well done all, and happy holidays!

Final grades will be posted before midnight tonight.

I thought you all might enjoy reading the blog that Kerry and Lauren created for the creative project, at http://aussiegabba.blogspot.com/.

I have finally caught up on these blog posts and wanted to say I appreciate the effort and interest displayed in them. This blog will stay online indefinitely and is open to the public, so feel free to come visit again.

Hope you all have a safe and enjoyable winter break!

Peg A.

Let Us Go Then You and I...

Before the semester ends and we go off for the holidays, I wanted to put up one more post. It's pretty much just a recommendation for a movie you might enjoy: Till Human Voices Wake Us.
It's a drama, but I would also consider it a bit of a romantic mystery.
In this film, Sam and Dr. Sam Franks (Guy Pierce) is a stable, emotionally guarded man who returns Victoria, Australia. This is where he grew up, found his first love, and lost her through a tragic accident.
Stay with me -- this is not your typical love story.

When Sam comes back as an adult, he must face these ghosts of the past, quite literally. Enter Ruby, a woman he encounters whom he suspects is more than she claims to be...


I'd hate to put the "..." on you but I don't want to give too much away. If you haven't seen Til Human Voices Wake Us, I'd highly recommend it. It has stunning scenery, characters with depth, and a unique storyline.

If nothing else, read some of "The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock," the poem by T.S Elliot on which the title (and some elements of the poem) are based.
It's quite long, but very beautiful. Here is the beginning:

LET us go then, you and I,
When the evening is spread out against the sky
Like a patient etherised upon a table;
Let us go, through certain half-deserted streets,
The muttering retreats	5
Of restless nights in one-night cheap hotels
And sawdust restaurants with oyster-shells:
Streets that follow like a tedious argument
Of insidious intent
To lead you to an overwhelming question …	10
Oh, do not ask, “What is it?”
Let us go and make our visit.

Anyways, have a lovely break everyone!

PS - Tonight I'm bringing pie. It's no Sweetie Pie, but it's got some quality fruit in it.

Over the Rainbow

Growing up with an older sister who adored The Wizard of Oz and a family that eventually became centered around performing in and auditioning for musicals, "Over the Rainbow," while I never hated it, was a song that came to be overdone and performed on way too many occasions, by people who were just not talented enough to do it any justice. Harsh, I know, but true. As a result, it was a song that I came to like less and less.
Then, I was introduced to Israel Kamakawiwoʻole’s version of “Over the Rainbow” through movies like Finding Forrester and You’ve Got Mail, among others. Not to forget this precious Rice Krispies commercial. Thanks to Mr. Kamakawiwo’ole my love for the song was renewed. The first few films I saw the song used in used it quite well and I was always pleased to hear it. Happy to hear the version of a great song that made me love it as though it was new. That is, until his version too became overplayed and didn’t quite pack the same punch as it had the first time I had heard the song.
And yet again, my love for “Over the Rainbow” has been reborn. Thank you Mr. Luhrmann for showing me the song in a new light. Hearing the song played on the harmonica, especially toward the end when Nullah was playing it on the front of the boat as he, The Drover, and the other mission children returned from the island, nearly gave me chills. It was haunting, beautiful, and romantic. It was wistful, but hopeful and, for me, enhanced the moments of the film when it was heard in ways I cannot eloquently describe.

Despite my best efforts I couldn’t find any online version of the harmonica rendition of “Over The Rainbow,” but a small bit of information about the soundtrack can be found here.

Check out some interesting facts about the song here.

Writing Australia in Tasmania

Not sure if another Australia review is what this blog needed so… Adventure Magazine included an article this month about Richard Flanagan, the Tasmanian novelist and leading conservationist, who spent two years working and writing Australia with Baz Luhrmann. Tasmania (according to this map below) is an Australian island located south of eastern half of the rest of the continent. From the pictures I’ve seen of the island, it is absolutely breathtaking. However, I think its landscape has more of a New Zealand resemblance than an Australian one.

Anyways, in the article, here, Flanagan describes his initial work and creative experiences with Luhrmann. Flanagan explains, “I had no idea how to work with Baz, and I don’t think he had any idea how to work with me. He first came to see me in Tasmania, at my shack on Burnby Island, where it’s so quiet I can identify the birds by the sound of their wings. My home’s surrounded by kangaroos and penguins. We drank, told stories, made up new stories, and eventually a third creative force arose that was neither me nor him but that we both liked. And we discovered, rather improbably, that we liked each other too.” I thought this explanation of Flanagan’s work environment was intriguing and so ideal. What a perfect place to write such a film.

I also did some research about film production in Tasmania. After see the grandeur and scale of the landscape, I was surprised that I hadn’t heard of any large productions being based within Tasmania. I found Screen Tasmania, which is the “State Government agency responsible for supporting and developing the state’s film, television and multimedia industries by increasing the amount of independent screen production occurring in Tasmania. “ – Screen Tasmania. I couldn’t find any current production information, but found information about specific productions the agency had support in the past. The financial support and funding provided though this agency is very similar of that of The Australian Film Commission, which as of May 2007 has been replaced by an agency called Screen Australia!!!

A Cinematic Extravaganza

I've given myself several days to process Australia, but I'm still a bit befuddled. I don't know what specific facet or aspect of the film to write about with focused concentration. It has been interesting to read my classmates' reviews and Australia-related blog posts before and after watching the film. I think I would be best suited at the moment to just share my general impressions of the cinematic extravaganza.

First, I'll try to focus on the positives that I took away from the film. As has been noted in another blog post, the film is visually captivating. I can't deny that the color schemes and special effects are awe-inspiring. Knowing that Baz Luhrman is responsible for Moulin Rouge, I was worried that Australia would be too over-stylized to enjoy on any level. I was pleasantly surprised (although I had lowered my expectations after reading some of the early feedback posted by my classmates). Now that I think about it, I think that having a forewarning of sorts helped me to enjoy the film more than I otherwise would have. I was expecting a campy, over-done, overly ambitious film... and I got exactly what I was expecting, more or less. The only other positives that I can recall are watching Wolverine return to his Australian roots, getting to see David Gulpilil's familiar (although drastically aged) visage, and being introduced to the young actor that played Nullah.

I don't know whether I'm in the minority or not, but I feel like I was not exposed to a lot of advertisements for Australia before its release or before I went to see it. Even now, after having seen it, I still don't feel like I'm exposed to a lot of advertisements for the film. My girlfriend has, apparently, and she mentioned something interesting after Australia finally ended. The young actor who plays Nullah recieves virtually no attention in the majority of the advertisements that she has seen. I find it curious that the young actor recieves such little attention, especially considering that he puts forth (what I thought was) the best performance in the film... and the film, as the text that bookends it suggests, is narratively strung together by the plight of the stolen generation.

In terms of the negatives that I took away from the film...

