"They come out with a strange, fantastic feeling and they can carry that, and it opens some little door or something that's magical and that's the power that film has." - David Lynch
Accidents Happen (Andrew Lancaster, Australia, 2009) This film is quite an achievement, a very clever dysfunctional family black comedy. Its succeeds on at least two fronts. If you didn't know otherwise, there is almost nothing to suggest the film was made in Australia. It's set in Connecticut (as is the novel it is based on, by American-born author now living in Australia, Brian Carbee) and, other than Geena Davis in the lead role, most of the remaining cast are Australians. While it is relatively easy to recreate the American mid-west (cars, flag-poles, etc), it's the seamless use of accents that I found most impressive.
The Australian kitchen-sink dramas (KSDs) of recent years have usually not failed, but not succeeded either. They kind of sit in this nether region where they look nice, have good performances and handle worthy subjects, but never really get off the ground dramatically. Another success of Accidents Happen is that it has taken a genre that has been done to death, and injected pizzazz or oomph. It's got that wow-factor that US quirky indie comedies (QICs) aspire for, but have done to death as much as we've done our KSDs to death, but with a freshness and darkness the QICs lack. You could say that Accidents Happen takes the best of both KSD and QIC genres and leaves out what's hackneyed, and come up with a really fresh oddball film that works.
Davis plays the mother of an accident-prone family. She's bitter, foul-mouthed with wit and is perfect for the role. I've mentioned recently that English-language films don't seem to offer interesting roles for women - most of the interesting roles have fairly limited appeal and are usually chick-flicks. This character is a joy to behold and a gift to Davis (and vice versa), who injects the film with humour, energy and ultimately, warmth.
While the support cast (including Harry Cook and Joel Tobeck) are strong, special mention also goes to Harrison Gilbertson as the youngest son who is most prominent in the film. He's perfect for his role as the good but damaged and guilt-ridden son who parents the mother and puts up with the taunts of his brother (Cook). There's a pathos to the character that is both endearing and moving.
Like most good comedy, the story works because it has a foundation in reality. It's stylised, but underneath we can believe the scenarios presented. I know I can - I've been in multiple serious accidents (god only knows how I survived) and lost a child. The depictions of a family coming to terms with its various misfortunes ring true and are simultaneously funny and tragic.
The film's recurring theme song is terrific; in fact the music throughout is very good - perhaps unsurprising given the director has a musical background. The visuals are also excellent, with some lovely slo-mo shots of various accidents in close-up. The film has a dreamy look about it with the use of lighting and atmospherics. The whole production design has a lovely feel to it.
I noticed David Stratton on At the Movies questioning why an Australian film, made in Australian with mostly Australian actors should depict an American story. I think this is unnecessarily picky. It's not the first local film to do it. Virtually all of the scenes set in America in Mao's Last Dancer were shot in Sydney, for example. It's also not evident that Happy Feet is an Australian production. The Machinist (starring Christian Bale) and Planet 51 both appear to be American films, but are produced in Spain. For me, Accidents Happen showcases what we are capable of in terms of taking on the Americans at their own game and in our ability to adapt and diversify. Hey, we're doing something different and let's celebrate that!
I think the direction the local film industry is taking is a good thing. I've often said that what the industry needs is a steady number of runs on the board, and with Beneath Hill 60 also currently screening, that's two strong local films that local audiences should have no trouble connecting with and feeling good about what we produce. We need films like this, that audiences will go to because they want some good entertainment, and not because they're feeling charitable and a need to support the local industry. If we can continue to do this over a period of time, perhaps we can do what Germany has achieved over the last decade or so: lifted the percentage of local film attendances from around 5% to the current 25%. It's do-able.
Out of interest, I thought I'd peruse the multiplexes to see how widely the film is being screened. I was more than a little surprised to find that neither Hoyts, Greater Union nor Reading were screening it and Village has it on one screen only - the Rivoli (where I saw it), in their smallest cinema, which only has six rows of seats! I just don't get that at all. This seems to be a clear bias against Australian films, even though the casual viewer would have no idea it's not American and even though it's better than most films of the genre from America. There's clearly shit going down here and I'm not impressed with the distinct disregard of the big muscle players.
Another week heavy with film - the stand-out is Man with a Movie Camera which screened at Melbourne Cinémathèque on Wednesday, an amazing film given it's place in history. Starting this week is a three-week season of films by (and one about) Jacques Demy, which I'm looking forward to - I've seen none of his work. My reviews of the two German films listed below can be found on my preview of the Festival of German Films.
FILMS:
Greenberg (Noah Baumbach, USA, 2010)
A Serious Man (Ethan Coen, Joel Coen, USA/UK/France, 2009)
Good Hair (Jeff Stilson, USA, 2009)
Madeo (Mother, Bong Joon-ho, South Korea, 2009)
Chelovek s kino-apparatom (Man with a Movie Camera, Dziga Vertov, USSR, 1929)
Aelita (Yakov Protazanov, USSR, 1924)
Le concert (The Concert, Radu Mihaileanu, France/Italy/Romania/Belgium, 2009)
Vision - Aus dem Leben der Hildegard von Bingen (Vision, Margarethe von Trotta, Germany/France, 2009)
*Nikita (La Femme Nikita, Luc Besson, France/Italy, 1990)
In Bruges (Martin McDonagh, UK/USA, 2008)
Greenberg I prefer this latest Baumbach film to his previous Margot at the Wedding (which I found a bit dull) but not as much as The Squid and the Whale, which I think more compellingly captured some home truths. This latest film seems to aspire in part with mumblecore, particularly with the character of Florence (played wonderfully by Greta Gerwig), the themes of adult lack of direction in life, and perhaps alluded to by the appearance of mumblecore wunderkind Mark Duplass. But it's not really mumblecore per se, as Greenberg (Ben Stiller in a solid and welcome serious role) is in his forties, as are his friends. And the heavy use of soundtrack music also gives it a different aesthetic.
I like that the film is nuanced and demonstrates Baumbach's eye for details within dysfunctional relationships. Given that the titular character has recently spent time in a psychiatric institution, it's not quite as universal a story as Baumbach's previous films. What is universal getting to a point in life and realising that things have not gone to plan, and of opportunities lost.
