Cinema Papers April 1984

/'flp

!

Visual effects production involves a degree of creative problem solving.

But you can’t get started unless you have the hardware.

Like a studio with a motion control camera system, a double-head optical printer, computerised matte scan system for matte paintings and animation, a rotoscope stand, a location camera, rear projection facilities, and a fully equipped workshop for model making and set construction.

No problem. We’ve got all the gear.

Next, visual effects production requires an enormous range of skills and techniques.

A properly set up company should have a specialist in design and mechanical effects like our Tad Pride; a cameraman with extensive miniature and front projection experience, we’ve got Paul Nichola; a model maker and artist with matte painting credits, such as David Pride; a design engineer who’s also an effects cameraman who worked for Lucas Film, how about Mike Bolles; and someone with a knowledge of optical effects and production management, Andrew Mason would do.

Then the visual effects company should have a range of credits that lets you know they know how to do the job.

For instance, T h e Empire Strikes Back’, ‘Captain Invincible’, ‘Mad Max II’, ‘Razorback’,‘Silver City’, and ‘One Night Stand’.

No problem. That’s us.

Finally, you should be able to draw on all the skills of these people and whatever equipment and techniques are required to produce the visual effects you want to see in your next production.

Problem solved.

Call Mirage on (02) 477 2633

A A T O N 8-35 The Aaton 8-35 is the smallest hand-held silent-running 35mm camera with instant 120m magazines. Designed for mobility, the 8-35 is ideal for hand holding on location in any outdoor situation, as well as for the studio. The overall size of the 8-35 is virtually the same as the Aaton LTR 16mm camera.

When you enquire about the 8-35, you’ll soon discover for yourself just why it really is the latest and best from Aaton.

CN M The latest Super 16mm technology comes together perfectly with the Aaton CNM. Lighter than you thought possible the CNM is ideally suited to trekking, mountaineering and all those hard to get to situations. The perfect companion to the LTR as a second camera, the CNM will get you out of those difficult situations you get yourself into. Find out how inexpensive the CNM can be for you.

For further details contact:

B FILMWEST Sole importer of the Aaton 8-35 throughout Australia.

SYDNEY: *

MELBOURNE:

PERTH:

Percy Jones Motion Picture Services, 1st Floor, 29 College St. Gladesville. N.S.W. 2111.

Téléphoné: (02) 816 3371

John Bowring - Lemac Films (Aust) Pty. Ltd. 279 Highett St. Richmond.

Victoria. 3121.

Tel: (03) 428 3336/429 2992

Filmwest Equipment Sales Pty. Ltd. o 75 Bennett St. East Perth. W.A. 6000.

Telex: AA94150 Tel: (09) 325 1177/325 1423

o

SINGAPORE: Filmwest Pfe. Ltd. a Suite 157 Raffles Hotel *; 1-3 Beach Rd. Singapore. 0718 Telex: RS36389 0 Tel: 337 8041/336 1509

I f you w ant your next sound track to w in an Oscar; it m akes sen se to u se the desk that won an Oscar.

«*:W-

WÊÊÈ.

»»»*•** «»»«***

I««»»»«

So C olorfilm w ent to Burbank and bought it.

D uring its tim e at T he Burbank Studios, the Quad-Eight D ubbing 5 custom re-recording console created a world following.

For its unique development, Quad-Eight was awarded an Academy of M otion Pictures Arts and Sciences Technical Achievement Award.

T hat was to mark the beginning of this consoles very illustrious career.

D uring which the Post Production Sound departm ent of T he Burbank Studios won an Oscar for

“All T he Presidents M en”.

A nd then went on to receive Academy Award nominations for “Electric H orsem an”and also “Tootsie”.

Recently T he Burbank Studios decided to put in a larger Quad-Eight machine, so Les McKenzie of Colorfilm quickly snapped up the original.

Given some minor modifications and a re-check

by Quad-Eight, it was then shipped to Australia.

It has now been installed for our Dolby stereo work in Colorfilms main

theatre, already equipped with 23 RCA high speed film transports and a Studer A800 24 track tape recorder.

This now gives ■Colorfilms sound departm ent the best high technology re-recording facilities in the South Pacific.

But don t take only our word for it.

If you have an Oscar contender coming up and youd like to know more, contact Les McKenzie on: (02)5161066.

Colorfilm Leo Burnett 4.4935

Museum piece, circa 1987.

The clapper-board may be taking an early retirement. This and other conventional tools of filmmaking may find themselves relegated to crates and carted off to museums.

What will replace them? Kodak film with Datakode magnetic control surface! This radical advance in film manufacture gives film the ability to “converse” with computers.

This could substantially reduce the time and costs associated with film post-production.

The Datakode magnetic control surface is a thin, transparent layer coated across the entire back of the film.

Less than 8 microns thick, it provides the means to record machine-readable information and makes possible a code that

i /*, Hours

j* m

à

Minuets

SecomIs TVFrames

can be used with both film and videotape.

All this is accomplished without altering the quality or characteristics of the final image.

Datakode magnetic surface will provide that bridge between film and computers. Sometime soon, the use of discs, video displays, time code synchroni­ sation and automated printing will speed film makers through all the noncreative, repetitive and tedious steps associated with film post-production.

Now isn’t the Datakode a radical advancement?

Kodak. W here technology anticipates need.

R. E. MILLER PTY. LTD. 30 HOTHAM PARADE ARTARMON 2064 PHONE: (02) 439 6377 TELEX: AA23655

fapiec/3—

BelieveIt orD

-

O P E /v pfl.0GR*#

Q Û TH£ AU STR ALIA* F i l m AND

TeiSVtSION SCHOOL WAS FSTA&L iSHBP IN <913, ANP iS FUN p e p S T THF A U S T R A L IA N FBdBRAL GOVBRNMCAJTf

V

it

W

i

SINCB

IR7 ^ M M ¡ Í ]

í/í ovex iz ,o o o

lA$T TEAR TUE OPON PROOF AM con do ere p

OVBR

ISO COURSBG ANO SEMINARS THROUGHOUT

PBOPLÇ HAYO

'

ATTFNDCP TH£ S-CAOOL'S

OPBM PROGRAM SHORT-TéPM iN T e N siué cours e s in film , TéLéYlGlON AND (RAPIO ¡

AUSTRALIA, ONLY HALF OF M I C H

W FRí IN S T P N F T i

ifiB ResouRces

u n it

0 F THF OPRN PROGRAM HAS A H U O e P A N O B 0F Film , TCLFTiSiON AND

RAPID TRAINING B00KC, FILMS SC VioeOTAPFS AUAILABLF for HiRF OR PURCHAS6 !

M o tio n P ictu re M ark ets D iv isio n .

K O D A K (A ustralasia) PTY. LTD.

Sydney: 692 7271, Melbourne: 353 2560, Brisbane: 52 1911, Adelaide: 212 2411, Perth: 458 9966, Hobart: 34 2099 Canberra: 49 1445, Townsville: 72 3366

f f â Ç CATALOGUE OH Opfn program CCURSCS ANP TRAINING MATORIAL inill BF SONT ro you IF YOU CONTACT.;

CAR MOT couT T O , O P C N PR O G R A M /AUSTRALIAN FILM AND TFLBUIÇioN SCHOOL PO. 6 ON ! 2 G , N 0 RTP P T P F N.0.UÜ.

2H3.

rC L G P H O N F (o s d % % 7 - f 6 é é > f

M V '® 16

't o -A*

|

r e 5e n » s r e p re d ir e c to r s

v*f*ters

c o m p o s e rs

d" t T e ^ S c T n e m a to g ra p h e rs ^ K e

<S

>c*>

CAMERON'S

®'00 ca^1

MANAGEMENT FTYLTD

• • • • • • •

, S(PoitePo^

120 Victoria St.

c f i°

^ao»,

ABRA CADABRA ALL THE RIVERS RUN ANNIE’S COMING OUT ANTARCTIC MAN DUSTY HIGH COUNTRY STRIKEBOUND

Please call us i f we can help you too.

COMPETITIVE PRICES ON EKTACHROME RVNP, EASTMANCOLOR, B & W INCLUDING REVERSAL, 16 AND SUPER 16-35 BLOW-UPS, RCA SOUND TRANSFERS VIDEO TO FILM, OPTICALS INCLUDING AERIAL IMAGE.

4 Guest St, Hawthorn 3122. Ph. (03) 818 0462

^

A A

SYDNEY AUSTRALIA MLC Centre Leveì 5 9 (02) 2 3 5 2 7 3 6 Telex: AA 2 3 9 1 7

BEVERLY HILLS (2 1 3 ) 2 7 1 9 8 8 0

TORONTO 1 4 Birch Avenue Toronto, Canada (4 1 6 ) 9 6 8 0 5 7 7 Telex: CA 0 6 5 -2 4 6 9 7

is proud to have provided COMPLETION GUARANTEES for th e se m otion p ictu res in A ustralia, New Zealand and Fiji

The Slim Dusty Movie Produced by Kent Chadwick Director Rob Stewart Associate Producer Brian Douglas Director of Photography David Eggby

of

n'i .

-fßß

Journey to the Dawning of the Day Produced by Michael Dillon Director Michael Dillon Executive Producers Lindsay Gazel, Judith West, Stanley Sarris Director of Photography Michaei Dillon

Annie’s Coming Out Produced by Don Murray Director Gil Brealey Executive Producer Don Harley Director of Photography Mick von Bornemann A.C.S

Phar Lap Produced by John Sexton in association with Hoyts Michael Edgley International Director Simon Wincer Executive in Charge of Production Richard Davis Director of Photography Russell Boyd

Savage Islands Produced by Rob Whitehouse and Lloyd Phillips Director Ferdinand Fairfax Production Supervisor Ted Lloyd Director of Photography Toni Imi WHERE AUSTRALIAN

The Settlement Produced by Robert Bruning Director Howard Rubie Production Manager Irene Korol Director of Photography Ernie Clark

Ginger Meggs Produced by John Sexton Co-Producer Michael Latimer Director Jonathan Dawson Production Manager Jill Nicholas Director of Photography John Seale

Motion Picture Completion (Australia) Pty. Ltd. Douglas Leiterman

Liz Butterfield

Lachlan S. Leiterman B.G.S., L.C.B.

Chairman

Chief Production Auditor

Australia Manager

EVERY COMPLETION GUARANTEE BY MOTION PICTURE GUARANTORS INC. IS REINSURED BY LLOYDS OF LONDON

mm

Articles and Interviews

Man of Flowers Reviewed: 85

Voyages of Discovery: an interview with David Stevens Debi Enker Words and Images Brian McFarlane Street Kids: interviews with Kent Chadwick, Leigh Tilson and Rob Scott Arnold Zable Simon Wincer: Interview Scott Murray Mini-series Ewan Burnett On Guard: an interview with Susan Lambert Victoria Treole

10 16 22 28 32 37

Top Ten Films People Vote: 62

Tenth Anniversary Supplem ent A Personal History of ‘Cinema Papers’ Scott Murray Photo Gallery The Industry Comments The Top Ten Films Two Views Antony I. Ginnane, Phillip Adams

41 49 54 62 66

Features Cinema Papers A History: 41

The Quarter Picture Preview: OneNight Stand Production Survey Picture Preview: Silver City From the Vault: a Cryptic Crossword Val Ward

8 26 75 96

David Stevens Interviewed: 10

99

Film Reviews

Simon Wincer Interviewed: 28

Man of Flowers Helen Greenwood Careful, He Might Hear You Jim Schembri Phar Lap Keith Connolly Bush Christmas and Molly Geoff Mayer Allies Keith Connolly For Love or Money Rod Bishop The Clinic Debi Enker

Managing editor: Scott Murray. Contributing editors: Tom Ryan, Ian Baiilieu, Brian McFarlane, Fred Harden. Sub-editor: Helen Greenwood. Proof-reading: Arthur Salton. Design and layout: Ernie Althoff. Office administration: Patricia Amad. Secretary: Heather Powley.

Advertising: Peggy Nicholls (03) 830 1097 or (03) 329 5983. Printing: Waverley Offset Publishing Group, Geddes St, Mulgrave, 3170. Telephone. (03) 560 5111. Typesetting: B-P Typesetting, 7-17 Geddes St, Mulgrave, 3170. Telephone: (03) 561 2111. Distributors: NSW, Vic., Qld, WA, SA: Network Distribution, 54 Park St, Sydney, 2000. Telephone: (02) 264 5011. ACT, Tas.: MTV Publishing Limited. U.S.: T. B. Clarke Overseas Pty Ltd. Founding publishers: Peter Beilby, Scott Murray.

85 86 87 88 89 91

Silver City Previewed: 96

92

Cinema Papers is produced with financial assistance from the Australian Film Commission and Film Victoria. Articles represent the views of their authors and not necessarily those of the editor While every care is taken with manuscripts and materials supplied for this magazine, neither the editor nor the publishers accept any liability for loss or damage which may arise. This magazine may not be reproduced in whole or in part without the permission of the copyright owner. Cinema Papers is published every two months by MTV Publishing Limited, Head Office, 644 Victoria Street North Melbourne, Victoria, Australia, 3051. Telephone: (03) 329 5983. © Copyright MTV Publishing Limited, No. 44-45, March-April 1984.

•Recommended price only.

CINEMA PAPERS March-April — 7

■ I H lH lI I lB if llllii

All-time Champs The January 11, 1984, edition of Variety printed the following All-time Film Rental Champs (in the U.S.-Canada market) based on film rentals: 1 . E.T. The $209,567,000 Extra-Terrestrial $193,500,000 2 . Star Wars $165,500,000 3. Return of the Jedi 4. The Empire $141,600,000 Strikes Back $133,435,000 5. Jaws 6 . Raiders of the $115,598,000 Lost Ark $96,300,000 7. Grease $94,571,000 8 . Tootsie $89,000,000 9. The Exorcist $86,275,000 10 . The Godfather Director Steven Spielberg has three entries in the top 10 (and four in the top 11); producer-director George Lucas also has three entries.

The highest-positioned Australian film is Mad Max 2 (The Road Warrior in the U.S.) at 381, with rentals of $11.3 million.

Next comes The Man from Snowy River at 474 with rentals of $9.25 million.

The only other Australian film to make the chart (minimum rental entry: $4 million) is The Pirate Movie, at 739 with $6.2 million, thus proving some cynics wrong.

The best-positioned Australian director is Richard Franklin with Psycho li at 256 (but 27 in 1983). Franklin was also co­ producer of The Blue Lagoon, at 97.

Of the top 10, only two are 1983 releases: Return of the Jedi and Tootsie.

The next best in 1983 are: $40,600,000 3. Trading Places $36,595,975 4. War Games $361400,000 5. Superman III $36,180,000 6. Flashdance $33,650,000 7. Staying Alive $33,203,999 8 . Octopussy $31,500,000 9. Mr. Mom $30,328,000 10 . 48 Hrs In the battle of the Bonds, Octopussy at $33.6 million easily beat Never Say Never Again at $25 million. Perhaps sur­ prisingly, Never had the bigger production budget: $34 million versus $30 million.

Other big-budget films of 1983 are Super­ man III at $35 million, Return of the Jedi at $32.5 million, Scarface at $31 million and The Right Stuff at $27 million. No Australian film made Variety’s Big-Buck Scorecard.

Of the expensive films, the big flops (given rentals to December 31,1983) were The King of Comedy ($1.2 million rentals from a $19 million budget), Something Wicked This Way Comes ($3 million from $23 million), Brainstorm ($3 million from $20 million) and The Right Stuff ($6 million from $27 million). The best returns on a big budget were Return of the Jedi ($165.5 million from $32.5 million), Stay­ ing Alive ($33.6 million from $15 million) and Jaws 3-D ($26.4 million from $16 million).

David Field and Malcolm Smith, Ray Atkinson (London representative), and Mike Harris and Andrea Marshall (from the Los Angeles office); producers John Dingwall, David Elfick, Paul Davies, David Williams and Dick Toltz; and Jim Henry (South Australian Film Corporation).

The Australian films being screened at the AFM are Abra Cadabra, Aussie Assault, BMX Bandits, Brothers, Buddies, Midnite Spares and Under­ cover.

For the first time in its four-year history, the AFM this year, with the addition of five new companies, will open its ranks to qualified sellers of foreign language films. Thus, it moves closer to a second Cannes.

The five new companies, representing four countries, will offer a total of 17 new films. The companies include Germany’s Atlas International and Cine-International, Italy’s Sacis/RAI, Japan’s Toei Co. and France's UGC.

New AFC Chief Executive Kim Williams will be succeeding Joe Skrzynski as chief executive of the AFC in March this year.

Skrzynski was appointed to the AFC in September 1980. He was previously Corporate Services Manager of the merchant bank, Pittsburgh National Seldon and Co., and financial adviser to the New South Wales Film Corporation.

During his term as chief executive, the AFC consolidated its supportive role in the film industry, concentrating on marketing, research, lobbying and monitoring the effects of the tax legislation. It also emphasized funding for the development of projects rather than basic investment funding in feature films.

Williams, who was general manager of Musica Viva until taking up the AFC appointment, has had a long involvement in the arts in Australia. He is also, at present, deputy chairman of the NSW State Grants Advisory Council to the Premier of NSW, a director of the Con­ federation of Australian Arts Centres, and a member of the National Arts and Enter­ tainment Committee of the Australian Bi­ centennial Authority.

IIB ia ilB B l

American Film Market The Australian representatives at the 1984 American Film Market (AFM), to be held from March 8 to 16, include Austra­ lian Film Commission staff members

8 — March-April CINEMA PAPERS

Kim Williams.

Previously, he held positions as the general manager of Music Rostrum Aus­ tralia and a lecturer at the NSW State Conservatorium of Music. He was founda­ tion member of the Music Board of the Australia Council and the then Dance and Youth Panels.

A recipient of many awards and prizes, Williams has had a fellowship from the Music Board in composition and won the Frank Hutchens composition prize twice.

He is married to the writer Kathy Lette.

Censorship Changes On February 1, 1984, legislation concern­ ing the classification and censorship of videotapes and printed matter came into force in the Australian Capital Territory.

The new law is the first step in a process to establish a uniform system for the sale, hire and publication of videocassettes and publications. It permits the restricted sale or hire of hard-core pornography and explicit violence under an “ X” rating for video and a restricted rating for publica­ tions.

The main elements of the system incor­ porated in the ACT legislation are: 1. Imported videotapes for home use. will no longer be subject to compulsory registration by the Commonwealth Film Censorship Board; 2. Videotapes for sale or hire are to be classified at the request of the importer, distributor or retailer by the Film Censorship Board; 3. The classification standards to be applied are to be the same as for cinemas: that is, “ G” , “ NRC” , “ M” and “ R” , but with a further category “ X” to be added for stronger material which would be refused cinema show­ ing. Only child pornography and similar “ very extreme material” , such as films depicting or inciting drug misuse, terrorism or bestiality, would be refused classification altogether; 4. The states are to pass laws imposing appropriate points of sale restrictions (in particular, no sale to minors) for “ R” and “ X” classified material; 5. The existence of a classification to be a complete defence for retailers against prosecution under state obscenity laws; and 6. Classification recommendations by the Film Censorship Board to be subject to review by the Commonwealth Films Board of Review.

The system of voluntary censorship places the onus on the importers, distribu­ tors and retailers, and will mean that products move more quickly on to the market.

At the moment, three states (Victoria, South Australia and Western Australia) have interim legislation based on the ACT model; the other states are still thinking about adopting the model. The video industry expects that Queensland will take a position very different from the other states.

Eventually, the system of classification could be extended into theatricallyreleased films, based as it is on the prin­ ciple that adults are entitled to read and view what they wish as long as people who consider such material offensive are protected from being inadvertently exposed to it.

The new look o f video.

AFC Appointment Vicki Molloy has been appointed director of the Creative Development Branch, filling the position left vacant by Lachlan Shaw in 1983 and taking over from Murray Brown who was temporary director.

Molloy has been working with the AFC as manager of the Women’s Film Fund since 1981. Before that she had worked as a researcher and presenter for docu­ mentaries at the ABC, as production manager on Mouth to Mouth (1978) and Dimboola (1979), and worked in the editing department at the BBC. As director of the Creative Development Branch, she will report to the general manager of Film Development, Malcolm Smith, and is responsible for Branch administration, policy advice on the Branch’s developmental role, liaising with film groups and organizations, and direct funding of alternative and independent films.

Film Victoria The board and staff of Film Victoria spent several months in 1983 formulating a policy review: looking at its past role, what its situation was and how best it might fulfil its charter. The director, Terence McMahon, issued invitations to 70 pro­ ducers, directors, writers, composers, etc., and 10 organizations fo give their comments, and the board spent time deliberating the policy document that was finally issued in November 1983.