While I can identify all of the Australian trademarks in Australia (except for mateship), and the Australian landscape dominated so many hours of screen time, I still don't feel like the film was that Australian in terms of tone or genre. The first half felt like an American Western, and the second half felt like Pearl Habor only set in Darwin. I think that the running time of Australia hurts it or will hurt its success in America. I know I have ADD as an audience member, and I found that I felt lost or confused at multiple points throughout Australia because there was so much to keep tabs on. Luhrman needed to trim the fat a bit more and decide which story he wanted to tell and which movie he wanted to make. Other things that didn't sit well with me were instances of contrived timing (e.g: Drover arriving just as Kidman's character wonders aloud where she will find a driver, the Japanese arriving at Mission Island at the same time as Drover and the rescue crew, etc. etc.) and music that counteracted the mood (e.g: all of the uplifting music during the various and many deaths... The music that plays during the drunk bookkeeper's death scene feels quite uplifting to me).

All in all, it wasn't a movie I would have ever seen had I not been assigned to see it. It's also not a movie I would ever watch again, or at least not in the near future. However, having had a forewarning of sorts from my classmates and consequently altering my expectations, I was able to enjoy Australia more than it seems that some others have. I'll update this blog post with a picture and links to make it "legitimate" in the next couple of days.

Vastly Inferior to Australia, the Country

What else can you say about the film? It was what I like to call "a bit much" with a pace, running time, and excess to make Michael Bay look like Werner Herzog this was definitely not my kind of thing. Granted, I was not expecting it to be.

First, what did not work for me: The fact that everything was so big and flashy - could anything have been shot, or at least remained at twenty four fps in the beginning? I felt all of this was just to mask the thin plot line. Speaking of which, the opening was just too long, with everything needing to be so significant throughout the whole thing I can understand the need for development, but really wasn't everything just significant for the purpose of significance? Then there was the end... I cannot even remember what it was but at one point it was grossly apparent that the film was ending, or at least the "end" was beginning, something did not feel right so I looked at my watch and saw that I had only been sitting in the theater for about an hour and forty minutes. Okay, so bottom line: didn't like it.

Anyway, as far as how this relates to class: I felt that this film could have been tailor-made to by analyzed from the perspective of this course. Of course there was the obvious allusion to Walkabout in the opening, but at a slightly deeper level, it was clear that Luhrman's intent was to capture nothing more than the country itself. I just don't feel that should take three hours. We've got the landscape, everything that makes "Oz" (that was a bit much too, right?) so otherworldly was there, and in my opinion this was by far the best part of the film. One example being the thought that crossed my mind of the stampeding cattle reminiscent of America's great planes. These animals are not indigenous and could a continet so unfertile support such life? Just a thought. Then of course, there's the aborigines. We've got the stolen generation - the presentation of which was practically stolen out of Rabbit Proof Fence. Oh and the British - what is there to even say about the way the British are interpreted? The same stuck up pricks they are always portrayed as in every Australian film, though understandably.

Then of course, there's the big buzz word we have been discussing since the beginning that was pounding us over the head constantly in this film - "Man's Country". In future classes a 30 second clip of this film would be enough for everyone to get that trademark.

So yeah, not my kind of thing, but very, very, Australian.

Just Another Australia Review

Well, here it is. With almost every aspect of this film having been dissected and scrutinized, I feel the only contribution worth giving is my own review of the film as a whole. Baz Luhrman, though obviously a successful director, is not usually my cup of tea. Romeo and Juliet and Moulin Rouge were both heavily stylized, with a unique set design and camera work that has become Luhrman's calling card.
I was hoping, however, that this film would be different. When one names a movie after an entire continent, it's kind of implied that the nature of the film itself will be pretty epic. In some ways, this film was. Luhrman certainly hit just about every topic we've talked about in class, from wide open land to the Aussie battler, and managed to scrape together a story that included members of every culture and race on Australia, which widened the umbrella even more. He also threw some obvious shout-outs to the canon of Aussie film, with a lot of Walkabout references scattered all over the place.
And this might be my biggest problem with the film, for by trying to hit every little marker, the story and conflict were cheapened. Every character was essentially brought to their cliche base. The half caste kid can stop a herd of stampeding cattle through his understanding of nature, Nicole Kidman's British character is stuffy and originally is seen as unfit to survive the harshness of the Outback, and Hugh Jackman is a class A Australian badass who doesn't take shit from anyone, except maybe Kidman. These are just a couple, but really the whole film tries to do too much because it scatter bombs, attempting to hit every cultural point in a film that's three hours long. Had they picked a few points to hit, instead of so many, they would have been able to concentrate more on creating real characters and not archetypal placeholders. Of course, this film was made to be marketable, like most films, which in this case was a problem only because it so clearly dominated every aspect of it. The story had to be relatively simple, and they probably felt like they had to hit every point to increase the amount of people who would want to view it.
But I digress, since I started by talking about the style. I was happy to see that he had at least toned it down, enough so that I didn't immediately pass the movie off as utterly ridiculous. Still pretty stylized, with a lot of unecessary camera movement and a set design that was also fairly characteristic of Luhrman. This didn't do too much to hamper the movie to me however, and was to be expected in the end.
All in all, I can see why we were assigned to view this movie, as in some ways it is a culmination of everything we've spoken of in class. I just wish it could have been culminated a bit better.

Female DP

I saw the film am immediately looked p the cinematographer, and it was a female! I was very excited because I am a girl majoring in cinematography. Typing that word a lot is difficult. I found this youtube video about the cinematography of Australia and Mandy Walker, the DP. Watching this makes me get camera and equipment envy. It also makes me feel bad that such a beautiful film is getting such terrible reviews. It takes so much work to make a film like 'Australia' that it is sad that someone didn't stop them along the way and say, okay, it's a little long for the general public. Anyway back to Mandy- here is an article about her nomination for Hollywood Film Festival's Cinematographer of the Year.
Lines like: "...things are looking good for Walker to become the first female Best Cinematography nominee in Oscar history." are pretty inspiring. I happen to agree that she does incredible work and I hope she gets the recognition she deserves.

Here are some interesting statistics about female cinematographers from the article:


- By genre, women were most likely to work on romantic comedies, romantic dramas, and documentaries and least likely to work on science fiction, horror, and action-adventure features.
- Among the top 250 films, women were most likely to serve as cinematographers on documentaries (17%), followed by comedy dramas (9%) and animated features (9%), and comedies (7%).
- Women did not serve as cinematographers on dramas, romantic dramas, romantic comedies, action- adventure features, sci-fi features, or horror features.
- Only 4% of cinematographers on the largest budget American films are women.

Dr. Martha M. Lauzen, a professor at San Diego State University in the US, recently published a report called The Celluloid Ceiling that revealed only 2% of the people working as cinematographers on the top 250 films made in 2007 films in Hollywood were female. Ninety eight percent (98%) of the films had no female cinematographers, which translates roughly to a grand total of five (5) camerawomen working on the top 250 big budget movies.

Even so Mandy Walker may be the woman to start making a change in those numbers. I also found an interview with her in which she states:

"I never knew until I started working in the industry that there weren't many women in the camera department, and I couldn't see why. Basically, I have never taken it on as an issue, and I think that people will hire me because I am good at my job, not whether I am male or female"



right on.

The Lost Generation...still lost?