Baumbach is a thoughtful film-maker and has a take on life that for me is real. There's an underlying truthfulness to his films, one that many of his compatriots are not prepared to handle so frankly. Yet this film doesn't fully grab me. I would have preferred the film give more time to Gerwig's role. Stiller performs surprisingly convincingly, given the puerile material he normally works with, but his deliberately unlikeable character lacks something - there's a kind of monotony to it whereby he's going nowhere, though that seems to be the point of the role. This film will likely appeal mostly to fans of Baumbach, mumblecore and Stiller.
A Serious Man This screened as part of double feature with Greenberg at Nova. I can see how they make good companion pieces, but I don't understand why (1) Greenberg is getting advance screenings as a double, (2) the advance screenings are over the course of a week and not just a weekend, (3) the film has no confirmed release date, and (4) it's screening only during the day (when most people are at work). Though I'd seen A Serious Man already and have it on Blu-ray, I decided to stay and see it again on the big screen.
I noticed a lot of small details that I missed on first screening, but otherwise, I don't think I gleaned much that I didn't on first viewing. The Yiddish story at the beginning remains my favourite part and the main story to me seems to be all about the Jewish identity, and the indefinable aspects of Jewish culture. I love that the Rabbis are very matter-of-fact as opposed to a false saintliness that their Christian counterparts often assume. I'll have to watch this again on the Blu-ray with the extras.
Good Hair I wasn't going to see this documentary at ACMI, but changed my mind after the missus showed me the Chris Rock clip from YouTube below. It has nothing to do with Good Hair, but it demonstrated to me how intelligent and insightful Rock is.
Good Hair is about black American women's obsession with their hair and the lengths they go to in order to have "good hair", i.e., like Asian or European women's hair. Rock ensures the material is always entertaining without allowing his personality to shadow the material. It effectively presents information that should surprise audiences, for example, how much these women spend on hair products, how widespread their obsessions are, and what these products are made from and where they are sourced.
I've read criticisms that the film isn't balanced but I don't think a documentary necessarily has to have a counter view to be worthy. Rock presents various pieces of information, clearly has his own view, but leaves it to both his subjects and audience to make up their own mind. It's definitely worth a look.
The following clip is for my pleasure, and if you like it too, that's a bonus. Here's Chris Rock in full-flight stand-up.
..
Mother There was a lot of buzz about this film coming out of MIFF last year and I was happy to catch it out of the pressure-cooker environment of a major festival, which gives one a bit more space to appreciate it. There's been comparisons to Hitchcock and others and they're all valid. The film looks nice, confounds expectations quite cleverly (but not too cleverly) and is definitely worth seeing. Like Bong's previous film, I like it, but not as much as others seem to. Kudos to the Nova cinema for giving it a chance to find a non-festival audience. The Nova has so many screenings these days that no-one else is supporting, so in support of diversity, it behooves us to support these small-run screenings so that Nova keeps putting them on.
Man with a Movie Camera This is one of the most amazing silent-era films I've seen, a veritable masterpiece. I had no idea that cinema was so introspective and developed at such an early stage. Vertov sets out to prove that cinema is an art distinct from literature and theatre by proclaiming that this film includes no sets, no inter-titles and no actors (with a brief exception). The film is mostly documentary in form, but not entirely. It has elements that are socially anthropological and it is also self-reflexive, including elements that are about the process of making a film. The array of techniques on display is awesome and puts Paul Greengrass to shame (hand-held doesn't have to look like shit).
Watching it at Cinémathèque, I was frequently reminded of social realist and essay films such as the works of Agnès Varda, Chris Marker and others. I imagine this film would have been treasured by the early social realist movement in Australia, who were largely influenced by Soviet cinema and communism.
I was also amazed at how Russian society at that time looked almost indistinguishable from say American society, with all the trappings of bourgeois life - bikinis, hair salons, dressing up, art deco artwork and architecture, etc. Equally fascinating is Vertov's presumed intention of capturing the seemingly banal; he must have known that this would document a particular place and time. It's focus on machinery in action is reminiscent of Fritz Lang's Metropolis, made two years earlier. Of course, what may appear banal today, is not necessarily banal even in the near future. I thought this title was available from Criterion but can't find it online. I'd like to get this on DVD or (preferably) Blu-ray. If anyone can point me in the right direction, that'd be great.
Aelita I was getting pretty tired by the time this first Russian sci-fi (silent) film screened at Cinémathèque. It's worth seeing if one has the chance, particularly on the big screen, but it didn't engage me anywhere near as much as Man with a Movie Camera. It's futuristic sets also remind one of Metropolis, but was made three years before.
The Concert This comedic drama (or dramatic comedy) has a central conceit that is basically an impossible premise (though the director claims it is based partly on factual incidents). One's ability to enjoy the film is - initally, at least - dependent on one's ability to suspend disbelief, which shouldn't be a problem for the mainstream audience it targets. A former orchestra conductor for the Bolshoi Orchestra witholds an invitation by the Chantelet Theatre, and brings together all his old friends from the Soviet era to perform in Paris in place of the actual orchestra.
There is social and political parody of the Soviet era, which Mihaileanu allows the audience to absorb without feeling they're being preached to. The film's first third is largely slapstick and enjoyable enough, though a bit formulaic. The middle is a bit flat before the film really kicks into gear, when the luminous Mélanie Laurent charismatically consumes the screen (as she always does). Along with the wonderful musical element, the film surprisingly grabs the audience in a way I didn't expect, and it had me in tears. Mind you, Mihaileanu's more serious Live and Become also had a similar effect on me. This film is clearly aimed at the Palace demographic and I imagine it will be well-received. It's not must-see for cinephiles, but it's not bad fun either. It opens in cinemas on 29 April.
Nikita I was pleasantly surprised to find that this Luc Besson film stands up quite well after twenty years. It was the first French film I saw that emulated Hollywood blockbusters and I thought it had an edginess that Hollywood lacks. On this second viewing, my observation was that the film shifts between cartoonish violence not so different to a good James Bond film (and it's been a long time since there's been a good one of those) and drama in which the character development and actor performances are just so real. Small details, like Nikita's torn nylons and bleeding leg for example, are a nice touch that Hollywood would normally gloss over. These elements give the film gravitas that one doesn't usually associate with the genre.
Like my recent viewing of Besson's Léon, I had a lot of fun watching this. The film introduces us to Victor (Jean Reno) who re-surfaces as Léon in a full-bodied role in Léon. Nikita was remade by Hollywood, with Bridget Fonda as the lead, but I couldn't bring myself to see it.
In Bruges Looks good, good characters, good fun. And lots of profanity. Not much else to say. Except that it's nice to see Ralph Fiennes playing something other than a broody, whiny prick.