The policy is a statement of the goals and parameters that Film Victoria has set itself. It emphasizes “ not only investments

The Quarter

in film and television but also a commit­ ment to film culture, the pursuit of quality and innovation, and the commercial viability of the investments it will make” .

Although Film Victoria has, under its legislation, the power to act as a producer, the policy affirms its decision not to exer­ cise that role in the short term. This, McMahon says, reflects the opposition expressed by so many people in film and television production in Victoria to the idea of Film Victoria becoming a production house. The view was put strongly, from across the spectrum of the industry, that Film Victoria could not assist producers while actively competing with them.

Presently, Film Victoria has invest­ ments in several television mini-series, including The Anzacs (Geoff Burrowes and John Dixon), Return from Paradise (Roger Simpson and Roger Le Mesurier) and A Thousand Skies (J. C. Williamsons and Ross Dimsey). Two feature films in which Film Victoria is a significant investor are presently in pre-production: My First Wife (Paul Cox and Jane Ballantyne) and The Wrong World (Ian Pringle and John Cruthers).

Film Victoria believes it is better placed financially than it has been for years. The Victorian Government more than doubled Film Victoria’s budget in September 1983 and this has enabled it to expand its staff by 40 per cent. Film Victoria is about to appoint several new staff members, one of whom will be a creative development officer whose principal responsibility will be liaison with organizations and indivi­ duals interested in the promotion of film culture.

Film Victoria has recently made grants to several film culture organizations including the Australian Film Institute, the Australian Teachers of Media, Cinema Papers and the Melbourne Film Festival.

Involvement with these bodies is seen as a way of discharging the obligation it has set for itself in the policy document as having a ‘‘responsibility for the develop­ ment and maintenance of film culture in this state” .

National Screenwriters ’ Conference The AFC has been investigating the feasi­ bility of holding a National Screenwriters’ Conference as an annual event.

A proposal has been prepared for the AFC by the co-ordinator, Margaret Mc-

Clusky, which suggests that the Con­ ference be sponsored partly by govern­ ment funding bodies and partly through private sponsorship. The Conference will be open to “ Australian filmmakers, their professional organizations, and allied arts organizations with preference given to experienced and neophyte writers” .

The AFC has approved funding for Stage 1 of the Conference, which is the holding of two workshops — one in Mel­ bourne and one in Sydney — to develop the proposal and form steering com­ mittees. The first was in Sydney on February 26, 1984, and the second will be in Melbourne on March 17, 1984.

The Melbourne Film Festival will run from June 1 to June 16 at the new State Theatre in the Victorian Arts Centre. In addition to its usual prizes for short films, the festival will be awarding a Peace Prize to the film judged to have contributed significantly to the cause of world peace.

Tickets will be available from BASS Agencies; brochures and information are available by phoning (03) 417 3111.

In Sydney, the Film Festival will run from June 8 to June 24 at the State Theatre with the Greater Union Awards for Australian Short Films being held on the first day. The Rouben Mamoulian Award of $1000 has been donated by Kodak.

Public bookings are now open and can be made by phoning (02) 660 3909 or through P.O. Box 25, Glebe, 2037.

AFTS Council Appointment Bob Weis, a Melbourne film producer, has been appointed to the council of the Aus­ tralian Film and Television School by the Governor-General, Sir Ninian Stephen.

The appointment, one of five made by the Governor-General, is for a three-year term.

Weis is co-producer of The Clinic (1982) and producer of the critically acclaimed Women of the Sun (1981). He joins David Ferguson (chairman), Jeffrey Rushton and John Daniel on the council.

The position for the fifth member has been vacant since July 1983.

Film Festivals

Head of Full-time Program The Australian Film and Television School has appointed Pablo Albers as Head of the Full-time Program, succeeding Richard Thomas who will return to profes­ sional practice when the 1984 graduates depart at the end of March.

Albers began his professional career in the theatre as an actor, stage manager and director, and was later an associate professor of English at the University of Mexico. Since studying film at Mexico’s Centro U niversitario de Estudios Cinematografico, he has written, pro­ duced, photographed and directed film and television news, documentaries, features and advertising.

Albers migrated to Australia in 1973, working as a director for the VideoTape Corporation in Sydney and The Film House in Melbourne before setting up his own production house six years ago.

Albers now assumes responsibility for the AFTS’s full-time training courses in screenwriting, production management, direction, camera, sound and editing.

The Melbourne Film Festival has appointed Paul Seto as its new executive director. Seto has been involved in several film and television productions, including The Chant of Jimmie Black­ smith, Number 96 and some Reg Grundy productions, and was manager for two years of the radio station 4MBS-FM in Brisbane.

The program consultant for the Festival is David Stratton who, until 1983, was director of the Sydney Film Festival for nearly 10 years. Stratton is now a selector Corrigendum and presenter of films for Channel 0/28.

The new director of the Sydney Film Festival is Rod Webb. Webb was execu­ In issue No. 43, May-June 1983, p. 125, tive director of the National Film Theatre ■Geoff Mayer’s article entitled “ Best (of) from 1977 to 1979, then cultural events Friends” quotes David Macdonald as the officer at the Australian Film Commission scriptwriter. The author’s name is Donald from 1980 until his appointment to the Macdonald. Cinema Papers apologizes for Film Festival. the error.

Contributors Phillip Adams is a film producer and chairman of the Australian Film Com­ mission.

Rod Bishop is a lecturer in film at the Phillip Institute of Technology.

Ewan Burnett works at Crawford Produc­ tions in the production department.

Keith Connolly is the film critic for The Herald in Melbourne.

Debi Enker is a freelance journalist and film reviewer.

Antony I. Ginnane is a film producer and has been a contributing editor of Cinema Papers.

Brian McFarlane is a lecturer in English at Chisholm Institute and is currently com­ pleting a doctorate in Cinema at Midlands University, England.

Geoff Mayer is a lecturer in film at the Phillip Institute of Technology.

Jim Schembri is a journalist at The Age in Melbourne.

Victoria Treole works in the distribution division of the AFC and is the editor of Australian Independent Film.

Arnold Zable was a lecturer in social sciences at the University of Melbourne, and is now a freelance writer and film reviewer.

Solution to Cryptic Crossword on p. 99

Notice to Readers The directors of Cinema Papers Pty Ltd, the former publishers of Cinema Papers, express their regret to all readers, particularly subscribers, for the lengthy delay between issues. As several newspaper items have indicated, Cinema Papers was faced with serious financial problems in mid-1983 and, until these were resolved, publication had to be ceased.

Due to a recently finalized funding arrangement with the Australian Film Commission (AFC) and Film Victoria, Cinema Papers is returning to the newsstands with a renewed vigour and confidence in the future. A public company, MTV Publishing Limited, has been formed to publish the magazine, in an arrangement in accord with AFC and Film Victoria philosophies.

It must be stressed that the magazine’s independence is unencumbered by the new arrangement. As with invest­ ments in film production or distribution, there has been no attempt at creative interference. The magazine is free to pursue its editorial policies as the editor sees fit.

With the new company structure will soon come another editor, and a fresh examination of the approach and production of the magazine. Decisions made in the next few months will affect the form of Cinema Papers.

While regretting the magazine’s absence from the newsstands during the past nine months, the publishers feel confident that the new accord sees Cinema Papers in a much stronger position. The future is certainly bright.

Scott Murray

CINEMA PAPERS March-April — 9

Will

David Stevens interviewed by Debi Enker

David Stevens’ second feature, Undercover, again demon­ strates the director’s capacity to inject humor and humanity into a script as densely populated, i f not as sharply observed, as The Clinic’s. The glossy, romantic tale o f the rise o f an undergarment business in the 1930s adds a new dimension o f decor-laden style to a body o f film and television work characterized by a continuing interest in the exploration o f Australian history and society.

Like a number o f his contemporaries, who alternate between film and television projects, Stevens began his training in Australia at Crawford Productions, directing episodes o f Homicide during the final, “golden years” o f the series. He reflects on his work there with pride and a conviction that the shift in emphasis from car chases to character studies, engineered by producer Henry Crawford during the last years o f the program, created a diverse and exciting fram ework that has since been largely ignored or vastly underrated. He believes the Crawford’s apprenticeship provided a form ative and invaluable environment fo r experi­

mentation with narrative structure and style fo r a group o f directors, including Igor Auzins, Paul Eddey, Simon Wincer, Kevin Dobson and George Miller (Snowy River).

Stevens’ work at Crawford’s includes writing and directing on Division 4, Matlock, Solo One, The Sullivans and the tele­ feature The John Sullivan Story, which he jokingly refers to as “Where Eagles Dare on $130,000”. Convinced that attitudes within the film industry to people who work in television are “scathing”, besought a feature film credit and, after unsuccessful attempts to get Rusty Bugles and The Two of Me into production, became a co-writer on Breaker Morant.

Stevens then returned to television to direct A Town Like Alice and the second episode o f Women o f the Sun. I f awards can be regarded as an indication o f accomplishment, Stevens has an impressive list to his credit, including an Awgie fo r The Sullivans, an Academy Award and an A u s­ tralian Film A ward fo r the Breaker Morant screenplay, and a Logie and Emmy fo r A Town Like Alice.

CINEMA PAPERS March-April — 11

David Stevens

Has the world-wide success of “A Town Like Alice” affected your career?

Look at me. I live in a little house in St Kilda and I love it, and I’ve even turned down very well paid work in Hollywood. I don’t want to make a film there just for the sake of it.

But a problem that arose from A Town Like Alice was that too many producers saw it and pigeon­ holed me as a soft, romantic film­ maker with a strong sense of the A ustralian outback. One of reasons I made The Clinic was that I didn’t want to go on making A Town Like Alice again and again.

I wanted to do something that would be perceived as totally different, though I happen to think that The Clinic has the same soft, humanist love in it as A Town Like Alice.

After “Alice” , your career has taken a different direction: into features . . .

The biggest audience you can reach, unless you do E.T. or Star Wars, is through television. So if you are interested in the commun­ ication of ideas, television is the place to work. If you do a film it has to be something that you can’t do on television, because of its spectacle, or because it needs a bigger screen or has a more restricted audience. The Clinic has now been bought for television, but, if I had tried to set it up for television, I wouldn’t have had a dog’s show.

Was your background in television a good preparation for directing features?

Magnificent. I really feel sorry for anybody who does not have that kind of experience before he goes on the boards to direct his first $2 million film. Homicide taught us to think on our feet, to think very fast and experiment.

We tried all sorts of things. I remember doing one program in which I went for long, continuous, fluid takes all the time and then another in which I decided I would never move the camera once. We played games with structure and with performance; with comedy and with tragedy. It was a phenomenal advantage to have.

When we came to make The Clinic, I decided that it would be a very static film, with reasonably long takes. It wasn’t a decision I had to sit down and think about. I believed that the characterizations were paramount in the film; any attempt to throw the camera all over the set would have distracted from the simple purity of the script and the characterizations, which is what the film is all about.

In relation to that, how would you describe “Undercover” ? Although you would have to make some con­ cessions for the medium, it seems to be a production that could be suitable for television . . .

It probably will be, but that is not why it was made. I had written Breaker Morant, I had filmed what is perceived as an Australian epic novel and I was doing The Clinic, which I knew would be perceived as a problem film. I believed I should follow it with something more mainstream. I wanted to work with a big budget. I wanted to do something that is, in the best sense of the word, camp.

Apprentice designer Libby (Genevieve Picot) and American promotions man Max (Michael Paré). Undercover.

12 — March-April CINEMA PAPERS

I think Australian historical dollars to spend. Then I could have films are largely very po-faced, put many more extras on screen. and I include Breaker Morant in We also had a horrendous situa­ that category. Some Australian tion in pre-production. We lost films take themselves altogether three or four of our 13 weeks too seriously. Art should be taken preparation because the money fell seriously but it should also be apart and most of my energy had witty, sensitive, moving and to be directed towards helping the irreverent. I wanted to do some­ producer, David Elfick, get the thing that had a sense of fun and money back together again. All the jollity about it. departments had to stop work When the script of Undercover because there was no cash to pay turned up, I fell in love: it had all them. I think we could have used the things that I wanted to say. I that four weeks just to make it a wanted to make a genuinely glam­ little bit more outrageous. And I orous film; I wanted to do some­ would have liked to have thing about an Australian hero channelled my energies into the that was fun. I hate the use of the making of the film, rather than word “ entertainment” as though it worrying about whether it would were pejorative and Undercover is be made. not intended to be just entertain­ ment; it might be entertaining, but How did you cast Michael Paré for I would rather call it a romance, an the role of Max? Australian fairy story.

One of the reasons the money For a film that is based largely on fell apart was because although the fact, it actually looks like a fairy­ Max character was American and tale: it starts with the book although we had agreed to cast an opening, it ends with the curtain American, a local actor did a test falling, and both the music and for the role which was just the lighting suggest a fantasy wonderful. We decided to use him, world . . . but the backers wouldn’t hear of it. Because of the size of the Let’s face it, you couldn’t do a budget, they believed they had to number like “ From the Outback to have an American as the main the Ocean” , where you have 20 character. The money was, to an chorus girls in red, white and blue extent, dependent on this, so I was tap-dancing to the Australian flag, packed off to the U.S. to find an in a serious film. We haven’t done American actor in a week. I saw an exact copy of Radiant Woman, about 60 actors and I was told by we have done an interpretation of the producer I had to put three it. names to Actors Equity.

Part of my worry about the My first choice was an actor of direction in which Australian film impeccable credentials, a very is going is that it is obsessed with exciting, theatre-trained actor with documentary fact. It has a rabid whom I very much wanted to paranoia about going too far, work. My second choice was an going over the top and, if I had any actor who probably wasn’t entirely criticism of what I did on Under­ right for the part, but who had a cover, it is that it doesn’t go quite big name. Then, because they far enough over the top. insisted I put up a third name, I proposed Michael Paré, a crazy What would you have liked to be Bronx boy who had come in to see different about it? me.

I was stunned when Equity Not a lot in terms of the work turned down my first choice on the that everybody put into it, but, in grounds that they had never heard terms of my work, I would have of him, despite his extraordinary liked to have had another million list of credentials. They said that I

David Stevens

could have my second choice as long as there was no government money in the film, but if there were government money in it I could only have Michael. In effect, Equity cast the role; I didn’t.

I love Michael and I think he is terrific. He has a lovely brash quality in the film, but it is to take nothing away from his perfor­ mance to say that he wasn’t my first choice.

There is also a scene in which Alice realizes she is never going to be a designer. She has already given up on her dream, which was always only to get away from home, to live her life as she saw it. And her ambition, finally, was to marry a Theo.

As far as Nina and the Professor are concerned, Nina retires and hands over to Libby. She has had her glory, she has had her days.

God knows how long the relation­ ship with the Professor will last, but he is probably a good fuck.

And Genevieve Picot (Libby)?

I had been aware of Genevieve for a long time because of her work with the Melbourne Theatre Company and with The Sullivans.

I was trying to find a heroine with some balls. I auditioned a lot of actresses, but I couldn’t go past Genevieve.

In all of your work the women are very strong, spirited and ambitious, and usually working people, with a lot of vitality. Is that something that attracts you to a script?

Do you object to this? [Laughs.]

I think it is part of the Australian ethos. There is this fantasy that men run the country, but they don’t: women do. Australian women are very ballsy.

“Undercover” certainly gives that impression. Even the wife’s role, which one would expect to be passive and compliant, isn’t. She is very supportive, intelligent and is called upon to make decisions at crucial times which change the course of events. Nina (Sandy Gore) is also a particularly strong character . . .

That is because of the kind of world in which I have grown up. In the theatre there is very little chauvinism. One is brought up amongst ballsy, striking women and, if it is possible for them to be like that in that situation, why isn’t it possible for them to be like that anywhere in the rest of the world.

What Undercover is essentially about, if you look beyond all the froth and glamor and tinsel, is the need to be yourself. It doesn’t matter a damn who you are, go for it.

“Undercover” has recently been recut. A couple of the changes are jarring, particularly in the scene with Nina and Libby at Libby’s new flat. Some of the dialogue has been deleted . . . “ What a bugger [that] men have to give you babies.”

Nina. When she returns to the country, the make-up goes back to natural, and from then on she is her own woman.

Probably the most beautiful shot of Libby is during the rehearsal in the theatre when she is wearing very little make-up. She has become herself, and that is what the whole thing is all about.

You can’t be scared of what the world thinks of you. You just have to go out and do it.

happen. But Nina and the Pro­ fessor (Barry Otto), and Alice (Sue Leith) and Theo (Peter Phelps) seem to be particularly odd couples. Is it necessary to have a ‘happy ending’ pairing off the characters?

Whatever anybody says about Undercover, I think it has an almost Shakespearian structure.

You are introduced to a group of people; some are survivors in some senses and some are not.

The women are strong in “ Under­ Alice and Libby we meet essen­ cover” but they seem to end up tially at the same time. I have them with weak or incompatible men. in a three shot with Nina, which is The relationship between Libby deliberate because Nina, at that and Max is set up early in the film: moment, makes the choice of at the moment she falls into his which of the two is the star. We arms, one hears the harp music know then that Alice is never going and one knows what is going to to be the star, but that Libby is.

The absence of that line took away some of the clarity of the char­ acter. There is a definite lesbian undertone in the film, particularly in that scene. The relationship between Nina and Libby is gentle, subtle and warm but that line, which is fairly suggestive, is gone, and the relationship becomes almost mother and daughter, mentor and student . . .

I have no argument. I don’t approve of the new cut.

Were you involved in the cutting?

No. Another example is the trimming down of the love scene and thus the implication that Libby is dis­ illusioned . . .

“It doesn’t matter what you do as long as you do it brilliantly” . . .

That’s right. It is the most telling line in the film: don’t try and ape anybody else.

A very clever thing is done with the make-up in the film with the progression of the Libby charac­ ter; she is delineated by her hair, her make-up and her costumes.

There is a sequence when she makes the big speech in the Town Hall defending Fred Burley (John Walton) and you can see she is wearing a lot of make-up. But I felt that was right because Libby is going too far: she is trying to copy Empress o f style, Nina (Sandy Gore), examines Libby’s designs. Undercover.

CINEMA PAPERS March-April — 13

David Stevens

There’s nothing I can say. I agree with you.

So, why was it cut?

It would be totally unfair of me to comment. I think you would have to ask the producer that.1 He did the cutting.

Is Nina supposed to be lesbian?

No. I don’t believe, as you must know from The Clinic, that there are delineated sexualities. I don’t believe in putting labels on anybody. Nina is a character who I am fairly sure at some point in her life had a love affaire with a young woman and love affaires with young or even older men. If an interesting situation arose in a Bombay brothel that she happened to be visiting, I am sure Nina would give it a go. She has probably had relationships with homosexual men, too. She is not intended to be lesbian. She is intended to be a complete woman.

Similarly, in the character of Eric (Chris Haywood) in “The Clinic” you have presented one of the most positive, strong, intelligent and appealing representations of homosexuality on the screen. Was it your intention to do that?

Partly, but we only have Eric’s word that he is homosexual, and we know that he lies at other points in the film.

When?

1. When contacted, David Elfick, the pro­ ducer, declined to give a statement but he did say Stevens had been consulted as to the cuts.

14 — March-April CINEMA PAPERS

When he talks about the pros­ titutes to the boy. We know that he will say anything to shock the boy.

It is only your assumption and that of Paul (Simon Burke), the student, that he is homosexual.

a failed actor turning to directing.

I stuck with it and I had a very lucky break: I took over the lead in an important play in London and, since then, I have made up my own mind about the right soil for actors.

With Paul and Libby and, to an There are certain actors with extent, Jean Paget (Helen Morse) whom I can’t work. I need to work in “A Town Like Alice” , there is a with actors who respond to my process of education, whereby the specific way of directing, which is character has to learn humility and to encourage them not to be afraid draw on his or her courage and of making a fool of themselves, face up to mistakes. Is that a because, no matter how big a fool central part of your character they make of themselves in front development? of the camera, I will be making a bigger tit of myself behind the Isn’t that what the process of life camera. is? It is what the process of what Actors are extraordinary people. my life has been. I hadn’t realized Nine times out of 10 you have to the device was so apparent in all feed them lollies and make them feel good and, occasionally, you my work.

I guess it applies to Breaker have to give them a smack, just as Morant, too. In the original script, with a child. They have very fertile Major Thomas (Jack Thompson), imaginations; the only problem is the defending lawyer, was the that sometimes they get side­ central character and it traced his tracked into areas that aren’t development from a bumbling, necessarily relevant to the direction outback clerk of the court to a man being taken, although those side with a passionate point of view and areas may be infinitely fascinating in themselves. But, as far as a commitment to a concept. possible, everything I do is sub­ The actors’ performances in all of servient to the actors. your work appear very relaxed.