Since almost every topic that I wanted to write on from the film "Australia" has been covered (thats what I get for waiting too long) I thought I too would delve into the aboriginal culture it portrays.  The Lost Generation seems to be a major theme in many Australian films, and Luhrman does not leave it out of "Australia".  However, I find that his take on the abuse of the aboriginal people was very generic.

Already we have seen many films where the abuse of the aboriginal people has been shown, and it has been disturbing to say the least.  However, I decided to google search "the lost generation australia" and see what the first hits would be.  I was surprised when I discovered that even the minor websites that appeared featured more information than what I had gathered from watching multiple films.  While I was happy to find that Luhrman addressed the abuse that the aboriginal women faced, and how it affected their lives, he (and many other film makers) left a crucial part of the story untold.  Perhaps because the abuse of the aboriginal people was so horrible, or perhaps because modern societies like to romanticize older cultures, but never once in a film have I seen the portrayal of a drunk, homeless, or down on their luck aboriginal.

Since before the 1900's the aboriginal people were being persecuted.  This website has the basic information on the history.  With a history of abuse this long, it was not surprising when I read that many aboriginals, in order to try and adapt to the new culture being forced upon them, became drunks and beggars.  While this may not fit the the romantic notions of an oppressed culture, it is real.  The only images we as an audience get through film, are those aborigines who defy the white man and continue to live in their own culture.  The grandfather in "Australia" is a perfect example of this.  He teaches his grandson the old ways, and the boy Nahla learns from him and grows to love the culture.  However, this was not the only option, many of the children were taken away (an estimated 8,000-great website for information on the children) and sent to work in white homes.  Those who were cared for by nuns and priests were not treated like real children. According to one website, they were fed food with maggots in it.  While the notion of taking children away from their families is bad enough, why not address the actual conditions that these children lived in.  It was lightly touched on in "Rabbit Proof Fence" when the children had to dump their toilet (a bucket) outside every morning.  However, "Australia" had many opportunities to address the actual conditions these children were forced to live in, and it skimmed over the topic.

Many are saying that Luhrman tried to attack too many topics, and that it why his film suffered.  I kind of agree with this, and perhaps if he had created a less romantic notion of how the aborigines rose above their treatment, it would have been too much; however, why address a topic and not fully show all sides to it.  Luhrman is not the only one, I have yet to see a true rendering of what really happen to the culture.  Obviously it is a strong one, since it is still around today, but instead of romanticizing the pain and suffering by only showing those characters who rose above the persecution filmmakers should feel free to explain how many were beaten down into an existence of poverty.

Today's screening

I had planned to show WOLF CREEK today but do not have access to it at the moment. (But I can bring it for next week).

If anyone has a copy, feel free to bring it to class today. Otherwise, we may watch SIRENS...or, more likely, AN ANGEL AT MY TABLE.

Or if anyone has other ideas, let's hear 'em. Other choices might include: LAST DAYS OF CHEZ NOUS; DANNY DECKCHAIR; ANGEL BABY; THE PIANO.

"Australia" a dud?? Where does Kidman go next?

According to a recent E! Online article (as well as a number of other reports I've come upon), Australia does not seem to be doing very well at the box office - and neither does Nicole Kidman's career. Interestingly enough, despite its blockbuster appearance and budget, the film did not do nearly as well as expected it seems...at least in America. The movie hit the top of the box office in Australia and is currently the number one film in its respective country. But critics and other moviegoers do not seem to feel the same sentiments about the film in America for some reason.

Many attribute this failure to Nicole Kidman's drastically dwindling career and performances which do not seem to stand out any longer, no matter the variation of roles she continues to play. Is this a fear that is keeping Kidman up at night? It seems as though the diminishing success of her latest film (which may be quite personal considering the plot revolves around her home country) is affecting her on one level or another after multiple articles have been published, including one from the Boston Globe which describes the film's setting as "depressingly unconvincing" at times. A recent interview (link below) on the Dave Letterman show features a very scattered Kidman who pauses awkwardly at some of Letterman's questions and seems to have no idea what's going on at various times throughout the interview.

An AP review of the film (link below) describes Australia using terms such as "repetitive", "predictable", and "self-indulgent." And the chemistry between Jackman and Kidman is likened (however unsuccessfully) to the onscreen legends of Humphrey Bogart and Katharine Hepburn in The African Queen. And despite his awe-inspiring performance, the half-caste boy in the film is also commented upon playing to a racial stereotype. The AP review also comments on the homage the film makes to The Wizard of Oz, declaring that you'll never want to hear the song "Over the Rainbow" again after leaving the theatre.

I found the film's strong points lay in its breathtaking cinematography and visual effects which can't be missed, no matter what one may think of the performances. I must admit Kidman's acting and chemistry with Jackman was a bit cliche and at times didn't work as successfully as director Luhrmann would have hoped for. The biggest disappointment for me was the outcome of the film after discovering they worked with an astronomical budget of $130,000,000!!! With the economy still stuck in a place similar to the Depression, I am surprised and sickened by the fact that this film's allowance wasn't put to greater use with a better script and possibly cast. I like both actors separately in their own regard but they just weren't convincing enough for my taste. Definitely a film I could have waited to Netflix.....not worth the $10 in the theatre in my opinion.

The articles/video below make some very interesting arguments in regard to Australia and are definitely worth reviewing.

Is Nicole Kidman over?

This is the article from which I titled this blog post. The E! online article presented by Yahoo discusses Kidman's performance in the film and speculates the possibility that her career may be close to over, after the repeated failure of some of her latest films.


Dave Letterman Interview

Hilarious interview with Kidman which highlights the extremely awkward moments between her and Dave, including the long, confusing pause when he asks her about her husband's music career (which she seems to know nothing about).


AP Review of Australia

Film critic Christy Lemire rips apart the film, commenting on Kidman and Jackman's lackluster performances and "self- indulgent" plot.

Australia: An Elaborate Joke

This review, which is directly out of the country of Australia, elaborates on how they absolutely detested this film on every level possible.

Luhrmann: Idiosyncratic Goofball or Hardened Conformist? Either Way: Blechh.

Baz Luhrmann

During the brief clip screened in class of Moulin Rouge, a favorite back in 8th grade, I wondered how I could have once taken such grotesquely heightened drama seriously. I wondered that too, a bit, during Australia, but the feeling had settled from bafflement into inquiry. Baz Luhrmann isn’t my cup of tea, but he’s not pompous, either: the new film has a tonally jarring, anything-goes approach that is fascinating, if not satisfying.

Anyone eager to fill out a perfunctory checklist of Australian themes should be satisfied: David Gulpilil is back, now taking his grandson on a Walkabout of his own, and as for Landscape, a character says, “this land has a strange power,” followed by the usual ominous pan across the outback. (It has always seemed obvious to me that there’s nothing more inherently mysterious or deep about the Australian landscape than, oh, the streets of Cambridge, and the former has only been enshrouded so because of formal techniques—a customary didgeridoo here, a swooping crane shot there—used to frame it. Any place in the world—the Commons, the Taj Mahal, any old bathroom—can be associated with mystery or banality, depending on context.) Any “foreignness” with which the land is perceived, however, is emphatically reversed: Nicole Kidman, scowling, trampling, and sulking, is not inaccurately called “the strangest woman I’ve ever seen” by the film’s half-caste narrator.

