Not Quite Hollywood: The Wild, Untold Story of Ozploitation

Not Quite Hollywood: The Wild, Untold Story of Ozploitation!

Mark Hartley

 

This feature documentary is a great look into the history of Australian film. It cleverly explores Australian film in ways that are rarely seen. The interviewees are amazing, including Quentin Tarantino who turns out to be a fanatic of Australian film.

 

Unfortunately the one thing I did learn is how crude, rude and sex obsessed our industry was in the 70’s. At times the films seemed closer to porn than detailed film.

 

The films production values are amazing, each interview is set in a beautiful setting and lit really well which, I believe adds to the class of the film. I learnt a lot about the different movements we have already been through and the strong influence funding has over film in their country. The good element was that it had a hopeful ending with Australian content starting to be taken more seriously on a world platform. 

Oscar and Lucinda

Oscar and Lucinda

 

 The reputation of Australian content is generally tossed aside when put on a world stage, unfortunate but true. I felt that this film altered this perception. Armstrong has an eye firstly for casting, especially picking up on Cate Blanchette as a rising star. Her wit for picking up on undiscovered actors and amazing casting, really made it work. The film was both beautiful, and clever with a strong story, strong performance and storong images to support it. Oscar and Lucinda are fantastic characters who work well one the screen. The only element I had trouble with was the constant geographical shifting if the story. 

Secondly, the imagery and cinematography of the film displays Australia as an absolutely beautiful place, which allows the beauty of the signature shot, when the glass church floats down the river. This is not just a beautiful shot bust stirs up the emotion in the film using her visual storytelling as a key to her work.

An amazing film that exceeded my expectations. 

December Boys

December Boys

 

In relation to Australian film this film is a nice modern view of the styles, attitudes and images of life in the early 1960’s within Australia that modner audiences rarely see. However as a film within the film context it doenst quite pull up to scratch.

 

In a way the film sold its soul before it began. The story (another adaptation! ) from the novel by Michael Noonan written in 1963. It focuses on a group of Orphans who are sent to the coast for a holiday.

 

I did enjoy the film and I must admit I was originally attracted to the film because of Daniel Radcliff (otherwise known as Harry Potter) was for the first time featuring in a different role. However I felt that with his casting they may have lost a direction that the film needed.

 

Unfortunately, Radcliff looks a bit old in contrast with the other boys. It feels like he doesn’t really fit in with the others, which I suppose was part of the “coming of age” style of the film. Still he felt just a little too old in the role, especially when he comes across counterpart,

 

The other young boys are very good in their roles. It is a bit of a catch twenty-two situation because without Radcliff there would not have been the publication and perhaps not the distribution to have the film as exposed as it was. I still feel though that the film could have been stronger with a young actor who really fit the part of Maps.

In contrast to the boys the girls in the film seem to be of a Syren breed.  Teresa appears magically appears from the wilderness riding stallions through the crystallising waves and Lucy appears and disappears from mystical caves like forms of mystical goddesses. Perhaps the mystic of the women was directed a little to boldly and off set the boys position in the film.

The film is a nice change form Saw series and Woolf Creek which are some of the more popular Australian films abroad at the time of its arrival. It is shot to show the beauty of the Australian cost, which in fact it achieves very well.

Still I think this could have been a very strong film on its own with the correct casting. It is a shame that such sacrifices have to be made for modern Australian films to be distributed.

In contrast to some of the films being released in Australia I must admit it was a clever choice to cast Radcliff because the film was need. I suppose it is up to each viewer to see if they see this as an advantage or disadvantage. 

Frustration with the Industry

Frustration with the industry.

I find it difficult to write about Australian film. Probably because I am an Australian and I want our films to do well but I tend to find even with Australian reviewers, they all boost the Australian films as fantastic works. However, when our films are put on a world stage they tend to fall behind the pack.