Animal Kingdom (David Michôd, Australia, 2010) This debut feature by David Michôd, which won the Grand Jury Prize for World Cinema at this year's Sundance Film Festival, is simply exhilarating. I'll go so far as to say that I think it's easily one of the top ten Australian films of the last two decades. To put that into perspective, the only films I’d place on that pedestal are: Everynight... Everynight, The Boys, Em 4 Jay and Samson and Delilah. If pushed, I could also include Ten Canoes, Shine and Three Blind Mice. And now Animal Kingdom.
Animal Kingdom is a mixture of genres – at heart an ensemble family drama, but also a crime thriller. The poster art perfectly captures the mood – much like a Shakespearean or Greek tragedy. Clearly inspired by the events surrounding the Walsh Street police shootings of 1988, it details a family’s implosion as crime and police corruption collide. Josh or J (James Frecheville) is embraced by that part of the family that his mother hid from him until she unexpectedly dies. He has no-one else to turn to. Like Malik, the young petty crim in Jacques Audiard’s A Prophet, he becomes our unwitting tour guide to the dark side as we follow a relative innocent’s induction into a world of crime.
Animal Kingdom is no less suspenseful than Audiard’s film and just as powerful. In fact, it's like a cross between A Prophet and The Boys. There is some violence, but it’s mostly off-screen. The film creates a nail-biting atmosphere by feeding the audience information that characters are denied. One of my favourite scenes involves a suburban dad (Clayton Jacobson from Kenny) simply backing his car out of his drive-way. We know the urgency of the situation, but he’s oblivious to the danger. There are various twists, which are wholly ‘organic’ and believable, as opposed to being tricksy Hollywood-style.
Some actors have never put in better performances. Michôd has brilliantly tapped a hitherto unseen talent in Ben Mendelsohn, without a trace of his usual larrikinisms. His inhabiting the role of a criminal psychopath is just as terrifying as David Wenham’s Brett Sprague in The Boys. Jackie Weaver's performance as the matriarch is also stunning. It demonstrates a skillful balance of excess and restraint, with an unsettling effect created by the contradictions of her homeliness, emotional neediness, mental stability and cunning ruthlessness. She has some great lines and is one of the backbones of the story. Guy Pearce is another and his performance as the seasoned detective is perfectly understated. Frecheville and Mendelsohn are the other pillars.
The whole ensemble cast performs well, with strong support from Joel Edgerton, Sullivan Stapleton, Dan White, Laura Wheelwright and others. Character development is just wonderful across the board. The story works so well because Michôd mostly underplays it, trimming the film of any fat. J is quietly introverted, so we don’t know what to expect. Ambiguity in characters causes doubt about who can be trusted. Sometimes, when action takes place, it seemingly comes out of nowhere. Court scenes are all but removed, focusing on the human and suspense elements.
Adam Arkapaw's magnificent camera work recalls László Baranyai's work in Noise (2007), easily the best aspect of that film. The music and sound design are terrific – pretty much on a par with the excellent achievements of Samson and Delilah. Each of the parts of Animal Kingdom is well-realised; the sum of the parts is sublime. This is a finely constructed story, one of the best films of the year and I can’t wait to see it again. Given that Sony Picture Classics snapped it up straight after the Sundance gong, hopefully it will do well in the US. I have no doubt it will receive a strong reception here.
Animal Kingdom is being released in Australian cinemas on 3 June.
Still unwell, I missed Film is a Girl & a Gun and Dogtooth, and there was a no-show by Claire Denis for her talk with Philippa Hawker. On the strength of Beau travail, one of my favourite French films, I just couldn't miss 35 Shots of Rum.
35 rhums (35 Shots of Rum, Claire Denis, France/Germany, 2008)
35 Shots of Rum I sense that there's a lot more I could write about this film than I will, because I don't have the time to ponder and research it. It's clearly a very personal film for Denis, who was due to introduce it and attend a Q&A, but didn't show. Apparently she's preparing her latest film for screening in competition at Venice. But Michelle Carey conveyed a few words about the film, and how the story basically is about her grandmother who died, leaving her grandfather to raise her mother.
This is another 'quietly satisfying' film that is observational and captures some of the minutiae within relationships. A father and daughter struggle to let go of each other, each pursues another or is pursued. People make advances, counter advances, there are rejections. Love, pain, it's all there.
Still Walking MIFF held a Kore-eda retrospective a couple of years ago and I think I saw them all, or maybe I missed one. Consequently, I was keen to see this latest effort and wasn't disappointed. Basically, it's a day in the lives of a family that unite (begrudgingly) each year to observe the death of a family member thirteen years earlier.
The son, daughter and their respective families travel to the home of their parents, an aging and retired doctor and his wife. It's summer and straight away I'm reminded of Olivier Assayas' sublime Summer Hours, especially the opening scene which similarly depicts the various dispersed branches of a family in an infrequent rural get-together in the family home. While Assayas' film procedes to explore other themes, Kore-eda's remains very much in the small details of the inter-family interactions.
Kore-eda is a very talented director. It is the observational nature of the film in capturing details of otherwise very ordinary people that makes this film a delight to watch. It feels almost a privilege to be privy to their lives, to see what makes them tick. It reminded me of a funeral I attended a couple of years ago for the father of a work colleague. I knew not the deceased man but attended to support my work pal, who had shown me support in various ways after my son's passing. At the funeral, I heard various eulogies that brought tears to my eyes as I received some insights into this man's life. And so I felt with this film, which becomes a meditation on the nature of relationships and ultimately, their passing.
Still Walking is a quietly satisfying film, certainly no headline act, but the type and quality of film I look forward to each year at MIFF, largely because this is the only time of year we get to see films like it. If quiet, nuanced, insightful, contemplative cinema is your thing, you'll want to see it.
Red Riding: 1980 As expected, with James Marsh at the helm, this is a big improvement over the previous instalment (Red Riding: 1974). The story seems to have a closer alignment to the Yorkshire killings, plays out with more realism and is more convincing all-round. Paddy Considine puts in a good performance and all-in-all, this ain't a bad genre film. I'm now looking forward to the final instalment, 1983, tomorrow.
BTW, while there are some slight connections between this and the previous film, you don't need to have seen the earlier one at all. This is self-contained.
Sweet Rush It's Wajda in his twilight years; old age is here and death can't be too far away. And so it is with this film, a very strange creature indeed, that requires some further information to glean its meaning. It mixes a film's fiction with events taking place in the life of the film's protagonist and we switch between different 'realities'.