In some respects, Luhrmann retains a cartoonish sensibility, which one imagines he is to some extent incapable of resisting: this is the sort of movie where men anxiously gulp upon seeing an attractive woman, and the score gracelessly flails about, trying to find a suitable refrain for each moment. Luhrmann is indifferent to moral perspective: he’s equally likely to beautify kangaroos one moment and cackle at their murder the next. And even if one can’t find a coherent sensibility amidst the muck, there’s a rule of adjustment that works for films like this, even if it doesn’t make them any more tolerable: that if it seems bizarre that minds of adult intelligence felt inclined to inflate the sensitivities of adult characters far past the point of plausibility, then Drover and Sarah’s behavior might make more sense were both characters about 12 years old. Were this Luhrmann’s goal, I’d be impressed, but my guess is that this is the effect of adherence to convention.

Australia Review

  

  Baz Luhrman's, "Australia" has received mixed reviews and has done less than anticipated at the box office.  In US markets (a main target audience for the film), it came in fifth place this past weekend with just $14,800,723.  "Australia" came behind "Four Christmases," "Bolt," "Twilight" and "Quantum of Solace."  For such an expensive movie to make, and with all the hype leading up to its release, this was definitely a disappointment.  However, the film is still good, and may still be award worthy in several regards, but this may not be that huge influential epic they had hoped it would be.

  In the film, there are several references to old-time Hollywood movies such as "Gone With the Wind," and "The Wizard of Oz."  While interesting, it can be a little distracting and take one out of the film.  Baz seems to enjoy this postmodern style of artwork that mimics other art forms though, as he uses the same style in many of his past films including, "Moulin Rouge," and "Romeo + Juliet."

  The movie is long, and at times extremely slow and boring.  The acting chemistry is good, not great, and the story is okay.  The cinematography and production quality, however, is amazing -   the sweeping camera shots of the landscape are phenomenal.  The visuals keep me interested for a while, but generally three-hour-long romantic period pieces are not my cup of tea.  I do like Baz Luhrman though, and many of his past films.

  An interesting article about our pal, David Gulpili, about his nomadic lifestyle removed from modern society, and how he was unaware of the passing of his old friend Jimi Hendrix.

  As I mentioned in my first blog post, Baz worked with Apple to create the "Set to Screen" podcast series.  Interesting stuff in regards to filmmaking, Australia, and Baz Luhrman himself.

 - Matt Colbert

'Australia' and the Stolen Generation

So yesterday evening I saw Baz Luhrmann's 'Australia.'
I made a point to avoid reading any reviews or even watching any trailers prior to seeing the film, simply because what little hearsay I had heard already began to skew my perspective. "I hear that film is like an Australian 'Pearl Harbor'" someone told me. Recalling the three hours of torture I had endured watching 'Pearl Harbor' back in 2001, I found this comment to be extremely unsettling.

Regardless, yesterday I watched ‘Australia’ and I have to admit.. it wasn’t bad. Though running at close to three hours seemed rather long, I was definitely entertained for a good portion of the film (or at the very least visually stimulated by the beautiful cinematography). I especially enjoyed noticing the references to Peter Weir’s ‘Walkabout’ that occur at a handful of places throughout the film, as well as seeing our friend David Gulpilil making another appearance on the big screen. Having said that, I feel that the film was a little too ambitious; covering too many plot points and historic events in the span of one two and half hour movie.

Upon glancing at various reviews online, I find that others shared this opinion. In fact, I’ve come across numerous reviews by actual Australians who found this film rather offensive. One reviewer went as far as saying it was tactless of Luhrmann to discuss so many aspects of Australia’s young history in such a brief and over the top approach. Particularly on the topic of the ‘lost generations,’ an event still so recent in the countries history – especially in light of the fact that only now, in 2008, a formal apology was issued to the Aborigine population by Prime Minister Kevin Rudd.

But what of the ‘Stolen Generations’? Now that time has passed, what was the outcome of ‘The Aboriginal Protection Act’?



The alleged goal of the act was to help these Aboriginal children integrate into a modern western society - so that they could gain and education and one day be employed. Unfortunately, the outcome for these children turned out to be very different. One study I found in ‘Decades of Change: Australia in the Twentieth Century’ compared statistics of removed children in the city of Melbourne to children who remained with their Aborigine parents, and the results are rather shocking. The study showed that removed children were less likely to gain a secondary education, twice as likely to use illegal drugs and three times as likely to have a police records. The only real area of improvement according to the study, was that those removed had a slightly larger income – though this probably attributed to the fact that the removed children in the study were living in the city and hence had better access to welfare checks than those non removed living in their home communities.

Today the indigenous community suffers from increased unemployment (20% of Aborigines unemployed verses 7.6% of non indigenous Australians), more health problems and according to this study they are twice as likely to be victim of violent crime. Furthermore there is reported huge increases in alcoholism and sexual abuse amongst present day Aborigine families.

Considering that I've only found two cases of reparations being paid, and that only this year has an apology been issued by Australia's Prime Minister.. I wonder what the future holds for Australia's Aborigine population?

Whales

This is a very disturbing story of whales were beached themselves and died on the coast after being unable to swim back to the sea, near the town of Hobart in Tasmania.

CRIKEY!

As many of you may have noticed, it seemed that Baz Luhrmann and the other writers were attempting to make a catch phrase of "crikey!" via numerous, mostly unhumorous uses throughout the movie. I can't be sure it wasn't their intention to use it as an homage to Steve Irwin or Australian culture in general, seeing as much of the flavor of the film was nostalgic, or if it was simply historically relevant for the film.

In any case, I thought I'd do a little investigating on the word's etymology to truly understand its history. The word is what is known as a "mincing oath," or more simply euphemism, used in place of the blasphemous explication of "Christ!" It is in fact considered a swear word by the Oxford English Dictionary, but that seems to only be relevant to Australian or New Zealand culture at this point in history. The first syllable is meant to mimic the initial sound of "Christ" (i.e. Chri- vs. Cri-) and is similar to the comparison of "damn" vs. "dang."

It's first recorded use in print was in 1838, though it's understood that the word was a part of the spoken language long before that. Surprisingly, the word originated in Great Britain and was adopted later by the criminals and English expatriates who migrated to Australia at its inception. "Cripes!" is an off-shoot of "Crikey!" and is essentially meant to convey the same sense of exasperation or displeasure.

Some info and examples

Overall, I found Australia to be a bit of a disappointment, and, like most people have already commented in some way, I found the performances and visuals to be strong but the story was trite and the dialogue was less than stellar. It was like Gone With the Wind sans the dynamic characters and compelling relationships. Though I did appreciate the ways in which it was almost a microcosm of everything we've been talking about in class this semester.

In memory of a great Australian, Steve Irwin, and the man who brought "Crikey!" into most of our vocabularies, I include a compilation of his bloopers that all deserve a hearty "Crikey!" or two.