It is the boarder crossing films such as Bad Boy Bubby  that grasp the attention of world cinema goers because of its outrageous take on Bubby’s life. When considering Australian film is it needed to take into account the fact than many Australian filmmakers are working with extremely low budgets with little support from the government? Is it that art is shunned more than usual in this country?

Why is it that this has been a running issue over the past hundred years and we still can’t seem to get it right?

It is clear we have the talent within our industries this is known by the success of Australian workers in different countries. Australians love their film but tend to avoid Australian films because of their reputation for bad content and boring story lines. Why would mainstream viewers waist twelve dollars on a film they wont enjoy when they go to the cinemas to escape?

Perhaps we are trying too hard to find the controversial or the amazing story. Perhaps we need to start building the industry up searching for new stories in our quickly changing society. 

Cosi

Cosi 

Directed by Mark Joffel

I am not sure if I am bias because I love this story as the  stage play, written by Louis Nowra but Cosi makes me laugh out loud which rarely happens in film. Although the film doesn’t always seem to hold the magic of when you see it performed live on stage, the acting of this particular ensemble is a priceless combination.

Cosi follows Louis, a playwright into a new job in the local  mental asylum. He is employed to put on a play with the inmates to keep them engaged. He attempts to try and put on a talent show but is overrun by the hilarious Roy who is determined that they will perform Mozart’s Opera “Cosi Fan Tutte”. By the time of the performance Louis realises the charm of each of the inmates he has been working with.

I think this film really hits a chord of Australian humour by the relationships shown between each of the characters. The amazing casting of Barry Otto as the mad Roy, Jacki Weaver as the flamboyant and love struck Cherry and David Wenham as the wild pyromaniac Doug. Still, each character has their own place in the ensemble and the overall story.

                                                                 

I could see that it might not hit such a strong chord overseas but it definitely hits a chord with the Australian humour. I think this comes with the mundane and hilarious situations the characters get themselves in. Although the humour is slightly violent at tomes (when Doug tells the story about setting his mothers cats alight.) It can also be a little crude; I think that comes with Australian humour itself.

In terms of production quality it is not amazing. The film is obviously held back by its low budget thus it has a slight amateur feel to it having been made in 1996. However, it is the performance we wait for and generously receive

.

This film rekindles and realigns what Australian’s see as comedy. It is a different humour than any other.

The Tracker

The Tracker

Ralph De Heer

 

The Tracker is a beautiful story of irony in the pursuit of “justice” in the early years of the 20^th century in Australia.

 

In true De Heer style the film is a little cryptic in style as it follows four men through the Australian landscape in 1922 to find a run away Aboriginal man who may or may not have committed a crime. The film has a kind of Brechtian style as we spend a lot of time on the road searching with the four men. None of the characters have proper names; instead it is the Tracker and the Fanatic although these are hardly used.

 

Part of the appeal of this film for me is simply watching David Gulpilil on screen. His presence, subtly of facial expression and especially his movement on screen is amazing to watch and allowing the other actors to bring the story to life. He seems to be a very generous actor who brings a cheeky acting skill and personality to the screen.

 

Wether this was intentional or by chance in contrast to Gulpilil, all the other actors look so uncomfortably out of place in the bush. Ultimately this adds to the story because soon into their search, “the tracker” realises that the group are nothing without him and he is able to start playing games and leading the group astray form the other Aboriginal man they are chasing. The one scene, which shows this is when The tracker (Gulpilil) pulls The Fanatic off the cliff and into the dam. After trying to drown him he gets out and starts apologising saying it is an accident.

 

Its setting within Australian film brings into play the beauty of the Aboriginal population and the importance of the rugged landscape of Australia. De Heer breaks the sections of our journey with the men up into sections by allowing shots to drift off into the Australian landscape, perhaps this is to notify the audience that the party are getting further from the “civilised” or that the land is a beauty in contrast to the story.

 

This is my favourite De Heer film. I love its us of the medium in different ways to bring emotion to the screen like cut always to paintings and visual meanders through the bush. In a way it captures a nice humour within quite a tragic story.