Strange things happen inside political parties.

 

Sometimes, within the bubble universe that activists participate in, and inside which they busily reinforce each other’s views, issues that seem obscure to the rest of the world become totemic. Shibboleths.

 

Such an issue for the UK Conservative Party is that of Europe, which destroyed the leadership of its last two Prime Ministers, and could be about to do the same to David Cameron.

 

In 1990 Mrs Thatcher was wounded by a number of issues, most notably the bungling of the Community Charge (more commonly known as the Poll Tax), but it was the resignations of first her Chancellor, and then her Deputy Prime Minister, over European policy that caused the leadership challenge which ended her career after three consecutive election wins.

 

John Major went on to win an improbable fourth election in 1992, before the Maastricht Rebels (or as Major called them, “The Bastards”) blew up his Government from the inside. Yes, Britain’s forced removal from the ERM, plus years of Tory scandal, meant that Major was likely finished anyway in 1997, however the effective collapse of his Government over Europe ensured that Tony Blair won extra big.

 

The Tories went on to elect first William Hague and then Ian Duncan Smith as leaders, not because the were the best candidates, most experienced candidates, or most popular candidates (they weren’t), but because they were the most Eurosceptic.

 

This need for purity on the European issue helped ensure that Labour’s victories in 2001 and 2005 were larger than they had to be, making David Cameron’s chances of winning a majority in 2010 all the more difficult.

 

Yet, he was able to govern in coalition with the Liberal Democrats for a term, and go on to win a narrow but workable majority in 2015.

 

The election of Jeremy Corbyn to the position of Labour leader later that year led to cheers amongst Tory supporters; Labour was now unelectable, they argued, and the Conservatives would romp it home next time.

 

Even back then, I urged caution; in a two horse race, both horses have a chance. Plus, the Brexit referendum was just around the corner.

 

I won’t go into the pros and cons of Brexit here, accept to say that issues around trade, plus Parliamentary and judicial sovereignty, mean that I’m naturally inclined to support it.

 

However, David Cameron has a larger world to inhabit, and reasonably is sticking to the more financially cautious option of advocating for Britain to remain in the EU, albeit with a few newly negotiated carve outs.

 

But now, Cameron can only lose. Probably.

 

In the event that Brexit gets up, against the policies of the Prime Minister, Cameron’s leadership will be finished. He will have to resign, and before the end of the year.

 

In the more likely scenario that Cameron wins the day and Brexit fails at the ballot box, Cameron’s political end is still likely, however it will be slower, and considerable more painful for all concerned.

 

The Tory party’s backbench is far more Eurosceptic than the Cabinet is. For many, Europe is the single main reason they got into politics. They will not forgive, or forget, if their once in a generation vote to leave the EU is foiled by their own leader.

 

Cameron has allowed Government funds to be used to provide pro-EU pamphlets to British households, and has led the campaign to remain. In the eyes of his Parliamentary colleagues, he will be personally culpable for their loss.

 

At least, in the eyes of enough colleagues to detonate his leadership, and likely spark a civil war inside the Tory party.

 

How would Cameron’s loyal lieutenants in the cabinet react if their man is torn down, as his reward for rescuing them from the wilderness in 2010, and winnable an improbable victory in 2015?

 

What would happen to the majority of the Cabinet that also advocated to remain in Europe?

 

And once that Eurosceptics have tasted blood – especially if they can install a pro-Brexit leader – are they likely to stop as long as the UK is in the EU? I suggest not.

 

The one thing voters hate more than disunity, is disunity over an issue that they don’t really care about.

 

For many UK residents, the EU doesn’t really affect their day-to-day lives. At least, not as much as keeping a job, paying the bills, raising the kids, and all those other pieces of daily life. This will be especially the case if the people have just spoken clearly in a referendum and chosen to remain.

 

If the Conservatives decide to return to the 1990s and define themselves against Europe, they will lose the community, and then lose the election. And Corbyn moves into Downing Street.

 

If the referendum fails, the party – the whole party – must accept the result, and focus on governing.

 

Because the alternate is Prime Minister Corbyn. Against a Tory party in the midst of civil war, even he could win.

Rarely does an actor have as complete a breakout movie experience as Taron Egerton did with the movie Kingsman: The Secret Service, which seemed to come from no-where at the start of 2015 to be one of the success stories of the year, grossing over US$400m worldwide. The success of this film was in no small part down to the onscreen charisma of Egerton, in his first ever feature length film role.

 

The question therefore is whether Egerton is a one-note wonder destined to forever play variations of the same role (hello, Hugh Grant), or a fully rounded actor ready for a diverse and interesting career.

 

Eddie the Eagle answers this question, as Egerton plays the lead character – the real life British sky jumper Michael “Eddie” Edwards – and totally immerses himself in the part. He successfully brings the audience on side in loving the character, whilst retaining the naive goofiness of the role. At the same time, he removes all memory of his Kingsmen role, a good sign for his future.

 

This is important, as the movie will only work if the audience buys into the improbable quest of Edwards to become an Olympian. Egerton’s performance ensures that only those with hearts of stone will not.

 

He is supported by Hugh Jackman, giving his usual strong performance, whilst Tim McInnerny provides the villain of the piece, who remains a realistic character, the right side of pantomime.

 

Of special note however is the direction, by Dexter Fletcher (formally of Press Gang fame).

 

Fletcher avoids the usual trap of smaller budget films (Eddie the Eagle was made for US$23m), which more often than not try to do something innovative (and annoying) with the direction in the traditional scenes. However, his imaginative filming of the sky jumps – each one different – is excellent, allowing the audience to really appreciate the terror of the sport.

 

Is the movie a pile of feel good schmaltz? Of course it is.

 

But it’s the best quality of schmaltz.

 

By the final act of the film, the cameo by a certain high profile Hollywood actor adds the perfect evaluation to an otherwise lovely film.

 

 

One of the great joys of watching movies is seeing young stars arrive. Spotting them as talented young actors in obscure roles, before they suddenly have their breakout moment.

 

Departure – shown as part of the Melbourne Queer Film Festival – is Alex Lawther’s movie. Lawther has yet to have his own real film breakthrough, but has been successful in the last couple of years, playing the young Alan Turing in the disappointing Imitation Game, as well has having a supporting actor role in the delightful X+Y last year.

 

Lawther is a talented actor, with a natural quirkiness similar to that of Ben “the new Q in the Bond films” Whishaw, which means he’ll never be a romantic lead (who’ll burst onto screen, be amazingly successful, and then flame out by the age of 35), but instead will have decades of interesting roles ahead of him.

 

As such, he makes this rather ordinary coming of age/coming out film more interesting that it should be.

 

The coming of age (and out) sub-genre was at its peak in the 1990s, when these sorts of stories hadn’t really been told on film before. Now, it seems that every possible variation of the theme has been told.

 

Departure tries to be original by setting the film in France, at the holiday house of a couple in the midst of a marriage breakup. This does allow for some nice cinematography, and the desperation of Lawther’s character’s mother (Juliet Stevenson) does allow for a couple of minor twists that also keep the plot just the right side of interesting.

 

Oh, and there are a couple of very funny jokes about carrots.

 

As a nice piece of cinema, Departure works. Its well filmed, Lawther is engaging as the lead, and the story moves along at just the right pace.

 

But it’s also incredibly transient; this is not a film that people will be reaching for in a decade’s time, as they did its cousins of the 1990s.

 

Still, keep an eye out for Alex Lawther; this kid will be something.