Crikey!

- Matt Holden

The Japanese are Coming!

(Image Source here)

After taking some time off (ok, a lot of time off) yesterday to go see Baz Luhrmann’s Australia, I had a few questions about the Japanese attacks on Australia. I’ve taken several 20th century history courses in both high school and college, yet these events had never been mentioned. So, I did a little research and found out just what actually happened.

As it turns out, the Australian mainland was attached over 90 times over the course of the war. 64 of those raids were on Darwin, the first of which, occurring on February 19th, 1942, was shown in the film. Apparently, Darwin was a key defensive position against the Japanese onslaught in the Pacific, and on the day the Japanese attacked, there were 46 ships, both Australian and allied, in the bay. 8 ships were lost and many damaged, and the casualties are somewhere between 900 and 1100 people, just from the first attack. It is said that the Australian government suppressed this information in order to keep public moral up. Later in the day, the Japanese would attack again, destroying the Royal Australian Air Force base.

The Japanese attack was lead by a man named Mitsuo Fuchida, the pilot that also lead the attacks on Pearl Harbor (Fuchida was the one who radioed “Tora! Tora! Tora!”). They attacked with 188 planes and destroyed all but one (out of the ten) of the Australian fighters located there.

Darwin was attacked again and again until November 1943. I found a list of the attacks here.

For more information about the Japanese attacks, check out this site

Beauty in a land called Oz

I took in a screening of "Australia" this afternoon.

First, let us take a moment to mourn the loss of Nicole Kidman's beauty. Remember the days when her hair was red, her lips weren't inflated, and her forehead didn't resemble a windshield? I miss those days.

I was, however, quite taken with the visual beauty of the film. This is especially true ofthe cinematography- the shot compostion and lighting coupled with the outback landscape is really quite striking.



What is even more exciting to me is that these images were captured by a female director of photography: Mandy Walker. Woman DPs seem to be a rarity in Hollywood- one has never been nominated for an Academy Award in Cinematography.

She came into the business of moviemaking in the same way that most people do: working odd jobs on set and consistently pestering her superiors. Her first film as DP was a small Aussie film called "Return Home" in 1990. She worked steadily in the Australian industry throughout the 1990s.

One of her first films that was widely seen on an international level was 2001's "Lantana". Said in a Senses of Cinema interview that this was perhaps her biggest challenge, due to the use of natural light. This led into her first American job, "Shattered Glass". This was the last film she completed before working on "Australia" (which was apparently long in development). She spends time between features working on commercials.

Walker has won awards from the Australian Film Institute and has received Kodak Vision Award. She says that even though she is often a rarity within her department, she wishes that she be hired solely for her skills, and not for gender reasons.

"I had always loved going to the movies; I find it is like entering a dream," she says. I agree, and I wish to see more of her work in the future. I hope she inspires more girls to join the more male-dominated aspects of film.

To top things off, here's the Chanel commercial she shot for Baz Luhrmann, also starring Kidman:

Somewhere Over Australia

Luhrmann knows his audience. Americans will respond well to his latest feature, Australia, not necessarily with awe over the landscape (or should I say pastel skyscape?) but the film’s relationship to the American fairy tale The Wonderful Wizard of Oz.  In the United States, we take pride in L. Frank Baum's fairy tale, the good ole’ story of a small girl on the Kansas prairie and her dreams of reaching some sort of home but realizing that it was right there in her backyard. "Home is where the heart is," in a sense.
The main characters of Australia must all learn what Dorothy learned, that they do not need to seek out their home and that Australia is the perfect nation to settle down in.   Lady Sarah Ashley finds a home in Faraway Downs (this link is great!),Drover realizes that his home is not miles away with cattle but with the woman he loves and Nullah realizes that he does not have to identify himself as either black or white. He can stay creamy.  He may be a half-caste but he is an Aborgine at heart. His story is like Dorothy’s, she feels lost in the real with her aunt and uncle and seeks a home away from home.

This film is made for us Americans that are always looking for that little something called the American Dream. Interestingly enough, us Yanks have a tiny cameo in the film and in the end, it is the American story, The Wizard of Oz, that saves the day.  The songs of the 1938 film relate to everyone’s search to adulthood and that greener grass on the other side.  This song was cut from the film: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nf1bcjQPO00

Movie Rating=It was okay.

Not worth three hours of my time but the references to The Wizard of Oz kept me amused.

David Gulpilil: Old Face of Australia

I too, wanted to blog about the mysteriously enchanting boy who played Nullah...but Kerry beat me to it. So now I will write about another face from the film, someone we should all recognize: David Gulpilil.

I had no idea David was in this film, so when I saw him I was very excited. I'd always assumed he was of Aboriginal descent (as opposed to an actor who had learned to play an aboriginal) but hadn't confirmed it before now. So if that was in question for any of you, yes  he is a legitimate Aborigine. And he has played an Aboriginal part in over 20 films and television series since his debut in Walkabout in 1971. Talk about type casting. He even has his own webpage, although he's not the one who created it or keeps it running, found at www.gulpilil.com.

No doubt that David has become one of Australia's most recognizable faces, maybe not internationally, but certainly within his own country. And now, thanks to Baz Lurhmann, maybe he will finally be able to claim international success as well.

The aspect of his career that intrigued me the most was what Aboriginal culture might think about his portrayal of their people. Is it frowned upon by other Aborigines for David to use their way of life as a means to make money? What do they think of his choice of career? And how has it affected him? Sadly, I could not find much in the way of an answer to my questions. Though I did find a short article on a film he made in 2002 titled Gulpilil: One Red Blood that may hold some answers if anyone is interested in seeing it. Here's the link:

http://www.australianscreen.com.au/titles/gulpilil-one-red-blood/

As far as Australia goes, I thought his performance was wonderful (as always) and seemed to be an honest representation of Aboriginal culture. The way he moves and speaks can be very haunting at times. His grace (and perhaps balance, he always seems to be on one leg in this movie) can be attributed to the fact that he is an extremely accomplished Aboriginal dancer. I dug up this youtube video of him performing a few traditional dances. You should check it out:

www.youtube.com/watch?v=L08e91HxX-w

Maybe David Gulpilil's legacy will open doors for new Australian actors, Aboriginal and otherwise, like Brandon Walters.

...and I never did figure out how to embed those links, my apologies for that.

-Megan R.

Brandon Walters: New Face of Australia?

(Here is the page I got the picture from.)

I had the pleasure of seeing Australia tonight, with my sister. I must say that when we got out of the theater and started talking about the movie, one thing we absolutely agreed upon was how much we enjoyed the performance of the boy who portrayed Nullah. Everything from his acting, to narration, to his hauntingly beautiful voice when he sings (I can't find any information saying it isn't him, so I assume he did that as well) is really captivating! His name is Brandon Walters and from what I gather, he is only twelve years old (I'm finding conflicting information online, but that is what most sources say. He is still a few years older than I actually would have estimated for his tiny size). It took a decent internet search to find anything on him, as this his is big debut, but I have a feeling there will be more to come very soon!

