'Sweet Country' is the best Australian film in years, and the best Australian "Western" ever. A little slow-paced maybe, but that's half the point. The characters and events portrayed in the film seem totally authentic, a sense that is heightened by the use of non-professional actors for the indigenous roles (Hamilton Morris, Natassia Gorey-Furber, Gibson John). The professional actors (Bryan Brow, Sam Neill, Matt Day) are also excellent. I wasn't a big fan of 'Samson & Delilah', but Warwick Thornton has really nailed it with this one. This is the type of film that Australian directors should be making. My only concern is that the film may not get the audience it deserves. I saw it during opening week in an Sydney inner-city cinema on a discount day, and the theatre was almost deserted. A discouraging sign. The reluctance of many Australians to acknowledge the realities of past and present race relations in their country may keep local audiences away. It is possible the film will play better overseas. Whatever, 'Sweet Country' deserves to be seen and is highly recommended.
Reviews
13 Reviews
Top of the Lake
(2013–2017)
Disappointing mish-mash
15 June 2013
Warning: Spoilers
I was looking forward to this series, pretty much on the basis of Jane Campion's reputation for quality writing and directing, and especially since her impressive last offering, 'Bright Star'.
How disappointed I was. I had forgotten about Campion's earlier film 'In the Cut', which demonstrated she was not a director suited to the crime-thriller genre. 'Top of the Lake' strongly reinforces that view.
Campion is an intellectual film-maker, and she's great when dealing with themes that are refined and internal ('Bright Star', 'The Portrait of a Lady'). But when it comes to a convincing portrayal of a criminal underworld and its police counterpart, she appears to be way out of her depth (pardon the pun). And that's the biggest problem with this series. The story and the characters just don't seem to have been really lived. It's all too artificial, contrived and imagined. Eccentricity and artifice have replaced authenticity and raw nerves.
So we have a teenager playing electric guitar in the wilderness without any discernible source of electric power. We have a runaway living in a mountain shack that everyone seems to know about but nobody bothers to check until the very last moment. We have a women's commune that exudes strangeness but in the end contributes very little to the plot.
Speaking of which, plot developments are often obvious, but then things happen without explanation or without connecting scenes. (Robin gets drunk then comes too with cuts to her face, before an ensuing car accident. How did she get the cuts? No idea. We're not shown.) Episodes stop suddenly, not with a bang, but a whimper, as does the series itself. You start to wonder if you've missed something. But then you wonder if you really care.
All the characters are alienating. The relationship between Robin (played by Elisabeth Moss) and Johnno (Thomas Wright) becomes nauseating in the extreme. They jump into bed (inevitably). Okay I get that. Their mutual attraction has been established. I don't need to see it again and again. You've made the point. Now you're just making me sick.
Elisabeth Moss was, in fact, miscast. Her accent jumps all over the place, and she does not convince as an experienced police. Peter Mullan also wasn't very believable as the hard-as-nails bad guy. Only David Wenham really did the trick with his portrayal of the creepy detective. Holly Hunter was also good as the eccentric GJ, but the character was not sufficiently developed and contributed very little to the story arc.
Though the entire story arc itself was the biggest disappointment. At the end, I was with GJ when she walked away from the whole mish-mash with unvarnished disdain.
How disappointed I was. I had forgotten about Campion's earlier film 'In the Cut', which demonstrated she was not a director suited to the crime-thriller genre. 'Top of the Lake' strongly reinforces that view.
Campion is an intellectual film-maker, and she's great when dealing with themes that are refined and internal ('Bright Star', 'The Portrait of a Lady'). But when it comes to a convincing portrayal of a criminal underworld and its police counterpart, she appears to be way out of her depth (pardon the pun). And that's the biggest problem with this series. The story and the characters just don't seem to have been really lived. It's all too artificial, contrived and imagined. Eccentricity and artifice have replaced authenticity and raw nerves.
So we have a teenager playing electric guitar in the wilderness without any discernible source of electric power. We have a runaway living in a mountain shack that everyone seems to know about but nobody bothers to check until the very last moment. We have a women's commune that exudes strangeness but in the end contributes very little to the plot.