There is an ease about them and, Everything? particularly in “The Clinic” , a feeling of spontaneity. What Well, there is the script, of approach do you take with your course, but everything else is sub­ actors? servient to the actors. [Laughs.]

An actor has to put a pretty good There is no simple answer to that case for me to allow him to change question. When I decided to go a line in the script; into the theatre, I wanted to become an actor. Within five So, there isn’t that spontaneity minutes I discovered that I wasn’t really when it comes to the script? going to be the Hamlet of my generation; I also discovered that No, not at all. there were directors and they What is the art of acting? I have seemed to have much more fun seen extraordinary, spontaneous than actors. But I didn’t want to be performances of Shakespeare

which don’t stuff around with Shakespeare. Why should actors assume — why should anyone assume — that the script they are dealing with is not Shakespeare?

Actors are not puppets. You cast actors for what they will bring to the role, not for what you can tell them to do. And I apply that to every aspect of the filmmaking process.

I think the work of Dean Semler (director of photography) and John Morton (gaffer) on Under­ cover is just ravishing. It was their idea to use soft smoke on almost every set, and Steve Dobson’s (camera assistant) idea to use silk stockings on the camera lens. It was those men who were totally responsible for working out the look of the film. All I did was say, “ I want it to look like a fairy-tale.”

Obviously, one is constantly provoking, questioning and chal­ lenging, working over the structure of the shot that you choose. What was lovely for me was that all the visual elements came together in terms of the make-up, costumes, sets, locations, photography and lighting. It was a voyage of dis­ covery for us all.

I try to create the right working atmosphere. If it is a happy scene, we have a bonza time laughing. If it is a sad scene, I tend to create a heavy atmosphere on the set, although, occasionally, I will break down with some stupid joke or drop my trousers, just to remind the actors that tragedy and comedy are not separate entities.

With such a large group of people, all immersed in their tasks, how can you sustain the atmosphere?

It is very hard work directing because you have to turn on an extraordinary performance all the time. But almost, everybody is trying to do their best, so all you have to do is lay down the ground rules. That is what being a director is: exercising that emotional con­ trol. It is the time when I live.

That doesn’t mean to say I am not occasionally bored or excited or w orried or challenged, but happiness should encompass all emotions, including occasional boredom.

Your films have a range of dis­ parate characters — the patients and the staff in “The Clinic” , the group of women in “Alice” , the employers and employees in “Undercover” — brought to­ gether in one place. And there is a density of characterization. They are all very much cross-sections of society, or groups in society . . .

I long to make a film with only two or three main characters in it.

In The John Sullivan Story there are 10 or 11 leading characters. A Town Like Alice is filled with people, so is The Clinic, and in Undercover there are seven or eight main characters.

David Stevens

Is that a preference?

Not really,, it just happens.

The subjects demand it. Lots of people said to me when they read the script of The Clinic, “ Ah yes, it’s all very well you know, but you should make it a story just about one of the doctors.’’ To which I said, “ Yeh, well that’s fine, maybe it would make a very good film, but it is not the film I want to make.” I wanted to make the film it became: a day in the life of a VD clinic, not a day in the life of Dr Eric.

But your intimate, warm and humorous groups of people create a very strong sense of community in your work . . .

I suppose that is because I believe we are all part of a com­ munity. There is a Russian film of Hamlet of which Kenneth Tynan said, “ It may not be the greatest Hamlet you’ve ever seen but it is the most properly peopled Elsi­ nore.” Within the film, Elsinore is a very busy place. It is a crossroad for ambassadors and traders and courtiers, and Hamlet very seldom stands alone on a battlement and makes a great speech. He is usually stuck in. the middle of 20 pages with half a dozen servants going there and five ambassadors being presented here, and that is what reality is. Very few of us live alone; we are all part of the street, the community, the city, the country or the world. When I eventually make Amsterdam it will be a film about how a community rather than an individual responds to a given threat.

What is “Amsterdam” about?

It is the true story of some Dutch homosexuals during World War 2 who formed their own little branch of the underground resis­ tance and destroyed the central Nazi Criminal Register. For their pains, 12 of them were shot. But it is not about poofters. If a society or a community denies any one element within that society, or community, then it is denying the whole community. The Amster­ damers, in effect, believe that life is a pillared community, and that if one pillar is taken away the roof will fall down. I also believe that.

concepts of life perished; those who were prepared to change their thinking, their clothes, their habits, their attitudes, their manners and their concepts were the survivors. It is very difficult to march half way across Malaysia in high heels and gloves. It is much easier to do it in a sarong and bare feet.

I was brought up in that situation. I was born in Palestine, and then I moved to Egypt and to South Africa, where I had a tribal Zulu nanny, so it is very difficult for me to believe in one concept of God. In fact, it is very hard for me to believe in a society in which every single human being is not an honored individual, in which someone is better than anybody else. I have always been sur­ rounded by a multitude of diverse sounds and languages.

That suggests an interest in the use of overlapping dialogue . . .

I tried that experiment once at Crawford Productions. I wrote an episode for Matlock where, in the first seven pages, there are never less than two conversations happening at once, probably three.

Overlapping dialogue is fine, but it can lead into situations, such as those you have in the worse ex­ cesses of Robert Altman, where you actually can’t hear anything.

Obviously theatre has been an important influence on your work.

What other influences can you identify?

The great storytellers in film — David Lean, Fred Zinnemann, Carol Reed — are men who under­ stand the myths of society, men who question God. Bill Routt’s comments2 compare “Undercover” with the films of Preston Sturges and Frank Capra and it is easy to see the influence of the classical musical in the ending . . .

When people asked me what the film could be like, I said Frank Capra and Preston Sturges films.

Nobody has heard of Sturges. It is not as crazy as a Sturges film but, in a similar way, its tongue is planted firmly in its cheek.

The ending was there in the manuscript. It is the one thing that It fits in very well with “The never was changed. It was also a Clinic” which also deals with a huge challenge. We shot it in five part of society that is usually and a half days.

I also admire the pyrotechnic ignored or repressed . . . filmmakers beyond measure. I Yes. And Amsterdam will also adore the work of George Miller be written by Greg Millin who (Mad Max) and I think the last two reels of Mad Max 2 are as perfect wrote The Clinic. an example of montage as I can It is also true of the women in imagine in the cinema. I was on the edge of my seat. But I can’t do “Alice” . . . that. My stories are different from That’s right. Nobody wanted to his in the way they are told. I don’t know about them, but they needed each other to survive. Those who 2. Bill Routt, “The Wizards from Oz” , Stills, Sept.-Oct. 1983, p. 74. stuck to the old traditional

Top: Dr Eric (Chris Haywood). Above: Eric and a student doctor (Simon Burke) restrain a concerned patient (Mark Minchinton). David Stevens’ The Clinic.

think the stories themselves differ greatly, but in the way they are told they are very different.

They are very much about heroism, and characters with tenacity and integrity working towards something and eventually succeeding . . .

I guess Mad Max is the same, isn’t he?

Yes, but he is a lot less naive than Fred Burley . . .

Well, Fred is a great dreamer. In fact, my films are really about dreamers. At present I am writing about Charles Kingsford-Smith, a man who was finally destroyed by a bureaucracy, and I suppose my whole life is dedicated to saying, “ Stuff the bureaucracy.

Dream your dreams, live your dreams and be individual, as long as you do no harm to anybody.”

That is the essential proviso.

What is project?

the

Kingsford-Smith

It is a six-hour mini-series for J. C. Williamson and Ross Dimsey about Sir Charles Kingsford­ Smith, the first man to fly across the Pacific. I took it on as a job that I thought was interesting, but it has become a passion in my heart because it is about an adven­ turer destroyed by bureaucracy. I find parallels in his life that are important to me as an artist.

I don’t see adventurers, be they painters, writers or flyers, as being that much apart. Okay, so I don’t have a lot in common with Concluded on p. 106 CINEMA PAPERS March-April — 15

Words and Images, by Brian McFarlane, is the first Australian book to examine the relationship between literature and film. Taking nine examples of recent films and two television series adapted from Australian novels — including The Getting of Wisdom, My Brilliant Career, Lucinda Brayford and The Year of Living Dangerously — McFarlane looks at some of the issues in transposing a narrative from one medium to the other.

In this article, Chapter 8 in the book, McFarlane discusses

Helen Garner’s Monkey Crip was first published by McPhee Gribble Publishers, 1977, and by Penguin Books, 1978 (page references to the latter). Monkey Grip, her first novel, won a National Book Council Award and her latest work is Honour and Other People’s Children. She has worked as a teacher and a journalist.

Monkey Grip was directed by Ken Cameron, for producer Patricia Lovell, from a screenplay by Ken Cameron, in association with Helen Garner. The director of photography was David Gribble, the editor David Huggett and the composer Bruce Smeaton. Running 101 minutes, it was released in 1982.

One of the achievements of Helen Garner’s novel, Monkey Grip, is that the heroine, Nora, does not lose hold of the reader’s sympathy despite the fact that the story, as told by her, centres almost wholly on herself and her frustrations. These preoccupations — the constant pondering on what she is feeling, the analysis of what is happening in her succes­ sive sexual relationships, the sense of herself as ill-used — ought in the end to be merely wearisome to the reader. And indeed a good deal of this prize-winning novel, with its vestigial narrative, is tiresome, but the reasons for this lie elsewhere. In Nora, Garner has created, through the most formidably unappetizing processes, a protagonist who emerges with a credible wholeness. One accepts that she is sometimes boring, sometimes self-indulgent, in the way that, in life itself, one accepts that a whole person is likely to be so from time to time. A whole person (i.e., character) is what shuffles out of the banal and repetitive incidents that make up the plot — to use the latter term at its loosest.

In Ken Cameron’s film version of the novel, the central firmness o.f the realization of Nora (Noni Hazlehurst) is even more striking. It is as though the scriptwriters (Cameron and Garner) and director have seen where the novel’s potential unity and strength lie, and have capitalized on it. They have done so partly by keeping Nora on-screen virtually throughout, but chiefly through casting Hazlehurst, an actress of real warmth and emotional range. Her performance is an achievement not 16 — March-April CINEMA PAPERS

Helen Garner’s M onkey Grip and the film adaptation.

Brian McFarlane is principal lecturer in Literature at the Chisholm Institute of Technology and is a contributing editor to Cinema Papers. He is also the author of a book on Martin Boyd’s “ Langton” novels, is the editor of the annual collection of literary essays, Viewpoints, and is the co-editor of a forthcoming anthology of Australian verse.

Words and Images is published by Heinemann Publishers Australia, in association with Cinema Papers.

unlike Geraldine Fitzgerald’s in The Mango Tree in the way that it works unobtrusively to pull together the narrative’s suggestions about the character in question. In this case, however, Nora, unlike Grandma Carr, is clearly intended to be the centre of the action in both novel and film. The strength the film gets from Hazlehurst’s performance and from its visual rendering of the novel’s ambience tightens the latter’s frail narrative grasp, but nevertheless draws intelligently on what is at least potentially there in the novel.

It is just as well that the chapters of this book do not seek to give plot synopses of the novels involved since such an enterprise would certainly founder on Monkey Grip. Divided almost arbitrarily into thirty-four whimsically named chapters (e.g., “ Respectful of His Fragility”, “ Do You Wanna Dance?” ), its narrative structure is, superficially, frag­ mented to the point of disintegration. Its bits and pieces make Ronald McKie’s The Mango Tree look as architected as Middlemarch. In a sentence, the narrative explores the shifts in the relationship between Nora, a single mother of thirty-two, and Javo, her off-and-on junkie lover, a part-time actor (and a full-time bore). However often she tries to wean herself of the habit of Javo, she appears to remain essentially hooked by him as he is by smack. Part of the trouble is (as Javo says to her) “that you like me best when I’m off dope, but Tm always happier when I’m into it” (p. 96).

By the end of the novel, when Javo has left again, this time probably with someone called Claire, Nora feels, “A funny kind of pain, dull, not sharp, spread through my body as if by way of the bloodstream” (p. 244) and, a few lines later, “ instead of that pain came the thought, ‘Well . . . so be it. Let it be what it is.’” There is just a chance that Nora has by now reached the stage of accepting her life, without Javo if need be. Every rational thought has been moving her in this direction but rational thought has never proved defence enough against her need for Javo. Though the need is powerfully sexual (more so on her part than his) it is by no means exclusively so. She in fact wants a kind of stability, a more conventional set of relationships than her world is likely to offer. At one stage, envisaging a trip north, she sees them “ on the road

::

” fACcTA , L-T wC - y - y ,. ■.-cAi ■ Words and Images

with Gracie [her daughter], looking like a ragged family. He took hold of ray hand and we stood together comfortably, liking each other and feeling hopeful” (p. 90). But she qualifies this image with the know­ ledge that she “ would have had to be a mediator: between him and Gracie, between him and the rest of the world” .

The narrative surface of the novel is more crowded than the brief account above suggests. While Javo is the continuing strain of emotional engagement throughout the year of the novel’s time span, Nora’s life embraces many other relationships as well. Chief of these others is that with her small daughter, Gracie, who observes her mother with wry stoicism. As well there are the women friends (e.g., Eve, Rita, Cobby) from whom she receives varying degrees of support, and Lillian, whom she distrusts, mainly from Javo-based motives of jealousy; and the men who are variously friends and lovers, but mostly lovers even if that’s not how they began. They include Javo’s mate Martin, the latter’s brother Joss, Gerald with whom Nora shares a house, and Francis. In fact, the network of shifting, drifting relation­ ships involves a cast of characters almost bewildering in their numbers and made more so because Garner has not sought to characterize them in any detail. And yet there may be a narrative purpose in this: that sense of a loosely-knit, not-very-differentiated crowd of people, drifting past each other, sometimes touching briefly, has its point to make: these other lives are important to the narrative only as they affect Nora and none of them compares in her life with the intensity of her feeling for Javo. They have their brief moment of vividness, coinciding with their narrative function, then subside into being part of the general ambience. For instance, Angela swims into focus when she asks Nora to accompany her to a birth control clinic (she is “ going to have a try at an IUD”, p. 155). Angela has had love problems with Willy but they are not intrinsically important. What matters chiefly is how Nora responds to Angela: first, she is very ready to support her friend, and in this unstable circle of people there is a surprising amount of solidarity; second, she promotes the following reflection in Nora: “ I silently envied the ease of her tears, the way she lived with her heart bravely on her sleeve, no levelling out of the violence of everything but full blast and shameless” (p. 156). The insight that offers into Nora and her view of her own situation is significant.

So, from the narrative’s point of view, is Nora’s capacity for such reflection. The more one reads this novel, the more one realizes that its central drama is to be found by attending to Nora’s narrative voice. The most potent discourse in Monkey Grip is not the “ subjective” utter­ ances of characters but the surrounding (but far from “ objective” ) narrative prose which of course belongs to Nora. And it is here, I believe, that the real drama of this novel is located. It seems to me scarcely possible to care one way or the other about most of the characters: one feels a mild revulsion against Javo, mild sympathy with, say, Angela: but one is in fact very much caught up with what Nora makes of her experience. She is not merely a recording voice, but a presence which responds, and grows through response, to a range of relationships. She is defined partly in terms of how she behaves in these relationships, partly through that voice which is sometimes reflective, Living in the 1970s, in Melbourne: Nora and house-mate Gerald (Don Miiler-Robinson).

Nora (Noni Hazlehurst) and Javo (Colin Friels).

sometimes summarizing, sometimes self-assessing, and always indivi­ dual and working towards the reader’s sense of a whole character.

This is the kind of pleasure, in reading a novel, that grows on one, perhaps making stronger claims in second or later readings. My impatience with Monkey Grip on first acquaintance grew largely out of dissatisfaction with its apparent shapelessness. Like many good novels, it is episodic but most of its episodes are unmemorable, particularly if measured against the crude narrative yardstick of what-happens-next.

In Monkey Grip, what happens next is apt to be very like what happened before: that is, there may have been a visit to the local swim­ ming baths, or a sexual encounter (invariably, monotonously and, therefore perhaps, significantly referred to as “ fucking” ), or a meal, or a trip to somewhere. In themselves, scarcely one of them really matters and few of them stay in the memory. That is not to say they lack all vividness: there are many sharply observed touches about people and places: but that they lack the sort of vividness one needs in order to feel that a narrative is building. Further, one remembers odd scenes but not with any exactness as to the part of the novel from which they came.

The scenes, like many of the characters, become part of that hazy milieu in which the more things change the more they stay the same.

This impression of narrative slackness, compared say with a “ well­ made” novel like Kenneth Cook’s Wake in Fright, is accentuated by the novel’s structural procedures. It is as though the latter are dictated by a mimetic urge to recreate the casual, careless, messy, sometimes warmly cheerful, often dreary lives of its characters. Scene after scene — and each chapter is divided into about half a dozen, some of them no more than snippets — is introduced by sentences like the following: I was sitting at the kitchen table after tea when Javo came around the corner to the back door. (p. 21) One afternoon, when I got home from working on the paper, 1 found Javo asleep in my bed . . . (p. 91) Peg took Gracie out for the day and I went off by myself, (p. 106) Javo came to my house a few afternoons later, (p. 118) At eleven o’clock that night Chris walked in with some coke. (p. 179) Cobby came home from America . . . (p. 190) I went over to Peel Street and found Rita tidying her room. (p. 193) CINEMA PAPERS March-April — 17

fi ords and Images

And so on, endlessly. It is perhaps the most loosely strung together novel of my acquaintance. The disjointedness, the failure of anything to build, and the sense of nothing’s being more important than any­ thing else are, at least on a first reading, maddening to the reader trying to discern and hold on to some sort of narrative development. Perhaps this problem is more acute to one raised in the tradition of carefully constructed, nineteenth-century, realist fiction than to those who have spent their formative years with modernism. Certainly on re-reading, the book’s apparent randomness is less daunting. This may be the result of knowing that the novel offers little in the way of the usual narrative rewards (and thus not expecting them) but is, I believe, really due to recognition and acceptance of different moves towards narrative coherence — and to accepting monotony as part of its meaning.

There is no point in looking for an A —B—C pattern of causality but there are other elements in the narrative that work to give shape and flavour to the book. The major one, as I have suggested, is in the drama enacted in Nora’s linking voice. In a two-paces-forward-one-pace-back fashion, she is gradually revealed as a protagonist trying to pull herself and her life into some sort of manageable shape. One’s chief interest is concentrated in this rambling but oddly compelling and endearing inner action. When she finds Javo’s “ fit” left lying around in Rita’s house, she realizes that one of the chief pressures of her life is that she “ was guarding them all from each other” (p. 72). Sometimes her voice registers the pressures as unbearably demanding, but there are also occasions such as the one when I was flooded with the possibilities, the theatre was full of people 1 liked and loved and whose work was joyful to me. Child beside me, friend to sleep with, body loose from dancing and laughter. Coasting! for a while.

(P- H8)

It is a voice which establishes itself as honest so that it is worth listening to for its own sake and for the light it sheds on others.

There is, too, a thematic concern, enunciated on two occasions in connection with Angela but which goes well beyond her in its resonance. Her problem has to do with “ Willy’s determined constancy in loving both Angela and Paddy, while living with neither” and with finding this situation “ no less painful to her for being ideologically impeccable” (p. 156). Later, when Willy has started an affair with Rita, there is talk about “ breaking out of monogamy” but Angela is “too miserable to care about theory” (p. 192). These two remarks (about a character of no special consequence) point to a crucial and pervasive source of tension in the novel. Nora and her friends are all living what in 1975, the time of the novel, would have been called an alternative life-style. It is located mainly in Melbourne’s inner suburbs and involves an approach free to the point of permissive in matters like where one lives and sleeps, and with whom, in experimentation with drugs, and in drifting from cafes to bars to fringe theatrical and film­ making activities. Negatively, it implies a rejection of monogamous, orderly households, of women performing traditional sex roles, of steady, gainful employment, of the careful ordering of one’s life.

However, while much of the freedom, the indulging of instinct as opposed to behaving conventionally, is undeniably attractive to people like Nora, it brings with it its own kinds of pressures and hurts. The gap between the ideology and importunate reality often lets the draughts in.

Nora has never tried to get Javo off the smack — “ I didn’t want to hold him, or stop him hitting up, or be with him twenty-four hours a day” (p. 66) — but this apparent easy tolerance of the junkie habit is no protection against the pain she feels each time he leaves her to look for a “ score” .