Very big things are expected from this little package in the future and Baz Luhrmann seems to be his main supporter. This Australian Herald Sun article uses the phrase "plucked from obscurity" when describing how Brandon was cast for the role and the UK Times Online reported about how he and Luhrmann bonded over the course of the casting and filming. A lot was also mentioned, in various articles, about how well Walters seems to have connected with Nicole Kidman. The term "maternal instinct" was used multiple times in describing her behavior around him at press conferences and public appearances. It doesn't surprise me at all, as the performances these two put on felt very genuine and mutually affectionate. This interview with Kidman explains their connection in a bit more detail.

There was just something about watching Brandon that made me very happy. He brought a certain brightness and presence to the screen that I feel might have been lacking without him there. That isn't to say I didn't enjoy any other performance or any other aspect of the film, I just feel like Brandon's role made the film extra special in helping Luhrmann to create that dreamlike note with the audience. I found this article in my search that states that at the age of seven, Walters overcame Leukemia. Again, I'm not sure of the details because there is so little information about him, but assuming this is a true statement, it could be said that perhaps this remarkable personal triumph accounts for that feeling of Walters' genuine optimism and true belief in that "somewhere over the rainbow" mentality. Regardless of why, the fact is that he does bring this charm to the screen and I would recommend going to see Australia so you may be introduced to this young actor!

Thanksgiving!

Hope you all have a nice holiday and break.

I will be away from email for the next two days, until Friday night.

"Hello Possums!"

When reading through Xander's post, I was caught by the name Barry Humphries. It sounded familiar, so I looked him up and was led to Dame Edna, his "most famous and enduring creation" as a comedic actor. Have you guys heard of her? I actually hadn't, but she is a really funny character!
You can go here for her biography (the one he created for her!):

http://www.dame-edna.com/biography.htm

This Melbourne housewife has made appearances on Alley McBeal, A Night with Dame Edna (1979), and recieved a Tony Award for Dame Edna: the Royal Tour.

As fun as Dame Edna is, I'd actually like to see more of Barry Humphries. He's clearly a very creative and talented comedian.

Mary and Max

Mary And Max, an Australian stop-motion animation feature, has been chosen to open this year’s Sundance Film Festival. This is THE FIRST TIME an Australian feature has been given the highest profile slot at Sundance!!! This is amazing, not only because the fact that it’s an independent Australian production, but that it’s a clay animation!
The story is about an eight-year old Melbourne girl who has a 44-year-old New Yorker with Asperger’s syndrome as a long-time penfriend (pen-pal). The director, Adam Elliot, said the story is based on 20 years of letters between him and his American penpal. I found most of this information through the Sydney Morning Herald.

I decided to explore further and sought out Sundance’s homepage to see how they were promoting the animation’s premiere. Of course, the film was on a headlining banner, promoting the film’s World Premiere at Sundance. The film’s press release revealed that it starred Philip Seymour Hoffman, Toni Collette and was narrated by Barry Humphries.
I also learned that this would be Adam Elliot’s second time at Sundance. Prior to Mary and Max, Elliot directed a film, Harvie Krumpet, which screened at Sundance in 2004 and went on to win the Academy Award for Best Animated Short Film.
I’m looking forward to following the success of Mary and Max beyond Sundance and the festival circuit.
Also, check out the film's super cool website: www.maryandmax.com

Textbook: URGENT

I have been told there has been a problem with the textbook being on reserve in the library. Any text ordered by the bookstore that is also in our collection should be automatically be placed on reserve. It was my understanding this had been done at the beginning of the semester.

I am not sure why there has been a problem with this book being on and off reserve. I am currently trying to resolve this with the reference desk.

The book has been signed out to a student and they won't tell me who. A recall for it has been placed.

If any of you have signed the book out, could you please return it immediately, so it can be placed on reserve so that other students who did not buy the book can use the only library copy?

THANK YOU FOR YOUR COOPERATION.

Last Day of Class: December 11th!

This year the final week of class schedule has shifted from what it has been the last couple of years. Instead of having classes end on a Wednesday, with Thursday being a "Reading Day", this year classes officially end on December 12th (a Friday).

So we will have our final class meeting on December 11th. This will be a full class with screening; we will probably watch The Rage in Placid Lake. We can also have our end of semester party that night.

The final class meeting during final exam week, Dec. 16th, at 8 pm, will proceed as scheduled. I will hand back any and all remaining essays, projects, etc. at that time.

Sorry for the confusion; they seem to change this scheduling every year.

Keisha Castle-Hughes Audition

I was looking for a clip of Keisha Castle-Hughes meeting Johnny Depp and no luck. But I did find:
Keisha Castle-Hughes Audition for Whale Rider:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qRbv5oBwpMg

Baz Luhrmann

While "Australia" seems to be on almost everybody's mind, I couldn't help but become interested in the director Baz Luhrmann.  Luhrmann reminds me on a young Peter Weir; his films are experimental but they also resonate with major audiences.  Luhrmann is know primarily for "Romeo + Juliet" and "Moulin Rouge!", and now he is garnering praise and attention for his upcoming film "Australia".

Baz Luhrmann was originally born Marc Anthony Luhrmann in 1962.  He was born and raised in Southern New Wales, Australia, and graduated from St. Augustine's College in Sydney.  His wife, Catherine Martin, is the production designer on all of his films. (for more biographical information check out Wikipedia Baz Luhrmann)

The fact that his wife is his primary production designer interested me, especially because when I think about "Moulin Rouge!" or "Romeo + Juliet" I can't help but think about their production design.  From the elephant in "Moulin Rouge!" to the church in "Romeo + Juliet", the set strikes a chord.  There is a certain fantasy aspect to their design, which help the viewers further immerse themselves into the world that Luhrmann creates, but at the same time these sets are grounded in reality.  The marriage (literal and artistic) between Baz and Catherine seems to be an equal blending of ideas, which transforms the stories and the film into something completely different than most Hollywood films.

Luhrmann originally worked in theater, and he directed the original stage version of "Strictly Ballroom".  Then, in 1992 Luhrmann released his first feature film, smartly titled, "Strictly Ballroom".  It is a romantic comedy (according to Wikipedia Strictly Ballroom) and while the theatrical production was short, it transfers well into a feature length film.  I happened to see this film years ago, in my freshman or sophomore year of high school, and what is really interesting is that I don't remember the plot, as much as I remember the clothes.  The costume design was very interesting because there was a lot of room for imagination in ballroom costumes.  As you can see from the poster (above) the saturated colors are very reminiscent of the Baz Luhrmann from "Moulin Rouge!" which was made almost ten years later. "Strictly Ballroom" is the first of the three 'red curtain' trilogy films, including "Romeo + Juliet" and "Moulin Rouge".  These are the first three films of Baz, and they are all very similar in production.

On a complete side note, Luhrmann is also credited with the single Everybodys Free (To Wear Suncreen) which was a #1 single in the UK. The original video is posted on YouTube.com .  This is an interesting song, the narrator talks his way through it, while there is music playing in the background.  It starts off with images like those in "An Inconvenient Truth" and then adds in old photographs and videos.  I would recommend watching  a minute or so, its very interesting, and good for a laugh.