Speaking of which, plot developments are often obvious, but then things happen without explanation or without connecting scenes. (Robin gets drunk then comes too with cuts to her face, before an ensuing car accident. How did she get the cuts? No idea. We're not shown.) Episodes stop suddenly, not with a bang, but a whimper, as does the series itself. You start to wonder if you've missed something. But then you wonder if you really care.
All the characters are alienating. The relationship between Robin (played by Elisabeth Moss) and Johnno (Thomas Wright) becomes nauseating in the extreme. They jump into bed (inevitably). Okay I get that. Their mutual attraction has been established. I don't need to see it again and again. You've made the point. Now you're just making me sick.
Elisabeth Moss was, in fact, miscast. Her accent jumps all over the place, and she does not convince as an experienced police. Peter Mullan also wasn't very believable as the hard-as-nails bad guy. Only David Wenham really did the trick with his portrayal of the creepy detective. Holly Hunter was also good as the eccentric GJ, but the character was not sufficiently developed and contributed very little to the story arc.
Though the entire story arc itself was the biggest disappointment. At the end, I was with GJ when she walked away from the whole mish-mash with unvarnished disdain.
Anna Karenina
(I) (2012)
Theatric and stylish adaptation of classic tale
6 March 2013
Director Joe Wright and actress Keira Knightley once again team up in this theatric and stylish adaptation of Leo Tolstoy's novel Anna Karenina. As with their previous outings (adaptations of Ian McEwan's 'Atonement' and Jane Austin's 'Pride and Prejudice') the film remains broadly faithful to the source material but is not afraid to tweak, compress and outright rewrite to attain dramatic effect. Such free interpretation may not appeal to purists but it does result in a rich and exciting experience for the film-goer.
The screenplay is by legendary playwrite Tom Stoppard and, as you would expect from such an experienced hand, contains all the main themes from Tolstoy's classic tale. I was particularly impressed by the deft handling of the relationship between Levin and Kitty. The drawing room scene where these two young lovers are reconciled was especially touching.
The film does, however, and by necessity, leave a lot of the source material out, making it that much harder to understand Anna's despair. The passion that Anna and Vronsky have for each other is convincingly established but Anna's demons are not sufficiently drawn. The final quarter of the film feels rather rushed, though at over two hours the complete package is a bit over-long.
Joe Wright's biggest gamble with this film was the use of highly stylised sets and a theatre-hall conceit. The film is hyper-realistic and reminiscent of a Baz Luhrmann production. It drips with colour, opulence and movement. Again, this may not appeal to the purists. But to me it was the masterstroke that released the passion and excitement in what is essentially a tragic story.
The screenplay is by legendary playwrite Tom Stoppard and, as you would expect from such an experienced hand, contains all the main themes from Tolstoy's classic tale. I was particularly impressed by the deft handling of the relationship between Levin and Kitty. The drawing room scene where these two young lovers are reconciled was especially touching.
The film does, however, and by necessity, leave a lot of the source material out, making it that much harder to understand Anna's despair. The passion that Anna and Vronsky have for each other is convincingly established but Anna's demons are not sufficiently drawn. The final quarter of the film feels rather rushed, though at over two hours the complete package is a bit over-long.
Joe Wright's biggest gamble with this film was the use of highly stylised sets and a theatre-hall conceit. The film is hyper-realistic and reminiscent of a Baz Luhrmann production. It drips with colour, opulence and movement. Again, this may not appeal to the purists. But to me it was the masterstroke that released the passion and excitement in what is essentially a tragic story.
Killing Them Softly
(2012)
Shaggy dog story with bite
25 October 2012
George V. Higgins must be the most underrated "crime" novelist around. He is admired by higher profile authors like James Ellroy but largely unknown by the general crime-reading public. Perhaps it's the shaggy dog, dialogue-driven nature of his books that puts people off. His stories are more about the journey than the destination. Higgin's finely observed portrayals of the speech-patterns and behaviours of the American East Coast underclass should have made his work fertile ground for screen adaptations, but again he has been pipped by other crime authors. As far as I'm aware only one other of his novels, 'The Friends of Eddie Coyle', has been adapted to film. A new adaptation was well overdue.
Thankfully, director and screen writer Andrew Dominik has stayed true to the source material (Higgin's novel 'Cogan's Trade'). In doing so, he has made a film of dialogue and mannerisms where, like Higgin's books, it's not so much where you end up, but how you get there. Along this journey, Dominik is ably assisted by a fine ensemble cast led by Brad Pitt. Each part plays its role and each is essential to the success of the other.