Beneath the surface disjointedness of their lives, she cannot help looking for a pattern that would help her to make sense of them. There is certainly no longer any hope or help for her in the suburban ordinari­ ness of her Kew-based family whom she visits on Christmas Day, nor in the prospect of marriage. In trying to work things out in her own mind she contemplates herself and her women friends in these terms: . . . we all thrashed about swapping and changing partners — like a very complicated dance to which the steps had not yet been choreographed, all of us trying to move gracefully in spite of our ignorance . . . (p. 192).

The image of the dance is in itself a sign that she wants to find, in the constantly shifting aspects of her life, a pattern, a sense of order, to which a key does exist but the finding of which the very nature of their ideological convictions makes improbable. The above reflection comes shortly after the Christmas inspection of her relations and it is com­ pleted by her resigned acceptance of the fact that “ though the men we know often left plenty to be desired, at least in their company we had a little respite from the grosser indignities.” Nora, that is, cuts her losses in a way that engages one’s respect: for “ plenty to be desired” one may read “ reliability”, or “ supportiveness” ; for “ the grosser indignities”, the sort of superiority her “ big boss” uncle exudes in his treatment of his plump blonde wife. He is, she recognizes, implacably “the enemy”. “ What’s love? Being a sucker, I suppose” (p. 63), Nora asks and, wryly, replies. Quoted out of context the remark may look portentously

Above and below: the bad and the good o f Nora and Javo’s relationship: “What’s love?

Being a sucker, I suppose. ”

theme-stating, but in the pattern of her life, with and, more often, without Javo, and of the lives of the loosely knit group of friends, it is a constant preoccupation. It is also a question-and-answer that points to one of the ways in which the narrative is held together. The women in the novel are looking for a tenderness and kindness in their relation­ ships with men, and Garner, through Nora, expresses a need for a mutuality of affection that precludes contracts but requires commit­ ment, that insists on independence but yearns for steadiness. In writing about Monkey Grip and Glen Tomasetti’s Thoroughly Decent People, Susan Higgins and Jill Matthews have claimed that: Both novels are unobtrusively shaped by a critical examination of the way such cultural norms as the entrapment of women in domesticity and the attraction of romantic love are deeply internalized, and this makes it legitimate, even necessary to describe them as feminist.1

As far as Nora is concerned, she is aware of the possibilities of “ entrap­ ment” and is, indeed, firmly entrapped by her role as mother and lover.

Despite the casual junketing around (e.g., to Tasmania, to Sydney, as well as on lesser expeditions), she is always aware of Gracie’s needs as a pressure upon her. And while ostensibly resisting the notions of “ romantic love” and what it implies for the woman involved, she also longs for some of its concomitants: for male tenderness, support, and answer to her sensual needs.

Her apparently casual, relaxed attitude to embarking on her relation­ ship with Javo will be harder to sustain than she imagines. What Eve says, “ You’re not — you know — doin’ it again, are you?”, Nora “ knew what she meant and could not control a grin of guilt. She meant falling in love” and replies “ Yeah, I suppose I’ve done it again” (p. 6).

Already, on the next page, she shows an awareness of what it means: People like Javo need people like me, steadier, to circle around for a while; and from my centre, held there by children’s needs, 1 stare longingly outwards at his rootlessness.

She is genuinely attracted to the drifting life but is equally aware of her “ entrapment” . Much later, having arrived in Sydney at 6 a.m. with “ Javo foul-tempered again, Gracie tired and frightened”, she reflects, “ I have to keep us together somehow” (p. 98). Whatever love is, it is not easy for Nora; as Barbara Giles, reviewing the novel, claims, Nora “ is caught, as fast as Javo, her blue-eyed junkie, only her addiction is love”2. In its grip, despite the feminist ideology which elsewhere offers her a good deal of comfort and practical support, she is, as Gjles goes on to say, “ caught in the usual feminine bind, of responsibility for bringing up a child, of love which makes demands on her”. The men she knows, including the ones she sleeps with, do not make the demean­ ing demands on her that conventional monogamy may, but the monkey grip of passionate need is no less inescapable for that. Her love for Javo may be generous and unpossessive but that is no guarantee that she will not sometimes be “ used” by him.

None of the other women, despite the warmth of sisterhood, is any better placed than she is. The book seems to me honest about the gains and losses in the feminist approach to love and sex. The way they persevere with their lives, trying to square their ideology with the often chilling facts of “ love habit” , is done with enough humour and percep­ tion to make one bear with some of Garner’s sloppier narrative habits.

Certainly there is enough of both to make one feel the unfairness of Ronald Conway’s characterization of “ all this sweltering narcissism dolled up as group fellow-feeling” 3, and to make the present writer mildly ashamed of having once described it as an “ almost ostenta­ tiously tedious novel”4. If I cannot, even on re-reading, find it “ a tremendous book” as Barbara Giles does, or “ overpoweringly real” and “ overwhelmingly filled with love and understanding” as Veronica Schwarz does5, I think there are now more things holding it together than I at first supposed. And the way the women grapple with the ideas of love and friendship and sex (the grappling is not limited to Nora) is one of these elements which help to provide a narrative cohesion not offered by a firmly made plot.

So, too, is Garner’s meticulous re-creation of the milieu in which the novel’s lives are lived. The physical scene of the inner suburbs of Carlton and Fitzroy, with a variety of overcrowded, sometimes lonely houses, the swimming baths, cafes and bars, is not there in the sense in which landscape is in a Thomas Hardy novel: that is, a presence having something like a life of its own. It is a cliche to speak of Egdon Heath in Return o f the Native as being almost a character in the novel. That is not the way Garner uses the setting. It is there all right, in casual, exact noting of streets and shops (like Myer or Readings Book Shop), and in brief but telling references to doing “ four loads of washing at the laundromat”, to walking dully past the kid’s adventure playground, across the car park, and up the broken stairs to the series of empty rooms over the Italian grocery, where [Javo] had a mattress in a corner and a heap of things he called his. (p. 44)

The references both specify a real place and indicate bits of personal landscape. Garner has said in an interview: “Another thing I like is

“ I t was ea rly sum m er. A n d eve rything , as it alw ays does, began to heave a n d change. ” N o ra at the p o o l.

what you find in nineteenth century Russian writers, a certain use of detail and description”6, and she goes on to suggest how this certain use renders the detail organic rather than merely scene-setting. In Monkey Grip, the firmly established sense of place, and the cultural life that goes with it, provides a network that catches up the semi-nomadic tribe that peoples the book, and both shapes and gives them something to respond to.

It could not have been done by someone who did not know the life at first-hand; it is not a matter of research, but of living and understand­ ing what holds these people tenuously but tenaciously together. The acutely rendered ambience is of course as much a matter of time as of place, and time is felt in several ways. The changing seasons, too glib a metaphor for what is going on in the human lives, are therefore not used as a metaphor but as an agent for coherence: lives drift by haphazardly and their unpredictability is felt the more strongly against the sharp, sensuous noting of the year’s moving from summer to summer. But time isn’t just nature: the novel’s period is placed in refer­ ences to singers like Stevie Wonder and Skyhooks, to films like Dog Day Afternoon and The Discreet Charm of the Bourgeoisie, to the Aus­ tralian Labor Party’s being “ done like a dinner” in 1975, in “ pushing] our way through Friday night crowds . . . back to Peel Street to watch Shoulder to Shoulder on TV” (p. 174). The cultural climate of Nora’s world embraces fringe theatre and film-making (Nora w'orks all night on a “junk movie” ), the Melbourne Film Festival, Rolling Stone, and endless novel-reading. The titles of her reading include Jean Rhys’ After Leaving Mr McKenzie, Agatha Christie’s Murder on the Orient Express (coinciding with the film version released in 1975), Tolstoy’s War and Peace, Virginia Woolf’s To the Lighthouse, and, at the end, significantly perhaps, Washington Square which finishes with Henry James’ heroine accepting the loss of her suitor and resigning herself with dignity, “ as it were, for life” . It is a nice touch to allude to this novel at this stage of Nora’s life; it is even nicer not to make it (or Nina Bawden’s A Woman o f My Age) the novel’s last reference but to whip Nora into To the Lighthouse instead. If there is, however, a thematic pattern in this reading it is well-concealed: there is a certain tendency towards novels about women in situations of entrapment, but Christie and Tolstoy remove the element of potential schematism. There used to CINEMA PAPERS March-April — 19

Words and Images r ------------------------------

Nora and daughter Grade (Alice Garner): friends and family.

be an old examination question asking students to consider the pro­ position that “ In a good novel, setting is never merely a matter of back­ ground.” On this criterion, Monkey Grip is a “good novel”. If it is not good enough to avoid some longueurs, it is extremely sharp in evoking a time and a place, so sharp and sustained that ambience becomes an important narrative element.

Ambience is of course one of the areas in which a film ought to have least trouble in the enterprise of adaptation from a novel. Ken Cameron, whose first feature Monkey Grip is, has certainly succeeded to a remarkable extent in making his mise-en-scene replace Nora’s narrative voice in the novel. Further, by retaining a good deal of the novel’s “ metalanguage” in Nora’s voice-over, he achieves an often startling replication of the feel and tone of the novel.

The film’s opening few minutes show both strategies in action. In a series of deft strokes, Cameron sketches in an impression of the real pre-Javo happiness in Nora’s life, in an audio-visual equivalent of the novel’s opening paragraph which presents a warm breakfast (“ noise, and clashing of plates, and people chewing with their mouths open, and talking, and laughing. Oh, I was happy then” ). The film arrives at the breakfast table only after several other significant images: a blue screen gradually shimmers into life with an underwater shot of legs swimming in a chlorinated pool; these — or other — legs are then seen cycling through suburban streets; there is a cut back to the pool; and then the camera moves in the breakfast scene with people snatching at bacon and eggs. But if these images suggest cheerful casualness, the voice-over is suggesting something else: “ Looking back, you see you’ve already plunged in when you thought you were only testing the water with your toe.” The tension established between aural and visual means here is an example of the cinema working very economically. The pool, the cycling, the breakfast table are part of the shifting communal life of inner suburban Melbourne; the voice-over anticipates what is going on in it for Nora and Javo. It is a tighter, subtler start than the novel’s which follows its opening paragraph with two short, explicit sentences: “ It was early summer”, “And everything, as it always does, began to heave and change.” The film makes its meaning more unobtrusively, the mise-en-scene and the voice-over working contrapuntally as it were.

Even during my dissatisfied first reading of the novel, it seemed to me that Monkey Grip had distinct cinematic possibilities: that is, that a director sensitive to its social-cultural-political setting might make an attractive milieu study from it. And that is what Cameron, abetted by David Gribble’s splendid camerawork, has done. Unclamorously but surely they have put on film the novel’s small world of inner suburban streets and shops, recording studios, scungy lanes, and grotty-tocomfortable houses and backyards. He has caught accurately those 20 — March-April CINEMA PAPERS

aspects of Carlton that the National Trust isn’t interested in preserving or that the developers haven’t developed. No other Australian film has caught so well this faintly seedy aspect of Melbourne — of city — life, nor in placing it in the lives lived there. The film’s direction and screen­ play offer a wry, sympathetically divided view of the characters’ emotional lives, offering a parallel to the novel’s sometimes painful apprehension of the gap between the ideology and the reality. The film balances a clear sense of rootless, itinerant camaraderie (less strongly feminist than in the novel), stressing the supportive aspect of its drifting, non-nuclear households against the emotionally draining, unfulfilling relationships of people who feel able to come and go at will.

Sandra Hall, in a perceptive review of the film, has said: [Cameron’s] characters are continually testing one another in love affairs and friendships, every relationship is a new challenge, yet the mood is understated. People move in and out of one another’s lives without cere­ mony and with as little explanation as possible.7

The film catches authentically the committed casualness and the longing the women feel for something more and does so with a greater succinctness than the novel can. One suspects that Garner, co-author of the screenplay, must approve of the tightening up (without needless spelling out) of this shaping thematic interest.

Nora’s apparently cheerful “ I’ll see you when I see you” approach is touching as it becomes increasingly clear that she’d like something more dependable. Her voice-over may say “ All the splinters of my life fitted together again” when Javo (Colin Friels) comes back from Asia, but, resilient as she is, she knows that it is likely to shatter apart again when he next succumbs to his addiction. She and her friends talk so much about their emotional lives and needs that it becomes clear how inadequate to them are the uncommitted relationships in which they mostly find themselves. The endless talk along the lines of “ I love you, but I can’t handle it”, or “ It seems I only get to see you when you want something” , strikes again and again authentic notes of unhappiness and banality. Despite my phrase “ endless talk”, the film really works very selectively in creating this impression: it reduces the number of shadowy characters from the novel and, inevitably, those that are left are fleshed out by the mere presence of actors. Whereas in the novel the discussions about love and sex are between Nora and any one of many (deliberately?) undefined women, and some men, the film by putting faces to these names forces the audience to identify them. In my view, the emotional content of the film is sharpened by the selectiveness and by the use of actresses as distinct from each other as Lisa Peers (Rita) and Christina Amphlett (Angela). What can begin to seem like a monotonously long-playing record in the novel gets a spike of individuality from the acting in the film.

Words and Images

If Cameron has been lucky with his cameraman, his production designer (Clark Munro) and his musical director (Bruce Smeaton) in creating the mise-en-scene for these cheerful, painful, uncertain lives, he has been even more so in the casting of Noni Hazlehurst. Through her performance, Nora’s attachment to Javo (intelligently played by a too-healthy-looking Colin Friels) is not just the source of a series of episodes but the shaping force of the film. She has, to start with, just the face for Nora: mobile, intelligent, embattled, vulnerable, with accesses of warmth and humour, and a mouth that can also turn down moodily. She clearly belongs to the scenes in which she is presented: in the office of the women’s paper, all flagons, posters, and tank-tops; in the house she shares with Rita until the strain of guarding her from Javo proves too great; in a beautifully composed and lit scene in which she works at her desk in a pool of light, while Javo sprawls on the bed.

Hazlehurst and Cameron have worked successfully to make Nora’s emotional progress the motivating factor for everything else in the film.

It motivates, for instance, some of the film’s most kindly and goodnatured scenes: those between Nora and her daughter Grade (age raised several years from the novel, to about ten or eleven). Gracie (Helen Garner’s daughter, Alice, in a very engaging performance) is clear-eyed about her mother’s somewhat feckless emotional life: without ever becoming a knowing tot, she does know what’s what. When Nora asks her, out of little' more than idle curiosity, “ What do you feel about Javo?’’, she s’ays “ You should just be nicer to him and leave him alone.’’ It is not censorious or wise-childish; just a plain answer, given because it was asked, to a difficult question. This is a very compressed version of a fine short scene in the novel (p. 102) and it works with beautiful directness. Gracie’s clarity of vision contrasts with Nora’s emotional messiness at this point. The film underlines how unlikely Nora is to be guided by advice, however sound, by having her rail at Javo in the next scene when he comes back stoned, having forgotten that he was due to take Gracie out. The film, by this juxtaposition, sharpens one’s sense of the emotional disorderliness of Nora’s life. And one of the sweetest moments in the film shows Nora and Gracie, companionable and relaxed with each other on the Manly ferry at night, after Javo has left. The feeling between mother and daughter has been established with so much affectionate detail that Nora’s final com­ ment on it — about the pleasure and pain of seeing one’s child “ taking off’’ — resonates affectingly with what has gone before. There is some­ times an amusing sense of Gracie’s being calmer and older than Nora, Nora and Javo, as it sometimes can be.

but the director does not let this develop into a cliche because Nora’s proper, maternal love for her daughter has also been made plain.

It must be said that the film’s greater sharpness and tightness do not always work in its favour. It is one thing for Nora’s voice-over to reflect, “ I couldn’t live for long with his restlessness, his violent changes of mood” as she cycles past suburban fences. A comment like this cannot, however, dramatize — even if it does encapsulate — the experience of a long-drawn-out, difficult relationship in which the rest­ lessness and violent changes of mood are enacted in a succession of incidents. The hundred minutes the film lasts as opposed to the much greater time it takes to read the book removes a lot of the tedium of the original; but the inevitable pruning necessarily dissipates some of the monotony that is also part of the book’s meaning. An affair like Nora’s with Javo produces long periods of disappointment, loneliness and aching need between the spells of well-being and happiness. The film, by tidying up the novel’s narrative procedures, runs less risk of boring its audience but, in doing so, cannot help losing some of the specific kinds of pain that the more discursive form of the novel allow's the reader to register. 1 am not making a point about “ faithfulness” to the original; merely adverting to what has happened in the transposition.

One has to accept, in statement in the film, what the novel in its more leisurely way can impress upon one through repetition. Clearly, there are gains and losses for each. The cinema, the medium less susceptible to the reflective mode, is no doubt wise to engage in the subtle modification of a narrative which even its original form, the novel, perhaps allows its central character, let alone its readers, more overt reflection than is wise.

When reviewing Monkey Grip at the time of its release, 1 finished by saying that “ it has understood that a film can dramatize monotony and repetitiveness without succumbing to either.” Now I am less sure of this. It seems to me that comments like the one quoted above, or Nora’s voice-over saying, “ Naturally I remembered the good and lovable things about him [Javo], not the drugs and resentment”, have more of a summarizing than a dramatizing function. In spite of their often retaining Garner’s original words, the very selectivity with which they are chosen for the screenplay is an admission that film cannot cope as a novel can with the sustained inner play of thought. The feeling one has in reading the book of listening to a dramatic monologue, in which, as in a Browning poem like “The Bishop Orders His Tomb . . .” or “ My Last Duchess”, everything is filtered through the consciousness of the protagonist-speaker, is missing. What Javo and Gracie, Angela, Martin and the others are like, or what the city itself feels like, are no longer a matter of an individual’s subjective impression. They inevitably take on an objective life of their own*. One can no longer be sure of seeing them just as they appeared to Nora because there they are, with their own physical presences, the latter making as much claim on attention as Nora’s perception of them. What has happened in the transposition of Garner’s novel to the screen is that, while the original tone is largely maintained through the use of the voice-over (and aspects of the miseen-scene), the process of thought remains elusive. In Chapter 1 [of Words and Images] it is suggested that rendering this process might well be one of the adaptor’s chief difficulties. Cameron’s film, careful and intelligent as it is and based on a screenplay collaboration with the novel’s author, has not really found an answer to this. If Sandra Hall is right in saying that “ The challenge is to transport the novelist’s tone intact”, then Cameron must be said to have gone a good way to achieving success, but it is in certain important matters a qualitatively different achievement from that of the novel.

Notes 1. Susan Higgins and Jill Matthews, “ For the Record: Feminist Publications in Australia Since 1975”, Meanjin, 3/1979, p. 329.

2. Barbara Giles, Luna, 3/1978,.p. 42.

3. Ronald Conway, “ Lost Generation”, Quadrant, May 1978, p. 77.

4. Brian McFarlane, “ Monkey Grip” , Cinema Papers, No. 39, August 1982 p. 366.

5. Veronica Schwarz, “ Multiplying and Dividing” , Australian Book Review, June 1978, p. 18.

6. Anne Chisholm, “ A love of language“, The National Times, 4-10 January 1981, p. 31.

7. Sandra Hall, “ Drifting along with a monkey on your back”, The Bulletin, 6 July 1982, p. 95.

8. This will, of course, be true of any first-person novel transferred to the screen; true, that is, in varying degrees according to how far the “ 1” character is a participant in or observer of the narrative, how far (s)he can be relied on. Nora seems to me very differently placed in these respects from, say, Pip in Great Expectations ox Nick Carroway in F. Scott Fitzgerald’s The Great Gatsby. In spite of the first-person narration, the characters of these two novels have an objective reality not to be felt in the shadowy lives of Garner’s characters. ★

From ‘Words and Images’ by Brian McFarlane, published by Heinemann Publishers Australia, 1983.

CINEMA PAPERS March-April — 21

f C om m u^ s c re e n ^ of C {n l t0 b gnd,

D e p a rt^

te

, ,henPernl ■t*entr hannel » The depan

unrsh w orld ani f Ul

cail

?