Technically, the talent is obvious and the visuals are very nice. A bit more narrative clarity would have been nice. By the end, I had some idea of what it's about and, if you ever consider seeing it, make sure you read up about it first.
Day 5 and still no knock-out films I've seen. What about you?
Home (Ursula Meier, Switzerland/France/Belgium, 2008)
Red Riding: 1974 (Julian Jarrold, UK, 2009)
Katalin Varga (Peter Strickland, Romania/UK/Hungary, 2009)
Home I wanted to see this film on the strength of my fascination with Isabelle Huppert, who is perhaps my favourite actress. Huppert is obviously sought for her unusual talents: her ability to display both strength and fragility - often concurrently - and her ability to take on very demanding roles. She seems to be drawn to the types of roles and films that also draw me. They're often in small films, like Home, a film I'd describe as not one of Huppert's finest choices.
A family is living within spitting distance of a disused highway, which is effectively their front yard. Life is about to change drastically when, with little warning, it is resurfaced and consequently re-opened to traffic. Privacy is lost, noise and fumes intrude and the family's routine is completely transformed, upsetting the domestic balance.
The scenario is quite inventive and executed effectively, at least visually. I was wondering throughout the film how they were able to realistically create the whole set-up, especially the transformation of an old highway to a new one. The family dynamics are mostly well-developed and the film sucks us into its world... to a point. Unfortunately, the various elements of the film's narrative don't stick and plausibility becomes an issue. As the film progresses, it becomes less and less believable.
Wouldn't the respective statutory authorities give more warning? Wouldn't they provide more amenity, like access to the property? Would the family really imprison themselves? The MIFF synopsis describes the film as a "social farce" that "teeters on the verge of comedy", but that wasn't my perception at all. It seemed very much a social drama/family drama. The film looks nice, but the story is inconsistent and Meier doesn't seem to make the most of her good ideas.
Red Riding: 1974 Julian Jarrold isn't exactly what I'd call an exciting director, but was prepared to give this British crime thriller a go based on good word-of-mouth. It immediately reminds me of the French Public Enemy no.1/Mesrine starring Vincent Cassell, but is not quite as strong. It is very entertaining as a mainstream genre film and feels like a tele-movie.
The film's set-up is not too bad, though some devices seemed a bit too Underbelly-populist, like the sex and nudity. The film is based on a novel, and frames a fiction around real-crime events, namely the Yorkshire Ripper. The film does get a bit silly as it progresses, but it still had my heart palpitating and palms sweating, so it does work on its intended level. The verdict: fun, lots of energy and exciting, but not must-see material. Wait for DVD or TV; who knows, it might get a theatrical release. I'm still planning to see the next instalment, Red Riding: 1980, and I have higher hopes for this as it's directed by James Marsh whose previous films include Man on Wire and The King, my no.2 favourite film of 2006.
Katalin Varga I don't have much to say about this film; basically I found it pretty ordinary. A woman is ostracised from her village after an affair and consequently exacts revenge on men who wronged her many years earlier. My biggest problem with the film concerns how she catches up with these guys and the impossible coincidences involved. There are other technical problems, like the use of sound and sometimes sub-standard visuals, but I could overlook those. I gave myself a lower threshold for walking out, and could have walked out on this at any point, but it was enjoyable enough to go along with the ride and stay. It's only 84 minutes long, so that was a plus (not very flattering, though, eh?).
Violent Cop What a blast this film is, and what a blast the original Japanese audiences must have had. Here is this guy - Kitano - known throughout the land as a comedian, and he comes out with brutally violent stuff that we all now know him for. Quite honestly, I see his films as comedies, of the darkest, blackest variety. Sure, they're violent, but there's an understated irony barely below the surface. I'm not big on violence in cinema, specifically gratuitous violence, but I can't get upset with the violence of Kitano. I find myself aghast and laughing in equal measure and I see it as very artful.
Pale Flower The current Melbourne Cinémathèque season is described as Japanese Noir, and noir this film surely is. I'm certainly no expert on the subject of either Japanese or Noir, but I enjoyed this. That's all.
My Year Without Sex I know that Sarah Watts' previous film, Looking Both Ways, was well-received, but it left me unimpressed. I liked some elements, such as the animation, but overall it all seemed a bit flat. I probably wouldn't have bothered with My Year Without Sex but for Jake Wilson's glowing review, in which he describes the film as "the most accomplished Australian film so far this year". While some have been unimpressed by the film, I find Jake often has insights that others miss.
I agree that the latest film is an improvement and that Looking Both Ways tended to be twee. In My Year Without Sex, the story and acting are more believable, the film is less gimmicky and it conveys some keen social observations. Somehow, though, it still feels a little flat. It depicts modern urban life as many experience it, but doesn't seem to rise above the mundanity of it all.
Maybe that undersells the qualities of the film - it's certainly an enjoyable film. It's just that I sense that Watts has a keen intellect and has insights she wants to share, but doesn't get the punch in her film that she aims for. While I think the JW review makes valid points, the film clearly didn't impress me like it did him.
L'heure d'été (Summer Hours, Olivier Assayas, France, 2008) Sometimes we see a sunset so awe-inspiring, it takes the breath away and one wishes we could bottle it. We know this to be impossible, but then Carlos Reygadas comes along and gives us Silent Light. Similarly, a film occasionally seems to come close to capturing emotions in a rare, almost transcendent way. Like plutonic love in the final scene of Lost in Translation, or grief in Three Colours: Blue.
In Summer Hours, an understated and nuanced family drama, Olivier Assayas has not only crafted a multi-layered and authentic story about generational change, but also captured something magical, something everyday and universal in a very special way.
Summer Hours is a story about family, about secrets, competing expectations, hopes and dreams. It’s about loss, change and disappointment. “All things must pass”, sang George Harrison, a truism that is at the core of the film. Some accept that and others have trouble letting go. The essence that Assayas has bottled is nostalgia, the sadness of the passing of the guard as one generation passes, mixed with the joys and aspirations of a new one.
What happens when a person with memories and possessions accumulated over a lifetime, reaches the end of the road? We can divide things up. Some things are taken by one party, some by another. Some things are lost or given away. In examining the small details of this aspect of life, Assayas demonstrates that he has a keen eye, and authentically depicts how death in a family can variously affect the family members.