'Killing Them Softly' may not be to everyone's taste, but if you like your films to be "mouthy", intelligent, well-scripted, well-acted and well-paced, this is one for you.
Thankfully, director and screen writer Andrew Dominik has stayed true to the source material (Higgin's novel 'Cogan's Trade'). In doing so, he has made a film of dialogue and mannerisms where, like Higgin's books, it's not so much where you end up, but how you get there. Along this journey, Dominik is ably assisted by a fine ensemble cast led by Brad Pitt. Each part plays its role and each is essential to the success of the other.
'Killing Them Softly' may not be to everyone's taste, but if you like your films to be "mouthy", intelligent, well-scripted, well-acted and well-paced, this is one for you.
Lawless
(2012)
Lawless is pointless
18 October 2012
Lawless is a potentially good film marred by a fire and brimstone script and pointless violence that teeters on the cartoonish and downright ludicrous.
I've been a fan of Hillcoat's earlier work (The Proposition, The Road). Nick Cave's screenplay for The Proposition hit just the right balance of Old Testament vengeance and outback myth. Hillcoat's interpretation of Cormac McCarthy's The Road also nicely balanced horror and humanism. In Lawless, however, both Cave and Hillcoat have gone over the top. Consequently, the film descends into parody. In the climatic screens it even becomes ridiculous. And the culprit? That would be violence.
Unbelievable violence. Violence that sees bad guys who are almost beaten to death recover within what seems to be mere minutes and exact terrible revenge on the film's "hero" and his girl. Violence that sees the "hero's" brother repeatedly and viciously struck in the head by the psychopathic deputy only to appear in the next scenes with barely a bruise or swelling and definitely no broken teeth. Violence that has no consequence, that bears little or no resemblance to reality.
Now I'm not against violence in films, but make it real for goodness sake. Filmmakers like Hillcoat and Cave really should get some firsthand experience of the effects of extreme violence on body and soul before making movies like Lawless that purport to be realistic and based on "a true story" but which are in fact total fantasies. Make it real guys. Make it really real.
I've been a fan of Hillcoat's earlier work (The Proposition, The Road). Nick Cave's screenplay for The Proposition hit just the right balance of Old Testament vengeance and outback myth. Hillcoat's interpretation of Cormac McCarthy's The Road also nicely balanced horror and humanism. In Lawless, however, both Cave and Hillcoat have gone over the top. Consequently, the film descends into parody. In the climatic screens it even becomes ridiculous. And the culprit? That would be violence.
Unbelievable violence. Violence that sees bad guys who are almost beaten to death recover within what seems to be mere minutes and exact terrible revenge on the film's "hero" and his girl. Violence that sees the "hero's" brother repeatedly and viciously struck in the head by the psychopathic deputy only to appear in the next scenes with barely a bruise or swelling and definitely no broken teeth. Violence that has no consequence, that bears little or no resemblance to reality.
Now I'm not against violence in films, but make it real for goodness sake. Filmmakers like Hillcoat and Cave really should get some firsthand experience of the effects of extreme violence on body and soul before making movies like Lawless that purport to be realistic and based on "a true story" but which are in fact total fantasies. Make it real guys. Make it really real.
Monsieur Lazhar
(2011)
"Small" but perfectly formed
28 September 2012
Monsieur Lazhar is independent cinema at its best - a "small" story of human relations told in a understated manner with naturalistic acting and sensitive direction. For me it one of the best independent films of the year, right up there with 'A Separation' and way better than the over- hyped 'Beasts of the Southern Wild'.
Monsieur Lazhar starts with death but ends with a life-affirming embrace. It is the story of how an Algerian immigrant helps a group of school children come to terms with the suicide of a teacher. But as Monsieur Lazhar helps the children, the children and the school also help him to deal with his own personal loss. It is a finely-wrought and ultimately very moving story told with dignity and humour.
The final scene is exquisitely tender, especially as it breaks through the constraints of political correctness to reaffirm simple human compassion.
Monsieur Lazhar starts with death but ends with a life-affirming embrace. It is the story of how an Algerian immigrant helps a group of school children come to terms with the suicide of a teacher. But as Monsieur Lazhar helps the children, the children and the school also help him to deal with his own personal loss. It is a finely-wrought and ultimately very moving story told with dignity and humour.