Kidman on her way out?

It seems Nicole Kidman may be retiring from acting. There is nothing definite persay. She hasn't made a Jaoquin Pheonix - style announcement and is you look at her filmography you can see that she still has a possible three projects in some level of production.

I think Nicole Kidman has been a little buried and forgotten in the last few years. However, I think she is a fine actress that has made some poor decisions recently: The Golden Compass, The Invasion, Bewitched, The Stepford Wives. But she still did take her time to make interesting pieces that showed her capabilities as an actress: Margot at the Wedding, The Interpreter, Birth.

My point is that Nicole Kidman is one of the most famous and talented actors to come out of Australia and it will be unfortunate to see her go.

You can read more here.

Hello Mr. Jackman

It seems everyone is under Baz Luhrman's spell waiting in eager anticipation for Australia. And People Magazine, it seems, is smart enough to realize it. People's Sexiest Man Alive 2008? None other than the leading man of Australia, perhaps both the movie and the country, Hugh Jackman.

Hugh Jackman at People.com

Alas, the man is getting the recognition I've felt he's deserved for years. Sexiness aside, though I'm not one to pretend that I have not fallen under Mr. Jackman's spell, his acting, singing, and dancing chops deserve much recognition. Having only really come into view in 2000's X-Men as Wolverine, Jackman has proceeded to have a surprisingly well-rounded career in the past eight years. From Wolverine, Leopold in Kate & Leopold, the legendary Van Helsing, to his turn as Robert Angier in The Prestige, and the voice of Memphis in Happy Feet, Jackman has covered quite the spectrum.
Lest we forget, Hugh Jackman also won the 2004 Tony Award for Best Actor in A Musical, portraying fellow Aussie, songwriter Peter Allen in The Boy from Oz. You can read about some of Jackman's thoughts on the experience in this CBS article.

Those who would like to still further wet their appetite for the talented Mr. Jackman can watch him sing, dance, and melt the hearts of women as Curly in a stage production of Oklahoma! and here acting as the aforementioned Peter Allen at the '04 Tony Awards--and yes, that is Sarah Jessica Parker.
Just something to think about as you watch Luhrman's soon to be released Australia. And for the doubters that he should be People's Sexiest Man Alive, well, perhaps I can't convince you otherwise, but at least recognize his talent. This Aussie is certainly doing his country proud.

(Images thanks to: http://www.sydentcent.com.au/index.cfm?s=content&p=event_detail&event_id=101937
and http://seat42f.com/site/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=3192&Itemid=299)

BBC: Australia hopes Luhrmann's film boosts tourism

They're hoping for another Crocodile Dundee, apparently. I will be seeing this three-hour long film on Thursday afternoon.

Second Essay

For those of you who want to start thinking of topics for your second essay (due December 4th), here are some guidelines.

The essay will be slightly longer than your first one: between 1800-2000 words (6-7 pages). You'll follow the same MLA format for citations. You are expected to use at least three exterior sources, and one of these should be your text Australian Cinema in the 1990s. Don't choose a topic that merely mirrors the chapter headings or main points (i.e. "disability in Sweetie")--instead try to use the readings and class discussions as a guideline to create a topic based on your own unique interests and concerns.

Your topic focus should be on films we have viewed in the second half of class so far, starting with Jane Campion's Sweetie. It is recommended you write about one of the films viewed in class, however, if you want to write about another film by one of the filmmakers we've studied, for example Jane Campion or Peter Jackson, this is permissible. If you want to write about a filmmaker we have not studied closely in class, for example Gillian Armstrong (who directed My Brilliant Career and Last Days of Chez Nous) or Baz Luhrmann, you may, but you need to get your topic approved by me first. It makes sense to focus on Australian films by Australian directors, but if you'd like to go outside of this guideline, again, give me a heads up. I would prefer that your essays focus on ONE film, not a survey of an entire career or ouevre.

I highly recommend that you all submit an abstract for your essay via email before you start working, to make sure your topic is on track. The abstract should be a paragraph in length and should clearly state your topic, in the form of a thesis statement and mentioning your main line/s of inquiry. The abstract can substitute for your first paragraph of your essay and you should aim to have the abstract contain the same kind of information you'd include in an opening paragraph.

Morbid Fascination

OK... I am happy to report that I am not the only one struck with a morbid fascination since seeing the film, Heavenly Creatures. Maybe its the abnormal psychology thing or simply the viciousness/apparent premeditation of the attack. I do know that the film captured my interest, or was it the story itself?

After researching, I was astonished to find that Juliet Hulme is now Anne Perry, a crime novelist with an impressive fan base. It seems amazing to me that her readers seem to draw no sense of irony related to her true identity. Maybe many are unaware of her true identity, though there is plenty of information available. Perry has been somewhat tight-lipped (as you can imagine) about this episode in her early life. But there is a very interesting interview she granted to Ian Rankin in which she discusses redemption and responsibility. However, she also refers to herself as an 'accessory' to the murder and claims that Pauline threatened to kill herself if they did not kill Pauline's mother, the 'obstacle' to their remaining together. In the past, she has also alluded to her TB medications causing her mental incapacitation at the time. Perry also refutes that her relationship with Pauline was homosexual in nature. She is a devout Mormon and seems to have come to some kind of peace with herself and her past. She resides in Scotland.

Pauline's life after prison has not been as glamorous, though decidedly successful considering that she was convicted of murdering her mother. She went on to study and teach, acquiring the post of headmistress before retiring. She managed to maintain her anonymity a bit longer than Juliet. She took the name Hilary Nathan and now owns and operates a riding school in rural England. She is considered a devout Roman Catholic and our only real understanding of her inner life comes from a brief explanation by her sister, Wendy, that she is fully remorseful for the murder.

Neither Pauline nor Juliet ever married. Juliet classifies herself as heterosexual and there a bit of evidence that Pauline is homosexual. I do find it interesting that Juliet claims that there was no homosexuality involved. No matter the physical relationship the girls had, without benefit of the film and only when reading the diary passages and trial testimony, it is clear that the relationship was an explosively charged and intense one. Though the insanity defense did not stick, the defense psychologist explains that the girls were suffering from a folie a deux, or 'communicative insanity'. This disorder is generally characterized by one dominant ego and another receptive ego. What may have been a more accurate diagnosis is folie simultanée, where two equal egos influence each other in shared delusions. What is most amazing is that these women have been to a precipice of madness and it seems that each were able to pull back from that step, in deed, anyway. There is no way that we will ever know the truth about the girls, their mental states and, ultimately, who they were and why they murdered Nora. The story's unfolding in Heavenly Creatures does show us a vivid, rich possibility. In the end, though, its just a movie and the truth of it all will never be truly understood.

Queer Mateship

Muriel's Wedding has been a favorite film for years. I own it and every once in a while pop it in for a good laugh/cry. In the context of this class, I have been able to appreciate it in a new way. Related to this film, I better understand that oh-so-macho concept of mateship.