The confidence of the direction is apparent, with Assayas refraining from putting into words that which can be conveyed visually. A “less is more” methodology gives the film a satisfying aesthetic, as we are left to discover and ruminate on the little details of the picture Assayas has painted. The cinematography supports this structure, with fluid movements of a roving camera that gives a sense that we are observers within the family.
An example of an unexplained detail is Frédéric (Charles Berling) appearing with a beard for a while. This is not uncommon when someone has died, particularly in Europe. Without words drawing attention to it, some may not notice this detail, and for the observant there are many like this.
The film’s ambiance strongly reflects the title’s suggestion of season. The use of light, scenery and sound all convey a sense of time and place. The sound in particular seems heightened, whether it’s birds singing or the click of a car’s seat belt, and creates an awareness of things occurring inside and outside the camera’s frame.
If the use of artistic items in the film looks authentic, it’s because many of them are genuine pieces provided by Musée d’Orsay, who apparently originally commissioned the film to commemorate the institution’s 20th anniversary. In the story, the family has a history of involvement in art. The film highlights that objects you may admire in a museum case were once everyday objects for people used in often mundane ways.
There’s something about Juliette Binoche – no stranger to films about grief – as a blonde that doesn’t quite work for me. I noticed it in The Flight of the Red Balloon, and I found it a little distracting in this film, too. As a 40-something, she didn’t quite look authentic. Binoche and Jérémie Renier are both fine actors I have high regard for, though Renier, as a 20-something, isn’t completely convincing as a 40-something. Mind you, it’s the film’s marketing, not the film itself that tells us his age, so this is only a minor quibble.
The main character of the film is Berling’s Frédéric, and who is most convincing. It is he who is most disturbed by the compromises to be made for family unity. Through him we understand how one’s visions of the future can collapse, and how grief is not just about what is lost, but also about what can no longer be. Dreams and expectations vanish.
The film is bookended with children playing. Ironically, the start includes a treasure hunt. The ending provides a bridge between past and future. Summer Hours is a very satisfying film, of a quality we don’t see enough of outside of MIFF and the French Film Festival. It doesn’t fit into the gritty milieu of films like say, Private Property or The Child, but nor is it a run-of-the-mill family melodrama. This is serious adult drama that is neither shocking nor challenging, but both entertaining, moving and thought-provoking.
A final point in passing: I shudder to think how much of this film’s subtlety will by spoiled by reviews that deprive the reader of any mystery of the story’s unfolding. My suggestion is just see it, no questions asked.
Summer Hours is screening at the French Film Festival, between 5 and 19 March (in Melbourne) and is being released in cinemas on 2 April.
This weekend has been full on. My work Christmas party was on Saturday, and the weekend pretty much revolved around that and a child's birthday party. I've completely missed the Japanese Film Festival at ACMI as well as the 15 hour screenings of Berlin Alexanderplatz. As I have mentioned, November has been chock-a-block full of films to see, most of which I've missed. When I get my Christmas break, I could watch a film a day, but then there's nothing decent to see in the cinemas. I suppose that's when I'll catch up on a few of the 50 or so DVDs I have that I haven't yet seen.
With the end of the Pedro Costa season at Melbourne Cinémathèque this week, I feel a little sad. I just want the season to continue, even if it means repeating the same films. The man's work is incredible, though not for everyone (many cinephiles may struggle with some of the themes and the scenes). Next week is the start of the Howard Hawks season, which lasts for three weeks before we take recess for the holiday season. I'll miss the last week as I'll be participating in my university graduation ceremony.
I started my Bachelor of Business (Business Information Systems) at RMIT University in 2001 and did the first three years (of four) full-time and the remainder part-time. I had only one subject to complete the degree but needed to put in an exemption. It's taken me three years to get the exemption in and I've not done a subject in that time. I can't wait to have this formality behind me, to have closure. As a fellow student once said: "to finish that which one has started".
Those three years have not been without tumultuous times. My oldest child suffered psychosis and my middle child took his own life (nearly two years ago now). There's been stresses at home and I've taken up learning French at Alliance Française. I've often felt like bowing out of classes, but have kept up my determination for over 18 months now. I figure that if I just stick to it, I'll get to where I want to be. I figure once one bows out, it's all pretty much over. If I put the same time into it as I put into my uni studies, I'd be speaking fluent French by now.
FWIW, I'm quietly happy with my French progress. I still struggle listening to say the French news, but I can get a reasonable understanding of a newspaper article. I can make myself understood to a French person; they just have to speak very slowly back, often more than once. I hope to live in France one day, for at least a year and preferably more. There's something about the country's culture that draws me, and I feel that moving to a foreign culture is an experience and personal challenge I want to have in this life-time. FILMS: Slumdog Millionaire (Danny Boyle, UK/USA, 2008) No quarto da Vanda (In Vanda's Room, Pedro Costa, Portugal/Germany/Switzerland/Italy, 2000) Ossos (Bones, Pedro Costa, Portugal/France/Denmark, 1997) Il y a longtemps que je t'aime (I Have Loved You For So Long, Philippe Claudel, France/Germany, 2008)
DVD:
Bande à part (Band of Outsiders, Jean-Luc Godard, France, 1964)
Slumdog Millionaire I'll post a review of this film in the first week of December, closer to its release (which is 18 December, and 'sneak previews' on 12-14 December). In short, it's OK and I think most people will like it more than me.
In Vanda's Room Wow! How did Pedro Costa get a film like this made? Could he have done it today? This is so raw and so bleak, that these questions kept coming into my head while watching this remarkable film. Audiences often think of the films of Alkinos Tsilimidos as bleak, but his are quite upbeat in comparison to Costa's (and that's not a sleight on either director's work, just observation).
The non-professional actors, residents of the Fountainhas slum being filmed, are all extraordinary, especially the two drug-addicted sisters, Vanda and Zita. They spend their lives in Vanda's room, smoking crack and occasionally venturing outside to sell vegetables to the neighbours. Their physical state is deplorable and I found my heart bleeding for them. Words fail me with both this film and Ossos (Bones). These films have been my favourite double of the three week Costa season, which has now concluded. Melbourne Cinémathèque screened all of Costa's feature films and three of his shorts. I feel like I need to re-watch these films to truly appreciate them. Costa is an awesome film-maker.
Bones I'd have preferred to have seen Costa's films in chronological order, especially the trilogy of films featuring the Fountainhas slum. Of the trilogy, no. 3 screened on week 1, and no. 2 screened before no. 1 on week 3. C'est la vie ! In Vanda's Room is nearly three hours long, so it was good that Bones is not too long (94 minutes). It makes for a long night, especially when one has work the next morning.