The final scene is exquisitely tender, especially as it breaks through the constraints of political correctness to reaffirm simple human compassion.
Lore
(2012)
Intriguing investigation of under-explored era
25 September 2012
Set in Germany at the end of the Second World War, this film takes up where others like Downfall leave off and asks questions about how the erstwhile beneficiaries of Nazi rule cope with their new world. The film tracks the journey of five innocents as their life of privilege collapses and they are forced to come to terms with the effects of dreadful events over which they had no control but to which they have given their tacit support.
Four of these children are really too young to bear any culpability. Only the oldest, Lore, is really capable of comprehension and it is through her eyes that the film is focused, as she slowly realises just how much her parents are implicated in the horrors of the Nazi regime, and, as an extension of this, herself and the whole German people. Lore is helped to this realisation by Thomas, a Jew who appears to have been liberated from a concentration camp. But Thomas also has a psychological burden and may not be all he appears.
This is another fine film from Cate Shortland, someone who surely should be making more films more often.
Four of these children are really too young to bear any culpability. Only the oldest, Lore, is really capable of comprehension and it is through her eyes that the film is focused, as she slowly realises just how much her parents are implicated in the horrors of the Nazi regime, and, as an extension of this, herself and the whole German people. Lore is helped to this realisation by Thomas, a Jew who appears to have been liberated from a concentration camp. But Thomas also has a psychological burden and may not be all he appears.
This is another fine film from Cate Shortland, someone who surely should be making more films more often.
Beasts of the Southern Wild
(2012)
Over-hyped and overrated
17 September 2012
I was looking forward to Beasts and for the first few joyous minutes of the film (before the title came up) I thought the hype just might be justified. If only. Once the title image faded the film went into a slow fade as well, with only one little lift in a bar-room scene towards the end. I left feeling sucked in once again by critic group-think and the over-enthusiasm of cinematic innocents.
I don't want to be overcritical of this film. It does have some points of mystery and intrigue. It does have some good performances. And it does showcase the talents of director Benh Zeitlin. But it just isn't what it's been cracked up to be.
Above all, it isn't a fable about climate change, despite the heavy- handed script. The storm, and the ice melts and the aurochs are symbols for I don't know what. In fact, if you know how the aurochs were created these creatures seem silly beyond belief - cute and ridiculous rather than relentless and threatening as they were no doubt intended to be.
Truth be told, I don't know what this film is about. It could be a parable about the dangers of alcohol, because most of the main adult characters seem to be drunk all the time. It could be a story about the lifestyle of bayou dwellers, though if I lived in those swampy backwaters I would be pretty annoyed by how I was being portrayed in this film. It could be a tale about the importance of community, except most the residents of the Bathtub seem to light out before the storm hits, leaving just the most stubborn, or stupid, or inebriated to regroup in an orgy of squalor, appalling personal hygiene and disgusting table habits. It could be all of these things, or none. But one thing it isn't is exceptional.
I don't want to be overcritical of this film. It does have some points of mystery and intrigue. It does have some good performances. And it does showcase the talents of director Benh Zeitlin. But it just isn't what it's been cracked up to be.
Above all, it isn't a fable about climate change, despite the heavy- handed script. The storm, and the ice melts and the aurochs are symbols for I don't know what. In fact, if you know how the aurochs were created these creatures seem silly beyond belief - cute and ridiculous rather than relentless and threatening as they were no doubt intended to be.
Truth be told, I don't know what this film is about. It could be a parable about the dangers of alcohol, because most of the main adult characters seem to be drunk all the time. It could be a story about the lifestyle of bayou dwellers, though if I lived in those swampy backwaters I would be pretty annoyed by how I was being portrayed in this film. It could be a tale about the importance of community, except most the residents of the Bathtub seem to light out before the storm hits, leaving just the most stubborn, or stupid, or inebriated to regroup in an orgy of squalor, appalling personal hygiene and disgusting table habits. It could be all of these things, or none. But one thing it isn't is exceptional.
Last Ride
(2009)
Well made but unappealing
14 July 2009
Last Ride is well made and well acted. The cinematography is a treat.