&

the

te e n a g e ^ (0 m o re ^

.? n fv ro s td u tl° n rk -a n d^he

struggle t0J horedoM a reiie/ /r^ g /or (lie comPerl . n r gdiccírnen *

f mily llJe;

¡ ve to

, t ig h t »

. ma/cers have

s?1 OJj,

Jro u g h o u t th e ^f

r rrnal nar

th a t ^

CflP¿ e t

f iim , m reSf; loss

nroddin%° f

g

ther^P^’

!d pid.re “ ”£

incisive ^

d

V

j

has an

^

• W[C

^

¿ ^

' “3

^

'

fhc stre e ts-1

Í fS “ i S

i «”j * ? ,% .> j

ilmrnakued w h il e they game

\

t i re n u ip m e n btects- T he

r

f

w

iS n a ^ a f

with the

S i r ■« t o m the <"” e T o ro d u c ti^ '

Jince i(s comP^ T ‘ re ° ^ o rk T ln in ju n c ti

in A s0 r

;t coneev

t Kids " the / i |m duled tn

,ril ! 9 « 3 :ued by

ju g h to re s in the i* s u b je e t0-

■ the film the ele^e State Go

-

our s 0 . y >n the making

r"s«

fgedbaC^ ’

gC(

e rs ^

ra and

„„d

The f d m httS, theteenage^ - f eelingsoU ts, ° i sol at ' T eliminated’ {itb their J. hang ners, and been elm aUdience w ((ie,r javo street cor flnd u confront the through lors, o hous St

Í s . «S ’* * '

Melbourne ] rating P * f J

d o c u m e n ^ /^ e lb o u r n e - J fe°Jatw a s

eet Kids ^ P o e te s s 2 S

^

■t u a t i o *0

Street Kids

duped. It was essential, as far as we were concerned, to make some­ thing that put the issues within a wider perspective, that allowed the kids to tell their own story, and not just to dwell on the more sensa­ tional aspects.

In Street Kids you do see some of these more dramatic issues — heroin addiction, child prostitu­ tion, drug abuse — but they are in the film because they are a part of the kids’ lifestyle, and part of the problem. However, these are just the symptoms of the deeper problem, which is that these kids have nowhere to go, no one to turn to and no one to love. And that is a pretty horrifying situation, born of a lot of different social factors. And the problem is getting bigger in every western city.

How was the project conceived?

Chadwick: In a sense, Street Kids emerged from Do Not Pass Go, which looked at the plight of children from broken homes and bleak backgrounds who got busted by the police, caught up in the juvenile courts system and finally drifted into the welfare system, ending up in remand centres, etc.

These kids were harmed by the bureaucratic process through which they went and their problems weren’t solved: they went back on the streets and it started all over again.

The main feedback from the public about Do Not Pass Go was how did the kids get into that situa­ tion in the first place? What were their backgrounds? Do Not Pass Go was never designed to answer those questions, but it threw up the question marks. So it was at that stage I decided that an important follow-up film would examine what was causing the breakdown in society that was leading to thou­ sands of kids hitting the streets.

That was where Street Kids was born.

It should be added that Do Not Pass Go was a dramatized docu­ mentary. Street Kids went one step further: it was important not to dramatize but to examine the issues first hand.

How did you develop your pro­ ject?

Chadwick: At that stage I met a Jesuit priest, Alex McDonald, who was possibly the only person in Melbourne then living on the streets with the kids and not ful­ filling any bureaucratic role through a department. He would be on the streets of St Kilda every night, and the kids would come to him for assistance.

It was through Alex that I was able, with writer Adrian Tame, to do our research, to try and under­ stand what life on the streets was like for these kids. That research

Is one of these factors unemploy­ ment?

Filmmakers Rob Scott (left) and Leigh Tilson (right). Street Kids.

went on for about 10 months, at which stage I brought in Leigh and Rob to direct the film.

The film required that Leigh and Rob live on the streets with the kids. So they rented a room in a broken-down boarding house in St Kilda.

Tilson: We went there to move amongst them, to get to know them as a natural extension of living in the same environment.

We generally made our first con­ tact through intermediaries such as Alex. At the same time, the kids were sussing us out; they were suspicious of people with cameras because they had been ripped off in the past.

Scott: We talked to hundreds of kids with diverse backgrounds from all over Melbourne. How­ ever, it must be remembered that

they were extremely mobile, being shunted, for one reason or another, from place to place. So you rarely found yourself talking to a kid who came from the suburb you were in. The kids in St Kilda come from everywhere.

Tilson: It takes much longer to get their trust or even get to talk to them in St Kilda, because they are in a much more precarious situa­ tion. It was six months before we started shooting in St Kilda.

Whether you got on eventually came down to chemistry.

Chadwick: It should be stressed that it was important that this film not be like the various current affairs programs over the years, with their rather flippant and superficial look at sensational sub­ ject matter, in which the kids got ripped off, and the public was

Chadwick: It is an exacerbating factor. But the cause is that there are so many pressures being brought to bear on families in the 1980s that there is a breakdown in com m unication between the parents and the kids. It happens at all levels in society. Unemploy­ ment just makes it worse.

If the kids were to name the major issues, what do you think they would be?

Scott: They all say, “ I want more fuckin’ money” , but then don’t we all? The issue is deeper than that, and it is expressed more often in manner than in words.

They feel outcast, they don’t feel at home, or there isn’t a home, or they can’t face the violence at home — incest and beatings, physical and mental. They live for the most part in incredible fear of something.

Tilson: The kids don’t have a significant person to rely upon, someone you belong to and feel loved by; someone who would accept you for what you are, and

Street Kids

not for the sake of fitting you in to something else. Being homeless is not being without a house or what­ ever — that is, lack of shelter — it is a symptom. The problem is: how did you get into that situation of being without shelter?

time.” Often we would have a lot of talking heads, and we would say, “ This is becoming too boring.

Is there a way we can illustrate that?” They would then come up with suggestions and we would talk them through. Then the kids would set it up to some extent, for This comes out in the section on instance telling the dealers it was Rohan. He seems to be the only okay that we were around. one who has really found a way It took nine months to cut the out — at least temporarily — film — Rob, Kent and myself, in through that significant other collaboration with the kids. A lot person you speak of . . . of them would come and help out with their segment. We made sure Tilson: That is why we put that they were satisfied that their seg­ segment in. It would be very easy ment was an accurate representa­ to make a totally negative film. tion of what they felt was But their lives aren’t all negative; important to say. It meant a lot to there are positive things — some the kids to get it across correctly. sort of friendship, good times, To us, it was more academic. We whatever. were basically middle-class, and we I really hate the stigmatization have left that scene. It was a that they are born no-hopers. I journey that we did and came out don’t believe that is true. Circum­ of. But for them it was cold reality. stances and environment can Chadwick: This project was in socialize and affect you in many many respects unique as a docu­ ways. mentary made in this country. It Chadwick: We talked to many would have been absolutely pro­ kids. The key kids who ended up in hibitive to make Street Kids as a the film were those for whom the commercial proposition, to spend making of this film was extremely three years on a project in which important. They were aware of the you are aiming for an hour and a problems they might encounter if half of film. We could do it only they spoke out, if the total reality because Film Victoria agreed to of their life was shown. They were finance it, and because a group of not only committed to the film, very dedicated people were pre­ but it became probably the most pared to spend that much time important aspect of their lives at exclusively making the film. the time. It was the first oppor­ Tilson: Apart from our involve­ tunity any of them ever had to tell ment with the St Kilda scene, and their story. From that point of kids from other areas, we also view they became almost working spent a year going out one night a members of the production team. week to the Turana Youth Centre.

Tilson: The Steenbeck [editing Even though you make sure not to machine] was in the boarding­ promise the kids things you can’t house room we stayed in. If we had fulfil, so as not to let them down as shot something one day, or done they have been let down so many an interview, it would be processed times in the past, you become very overnight, picked up from Cinevex much a part of that reality, Laboratories down the road and because it was just so much shown back to them. Basically it stronger than our protected, was either good, bad, or shithouse. middle-class environment. This A lot of times they would say, experience of making the film “ Oh, that was important to me, I dominates your whole thinking.

I am thankful for the whole want to do it again. I want it to get through and I blew it the first experience because it has shown

H«

me how important honest ships are. On one level it like going overseas for leaving your family and surroundings.

relation­ was just a year, familiar

This raises the question of film as therapy. Did any of the kids benefit from the process?

Chadwick: At the time that the film was being made, quite a few of the featured characters were benefiting very much, because it was the first time in their lives that people were treating them as human beings with something positive to offer society. If you watch those interviews, you can feel the kids thinking very deeply about what they are saying. This film gave them the chance to analyze themselves in a broader perspective.

Tilson: At first, many of the kids saw themselves as being able to help other kids through the film, to communicate to their parents, or even just to do something interesting. But at some point they would turn around and say, “ Hey, I’m not doing it for other kids. I’m doing it for me.”

Chadwick: It worked both ways also. I had a fair idea in statistical terms what the problem was about: that there were 15,000 kids roaming the streets of Victoria, and that most of them were in Mel­ bourne. But coming to grips with the situation and talking with those kids was certainly very therapeutic for me, and I’m sure for Rob and Leigh as well.

Street Kids' producer, Kent Chadwick.

along, sometimes not knowing what we were to do the next day.

Being completely unscripted was quite freaky in a way: to a large extent it was up to the kids as to what we would be doing, and to what depth we would be taken.

This affected the way we worked on a technical level as well. We had to be a mobile, two-man crew with portable equipment. Also, as many of the kids sleep all day, are up all night and are all over the place, it meant that if we were to capture anything we needed a high-speed film stock we could use at any time. We used Fuji 250 ASA stock that proved capable of achieving usable pictures at 2000 ASA. We pushed one stop in processing and two in printing. Our only artificial lighting was in interiors when occa­ sionally we would use 250 watt There are two or three relation­ globes in existing sockets. Street ships in the film, and one can say lights meant that we could shoot that at least those couples have virtually anywhere. each other . . .

Scott: It was important for us that the filming process was de­ Chadwick: But remember that mystified; that it didn’t become a one of them says, “ You can’t trust big deal. We never used a clapper anybody. In some things, you board, we used a sync lead when can’t even trust your own girl­ we could get it together quickly friend.” So even the couples are enough, and we got heavily into lip vulnerable in that situation. They reading for most of the synching of just don’t trust anybody. An rushes. We didn’t use a shotgun average person with a reasonable microphone pointing at someone’s family life cannot conceive of the head, expecting them to be situation that these kids are in. relaxed. Instead, we sacrificed These kids just don’t know what it some signal to extraneous noise is like to have somebody celebrate and used a flat plate microphone a birthday with them, or to send taped to the side of the Nagra, them a Christmas present. All the making sure we were close to what­ little things that are ways of ever was happening to be able to declaring love for one another in a pick up the sound more effectively. family situation are just not part of Everyone loved to have their peek their world anymore. through the camera, too.

Scott: It is interesting to note that they sometimes celebrate In this respect, were you influ­ birthdays with each other, or enced by any other documentaries? spend Christmas together; there is some sense of community among Chadwick: One thing that im­ some of them. But it is not the pressed the hell out of me was a normal, family situation. series of black and white films Tilson: Another thing that made about 10 years ago in New comes through is the way they live York called The Police Tapes. The from day to day, without any hope filmmakers went out on night for a future. They can’t plan. patrols with the police, their When you ask them what are you cameras in the back of the car, not doing tomorrow, they answer, “ I knowing what was to be encoun­ don’t know.” That obviously tered that night. They filmed every affected the filming. We had to go Concluded on p. 104 CINEMA PAPERS March-April — 25

ยกMBMB

Clockwise from top left: Sam (Tyler Coppin), Eva, Sharon and Brendan; Sam performs from King Lear; Brendan shuffles the cards for strip poker; Eva, in a flash-back to her schooldays; Brendan and Sharon.

Four young people are trapped in the Sydney Opera House on the night World War 3 breaks out.

One Night Stand is directed by John Duigan, from his screen­ play,, fo r producer Richard Mason. Director o f photography is Tom Cowan.

Right: Eva (Saskia Post) and Sharon (Cassandra Delaney) huddle in an underground shelter. Below: Eva and Sharon are ‘chatted up’ by two Santa Clauses: Tony (David Pledger), left, and Brendan (Jay Hackett).

'i I

i SB 1111 , t . «■_

Having directed three features and almost 150 hours o f film and videotape drama fo r television, as well as many commercials, Simon Wincer is one o f Australia’s most experienced directors.

Wincer began his career at A B C -T V in Sydney before working in the theatre, then at Rediffusion and the BBC in London. He returned to Australia to direct fo r Crawford Productions. His first feature, Snapshot, won a special award fo r Innovative Technique at the 1979 Asian Film Festival; Harlequin, which followed, drew only moderate reviews locally but proved successful overseas; and Phar Lap, his most recent feature, is the second most successful A us­ tralian film in its home territory.

Wincer has directed many award-winning television series, including episodes o f the highly-acclaimed Against The Wind and The Sullivans. Other television work

Phar Lap

To what extent during the scripting and production did you feel bound by the facts? How much freedom did you allow yourself to turn it into a good story?

stage and the first thing I did was to sit down with David Williamson [scriptwriter] and, after a couple of weeks, churn out another four drafts of the script.

We had an excellent rapport, but he couldn’t believe how insistent I was in spending so much time with him. He’d had a few bad experi­ ences working with other people, but I assured him, “ Look, once this is right, we don’t have to worry.”

Actually, the biggest problem we had — when I say we I mean John Sexton [producer] too; he was the one who started the project and who was so passionate about it — with scripting was deciding what to throw away. One can only show so many races and in the early draft we had far too many racing scenes.

We had to decide how many to show, and what were the key, dramatic moments.

Nothing was invented. I came into the project at the first-draft

What source did you use as a start­ ing point?

What attracted you to the story of Phar Lap? It is a rattling good yarn, a great story. It is also a part of the Australian consciousness. When the horse comes storming home in the Melbourne Cup there are very few people who don’t get a shiver up their spine. We have all listened to the radio on the first Tuesday of every November, and, when you know the animal up on the screen that wins the Cup, it is very moving.

includes Cash and Company, Tandarra, Young Ramsay, The Lost Islands, Bailey’s Bird, Chopper Squad, Ryan and Homicide.

Three years ago Wincer joined forces with Michael Edgley in a new venture to produce feature film s and television series fo r the Australian and international markets. Michael Edgley International co-presented The Man from Snowy River as its first film project and appointed Wincer as executive pro­ ducer. Phar Lap was Edgley’s second venture, and is being followed into release by John Duigan’s One Night Stand (Wincer is executive producer) and Igor A uzins’ The Coolangatta Gold.

In the following interview, conducted by Scott Murray, Wincer talks about the success o f Phar Lap, his role at Michael Edgley International and the new joint venture between Hoyts and Edgley International.

Phar Lap, with a hoof injury, leads the race at Agua Caliente. Simon Wincer's Phar Lap. CINEMA PAPERS March-April — 29

Simon Wincer

can’t remember the amount of money they won on that Caulfield and Melbourne Cups double but it was, in today’s terms, millions of dollars.

The story of “ Snowy River’’ is very much linked to the building of the Australian nation and the sort of people who were crucial to the development. How do you see the story of “ Phar Lap” relating to Australia as a nation?

Top left: apprentices and strappers gather for meal time. Top right: “Cappy” and Harry Telford (Martin Vaughan) with the 1930 Melbourne Cup. Above: the Agua Caliente Casino, 1932. Phar Lap.

John Sexton started with Phar front of you: what do you do? poison; in other words, Phar Lap Lap, a book by Michael Wilkin­ Everybody ran off to get opinions had been got at. But the other vets son, a former journalist with The and so many autopsies were con­ didn’t agree.

Sun [Melbourne]. It was published ducted it all got out of hand. No in 1980. Michael had long con­ one will ever really know. You talk You spend considerable screen versations with David and John in to five different people who were time on the rigging of the Caulfield the early days before I became there and get five different and Melbourne Cups double. Did involved. David also spent time answers. Some say the Americans you ever fear this lengthy episode with Tommy Woodcock [Phar poisoned it, others say the vet gave would taint the audience’s Lap’s strapper and, later, trainer], it the wrong dose, or it was sick, or response to Phar Lap? and many of the scenes are almost they had been using an arsenicverbatim as Tommy described based poisonous spray on fruit No. It is not the horse’s fault, them. trees outside the stables. but that of the people behind it.

The Governor of California Basically, we have been true to Why we concentrated so much the story and the legend. Even old actually called an investigation on that area — it is almost a film in Tom reckons we got the charac­ because the affair was a huge itself — is that it demonstrated the embarrassment to the Americans. behind-the-scenes power struggles. ters pretty right.

This horse had arrived from Aus­ It was just sheer greed. During the What about in areas of specula­ tralia, won this fantastic race and, two weeks of the Melbourne Cup tion, such as the death of Phar Lap 16 days later, was dead. period, Phar Lap raced something Interestingly, the first guy who like eight miles in 10 days, just in the U.S. Did you find out new carved the horse up was the Aus­ because Harry Telford (Martin things? tralian vet, a man named Nelson, Vaughan), the trainer, needed Not really. The day the= horse played by Robert Grubb in the money to keep Braeside going, and died was a comedy of errors. Jt was film. He adamantly swore that the because the owner, Dave Davis a bit as if you were standing'riext to lining of the horse’s stomach had (Ron Leibman), was only getting a the Queen and she collapsed in been eaten away by an irritant small percentage of the winnings. I 30 — March-April CINEMA PAPERS

The aspect that fascinated me most was that an animal could become what we call “ a hero to a nation” . We are looking at pre­ Depression and then Depression Australia and, suddenly, amongst all the problems there was this symbol of hope. The mob would trudge out to Flemington and put a bob on Phar Lap — and that would pay for their dinner. The horse became an extraordinary icon, as many of Australia’s sport­ ing figures have become, but Phar Lap even more so.

I have a beautiful piece of prose that a young girl wrote and sent us some years ago. She tried to analyze why a photo of this horse was on the family mantelpiece and what it meant to her father. It is the most moving piece. In her father’s case, she regards Phar Lap as a stable entity emerging from the insecurities of the times; a horse that kept on winning; it was something that everyone looked up to and loved.

So, it is a part of our history but it stirs you for different reasons from Snowy River. It doesn’t tell us anything more about our past than what we already know.

In many ways, Phar Lap is the classic Aussie battler . . .

Yes, he triumphs, despite the odds. Good wins over evil, when no one thought he was any good in the first place.

One critic1 has already drawn 1. Tom Ryan, 3AW, Melbourne.

Simon Wincer

parallels between “Phar Lap” and “Gandhi” : in both the heroes die at the start; each, through their rise to fame, helps alleviate human troubles, but their solution to human troubles, by giving hope and encouragement for the future, is what defeats them at the end . . .

It is the same with all great figures in history. It is Greek tragedy.

The first thing I felt when I read the script was that Phar Lap was so great he was destined to die tragic­ ally. I then wrote down a list of all the people whose lives paralleled this: Jesus Christ, Gandhi, John Lennon, President Kennedy . . . It just goes on and on.

“Phar Lap” is unusual for its number of emotional climaxes.

There are five or six points where the audience is invited to shed a tear . . .

All those elements were inherent to the story because that is the way it happened. However, we did choose to put the death of the horse at the beginning of the film because we felt that otherwise an Australian audience would spend the whole film waiting for it to happen.

In the U.S., we are experiment­ ing with putting the death at the end. The first sneak preview was on January 28 and seemed to work just as well, but it is an unknowing audience. Audiences there really don’t know about Phar Lap; they are not conditioned to the legend.

The other emotional climaxes in the film are to do with the actual story. There is the triumph of the 1930 Melbourne Cup, after they tried to knock the horse off and it only just made the course in time.

The next year the horse lost, but by

then you are in love with the horse and it seems that everybody else is against it.

Something of which David Williamson, John Sexton and I were aware was how the Agua Caliente win had to top everything else emotionally. I think it suc­ ceeds because the horse really shouldn’t have raced with the injury to its hoof. A lot of people thought that was invented for the film, but it is exactly what happened. The horse broke down in the middle of the race and some­ how its big heart dragged it across the line. That is very emotional.

How did you cast the Americans in the film?

We found all the bit parts here, because there are enough local resident American actors now in Australia. Ron Leibman we found in the U.S. He is stunning in the film and was an absolute delight to work with. He had a marvellous rapport with every­ b o d y , p a r tic u la r ly M a rtin Vaughan and Tom Burlinson. Ron always wants to play a scene totally against the way it was written; he is an absolute ball of energy.

Australia has rarely produced name stars. Have you attempted to promote Burlinson as a name, given that he had already risen to prominence with his role in “ Snowy River” ?

In the case of Phar Lap, no.

When I became director, Tom Burlinson’s name was thrown up. I initially rejected it because of the Snowy River connection. I was anxious to find someone else. But everything led back to Tom because he was so like Woodcock; he had a good rapport with animals, particularly horses.

We screen tested a number of people and none of them was right so I said to David Williamson, who hadn’t seen Snowy River, that he ought to go along. When he did, David said, “ God, why are we bothering to look at all these other people? Tom’s absolutely perfect.” That was the swaying vote.

Was your reservation that Burlinson’s “ Snowy” characterization would, in people’s eyes, cloud his portrayal of Woodcock?

Exactly. But I don’t think that is the case at all.