Muriel's Wedding is, first and foremost, offering biting social commentary about machismo. It turns on its head the concept of mateship that we've been discussing by exploring the same bond between women who ultimately choose to live life together, and without husbands. Although not surprising or controversial, I found the classroom discussion regarding homoerotic tensions in the film interesting. Before this discussion, it would never have occurred to me that Rhonda and Muriel's relationship is homosexual in nature. However, in the narrative as presented I can certainly see how and why the relationship is easily seen as homosexual, even if not in action but spirit alone. There is a sense of dramatic camp to the film (which is closely tied to queer expression.) Greg Taylor is quoted: http://salymanderfilmaslit.blogspot.com/2007/01/camp-campy-campiness.html "camp is fundamentally an aesthetic declaration of the spectator’s ability to choose and manipulate the cultural meaning surrounding her. Camp has been appealing to dominated cultures […] precisely because it asserts control over one’s own symbolic identity." ABBA has long been described as campy, and Hogan's use of their music must have been fertile soil to create the story.

So, what is it that the film critiques? I think it is the very essence of mateship as an understood extension of the concept of 'a man's country'. By deconstructing the patriarchal figure-head of the Helsop family and reconstructing mateship in the context of female relationship, Hogan takes a postmodern swipe at the heart of what can be seen as misogynistic national ideals. And what better choice than a campy production fueled by camp music to make his point. Essentially, this is what camp has attempted to illuminate (Sorry Susan Sontag, I do take some exception to your thesis.)

I suppose, in the end, I do not think that the movie is homosexual, necessarily. I do believe that it is an example of queer expression, which has grown to illustrate and give voice to heterosexual lifestyles operating outside of and rejecting the artifice of the 'norm'.

Australian Films on IFC!

There are a number of Aussie films being shown on IFC (the Independent Film Channel) this weekend. Yesterday they showed Picnic at Hanging Rock (which I wanted to watch but my husband's eyes started to glaze over). This afternoon they showed The Cars That Ate Paris (damn I missed it!) and right now they are showing Proof, and tonight at 11:05 pm is Lantana, starring Anthony LaPaglia, Geoffrey Rush and Barbara Hershey. Some of these films are repeating later this month.

Australian Cinema Today

So this far in the class we have watched several of Australia's finest movies from the seventies, eighties and nineties - many of the films which defined Australia's cinema and exposed cultural themes found in no other country.

But what of Australian cinema today?

I'm sure many of us have heard about or even seen the preview of the soon to be released 'Australia', starring both Nicole Kidman and Hugh Jackman. The film is directed by Baz Luhrmann of 'Moulin Rouge', 'Romeo + Juliet' and 'Strictly Ballroom' fame - all Australian influenced films which have achieved mainstream success in America. 'Australia' seems to fit the exact same profile as Luhrmann's previous films: it stars Australian born but mainstream Hollywood actors, it is produced by American Hollywood studios and appears to be targeted at American movie goers.

I refuse to believe that 'Australia' will do the nation's cinema much justice; so I set out and searched the internet to see what critically acclaimed yet non-mainstream Australian films have been produced in the last two years. And here are my findings:

The Black Balloon (2008)

Starring 'Muriel's Wedding''s own Toni Collette, 'The Black Balloon' was released just this year and filmed entirely in New South Whales, Australia. It is about a boy trying find a normal adolascence and come to accept his autistic brother. The film received two notable Australian awards and was well regarded by audiences and critics alike.
The Black Balloon

The Jammed (2007)

'The Jammed' is a low budget but multiple award winning independent film that was entirely filmed in Australia. The story follows the lives of a handful of women and their struggle with sex trafficking and deportation in the city of Melbourne. The film was acclaimed for its realism and award winning script.
The Jammed

The Unfinished Sky (2007)

Australian Director Peter Duncan tells the story of an outback farmer who takes in an Afghani woman who has fled from a local brothel. The entirely Australian funded film was nominated for nine awards and praised for its stunning cinematography and portrayal of the outback around Queensland, Australia.

The Unfinished Sky

A Man's Home is his Castle

We’ve seen many critically acclaimed Australian films in class that have garnered attention around the world.  The Castle is a lesser known, but equally entertaining Australian comedy from 1997.

The Castle concerns the contended life of the Kerrigan family.  Father Daryll Kerrigan purchased the family home adjacent to the Melbourne Airport and beneath several major power lines for next to nothing.  In fact, the son proudly reports the house is worth “almost as much today as when we bought it.”  The house features numerous add-on rooms and a fake chimney.  Daryll is exceedingly proud of his offspring and their achievements, the greatest of which is the degree his daughter earned at Sunshine Taffe Hairdressing.  All seems right with the Kerrigans until an eminent domain case threatens the family’s home.

The film was shot in 11 days for less than $500,000 and went on to gross over $10,000,000.  Though the film did not receive much international attention, it is critically acclaimed in Australia.  At face value, the film is a comedy but it also touches on themes of land rights, the Australian constitution and the concept of the Aussie Battler.  The Castle was Eric Bana’s first film and it also starts Sophie Lee (Muriel’s Wedding).

NY Times Review

The Castle and Eminent Domain

First 8 Minutes on YouTube

Blind Photographers

After watching Proof and reading about Joceyln Moorhouse’s inspiration to write the story after hearing a story about a blind photographer, I decided to search for blind photographers myself on the Internet. Google instantly gave me 10,600 websites, articles and pictures that were relevant to the phrase, “blind photographer.” The idea of being blind, yet channeling your creative energy into an art that is purely visual is astonishing to me. I don’t think any non-visually impaired individual will ever truly understand the relationship between photography and the visually impaired. There seems to be a sort of magical connection between the impossibility of this relationship.

Google’s search varied from articles about exhibitions, newspaper articles and photography programs for blind people. There was one article that really stuck out to me the most. The San Francisco Chronicle had written an article about a man named Pete Eckert who had hadn’t always been blind, but lost his sight due to a eye disease called retinitis pigmentosa. Eckert, however isn’t just an ordinary photographer. Besides being blind, he also works with infrared photography. Eckert describes using all his senses the feel the world around him. "I can see lots of ... really weird things," Eckert says in the Chronicle article written by Delfin Vigil. Eckert is also quoted in the article by Vigil saying, "I can feel light so strongly that it allows me to see the bones in my skeleton as pulsating energy, or like in an X-ray. At times I can sort of see sound. Sometimes I can even see things from the back of my head."
The photo shown here is one of Eckert’s and is titled “Saloon.” In the article, Vigil talks about Eckert’s photography process. Vigil describes that the photo was “shot at the old Saloon on Grant Avenue in North Beach, once a favorite hangout. Relying on his hazy memories of past drinking days, Eckert entered the Saloon, scoped out a spot in the back and waited for tourists to fill up the bar and create sounds of the room. He then snapped the pictures in about the same time it took to drink a Manhattan.” The process of feeling and understanding all the aspects of an environment before photographing it makes perfect sense to me. So many people are so quick to take a photograph of a location, event, or area before they even know all its nooks and crannies. As also shown through the character Martin in Proof, blind photographers may be visually impaired, but their intuition and relationship with their other senses is well beyond those of sighted artists.