Bones is nowhere near as bleak as In Vanda's Room. There is more colour and the people's lives have a little more hope. I can't say it's a better film, just less downbeat. Mind you, the story is no Hollywood theme: suffice to say that the Dardenne brothers' L'enfant (The Child) covers similar territory. These Costa films simply have to be seen, to be experienced.
I Have Loved You For So Long You'll enjoy this film much more if, like me, you know nothing about it prior to seeing it. There is a central mystery, and the unravelling of it could have resulted in a much stronger film if it hadn't played out conventionally at the end. Suffice to say, I'm not giving any plot details here.
Kristin Scott Thomas is impressive in the central role of this film. As an English-speaking actress, her French-speaking seemed impeccable, though her character in the film is written as having an English accent, so obviously the French would pick it up. This is perhaps the best role I've seen her in, though I generally haven't been impressed with her. This role required a fairly repressed individual, and as Thomas' acting is generally quite wooden, she is perhaps perfect for the role. This probably sounds less kind than I mean it to be, because she does play the part well.
Thomas appears with little makeup for most of the film, and seeing her bravely bared before the camera like this gives the film a visual rawness that enhances the verisimilitude of the story. For most of the film, there are unexpected turns that feel natural rather than being contrived twists. After about the three-quarter mark, the initial setup is, well, I'll call it cheapened, though what it's doing is catering to populism. I could start to predict what some of the outcomes would be and the story really tugs at the heart strings.
The French are excellent at producing gutsy arthouse films, of which this is not one. But nor is it a middle-of-the-road family melodrama (which I usually hate). This is a solid drama, with some great arthouse aesthetics that should be very popular with most arthouse audiences (think Nova or Como). The film's compromises are what make it accessible and enjoyable, but left me feeling just ever so slightly disappointed.
Time flies! I didn't get my Week in Review up for last week, so here's two weeks below. I don't have time to offer much in the way of comment, but feel free to add your own comments or questions. The highlight was seeing Paranoid Park again, the first time I've seen a film three times during its theatrical run.
FILMS: 17 - 23 March
Be Kind Rewind (Michel Gondry, USA, 2008)
Before the Devil Knows You're Dead (Sidney Lumet, USA, 2007)
Planet Terror (Robert Rodriguez, USA, 2007)
Death Proof (Quentin Tarantino, USA, 2007)
Death Defying Acts (Gillian Armstrong, UK/Australia, 2007)
Histoire(s) du cinéma (pt. 1a & 1b, Jean-Luc Godard, France, 1998)
Die Fälscher (The Counterfeiters, Stefan Ruzowitzky, Austria, 2007)
Duell in der Nacht (Duel in the Night, Matti Geschonneck, Germany, 2007)
Be Kind Rewind While Michel Gondry's The Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind, co-written by the supremely talented and bizarre Charlie Kaufman, seemed a match made in cinematic heaven, Gondry's going it alone as both writer and director on The Science of Sleep seemed a bit flat. The latter film was still very much in bizarro-world, but the chemistry between film and audience wasn't quite there.
Perhaps Gondry has learnt from experience. He's still using similar devices to The Science of Sleep, but somehow it all comes together in his new film. I went into the film with low expectations, but willing to give it a go. After all, Sleep wasn't a bad film, it just wasn't a particularly good film. Two out of three ain't bad (Gondry's first feature film was Human Nature). Eternal Sunshine had an impressive twelve month run at Cinema Nova.
I found it took a little while to warm to the film at first, partly because the basic premise of the film was so well known, so there was a lack of surprise as the story unfolded. At this stage, every laugh of the enthusiastic audience was distracting, because I just didn't find every little quirk that funny. Once the original setup is established, the film's momentum quickly builds and hardly misses a beat. I found it totally grabbed me when I least expected it, and as the story travelled in unexpected directions, it took me completely with it.
Jack Black who, while still uses his trademark manic excess, shows welcome restraint and is perfect for the role, while Mos Def complemented him. They make an excellent Laurel and Hardy-like duet. Even Danny Glover, who sometimes looks like he should be put out to pasture, was used to great effect by Gondry. The support actors - many of them non-professionals - all contributed effectively to the film. A special mention goes to Melonie Diaz (Raising Victor Vargas, A Guide to Recognizing Your Saints) who I always find has a really good naturalistic on-screen presence. She is normally portrayed as the ugly girl, but I find her energy really attractive.
My advice is don't go looking for another Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind. They both clearly have Gondry's hand in them, but Be Kind Rewind is a much lighter, comedic film. It has very little drama and not the bleakness of Sunshine. As for comparisons with The Science of Sleep, this film is so much better written. He skillfully holds the audience's attention and brings the film to a very satisfying ending, full of heart and humour.
The film appears aimed at a fairly wide audience, and I think it will appeal to all ages equally well. I don't think it's designed to be a children's film, but I think it's one of the best in that genre that I've seen for a long time (cinema releases, that is). There's an almost Laurel and Hardy aspect to it that will have kids of all ages (maybe even under-5s, even if they don't understand it) connecting with the humour.
Before the Devil Knows You're Dead Yeah, it's OK, but nothing special.
Planet Terror Fantastic, exhilirating, full-of-laughs. Loved it. Death Proof Liked it even more the second time, though not as good a homage to grindhouse movies as Planet Terror. They did, however, complement each other excellently, and for pure fun, the double is about as good as it gets.
Death Defying Acts Boring, boring, boring.
Histoire(s) du cinéma I think one needs to get into the zone for this eclectic homage to cinema, and I couldn't get into it. Or maybe this just isn't what I go to the cinema for. I could dig what Godard was trying to communicate, but it just didn't grab me. I only saw the first 90 minutes (it's 4.5 hours!).
The Counterfeiters & Duel in the Night I'll be writing on these for the upcoming Festival of German Films.
La graine et le mulet (The Secret of the Grain, Abdellatif Kechiche, France, 2007) Slimane (Habib Boufares) is a sixty-something immigrant dock-worker who has spent most of his life working for the same small company.Globalisation has spread its tentacles everywhere.Slimane’s company was taken over by a larger one several years ago, jobs have now gone offshore where labour is cheap and work is in decline.Slimane decides to use his modest redundancy payout to renovate a boat and make a floating restaurant, using his own skills and the assistance of his extended family.