“Phar Lap” is billed as the most expensive film made in Australia.

Why was it shot on such a tight schedule?

It goes back to those taxation incentives2. The film had to finish shooting before Christmas to enable us to complete the post­ production by the end of June. I saw the first print of the film on June 24 last year; that shows how tight it was. The post-production was huge and the soundtrack mind-boggling. It took five weeks to mix, and, at one stage, there were five sound editors working simultaneously.

How does that “Snowy River” ?

compare

to

Snowy is going to end up return­ ing about $8 million in rentals.

E.T. is the highest grossing film in Australia, followed by Snowy River. Hoyts told me that Return of the Jedi is probably not even going to match Snowy, so the market seems to have changed con­ siderably in the past year with the influence of video and so forth.

So Phar Lap is going to end up as the No. 2 Australian film of all time; it certainly won’t pass Snowy River. Terry Jackman and Jona­ thon Chissick [of Hoyts] both say that they don’t think any other Australian film will be capable of doing Snowy business.

Phar Lap is a little disappointing in that it failed to attract the main audience, which is the 14 to 22 year-olds. We got them for a while but really it was the older generation that went to see it. The film didn’t seem to present any appeal to that younger age group, though once they went along they really enjoyed it. Snowy, of course, managed to capture that audience.

Why do you think “Snowy River” attracted that section of the market but “Phar Lap” didn’t?

How successful has “Phar Lap” been?

Terry Jackman and I were dis­ cussing this the other night and we think the romantic appeal of Locally, it has rentals in excess Snowy could be one of the things of $4.2 million, a gross of around that helped capture that market. $10.2 million. It has been seen Phar Lap is very much an urban by about two-and-a-half million story and there is no fantasy. It is people and is still running. Hoyts all facts. I happen to find it a much predicts it will do finally about $5 more emotional story than Snowy million in rentals.

River, and a more satisfying film, but that’s just my taste . . . prob­ 2. Prior to the recent changes to the Taxa­ ably because I directed it! [Laughs] tion Act, to receive maximum benefits a film had to be financed, filmed and Sorry George! co m p le te d in th e o n e fin an cial year.

Were you tempted to expand the romantic relationship in “Phar Lap” ?

No, because the story didn’t allow room for it. The focus all the time is on the horse first, then the characters surrounding it. It would have just been gratuitous.

How is “Phar Lap” being handled outside Australia?

A stableboy (Ross O’Donovan) watches as Tommy Woodcock (Tom Burlinson) puts a bridle on Phar Lap. Phar Lap.

In the U.S., it is being handled by 20th Century-Fox; it will have a major release, although the initial release will be handled in a small way. Fox feels it has to be started slowly and then widened.

Outside the U.S., it is being handled by Bobbie Meyers, of Robert Meyers International.

He is a very good, independent dis­ tributor and is doing territory by territory sales. He will be using the American Film Market as his main push. The Snowy foreign release, outside of the U.S., wasn’t as suc­ cessful as hoped, so we have tried a different approach.

Concluded on p. 102 CINEMA PAPERS March-April — 31

Ewan Burnett

,i

The growth of the mini-series phenomenon over the past 14 years has contributed greatly to the revitalization of the film and television industry in the West. The form has drawn huge audiences on a regular basis and is still gaining in popularity with producers and audiences alike as its limitations and applications become established.

The term “ mini-series” has been used to label everything from two-part, one-off specials (which resemble tele-features with long inter­ missions) to 26-hour sagas of daunting and exhausting proportions. The degree of con­ fusion that exists as to what the format consti­ tutes exactly is partly attributable to the fact that the term has a “ special event” draw-power and consequently has been used extensively in pre-release network publicity.

Essentially, the mini-series is a limited-run series of two or more episodes (but usually less than the 13-episode block favored by series pro­ ducers), whose narrative is developed over the block and resolved in the last episode.1Unless it comprises an anthology of work or is an episodic documentary, the individual episodes of the body of the program do not present a major resolution of narrative development but have a dénouement similar to that used in the serial episode.

Traditionally, a mini-series is shot on film to achieve the picture quality suitable for its “ special event” status. It is promoted as such and programmed over consecutive nights or in weekly instalments.

1. The Australian government specifies that for tax purposes each episode should be one hour or more for adults’ mini-series or half-an-hour or more for children’s mini-series.

32 — March-April CINEMA PAPERS

Antecedents The mini-series format is peculiar to television.

Although it is an amalgam of a number of formats, it has no direct precedent in films or broadcasting. It draws historical antecedents from the series, serial and feature forms in cinema, as well as their subsequent counter­ parts in television, but also owes a lot to the genre of the epic.

The film series and serials that became so popular in the 1910s were themselves spin-offs from another medium, that of the popular newspaper and magazine serializations of the 19th Century. Cinema added an extra dimen­ sion which, by the early 1930s, had created a devoted following around the world. Their huge success demonstrated that strong formulae and popular characters could attract audiences to return repeatedly to a continuing story.

The demise of serial and series production occurred with the introduction of radio and television. People found entertainment in their homes and, as cinemas drained, the studios concentrated on enticing patrons to them again with gimmicks such as 3D and CinemaScope.

By the mid-1950s, the large-scale production of film series and serials had ceased.

The one form that could continue to attract the numbers was the epic. From D. W. Griffith’s The Birth of a Nation (1915) through to Gone with the Wind (1939), Ben Hur (1959), 2001: A Space Odyssey (1968) and so on, the epic has successfully proved that productions of massive scale can draw audiences of similar proportions. The form established the precedent for special event viewing upon which the mini-series would later draw.

Television, at least for the first 30 years of its history, had no need of “ special event” tele­ vision epics. The novelty value was still very high and cheaply produced serials and series were the bulk stock for years. When not pro­ ducing sports and variety shows, television refined and extended these two forms borrowed from film.

However, then as now, the serial and series presented quality problems. The episode-toepisode character and plot development of the serial generally overstretched its material; devices of tension developed in .film serials became familiar and hackneyed; and irrelevant sub-plots, overacting and plastic emotions tested the patience of maturing audiences.

The series, though allowing for tighter dramatic narrative construction, wrestled with the danger of becoming blandly predictable.

The necessity of returning the characters and plot to an unaltering, neutral base at the end of each episode resulted in the formulae for plot development becoming as cliched as they did in serials. The aim for the success of a series rested on little more than the protagonist’s ability to perform his function with style and flair, and the unusual nature of the circumstances in which he did it.

• The one-off drama became a programming necessity to revitalize schedules. The “ made for television” feature film dates back to the early 1950s when Walt Disney’s Davy Crockett and other furry creatures began appearing in homes. By the mid-1960s the format had evolved into an important element of drama entertainment and had become an established part of television. The audience could watch a one-off feature in their homes with easy access to conveniences and frequent opportunities to

Mini-series

do so. Even though television films were made on lower budgets than those for cinema, the show had been made specifically for the privileged home audience. One did not have to suffer tribulations such as losing half a twoshot in the transfer from the large to small screen. One could also escape the escalating cost of the cinema ticket.

As with those other “ special event” programs derived from Broadway shows, novels and variety, the tele-feature enjoyed enormous success but could not bring itself to transcend the standard 90-minute or two-hour duration. It appears the passive home audience was not credited with the concentration span or patience to sit through three hours of con­ tinuous drama.

Thus it suffered the same limitation as the cinema release: the constraint of a limited time slot and the inability to develop more than one thread of a narrative to any depth. A precedent had to be set to prove the viability of the longform drama.

QB VII, Rich Man, Poor Man and The Blue Night were three American-produced successes in the early 1970s that continued the gradual exploration of the format. The NBC set out to exploit these successes on a regular basis, but in doing so robbed the form of its special event attractiveness. In 1976, the NBC produced a weekly program called Best Sellers. The intention was to prevent the format from becoming bogged down in period pieces and so looked to novelists such as Harold Robbins, Irwin Shaw and Jacqueline Susann for soapopera fiction, with intrigue and lust as the key elements.

The resulting programs, produced at Uni­ versal, such as Captains and Kings and Seventh Avenue, though rating consistently, did not achieve the excellent ratings of Upton Sinclair’s The Moneymovers. This mini-series, though made to the same formula, did very well on NBC’s The Big Event program. Best Sellers was therefore dropped and the status of the mini­ series as a special event drawcard was affirmed and consolidated.

Then in 1977 came the big event. The The Inception o f the Format American ABC took an enormous gamble by programming Alex Haley’s ‘docudrama’ Roots This came with the BBC’s production and over eight consecutive nights. The gamble paid broadcast, in the northern spring of 1969, of Sir off and the program made television history. It Kenneth Clark’s documentary mini-series, became the most popular television event ever, Civilization. This 13-part program dealt with attracting a rating of 45, or 66 per cent of the the development of civilization in Western possible audience numbers. It received 37 Europe and was the first of four, very success­ Emmy nominations and created a euphoria in ful documentary mini-series produced by the the American industry that lasted for years.

BBC. It was followed by Alistair Cooke’s America (1972), Jacob Bronowski’s The Ascent of Man (1973) and John Kenneth Galbraith’s Australia The Age of Uncertainty (1977), which con­ solidated the successful use of the mini-series In Australia, Channel 10 (or 0 as it was then) format to provide concise documentary made up for a fairly mediocre ratings decade by perspectives on huge topics. buying Roots before shooting had begun. This The precedent for drama mini-series was also foresight led them to cash in on a phenomenon set by the BBC. The process that made “ Based which, though not rating as highly as it did in on the novel by . . .’’ a regular credit was estab­ the U.S. (35 rating), certainly opened the eyes lished in 1969 when the BBC produced The of local programmers to the potential of the Forsyte Saga based on several novels by John mini-series.

Galsworthy. This 26-part, limited-run series Australia was indeed in a fortunate position. finally allowed for the television novelization of Having access to British- and Americanpopular literary material and its success proved produced programs meant that programmers that audiences relished the depth of charac­ could choose a product that had been proven terization and plot development that this successful in its home ground. The kind of format allowed. reaction that kept restaurants around Australia The BBC documentary mini-series The empty during Brideshead Revisited in 1982 Forsyte Saga and the dramatized documen­ could generally be anticipated and so pro­ taries The Six Wives of Henry VIII (1970) and grammed for accordingly. Of course, this did Elizabeth R (1971) were the inception and proof not always hold true, as the only minor of the format. In the U.S., these shows were success of the flatulent Winds of War (1983) presented on the Public Broadcasting System demonstrated.

(PBS), whose tenure it was to screen material The availability of quality foreign production outside the definition of commercial television. placed enormous pressure on the local product Presented through Alistair Cooke’s Master­ to match the overseas standard on a fraction of piece Theatre, the enormous popularity of these the budget. In the days before the tax incentive shows demonstrated the potential of the format for film investment, Ian Jones and Bronwyn to the commercial networks.

Binns had valiantly produced Against the Wind The popularization of the format in the U.S. (1978) on a shoe-string. At $75,000 an hour it was also attributable to the re-run issue. was by no means expensive by international Research had shown that re-runs of series were standards, reflecting the fact that an Australian often almost as popular as the original mini-series was an untried commodity here and screening. Programmers countered criticism of overseas. But Channel 7 believed in it strongly using re-runs, saying that they could not afford enough to take the gamble and the show’s to produce constantly a high proportion of success rating, which increased from 38 for the first-run material. To do so they would have to first episode to 50 for the final one, established produce more of the cheaper game and variety that a strong local market did indeed exist for shows and increase production in foreign the indigenous product. countries where costs were lower.

The performance of A Town like Alice in The foreign mini-series therefore became 1979 on the international market proved that attractive as a special event or fill-in. But the this success could be taken further afield.

British had a practice of producing only as Produced by Henry Crawford at the then huge many programs as could be produced well. So, sum of $225,000 an hour, this show was considering the obvious popularity of the awarded an Emmy in 1981, nominated for material aired on PBS, the escalation of another in 1982, won prizes in Banff and New American mini-series production became York, and was cited by the British broadcasting critics as the “ best imported drama in 1982” . inevitable.

Mini-series

In Australia it peaked with a 43 rating and its successful re-run in 1983 again demonstrated its popularity.

The Success o f the Mini-series Internationally, programmers were looking to quality television to satisfy the growing sophistication and maturation of audience tastes. For many reasons the mini-series had greater scope for this quality and, although ratings do not always directly reflect the quality of programs, well-produced mini-series were good for ratings. These little numbers at the end of a weekly phone call from McNair Anderson in Australia, or Nielsen in the U.S., are the yardstick by which a program is judged. Often maligned as inaccurate, especially by television executives when unfavorable, they are pursued religiously and their admirable accuracy celebrated with expen­ sive champagne when favorable.

Few networks are in the privileged position of the BBC or PBS which, because of the nature of their funding, are not inextricably tied into the pursuit of these numbers. They are able to pursue quality, wherever possible, for the sake of quality alone.

For those unfortunates pursuing the dollar return, however, the mini-series is special event television that is usually good for ratings. It also encourages major sponsorship and brightens a dull schedule.

The pursuit of quality is even reflected in the production set-up from which these projects are usually undertaken. The mini-series format, which has attracted the likes of Crawford Pro­ ductions and McElroy and McElroy away from their usual domain, is, even for these organiza­ tions, produced from a separate entity set-up specifically for that purpose. This type of independent structure relies on the use of experienced freelance crews chosen for their proven track record and, while ensuring a creative contribution from the crew, it keeps overheads to a minimum and maximizes pro­ duction value on the available budget.

The series and serial are locked into network or production-house schedules that often dictate compromises to keep the show on the road. Tele-features and mini-series can achieve higher standards because, although they may 34 — March-April CINEMA PAPERS

well be locked into a budget-dictated, tight schedule, they need be released only when they are completed to the satisfaction of the producers.

One of the major elements of quality in the mini-series is its ability to present, in novel form, popular literary works and to offer dramatic or documentary perspectives on important events in social history. In doing so it allows for a depth of study not possible in other forms. It can tell a good story.

The importance of the strength of this element was demonstrated in 1980 when Water Under the Bridge received disappointing ratings (24), despite a high degree of critical acclaim for its excellent performances and photo­ graphy. The lack of strong characterizations and a tangible theme resulted in this mini-series settling down into melodrama of little pace where no expectation of resolution was fulfilled and where the characters became unlikeable in their unattractiveness.

The similar ratings disappointments of The Last Outlaw and The Timeless Land in the same year created a degree of negative feeling toward the form in the Australian industry. All three shows were well received by the critics and overseas sales were forthcoming but in the local market the reaction was unfavorable. This served to identify further the necessity for a strong narrative in a format that presents itself as above the ordinary in television drama.

Castleman and Podrazik, in their assessment of the success of Roots, identified the elements of success as: excellent writing, first rate acting, effective violence, strong relationships, tantalizing sex angles, a clear cut conflict between good and evil and ah up-beat ending.2 The longer format allows for complexity of character development without historic or dramatic compromise. It can expand on the single-thread construction available to the feature or series but can do so without having to pad the material ad infinitum, as is often the case with the serial.

It can also construct a historical event and identify individuals within the framework of their cultural circumstances. The success of bio­ graphical mini-series such as Jennie (1975), 2.

C astle m an a n d P o d r a z ik , Watching TV: Four Decades of American Television, M c G r a w Hi ll, N e w Y o r k , 1982.

Oppenheimer (1980) and The Six Wives of Henry VIII is attributable to the ability of the mini-series to provide an in-depth investigation of the behaviour and motivations of noted individuals in their particular environments.

This docudrama role has been used from the format’s inception and, though generally unexplored in Australia, is becoming more and more prominent as producers turn increasingly to material with contemporary relevance.

Among the topics dealt with in forthcoming Australian mini-series are the “ Bodyline” cricket tests, the waterfront strike of the 1920s, Eureka Stockade and the Japanese POW escape from Cowra.

In this docudrama application, the mini­ series has the ability to present concise but detailed perspectives on a social history that draws a degree of understanding from the huge proliferation of knowledge, sub-cultures and opinion that has characterized the technological age since the last war. The popularity of programs such as Roots and The Dismissal (1983) would tend to suggest the audience’s desire to extricate cohesive threads of under­ standing from the information melee.

So strong is the format’s ability to explore social history in the docudrama application that it will probably never be allowed to fully exploit this potential on commercial television.

Ken Loach’s mini-series, Days of Hope (1974), set out to investigate issues such as conscription and unionism, and did so with such force that conservative British institutions feared that the BBC had been infiltrated by leftist banner wavers. In Australia, the show was nervously screened by the ABC in a non-rating period.

The drama and docudrama mini-series have the potential to transcend the role relegated to the series of endorsing the dominant political and social system. In contemporary series, the protagonist is usually identified by his social role as doctor, lawyer or policeman. The ills to which he addresses himself are generally repre­ sented as maladies of individual psychologies rather than social ills. In redressing them, and to return each episode to its biographical base, he disposes of the symptom but not the social circumstances that produced it. The mini-series does not have to return the protagonist to a safe, neutral base each episode and, therefore, can examine more than the surface functioning of social systems.

It is interesting to note that the Australian government’s definition of the drama mini­ series in its tax legislation amounts to an endorsement of the Hollywood narrative form wherein: . . . the key dramatic elements are introduced, developed and concluded so as to form a narrative structure (similar to that of a novel) which features a major continuous plot enhanced by minor plot and there is the expectation of an ending which resolves major plot tension.3 This would appear to preclude any form inciting anything other than a “ resolution of tensions” .

One problem with the format’s use for the study of social history is the potential for the over-fictionalization of historic atrocities.

Strongly identifiable demons are good for any form of entertainment and increasingly the hang-over from the “ love” generation is dissipating as one is encouraged to polarize one’s emotions and enjoy with relish the continents of hate, lust and so on. Historical aberrations make for popular television and Hitler shapes up as a favorite demon in mini­ series. But the danger is that sensationalist tele­ vision could over-fictionalize an atrocity to the 3.

F r o m Special Income Tax Report to Australian Tax Reporter Subscribers, S y dney, 1983.

Mini-series

extent that, for instance, Holocaust is remem­ bered as “ that moving mini-series of 1978” and the real atrocity is misplaced. However, when applied to drama fiction derived from novels, this danger is somewhat allayed.

Most successful drama mini-series have been period piece shows originating from novels.

These offer the attraction of being able to provide a point of view, which is usually that of the novelist, and the quality television which is often construed as spending heaps on sets, costumes and so on. But there are problems associated with the production of contem­ porary mini-series that have resulted in the dearth of such shows. Except for notable excep­ tions such as Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy, the most successful are those flamboyant Holly­ wood extravaganzas which employ the soap and serial devices of sex, intrigue and wealth.

The serious mini-series relies heavily on con­ tinuity of dramatization and character develop­ ment to hold the story together over an extended period. But when it is set in a modern environment this consistency runs into great difficulties.

In the feature film, dramatic continuity is equally important and generally achievable.

Where there is only one producer, one director and one writer, a film may develop a cohesive framework or singularity of vision attributable to particular creative sources and deriving its merit from this.

The mini-series cannot afford this luxury.

Due to the sheer volume of material and work, it is common practice to employ several writers and directors. When the final reference for the script development and execution is the period novel, the creative team has a clearly defined and stated set of ethics, modes of behaviour and environments at sufficient historical dis­ tance to act as a solid point of reference. With contemporary mini-series, however, the inter­ pretation of recent modes of behaviour be­ comes arbitrary and difficult to sustain from a proliferation of creative contributors. The onus for dramatic continuity thus falls back on the producer who, especially in Australia, is also frequently acting as entrepreneur and salesman.

One possible solution to this problem is to reduce the contemporary story to a peculiar, closed environment with interesting and

unusual behaviour patterns. The subject and

The Dismissal: Australian political history retold.

treatment do not have to be epic in proportion.

The circumstances and quality of the drama lend the mini-series its special event status by allowing the audience a privileged insight into a unique environment.

Hollywood feels safer producing the likes of Aspen, Scruples and Moviola, which sell them­ selves through their sensationalism rather than their dramatic content. Apart from Return to Eden (1983) Australia has difficulty producing material of this epic, escapist nature because, basically, there is just not enough money to mount the scale of these productions and attempt, for instance, the obligatory wrecking of a fleet of vehicles in an urban landscape.

A contemporary mini-series such as Silent Reach (1983), though utilizing a unique and interesting environment, might not be able to sustain itself on the strength of its script. It therefore runs up against the expectation of more spectacular effects and adventure on the American scale which it might not be able to

fulfil. The special event status has to be maintained, as such, on the level of the quality of the material and the quality of the pro­ duction.

Another possible solution to this difficulty of the format to handle contemporary material successfully is for more writing, production and directing talent to be drawn from the cinema industry where the discipline and integrity of story construction is of paramount importance.