Unfortunately the script lets the film down. The central character (played by Hugo Weaving) is just a bit too unappealing, just a bit too hard to relate to, just a bit too hard to empathise with, just a bit too selfish.
In a way the film could be compared to Clint Eastwood's A Perfect World. Both are stories about the last ride of father and son figures. But where in A Perfect World I felt sympathy for the fate of Kevin Costner's father figure, in Last Ride Hugo Weaving's father ultimately left me repelled. For me the film suffered for that and, for me, the fault was with the script.
Unfortunately the script lets the film down. The central character (played by Hugo Weaving) is just a bit too unappealing, just a bit too hard to relate to, just a bit too hard to empathise with, just a bit too selfish.
In a way the film could be compared to Clint Eastwood's A Perfect World. Both are stories about the last ride of father and son figures. But where in A Perfect World I felt sympathy for the fate of Kevin Costner's father figure, in Last Ride Hugo Weaving's father ultimately left me repelled. For me the film suffered for that and, for me, the fault was with the script.
The Wrestler
(2008)
Great acting but the film is disappointing and over-hyped
20 January 2009
Warning: Spoilers
With all the hype surrounding the film and Mickey Rourke's performance I was really looking forward to seeing 'The Wrestler'. But, it happened again. An much-hyped film failed to deliver and left me feeling disappointed.
The strengths of the film all lie in the performances. Rourke deserved his Golden Globe win and deserves an Academy Award nomination. Marisa Tomei is fantastic, as ever. She really has to be one of the bravest mainstream actresses around. Evan Rachel Wood is also good, as are all the minor characters.
So no complaints at all with the acting. It's with the script and direction that the film disappoints.
While the script has the narrative arc of a classic tragedy and is fairly easy to predict it just doesn't have enough pathos to allow us to be moved and surprised by what unfolds. Basically I just didn't like the characters enough to really care about their fate.
The film has the feel of movie-making by numbers.
The "fallen hero" has a life changing experience that brings him near to some sort of redemption but is then finally brought down by the personal failings that have determined the pattern of his life.
It was all handled just a bit too crudely for my taste. Randy 'The Ram' Robinson was just a little too self-pitying. Cassidy/Pam was just a little too much the working girl with a heart of gold.
Just a little more finesse would have made this a truly great film. As it is, however, The Wrestler' is fatally flawed, just like Randy 'The Ram' Robinson.
The strengths of the film all lie in the performances. Rourke deserved his Golden Globe win and deserves an Academy Award nomination. Marisa Tomei is fantastic, as ever. She really has to be one of the bravest mainstream actresses around. Evan Rachel Wood is also good, as are all the minor characters.
So no complaints at all with the acting. It's with the script and direction that the film disappoints.
While the script has the narrative arc of a classic tragedy and is fairly easy to predict it just doesn't have enough pathos to allow us to be moved and surprised by what unfolds. Basically I just didn't like the characters enough to really care about their fate.
The film has the feel of movie-making by numbers.
The "fallen hero" has a life changing experience that brings him near to some sort of redemption but is then finally brought down by the personal failings that have determined the pattern of his life.
It was all handled just a bit too crudely for my taste. Randy 'The Ram' Robinson was just a little too self-pitying. Cassidy/Pam was just a little too much the working girl with a heart of gold.
Just a little more finesse would have made this a truly great film. As it is, however, The Wrestler' is fatally flawed, just like Randy 'The Ram' Robinson.
Scarecrow
(1973)
Pacino Overcooks It
1 January 2008
Warning: Spoilers
Though Scarecrow has a lot to recommend it (great acting by Hackman, and an interesting cast of little-known or non-professional actors), it also has a couple of flaws that, for me, made watching the film more and more of a trial the longer it went on.
The narrative follows a fairly predictable arc that is slowed by some repetition. The script tends towards the saccharine. The characters become less believable the longer they hang around.
Most of all, however, Scarecrow is marred by Pacino's overripe, over-the-top performance. As Pacino becomes more and more histrionic his character becomes less and less sympathetic. At the end I didn't like the guy at all and couldn't wait for the inevitable hammer blow. Director Schatzberg should have reigned Pacino in. Less is often more.
The narrative follows a fairly predictable arc that is slowed by some repetition. The script tends towards the saccharine. The characters become less believable the longer they hang around.