I prefer the French title of this film which translates as “the couscous and the fish”.It refers to a dish that the matriarch of the family, Slimane’s estranged wife, Souad (Bouraouia Marzouk), makes as her specialty.
Director Abdellatif Kechiche is himself an immigrant, arriving in France with his family at the age of six.One suspects he draws heavily from his own life experience in crafting this really impressive story imbued with humanity, compassion and intelligence.
I have heard this film being compared to Eat Drink Man Woman, which is fair enough, if not slightly deceptive.Sure, there’s a similar veneration for the art of cooking and how this draws and binds families.But the film casts a wider net than this may suggest.For me, it strongly resembles the humanistic and naturalistic stories of Robert Guédiguian, particularly La ville est tranquille (The Town is Quiet).
The actors are largely non-professionals.The use of long takes, including long stretches of dialogue, is very impressive and suggests that some of the script may be improvisational.I liked the chit-chat, the small details of daily life (like toilet-training a child), that films normally gloss over.
The film has a documentary look and feel and parts are like a fly-on-the-wall at a family gathering.For me, the importance of this is to convey how human this family is, with a rich and warm cultural heritage.In particular, it renders as impotent, irrational fears of Muslim culture.
The film works on multiple levels because it taps into the universal everyday concerns that potentially touch us all in one form or another: prejudice against immigrants, attitudes towards Islam post 9-11, globalisation, ageism in the workforce, the effects of poverty, family breakdown and more.Yet, importantly, the film is not preachy but merely presents life in a matter-of-fact way.
The female performances in the film are particularly affecting, especially the young Hafsia Herzi playing Rym, the daughter of Slimane’s lover, and Leila D'Issernio who plays his Russian daughter-in-law.
At 151 minutes, the film is quite long, though this is not apparent until the final scene, which seems to be prolonged in real-time for a particular effect.On paper, the story looks like something we’ve seen before, but avoids all the clichés we might expect.I loved it.
The film won four awards at the Venice Film Festival, including Special Jury Prize and the FIPRESCI Prize.It has also just won four French Césars: best French film, best director, best original screenplay and most promising actress (for Hafsia Herzi, who had no prior acting experience).
The Secret of the Grain screens again at the Como on Friday 14 March, 8.45pm, Balwyn on Sunday 16 March at 3.45pm and Westgarth on Tuesday 18 March at 8.45pm. It has a cinema release on 20 March.
With the French Film Festival starting this week, I could see only one window of opportunity to see the much-acclaimed The Tragedy of Hamlet Prince of Denmark, a Melbourne production that is aptly (if not unusually) screening at the Malthouse Theatre. I planned to leave work at 4pm on Friday, leaving me plenty of time for the 5pm screening. Unfortunately I got held up by my boss and arrived at the Malthouse at 5.02pm to find that I'd been locked out. This is something I'd never experienced before, certainly not at any cinema. My calendar is really full at the moment and this was the only screening I could fit in. Disappointed? You bet. Ironically, I expect that a 5pm Friday session would have been near empty.
FILMS:
Macbeth (Roman Polanski, UK/USA, 1971)
Nóz w wodzie (Knife in the Water, Roman Polanski, Poland, 1962)
The Black Balloon (Elissa Down, Australia, 2008)
Macbeth I had some anticipation in seeing this magnificent portrayal of treachery, a film I first saw in my teens when we covered the text in English. It left a strong impression on me, and I remembered it as a cold and bloody film. Some thirty-odd years later and it has certainly withstood the test of time. I haven't read Shakespeare since my school days, but the guy was brilliant, and Polanski certainly brings the text to life.
I loved the graphic and repugnant depictions of the witches, bookended with the spell at the start and the coven at the end. The murder scenes were fantastically gory, and one wonders what effect the then recent murders of Polanski's pregnant wife and three of his friends by the Manson gang had on the making of the film. The story effectively portrays the changes that occur when one commits a crime out of greed. Things don't go to plan and for Lady Macbeth, the result was insanity. My favourite scene is Macbeth's vision of Banquo's ghost at his dinner table.
Knife in the Water Polanski's first film, and the only one made in his native Poland, I found it a fascinating look into the director's early work. While the tone and narrative are clearly different, I saw similarities with Michael Haneke's Funny Games. The obvious connection is the yacht, but both films also had a playful competitiveness about them. I particularly liked the ambiguity of the ending in which several questions were left unanswered.
The Black Balloon Despite Lynden Barber's glowing recommendations for this new Australian film, the shorts gave me reservations that I found justified. I don't think it's enough for a film to be authentic and based on a true story (which it is). It has mostly good performances, though I found the smile of the lead, Rhys Wakefield, slightly grating. I also think Toni Collette is in serious danger of being permanently typecast as a frumpy suburban mum. When I think of Rowan Woods' The Boys, I know she can do so much better.
What can I say? Maybe I'm just suffering Australian coming-of-age fatigue. Luke Ford did a better job of portraying an autistic child than I expected, and Gemma Ward was better than I expected. Erik Thomson also performed fine as the father, and his small role was well written, I thought. During and after the film, I just felt like I hadn't been offered much that could be differentiated from the raft of other coming-of-age films that have been released here in the last year, even if it is a touch better than the rest of them.
Christmas holidays are here, so what better way to spend time during these hot days than in a cool cinema. Nothing really stands out for me this week.
FILM:
The Darjeeling Limited (Wes Anderson, USA, 2007)
The Golden Compass (Chris Weitz, USA, 2007)
Coeurs (Private Fears in Public Places, Alain Resnais, France, 2006)
Crackers (David Swann, Australia, 1998)
Casablanca (Michael Curtiz, USA, 1942)
The Maltese Falcon (John Huston, USA, 1941)
DVD:
Duel (Steven Spielberg, USA, 1971)
Paris, je t'aime (Various, Leichentstein, 2006)
The Darjeeling Limited It seems some people love Wes Anderson's style and some hate it. I tend more towards the former camp, though I've only seen The Life Aquatic with Steve Zissou. Of the two films, I prefer The Darjeeling Limited, which could be viewed as a family drama with comedic elements or a comedy with dramatic elements. In actuality, it is highly comedic, but there is also much dry and understated humour and much drama with strong threads based in reality that we can grab onto.
The characters are great, better than I expected after seeing the shorts many times. Having established the family dynamics between the three brothers, it was quietly amusing to see the understated way Anderson introduced another family member. You'll know what I mean when you see the film. The Indian characters are terrific, especially the Chief Steward. Bill Murray gets an obligatory cameo, and Natalie Portman's small role is sweet.