The return of such notable figures as David Williamson and Thomas Keneally to writing for the small screen would tend to give hope to tele­ vision executives that the mini-series will stem the flow of writing talent from television to film.

There would also appear to be a necessity, though potentially expensive, for the delinea­ tion of creative producer/script editor/entrepreneur/promoter roles which, in independent production, is often relegated to or suffered by one individual. If there is a necessity for multiple directors and writers, the creative pro­ ducer’s role must become stronger. Whereas organizations such as Crawford Productions can afford the luxury of an in-house marketing director and production supervisor working on a project from an early stage, the independent producer may have to perform all of these tasks at the same time as suffering the traumas of having his house and family in hock to make ends meet before the finance comes through.

Programming

AB the Riven Run: another successful exploration o f the past.

The mini-series format has traps for the tele­ vision programmer. One of the biggest problems is that, unlike the series, the episodes of the mini-series cannot be split for program­ ming as re-runs. The show must occupy a set number of slots in a progression which, if not on subsequent nights as possibly originally pro­ grammed, should be no more than a week apart. Series such as M*A*S*H can be split and programmed to suit seasons, ratings or fancy without major alienation of the audience. Even episodes made 10 years apart are programmed in the same week with success.

The performance of mini-series re-runs has not been extensively researched in Australia but, in the U.S., it has been shown that they do not do as well as the series. If the special event CINEMA PAPERS March-Aprii — 35

Mini-series

Waterfront: Jack Thompson as Maxey.

is successful the first time around it becomes less special the second time. Re-runs, therefore, are generally left until several years after the first screening to allow for a degree of turn-over in the audience.

Perhaps the most dramatic flaw with the format is that the first episode has to do well on the night or the network is left holding a multiple-evening disaster. The format, because of the depth of its development, does not lend itself to having audiences join in mid-run even with recaps at the head of each episode.

Networks generally rely on heavy promotion campaigns to sell the show. These often appear months before the program with fleeting and, supposedly enthralling, promises of the imminent arrival of the big event. These campaigns then progress with all manner of media promotion in an effort to have the viewer anxiously hanging off the end of his seat for the first episode.

The network has to be sure of its material because, should the big event turn out to be a fizzer, there is a limit to how often they could cry wolf without depriving the mini-series of its attractiveness.

But there have been few real fizzers recently; 1983 proved to be an excellent year for the mini-series in Australia and one which could prove hard to follow. It was a year in which the local product fared very well with the outstand­ ing critical and ratings success of The Dismissal and AH the Rivers Run, and the ratings suc­ cesses of For the Term of His Natural Life and Return to Eden.

In terms of production, other than the distinct possibility that the Burrowes Dixon production of The Anzacs will eventuate, several projects from established producers are in advanced stages of development or pre­ production.

Perhaps the most interesting event of 1984 will be the $7.3 million production by the South Australian Film Corporation of Rolf Boldrewood’s Robbery Under Arms. This will be produced as a six-hour mini-series as well as a double-length feature film, complete with inter­ mission, to precede its television release by two years. Producer Jock Blair feels that both of these forms will be viable propositions and will provide a secure return on the investment which, at $750,000 an hour of television, places it well ahead of the current average of $600,000 an hour.

This will be interesting because the use of the two formats for the same material has not proven successful for the two similar American ventures. For both Moses the Lawgiver (1975) and Shogun (1979) the feature film did poorly in the box-office, while the mini-series rated well on television. However, the enormous success of The Godfather and The Godfather Part II in the cinema guaranteed the subsequent success of the nine-hour mini-series, which was cut out of the two films and previously unused material, and screened many years later.

Robbery will differ from Shogun in that additional material will be shot for the feature rather than culling it out from the mini-series.

Given the proven inability of the mini-series to rate well in re-runs in the U.S., however, it will be interesting to see whether the audience, having seen the blockbuster in the cinema, will watch the same special event on television as soon as two years later. The success of the mini­ series would also appear to be heavily dependent on the success of the film release.

The ABC has had a couple of interesting, if low-budget, attempts at the mini-series format in recent years. 1915 (1982), A Descant for

36 — March-April CINEMA PAPERS

Conclusion The mini-series has the capacity to be used for serious drama. The British established this in the early days of the format and it has been consolidated with a number of quality Aus­ tralian, American and British mini-series. The major hurdle is to maintain the pace and consistency of the story development. A show that waffles on endlessly without the drawcards of a brilliant script or, conversely, soap sensationalism is destined to the pile of mini­ series flops that has grown in the wake of an otherwise successful history.

Furthermore, the special event status must be maintained. A number of prominent critics and producers have expressed concern with the rush of people, many without much experience, announcing interest in capitalizing on the tax incentives and intending mini-series of their own. Established producers such as Henry Crawford fear that a proliferation of quicklyproduced, badly-scripted, cheap mini-series will throw the format into disrepute and deprive it in future of its special event attractiveness.

This is, indeed, a danger as the current popu­ larity of the format has every man and his drover’s dog jumping on the bandwagon, much as in 1975 and 1981 when everyone was making feature films. One can only hope that the process of elimination by ratings trial that has established the successful parameters of the mini-series during the past 14 years will create the pressures from the cable and television pro­ grammers for the continued and growing use of the format for quality television.

The Future This year seems set, however, to be at least as spectacular for the mini-series. Network 7 alone has nine mini-series programmed for the year.

Several Australian shows await release including Eureka Stockade, produced by Henry Crawford, and Waterfront, produced by Bob Weis.

Gossips (1983) and The Scales of Justice (1983), though lacking the scale of production of other commercial projects, were popular because of the strength of their scripts and the intimate nature of their setting.

• However, Chris Muir, head of the ABC drama department, has indicated that the ABC will in future steer clear of the mini-series bally­ hoo in favor of lower-budget one-offs which he feels allow more opportunities for high-quality, innovative and imaginative experiments.

For those involved in independent produc­ tion, the current slump in the cable television market in the U.S. could prove disadvan­ tageous to the local as well as the American industries. Home Box Office, the vast organiza­ tion which pre-bought All the Rivers Run (1983) from Crawford Productions, is currently going through a major staff and policy restructure in an effort to streamline opera­ tions. Even though Henry Crawford sold his series Five Mile Creek to the Disney cable network, cable television would appear to be proving less of a bonanza than expected. The phenomenal growth of home video in the U.S. has hit hard at what was the scourge of network television several years ago.

In the U.S., critics are hoping that the estab­ lishment in the past five years of non-network, independent production companies, such as Operation Prime Time and Metromedia, will mean a trend toward material of more intro­ spective drama appeal appearing in the tele­ feature and mini-series formats. Network pro­ duction appears to have polarized itself into police, detective and action adventure on one side and big-time, soap mini-series on the other.

Serious drama, other than that on the popular Masterpiece Theatre, has all but been elimin­ ated from American network programming as the frantic scramble to retain audiences in the light of home video and cable continues.

A Descant for Gossips: Kaarin Fairfax as Vinny.

Acknowledgment: Rosemary Curtis, tralian Film and Television School.

Aus­

An interview with Susan Lambert Why did you change from being a Susan Lambert’s On Guard, in the style o f a heist adventure, successful documentary director to concentrates on fo u r politically active and assertive women a director of drama?

about trying to do that within the adventure/thriller genre. But after much discussion we realized that (played by Liddy Clark, Jan Cornall, Kerry Dwyer and the women should be concerned Mystery Carnage). Shot on 16 mm and 51 minutes long, the about something, so that the adven­ ture/thriller stuff would have a film is a frank depiction o f the women’s sexuality and firm foundation. We came up with emotional lives, and the complexity o f their domestic respon­ the issue of reproductive engi­ which we had been inter­ sibilities. Within its thriller format, On Guard raises the neering ested in for a long time. It is a ethical issue o f biotechnology and its impact on women. fabulously complicated moral Lambert’s previous films, all documentaries, have mostly issue, with which the medical and legal authorities are still grappling. been co-directed with Sarah Gibson (co-writer and associate Anyway, as we got further and producer o f On Guard). They include Ladies Rooms (also further into the writing, the issue more to the forefront and with Pat Fiske, 1978), Size 10 (1978), Behind Closed Doors came couldn’t be kept down, so we had (1980) and Age Before Beauty (1980). In the following to research it thoroughly and arrive at a position. That was the hardest interview Lambert talks with Victoria Treole. part.

What is interesting is that it is not an issue that has been bandied around or discussed within the women’s movement, or in larger political circles; so, whereas previously our documentaries had been in reaction to issues already being discussed, this film was to tackle a subject long before it became an issue, and get people talking.

What Sarah and I are interested in is getting new ideas across to people and so, even in our docu­ mentaries, we have experimented with new ideas in form as a means to this end. For example, Size 10, at the time it was made, was not really what you would call a standard documentary. It included some dramatic sequences.

In fact, that film had some initial difficulty getting distributed because the dramatic sequences featured four nude women and, in a film that was broadly educational and destined for some school audiences, this was considered to be very radical. For us, of course, it was essential that a film about body image actually have some bodies in it, but in 1978 you just didn’t do that in a documentary.

Another film, Behind Closed Doors, was a short one about domestic violence. It didn’t have any people in it but was an experiment in film language to get across some information without having to resort to talking heads and statistics. As such, it worked very well.

Age Before Beauty is a much more conventional documentary with interviews, talking heads and so on, and it is very accessible.

With On Guard, the area we wanted to look at was women as activists. We wanted women to be seen on the screen as thinking, intelligent and active characters.

The narrative drama suggested itself when we realized that we didn’t want to be pinned down to a single issue, like before, but rather could exercise almost total control in terms of what was said and who said it.

We wanted to show a particular lifestyle and to show women in a positive way. Then we got excited Director Susan Lambert, right, and actress Mystery Carnage on the set of On Guard.

Do you always work with Sarah Gibson?

No, I made two films for the Health Commission through the New South Wales Film Corpora­ tion, although it was our produc­ tion company, Red Heart Pictures, that got the tender. Sarah has made another film too, Ailsa (1977), about a woman artist.

Originally, we were going to co­ produce and co-direct On Guard, but it became too big a project and, when Sarah was offered a lecturing position at the New South Wales Institute of Technology, which she was keen to do, we reorganized the production.

How did you get the idea for “On Guard’’?

CINEMA PAPERS March-April — 37

On Guard

We had always wanted to make an adventure film, having both been addicted in childhood to the Perils o f Pauline kind of literature, and that, combined with the frus­ tration of never seeing strong, capable, active women on the screen, led us right to it. We wanted to make a heist movie and have the girls get away. That’s where it started.

Sarah had been overseas and came back obsessed with the idea that paper money was becoming obsolete and that credit was the evil force taking over, so we started toying with that idea. That was three and a half years ago; the ideas metamorphosed, as they do.

Where did you raise the finance for the film?

We went to the Australian Film Commission with a treatment for a film called “ Rotten Motives, Twisted Passions” , which was the original story that became On Guard. We were rejected by the Creative Development Branch, but later got script money from the Women’s Film Fund.

Do you think that is significant?

Yes, very significant. The first assessors both came from the main­ stream industry. They were feature film writers and they simply had no idea of what we, and others, were on about. A lot of people were dis­ illusioned with this particular panel. The assessors had no idea about the films we had already made, or the context in which we

worked, and our ideas just fell on deaf ears. That whole assessment was a disaster for a lot of us.

On Guard script, we went to the Women’s Film Fund again and they supported the project with the first $20,000 and then we went back to What did you do after getting the the Creative Development.Branch first-draft money from the which came up with a further Women’s Film Fund? $70,000. But we still had to raise another great chunk of money We did several drafts and then privately, which Digby did. We we went back to the Creative went into production in January Development Branch for produc­ 1983 and had raised the private tion money, at which point we were money in the December prior to rejected again. that. It was quite hair-raising at the time.

Do you know why?

You said that the first lot of I think they thought that the assessors didn’t really understand script wasn’t ready. what you were trying to do, or the area in which you worked. Was Was that appropriate? that because the script differed greatly from a traditional narra­ Looking back on it, I think it tive? was. They were quite supportive of us in terms of being able to make It was attempting to do that at the film, feeling that we were very the time. In the first script the main visual and had achieved our aims in emphasis was a large gang of the past. But, they were reluctant to women as opposed to one or two, take the risk on that script. They or even four, well-defined indivi­ were worried about the move into duals. It was also much more drama. It was a bit of a blow. It surreal in the sense that the heist threw us right back into changing they did was more ambitious and the dimensions of the script and unbelievable, and it didn’t have the what resulted was On Guard, a issue-related content that the final much more conventional narrative, script had. There was none of the except that it had four main business about reproductive engin­ characters, instead of the usual one eering. It was solely to do with or two. notions of crime and who are criminals and who aren’t.

So, with this new script, did you then engage Digby Duncan as One of the interesting things about producer? the heist in “ On Guard” is that it is quite domestic in flavor. The No, Digby had been in it from mechanics of the crime are so the time we first approached the simply explained that the film Women’s Film Fund. With the new almost works as a blueprint for a

Georgia (Mystery Carnage), Diana (Jan Cornall) and Adrienne (Kerry Dwyer) en route to their sabotage mission. On Guard.

38 — M a rc h -A p ril CINEMA PAPERS

new kind of terrorism. Were you aiming for that?

As soon as we started to break down the script, we had to come to terms with how they actually did it.

In the earlier drafts, they had just sort of fluffed around with knobs and flashing lights, such as you see on television, and that wasn’t good enough. As we were wondering what to do about it, a friend of mine, Cristina Perincioli, who is a German filmmaker, wrote to us after reading the first script. She had picked up the same absence and suggested building into the story our relationship as film­ makers, as well as the relationship of women to technology, and that started us off on a whole new period of research. We had to find out just how you would go about sabotaging a computer bank, not a subject that many computer people wanted to talk about, as you might imagine.

Having arrived at a final script, how did you cast the film? Liddy Clark is quite well known and Kerry Dwyer is known for her theatre work but the others are more or less unknowns. Was there a reason for not using all estab­ lished actresses?

We cast it ourselves — that is, Digby, Sarah and I — and we threw out a very wide net. We looked at professional actresses as well as women who hadn’t acted before, but who were familiar with the lifestyle portrayed in the film.

Liddy was fabulous right from the

On Guard

first reading and Jan Cornall was always somebody with whom I had wanted to work. She hadn’t done much film work but had worked a lot in comedy theatre and I thought she would be fascinating. It was a risk, but well worth it, and I am sure it is the beginning of a lot more work in films for her.

Mystery Carnage is the lead singer of a Sydney rock band, The Stray Dags, and she was the opposite in some ways to Liddy.

She has no formal acting experience but has a fantastic screen presence; she has a really relaxed body language that was very unstereo­ typical, which was one of the things we were trying to present on the screen. That was quite important.

through into the lighting of the film. It was quite successful and I think the film does have a real comic strip feel to it, which sets it apart from most of the European heist movies which are all grey and brown. We wanted to reflect the Australian light.

Do you think it is a particularly Australian film?

Not so much in content, but certainly in light, color and the way people dress.

How has “ On Guard” received overseas?

been

It was selected for the London Film Festival and a lot of people What do you mean by unstereo­ were very excited about it because typical body language? it made them feel optimistic. I think the humor had something to do What continually frustrated us in with that. And they loved the fact a lot of films is that every time that the women got away with it. It women attempt to do anything is a standard convention, but active, they always seem to fluff it everyone responded to it and up because they are seen as enjoyed it on that level. The same physically incapable. They stumble thing happened in Germany and running down the street; the Holland. simplest action is always too much.

In London, where I was able to We wanted to work against that attend the discussions after the notion, not by making a big thing film, the audience relationship to of it, but just to show that, if you undress was the big controversy. train for it, you can perform almost There are some scenes in the film any physical feat with relative ease. where the women are nude or partly nude and there was a debate about Given those ideas about characters, whether these scenes constituted a what were you hoping for in the art voyeuristic cinema. Some of the direction and style of the film? audience thought that the women were being set up for the male gaze The art direction was intended to and that men would get off on it, be comic book in style, with lots of which was of course the last thing primary color followed right that we wanted.

In relation to the lesbian sexuality in the film, we spent a lot of time discussing the best way to shoot it because, although some mainstream films have recently dealt with it in a romantic way, we thought that it was important to show scenes like this in an ordinary way and not make an issue out of it. What we finally decided was to shoot the bedroom scene in one wide-shot and to have it quite highly lit and try as much as possible not to have bits of sheet covering up bits of body, but in fact to have the bodies completely exposed. At the time, they are lying in bed discussing what is the best

Diana and Georgia escape from security guards during their mission. On Guard.

method of wedging a door open, so it is not as though the scene was there for erotic stimulation.

I will say this about the English though, they were quite surprised to see people walking around the house with just a towel around their waists. Apparently, it is just not done in England! So, whereas I think that some of their criticisms are just, I also think that some of them just come down to whether or not you are familiar with people walking around half-naked at home — and that is a function of climate as much as anything else, I suppose.

Are you only interested in directing films that you write?

At the moment, I would like to do more directing where I am not responsible for the whole film and for everything everyone says, so that I can actually concentrate on the craft of directing. Despite that, I am sure I will continue to make my own.

At 51 minutes long, “On Guard” is quite short for a theatrical release.

What are the plans for it?

Amelia (Liddy Clark) and Diana discuss the sabotage plans at the local swimming pool. On Guard.

Ronin Films is the distributor and it has organized theatrical releases in four states, at the Academy in Sydney, the Carlton Moviehouse in Melbourne, the Classic in Adelaide and at the Elec­ tric Shadows cinema in Canberra.

The film will be billed with a selec­ tion of Australian rock ’n’ roll clips and Toby Zoates’ new anima­ tion, The Thief of Sydney, which will make a great program. The rock ’n’ roll clips are a great idea, I think, because On Guard has a very strong music track composed and played by the Stray Dags and produced by Celeste Howden, who used to be with Stilletto. I love it.* CINEMA PAPERS March-April — 39

No pow er - No lights.

Power. It's taken for granted every day, but w ithout it films like 'The Man from Snowy River' just couldn't be made.

MacFarlane generators hire and supply portable sound proofed power generators for many film and television applications.

For instance MacFarlane's supplied a 35 KVA and a 90 KVA unit mounted on 4 wheel drive vehicles, for the film­ ing of 'The Man from Snowy River' - that's portable power.

MacFarlane's emergency service is FAST and their rates very reasonable.

Send for our brochure and price list and think of us when you next hear "Lights, action...".

'P o w e r A n y w h e r e , A n y t i m e '.

109 Carinish Rd., Clayton. Telephone (03) 544 1700.

LLB& A 853

AÁHISTORY OF Scott Murray

The first issue of a magazine called Cinema Papers was published by a group of under­ graduates at La Trobe University in October 1967. The name was derived from Cahiers du Cinema which, by the mid-1960s, had become the bible of the French “ new wave” cinema.

The 25-page journal was run off on the roneo in the Glenn College office with the help of the college secretary, Kay Mathews (now at the Australian Film Commission in Melbourne). It was a low-budget operation with both paper and machine borrowed from the late Professor Whitehead, founding professor in Economics.

This first issue contained an emotional editorial [see Box 1], one obviously motivated by frustration at the lack of a meaningful and significant film industry in Australia in the mid-1960s. Edited by Philippe Mora, it included contributions by Peter Beilby, Lucien Bessiere, Rod Bishop', Freya Mathews, Mora and Howard Willis.

Mora and Beilby had met at University High School in 1963. They shared an obsession with cinema, devouring any available literature on film, and had also experimented with 8 mm filmmaking at artist Mirka Mora’s studio in Melbourne.

After graduating in 1966, they enrolled at La Trobe University, which opened that year.

Shortly after orientation week they formed a film society with Bishop, Willis and Mathews.

Not only did the society show films, its com­ mittee decided to make them; Bishop has described the resultant 16 mm shorts as “ inter­ esting avant-garde and undergraduate stuff” .

The Film Society also decided to support financially a film journal: the aforementioned Cinema Papers. Unfortunately, it was a short­ lived publication. After that first and only issue, Mora left for London to pursue a career as a painter and filmmaker. He went on to make Trouble in Monopolis (1968), Swastika (1973) , Brother, Can You Spare a Dime?

(1974) , Mad Dog Morgan (1975), The Beast

Within (1982) and The Return of Captain Invincible (1983).

In 1968, Beilby left La Trobe to teach English and film studies, while Bishop continued with a degree in Sociology. The next year, Scott Murray arrived at La Trobe and began a Bach­ elor of Science degree in pure maths. He joined the film society and wrote film reviews for the campus newspaper, Rabelais, which was then co-edited by Bishop.