Most of all, however, Scarecrow is marred by Pacino's overripe, over-the-top performance. As Pacino becomes more and more histrionic his character becomes less and less sympathetic. At the end I didn't like the guy at all and couldn't wait for the inevitable hammer blow. Director Schatzberg should have reigned Pacino in. Less is often more.
Okay but way too long
18 September 2006
I wish the moguls at Hollywood could learn that less is often more. Too many blockbuster films of recent years have been ruined by self-indulgent directors going on and on and on until stories become overweight and boring. Think Peter Jackson and King Kong, or, for that matter, any Peter Jackson film.
Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest is another one of these. The elements of a rollicking yarn are there but too many scenes overstay their welcome. The film could have been cut by at least half an hour and it wouldn't have lost a thing. In fact it would have gained.
I suppose we can expect the same in Pirates of the Caribbean: At Worlds End. Personally I hope they try to bring it in in under two hours.
Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest is another one of these. The elements of a rollicking yarn are there but too many scenes overstay their welcome. The film could have been cut by at least half an hour and it wouldn't have lost a thing. In fact it would have gained.
I suppose we can expect the same in Pirates of the Caribbean: At Worlds End. Personally I hope they try to bring it in in under two hours.
Jindabyne
(2006)
I can't help it, I really dislike this film
10 August 2006
Warning: Spoilers
After thinking about Jindabyne for several days (and probably the best thing about the film is that it does merit some thought) I'm still not quite sure why I dislike it so much.
It's not that I don't appreciate Ray Lawrence's previous work. 'Bliss' was a well-made interpretation of the book, though both the film and the book have dated rather badly. 'Lantana' was a great film that helped to revive confidence in the Australian film industry. But now we have 'Jindabyne'.
In a way 'Jindabyne' is a logical progression of the themes explored in Lawrence's earlier work - the angst and dislocation of the well-educated middle class; for although 'Jindabyne' is concerned with mainly "working class" characters it's underlying themes are middle class themes, and not only are they middle class themes they are the themes of the bourgeois middle class.
This is perhaps the source of the disconnect that flawed the film for me; a disconnect which, ironically, is one of the film's major themes. No one in the film seems to sit well in the landscape, not even the Aborigines. None of the actors seem to sit well in their characters. The progression of the script does not sit well with the promise of the introductory scenes. I just didn't like where the film went, or more precisely the mish-mashed route that it took.
None of the characters in the film were particularly sympathetic, some of the acting was a little forced, the theme of the effect of the past on present circumstances and the need for reconciliation was clichéd and handled in a wishy-washy, hand-wringing manner. Many aspects of the plot development were not convincing. The film finished without any real resolution of the interpersonal and interracial themes it had raised. Even the crime at the centre of the film was not resolved. In fact the film literally tip-toed around the edges of the real crime, raising bourgeois chimeras that prevented me from connecting with it in any meaningful way.
It's not that I don't appreciate Ray Lawrence's previous work. 'Bliss' was a well-made interpretation of the book, though both the film and the book have dated rather badly. 'Lantana' was a great film that helped to revive confidence in the Australian film industry. But now we have 'Jindabyne'.
In a way 'Jindabyne' is a logical progression of the themes explored in Lawrence's earlier work - the angst and dislocation of the well-educated middle class; for although 'Jindabyne' is concerned with mainly "working class" characters it's underlying themes are middle class themes, and not only are they middle class themes they are the themes of the bourgeois middle class.
This is perhaps the source of the disconnect that flawed the film for me; a disconnect which, ironically, is one of the film's major themes. No one in the film seems to sit well in the landscape, not even the Aborigines. None of the actors seem to sit well in their characters. The progression of the script does not sit well with the promise of the introductory scenes. I just didn't like where the film went, or more precisely the mish-mashed route that it took.
None of the characters in the film were particularly sympathetic, some of the acting was a little forced, the theme of the effect of the past on present circumstances and the need for reconciliation was clichéd and handled in a wishy-washy, hand-wringing manner. Many aspects of the plot development were not convincing. The film finished without any real resolution of the interpersonal and interracial themes it had raised. Even the crime at the centre of the film was not resolved. In fact the film literally tip-toed around the edges of the real crime, raising bourgeois chimeras that prevented me from connecting with it in any meaningful way.
Tell Your Friends