Much has been said about Anderson's use of colour (highly stylised in The Life Aquatic). India makes a great natural backdrop for The Darjeeling Limited, where colour is a natural element of the social and cultural life. I found the depictions of the country mostly authentic (except for one amorous scene on the train, but which most Western audiences would not pick up on).
Anderson's use of colour, his eccentric characters, the story arc and his creative use of camera angles makes for an enjoyable experience. Many films have come out of the US in recent years that I call 'quirky', which could almost be considered a separate genre. In my opinion, most of them don't work, because the quirkiness is too self-conscious, too contrived. For me, Wes Anderson joins Hal Hartley as someone for whom quirkiness works.
The Golden Compass There's a novel device that differentiates this film from other children's films of a similar genre - in this parallel universe, people's soul's live outside the body in the form of an animal. Other than that, it's basically a CGI extravaganza of the order of say the Harry Potter franchise or Narnia. None of these films particularly impresses me. I find them too formulaic and predictable, with some hero figure, a victim to be saved and some
The film has an open-ending; it is obviously to be continued. This leaves a slight frustration, though thankfully the film ends around the 90 minute mark. The performances are OK, especially by the young Dakota Richards. Nicole Kidman seems a little it like a fish out of water, but does her best with a fairly weak role while Daniel Craig seems more credible in a smaller role. I found Ian McKellen's easily recognisable voiceover for one of the CGI characters a bit distracting - he has a good voice, but it was hard not to picture the actor, so a less recognisable voice would have been better.
The film is entertaining enough for children (my seven year old enjoyed it), but not recommended otherwise. Personally, I'd like to see more children's cinema like John Sayle's The Secret of Roan Inish (1994) where characters are more nuanced, there's a little more naturalism and less CGI. Or even Tim Burton's fairytale-like stories, that play on stereotype, but usually have some bent twists.
Coeurs Oh, what a dreary, boring film, and I endured all 120 minutes! This film was one cliché after another, terribly staged (as if were were watching a third-rate live theatrical performance) with stereotypical characters that seemed straight out of The Bold and the Beautiful. People did not respond as people do. The writing was puerile, so there wasn't much the actors could do with the material.
So many devices annoyed me, including: - the soft camera lenses on 60+ year old women to attempt to make them look gorgeous - the intrusive and manipulative music - the sets and setups - the snow-fall fading in and out at the end of each scene as if it were a stage curtain - the acting that was like a third-rate stage play (and the sets reinforced that)
Melodrama doesn't have to be stupid. This film lacks any subtlety, is very stupid and is currently on target to just make it onto my worst 10 films of the year (along with 5 other French films!).
Crackers Hey, it's Christmas-time, so what an appropriate film for ACMI to screen as part of its Australian Perspectives program. The dysfunctional family get-together at year's end. In many respects, this is a fairly stereotypical Australian comedy, at least on paper. Yet it has an edge and an underlying authenticity that extracted much laughter from the small audience at the single ACMI screening I attended with my family (and my seven year old loved it).
My elderly mother still dreams of getting another caravan and going away on a holiday, perhaps with one or more of her adult children. The start of this film drives home for me why I absolutely refuse to have any part of it. Hell on wheels, that's what I remember it as, and that's how the film depicts it.
Crackers is not a particularly consistent film. There's various flat spots at times, a few stereotypes and weaknesses in the direction. It does, however, have a good heart and some good humour that makes it stand out in the genre. My favourite bit was when the dog gets burnt over the barbeque. My son couldn't control his laughter at that bit.
In spite of some predictability, the film does have some redeeming features, like not using clichés like referring to men as blokes or Aussies. You know, that mythological "Strine" that just doesn't exist anymore (at least, not as films depict it). I much prefer a modest little film like this, with a good heart and some good writing than a big budget poorly written film. Kudos to ACMI for unearthing little gems like this for the Australian Perspectives program.
Humphrey Bogart double at the Astor I don't think there's anything I can say to add to these two classics: Casablanca and The Maltese Falcon. I preferred the former, and the number of famous lines was awesome. But I enjoyed them both. Duel I saw this DVD on special somewhere and thought I'd give it a go. I think it was Tarantino's Death Proof that got me thinking about it. On occasions, I've revisited 70's films that impressed me on original release, only to be disappointed at how much they've dated. That happened, for example with Tommy (Ken Russell, 1975). Sure, I still like the music, but the film is cringe-worthy.
Duel was originally made for TV in the US, but was distributed elsewhere as a feature movie - director Steven Spielberg's first - by adding a few scenes to bring it up to 90 minutes length (I believe it was originally 74 minutes). As I recollect, it screened here as the opener to a movie double, and was the minor feature. I saw it at a drive-in theatre, something my family (with four children) found economical. I don't remember the main feature, but Duel always stuck with me. Even though it has dated in some respects, I think it has withstood the test of time and is just as enjoyable now as I remember it then.
Basically, a travelling salesman finds himself the victim of a malevolent truck driver who tries to eradicate him on a lonely desert road. The film consists of a cat-and-mouse chase with various twists. I can't say I'm a big fan of Spielberg, but this film really shows his talent at an early age (he was in his early to mid 20s at the time). What is basically a one-man show holds its own for the whole duration, a real edge of your seat thriller. The camera angles are great, the truck looks genuinely menacing and the twists are believable. The finale is excellent. I got my money's worth with this one.
Paris, je t'aime Revisiting this after six months or more was an interesting exercise. I think I liked this compilation of short films more than most, for reasons detailed in my original post. Watching the interviews and other DVD extras perhaps enhanced my appreciation, and I liked the film even more this time round. The injured Nigerian immigrant, the grieving mother, the lonely driver, the boy by the Seine - all these stories affected me at least as much as the first time. Even the stories that had a lesser affect (like Christopher Doyle's Chinatown segment) seemed to improve over time.
This film is quite an achievement, a very clever dysfunctional family black comedy. Its succeeds on at least two fronts. If you didn't know otherwise, there is almost nothing to suggest the film was made in Australia. It's set in Connecticut (as is the novel it is based on, by American-born author now living in Australia, Brian Carbee) and, other than Geena Davis in the lead role, most of the remaining cast are Australians. While it is relatively easy to recreate the American mid-west (cars, flag-poles, etc), it's the seamless use of accents that I found most impressive.