Editorial, 1967 We are thinking about cinema here in Mel­ bourne, Australia. We are involved in cinema but we are working and thinking in a complete vacuum . . . There is not one champion of the cinema in Australia who has any courage or intelligence whatsoever — there is not one man here in whom we can put our faith.

Local Production

LE

(kA.

JOURNAL

DU

CINEMA ET DES

¿fcc

¿¿wl tU.

ARTS

Uninspired. Barely existent. Pathetic. The Commonwealth Film Unit does not rate. Nor do pseudo-underground films. Local television production pampers the idiotic mind. Let us hope (a hopeless hope) it is not indicative of the state of the Australian consciousness . . .

Local Criticism Uninspired, uninvolved, pathetic. Film criticism (in The Australian, The Bulletin, Nation and University Film Group Publications) is mostly plagiaristic or psychophantic [sic] but always astonishingly devoid of sensitivity and intelli­ gence . . .

Cinema Is Now Cinema is now. It is a symptom of the G r e a t that cinema does not exist here/is not created here. Cinema is now, thus Australia is yesterday. How ridiculous, how absurd, how puerile to have to scream at Aus­ tralia. How ridiculous, how absurd, how puerile to be cast in the role of angry young men. We would rather be cynical, unidealistic, we would rather hate and destroy. Oh the joy and simplicity of crushing a few cretinous heads . . .

And so we are brought to this. To scream in the dark for cinema. But we know in advance that screams here land on deaf ears.

A u s tra lia n Sterility

Cinema Papers, No. 1, October 1967.

CINEMA PAPERS March-April — 41

A Personal History o f Cinema Papers

The Second Attempt 1967-70

Towards the end of 1969 there were rumblings of the re-emergence of a film industry in Aus­ tralia. Beilby and Bishop were keen to get Cinema Papers restarted so that it could be a vital part of the development of that industry.

They decided on a tabloid newspaper format for the magazine, and, with Demos Krouskos, formed Global Village Publications. The initial capital for the venture was $180, jointly con­ tributed, and the first issue was released on October 24, 1969.

Keith Robertson, who had laid out and co­ edited Rabelais, designed the new Cinema Papers', Murray wrote for the journal under his own name and the pen name, Stephen Kennett1; and Mora became the London correspondent.

Other contributors included Tom Ryan, John Tittensor, Ken Mogg, historian Andrew Pike, playwright Jack Hibberd, novelists Frank Moorhouse and Laurie Clancy, director Richard Franklin and political satirist Don Watson. No contributors were paid.

The first issue contained an enthusiastic and forward-looking editorial [see Box 2] which reflected the attitude of the editors. A lot of space was given to articles condemning the repressive censorship laws of the time and to others pressing the government for legislation to assist the financing of Australian film production.

In 1969 things had not improved much for the Australian cinema and most of the editorial content was, of necessity, on foreign films. But issue No. 1 did cover Albie Thoms’ under­ ground feature, Marinetti, and several UBU films; No. 2 had an article on Australia’s “ Forgotten Cinema” , and an interview with the unit photographer (!) on Ned Kelly; while Nos. 4 and 5 printed Ross Cooper’s “ Australia Does Have a Film Heritage” .

The first review of a mainstream Australian feature was Murray’s critique of Frank Brit­ tain’s The Set (No. 6). The only other feature coverage was Bishop’s review of Phillip Adams and Brian Robinson’s Jack and Jill: a Post-

4 IM :M \

R 1PE R S

.OSAI VliiAa t C&VSMA PUBüCATtON- OCTOBER 2Mft

FRANKENi-

Cinema Papers (tabloid), No. 1, October 1969.

script, and an interview with Tim Burstall about his 1969 feature, 2000 Weeks. All this indicated how little was happening with feature filmmaking, a crisis examined by Beilby in issue No. 7, and by a report of the Producers and 1. The use of pseudonyms reached the level of the bizarre Directors Guild of Australia reprinted in issues with a letter published in Cinema Papers (tabloid), No. No. 9 and No. 11.

10, p. 8: The only film activity was in shorts and docu­ Dear Sir, mentaries, particularly avant-garde and under­ I have a feeling in my unsophisticated bones that Cinema Papers, via Stephen Kennett or some other ground shorts. A major event was New Cinema member of its stable of undergraduate illiterates, is ACT, a weekend of experimental films in about to greet the impending release of Henning Canberra organized by filmmakers Arthur and Carlson’s Hunger with yet another of the destructive Corinne Cantrill (reviewed in No. 11). and abjectly-written reviews which constitute the Not everyone was excited by Cinema Papers' prime basis of your journal’s current notoriety. I find it hard to decide which prospect distresses me reappearance. Corinne Cantrill, who co­ more: that of seeing another good film pitifully mis­ published Cantrills Filmnotes, wrote: interpreted and subjected to a level of criticism more Rather than publish yet another little film suited to reviewing of Japanese monster movies; or magazine, why don’t you put your money into that of wading through one more reckless and undis­ filmmaking? If you can’t do that, why don’t you ciplined assault on all the major qualities of the English language. Yet there is a feeling of inevita­ import a few films that have not been seen in Aus­ bility about it all: Cinema Papers, in many ways an tralia yet? Those would be worthwhile contribu­ estimable magazine, seems incapable of doing justice tions to the contemporary film life in Australia.2 to the few really worthwhile films that come our way in this benighted corner of the world. While a minor Most of the reaction was positive, however, and work like Easy Rider can draw a delightfully impres­ 11 issues of the tabloid Cinema Papers were sionistic, if excessively scatalogical [sic], review from printed. Each was 12 pages and sold for 15 Demos Krouskos, better films continue to fall victim to the erratic grammar and tortuous non-perceptions cents (numbers 10 and 11 leapt to 20 cents). A of the Stephen Kennetts or, worse still, to the down­ few copies were sold in London and New York. right vilification of the John Tittensors (surely this The journal unfortunately folded in 1970 latter is some kind of bizarre pseudonym) . . . after the eleventh issue (April 27, 1970), due to Whence my closing plea: at least encourage your readers to see this film and judge for themselves, poor cash flow (the Sydney distributors had rather than have their thinking done for them, in a defaulted on payments since issue No. 8). So, muddle-headed and semi-literate fashion, by some even though sales and advertising were theor­ McLuhanite desperado bent on indiscriminate etically sufficient to break even (sales had destruction.

Sincerely, reached 2000 per issue), the magazine was Robert Linssen. forced to close.

The irony is that Linssen (actually John Tittensor) had read Scott Murray’s review of Hunger at lay-out stage and quickly penned a letter for the same issue.

42 — March-April CINEMA PAPERS

tfc APSTftAUA.i

2. Cinema Papers (tabloid), Letters, December 1969, p. 4. •

2 Editorial, 1969 We invite you to explore Cinema Papers, to read and react to the thought and imagery that inhabit its pages. It is the start of what we hope will be a continuing excursion into the world around us. In this publication the serious will find stimulation; the dedicated . . . encourage­ ment. To the light hearted — pure enjoyment.

To those bored with the cliches that surround communication Cinema Papers provides a new Point of Departure.

It no longer surprises us that a polished steel surface at one million magnifications looks like a satellite photograph of the earth, or that a man, rather than an angel, is floating gracefully around the earth at orbital speed. We have swal­ lowed ideas and images that our grandparents would have choked on. But if our old ways of thinking, seeing, communicating have become obsolete, our new ways can become obsolete even more rapidly. Before the paint is dry on the protest poster, the issue has shifted — so much has our rate of communication changed. One of the definitions of a work of art has been a creation in which form and content, medium and message are so inextricably blended as to become one thing. Each new medium that has added its flicker, chatter or hum to our sur­ roundings has arisen purposefully. After the first generation of electronic media had existed in a degree of isolation, a natural process of hybridization produced talking pictures, the newsreel, the radio-phono-graph and then the radio-stereo-phono-graph-television console, the video tape, the videophone and so on.

There is nothing here intended to be final or definitive; we are a point of departure.

Tenth Anniversary Supplement

The Third Edition

1973-84

Despite Cinema Papers’ cessation in 1970, those who had worked on it kept in contact and participated in several joint filmmaking activities, while continuing studies or teaching.

The first of these films was the political docu­ mentary, Beginnings, made in 1970 by Bishop, Murray, Gordon Glenn (a La Trobe student who had worked at Crawford Productions) and Andrew Pecze (also at La Trobe). Then, in 1971, Beilby directed a documentary on autistic children, Eye to Eye, assisted by Bishop, Glenn and Murray. Glenn also starred in Murray’s Paola (1971). ' In June 1973, Mora returned to Australia to attend the Melbourne Film Festival to exhibit Swastika. He suggested to Beilby that they try to get Cinema Papers started again. Beilby was now working as a film editor at the La Trobe University Media Centre (run by Dr Patricia Edgar). He was interested and approached Murray and Bishop to be fellow editors, but the latter declined.3 The major problem was finding the money to get the magazine up and running. The most likely source was the Film and Television Board (Radio was added later to the title), one of the seven boards of the then Australian Council for the Arts.

A submission was prepared, which outlined the policy of the magazine as one of docu­ menting the growth of the local film industry and disseminating information to aid this growth [see Box 3]. The aim was to cover the spectrum of cinema, from film history to reviews, production reports to technical facts, film education to in-depth interviews with people from all facets of the filmmaking process.

In September, the Film and Television Board approved a grant of $10,000 for the first issue of what had been intended as a three-times-ayear publication. The Board instead requested it be quarterly.

When the grant came through, Keith Robert­ son was approached to do the lay-out. He agreed and went on to design every issue up to No. 42, when he left to work as a freelance 3. Bishop did eventually become a contributing editor, and has been a frequent contributor.

Box 3 Application to the Film and Television Board The roots of an Australian Cinema have struck.

Australia may very soon be in a position not only to maintain an economically sound film industry, but also to make genuinely innovative, original contributions to world cinema.

It is the impressive, parallel development in the past few years of film production, film criti­ cism, and film education that has laid the groundwork for this possibility. It is essential that these three developments do not now diverge, but rather that they continue to con­ verge. What is needed is a forum to stimulate the interchange between filmmakers, critics and educators . . .

■ In providing such a forum [Cinema Papers] would hope to function, not only as a medium for interchange, but as an agent for investiga­ tion, criticism and innovation. It would aim at involving, not only people working in the developing Australian cinema, but also the interested public and foreign observers.

A Personal History o f Cinema Papers

graphic designer and then lecturer in graphic design at the Phillip Institute of Technology (where, incidentally, Bishop is now a lecturer in film). Robertson was assisted for several years

by Andrew Pecze, who now runs a typesetting .and lay-out business.

An office was established in Richmond and the first issue produced. Dated January 1974, it was released in December 1973. The 96-page issue, costing $1.25, contained interviews with director Ken G. Hall (including a filmography), scriptwriter David Williamson (he had just written an episode of Libido), actor Graeme Blundell (on Alvin Purple), director Gillian Armstrong (on her short film, 100 a Day) and independent distributor, and later producer, Antony I. Ginnane. Two Australian features were reviewed: Dalmas and 27A. There was a profile of director Peter Weir, by Richard Brennan. This was followed by the first Cinema Papers Production Report, which covered the location filming of The Cars That Ate Paris in Sofala, NSW. Those interviewed in the Report were Weir, producers Hal and Jim McElroy, director of photography Peter McLean and sound recordist Ken Hammond.

This initial Report set the tone for those that followed (it was a regular feature up to issue No. 28), in that film technicians were accorded prominence with directors and money men.

Early Australian cinema was represented by Ina Bertrand’s article on Francis Birtles (plus the Hall interview), while technical matters were covered in a piece on the Victorian Film Laboratories. Barrett Hodsdon wrote an article on the recent Tariff Board Report on the Motion Picture Industry [see Box 4], There was no Production Survey; that had to wait to the next issue, where In Production listed eight 35mm features and eight 16mm films.

Francis bi Rtles ~ Cyclist

Explorer, Kodaker_

B£xnAND

¿Sassiïiï

^Probiblyt

Tn'^nMocw rr,/ tbour KBOAKES/ TARIFF BOARD

Box 4

Cinema Papers, No. 1, January 1974.

Tariff Board Report

As with each Cinema Papers that followed, not all the editorial was on Australian cinema.

There was an interview with special effects king Ray Harryhausen, an article (by Mora) on Comics and Film, and reviews of Le Samourai, Solaris and Performance.

It was always envisaged that Cinema Papers balance its editorial coverage between Australian and overseas cinema. The magazine aimed to be a forum for Australian writers to develop critical ideas and, naturally, these interests were not exclusively devoted to Aus­ tralian cinema.

Cinema Papers also sought a coverage of other national cinemas, ranging from the Swedish to the French to the Sri Lankan. Many have parallels with Australia’s, particularly those in Canada and New Zealand. By means of lengthy supplements, which included inter­ views with top industry figures, the magazine attempted to provide a wide range of informa­ tion for those within the Australian industry to evaluate the positive aspects and avoid the negative.

Another benefit of a world view is that it counters tendencies toward parochial jour­ nalism; such writing invites a lessening of standards, not what an industry, still in its infancy, needs. In an interview at the time of Cinema Papers’ inception, Murray said, “ One of the best things we can do for the Australian film industry is to be tough on it.” 4 The Aus­ tralian film industry can only be said to have reached maturity when its films can stand honest comparison with the best from the rest of the world.

In Barrett Hodsdon’s article on the 1973 Tariff Board Inquiry into Motion Picture Films, Hodsdon lists the Board’s principal recom­ mendations: 1. The formation of an Australian Film Authority (AFA) envisaged as the main body charged with the function of fostering and developing the industry producing theatrical films in Australia; and 2. The divestiture of 13 theatres from the major chains in Australia and the divorcement of exhibition from distribution.

The second recommendation never came about, but the AFA and the Australian Film Commis­ sion do share similar interests. It was intended that the AFA comprise four branches: (i) Project Branch. This was to replace the Australian Film Development Corporation (AFDC); (ii) Film Distribution Branch. This would (a) take over distribution from Film Aus­ tralia, (b) act as an export agency for Australian films, and (c) subsidize exhibition outlets for those films with special monitoring problems; (iii) Special Funds Branch. This would be con­ cerned with (a) awards to films without government finance, as well as films of special merit, and (b) the allocation of funds for the Experi­ mental Film Fund, the Film and Tele­ vision Development Fund, and Educa­ tion and archival grants; and (iv) Industry Supervision Branch. This would act as an overseer of commercial exhibition and distribution interests, and would super­ vise the divestiture of the theatre chains.

4. Vogue Australia, Sydney, May 1974, p. 88.

CINEMA PAPERS March-April — 43

A Personal History o f Cinema Papers

Australian Reaction The reaction to the first issue, by readers and film critics, was mostly enthusiastic. There was a surprising number of people who felt Aus­ tralia would not be able to produce enough films for the magazine’s writers to cover, but most applauded the launch of a new, national film magazine.

Many newspapers carried minor items or photographs of the magazine’s launch party, but it was not until April 27, 1974, after the publication of a second issue of Cinema Papers, that a considered opinion was printed.

That was by film critic Colin Bennett in The Age (Melbourne): Film Guide, Film Journal, Film Chronicle, Cinema Papers Mark 1, Show Business, Lumiere . . . we’ve seen them all come and go. Now we have a magazine version of Cinema Papers . . . and a really promising publication it is. This courageous venture . . . devotes most of its big, bulging pages to Australian cinema — just when the cinema is reaching its most interesting stage and needs all the encouragement and publicity it can get. The current issue includes some very important articles, as well as an amount of super­ fluous fat . . .

There are pitfalls, I think, which Cinema Papers must be careful to avoid. One is the danger of overdoing the question-answer interviews format, which can quickly grow boring . . . Then again, the editors, in their commendable eagerness to promote local production, have devoted large dollops of space in both issues to some film people who have yet to prove themselves . . .

Bennett continued to chart Cinema Papers' progress and on January 22, 1977, wrote a follow-up piece. In part it read: Three years ago when a new Australian quarterly appeared, I suggested it might prove to be ‘a national film magazine worthy of the name to present an Australian viewpoint on cinema to the world’. And after 11 issues, Cinema Papers is at least well on the way . . . C.P. has become a forum for the interchange of ideas and informa­ tion between those who make, distribute, exhibit and preserve films and those who see them. Now­ adays, no film-lover interested in what is going on in this country can afford to miss an issue . . .

A good deal of C.P.’s superfluous fat has been cut away by now, although it is still inclined to grab the nearest available American producer off the plane and question him at length about his past in “ B” quickies or his views on the Australian industry. The magazine has also found a better balance between local content and writing of the sort covered by overseas publications . . .

There is so much to commend about Cinema Papers . . .

In his first article, Bennett raised the most­ voiced criticism of Cinema Papers: the number, length and format of its interviews. As Cinema Papers has never printed an editorial, and thus not commented on magazine policy, it is perhaps informative to make some remarks here.

Two of the inspirations for the present Cinema Papers were Andy Warhol’s Interview and the Playboy interviews. In fact, at one stage it was envisaged the magazine would be entirely interviews; the editors finally decided on about 30 per cent.

In opting for a question-and-answer format, the editors chose not to commission rewritten interviews, whereby the interviewee’s answers are dotted throughout the journalist’s prose.

An example could be: Ken Miller lay back on his white lounge in his Paddington sitting room. Copies of Vanity Fair lay sprawled on his glass coffee table. He looked tired as he sipped his decaffeinated coffee. “Yes, it was one hell of a shoot’’, he confided. I thought about probing him more, but he looked so wrung out I decided first to question him about his ‘rela­ tionship’ with actress Judy Morse . . .

44 — March-April CINEMA PAPERS

S H O R E I St.i*#■

È>I aWÊ Bm.Ê 99

m ft l;Those & S «•* ««SgL fi,* (,8 r,sm!.

*****

As to length, it has always been an editorial decision between readability and the need for depth of coverage. At the same time, there is no reason to assume every interview is read in one sitting, or in its entirety: it can be put down part-way, as with a book, and resumed later; or, a reader can skip passages he finds of lesser relevance. It is certainly not presumed that every word in every interview is of interest to each reader.

Regarding accuracy, Cinema Papers has always had the policy of returning edited trans­ cripts to Australian interviewees for checking.

Interviewees may also suggest rewrites of sections if they feel the passages are unclear, but there is no obligation on Cinema Papers to accept the changes. Obviously most are, since it is in everyone’s interest that the interview be printed in its best form. However, if the changes significantly alter the meaning of the original they are not accepted. A published interview is a record of that interview, and the integrity of it should be retained.

A final point is that some people, such as Bennett, have suggested that the interviews are unedited and thus cheaper to run than an article. But the transcription costs alone are more than the minimal amounts Cinema Papers has been able to pay for a finished article, and the costs of editing are also expensive.

In many ways, interviews are the backbone of Cinema Papers and are not some cheap stop-

The Cinema Papers interview.

gap. It is no coincidence that when books on Australian cinema are published it is these interviews which are the most often sourced and quoted.

Another oft-voiced criticism of Cinema Papers has been that it has concentrated too much on feature filmmaking. Albie Thoms in a 1976 article on the Sydney Filmmakers Co­ operative wrote about “ the total neglect of the new alternative Australian cinema by the Board-funded quarterly Cinema Papers” .5 “ Alternative’’ is a word that people use to cover all kinds of filmmaking, from the avant­ garde to low-budget features. In terms of highly experimental films, the editors of Cinema Papers chose not to attempt to duplicate the fine work of the Cantrills in their magazine.

However, it was always intended that the magazine cover, and give recognition to, short and low-budget films. And this has happened.

By the time of Thoms’ article, of the 14 directors interviewed by Cinema Papers, four were at that time exclusively directors of short films (Paul Winkler, David Greig, John Papadopolous, Gillian Armstrong) and nine had never before made a feature, most having made 5. Albie Thoms, “ History of the Sydney Filmmakers Co­ operative Part Two” , Filmnews, December 1976, pp.

Tenth Anniversary Supplement

A Personal History o f Cinema Papers

experimental shorts (e.g. Peter Weir, Mike Thornhill). Only one director had made more than one feature: Ken G. Hall. (The break-up of articles and reviews shows a similar pattern.)

The most recent reference to Cinema Papers' “ neglect” of alternative cinema appeared in Barrett Hodsdon’s review in Filmnews of Nick Herd’s Independent Filmmaking in Australia (1960-80).6 Hodsdon begins:

AFC that a review of her film had cost her an American sale.

Another way the publishers of Cinema Papers decided to help with this dissemination of information to overseas readers was to produce a special issue each year for the Cannes Film Festival. The bumper issue contained editorial on all the Australian films being shown at Cannes in the official events and the marketplace. But due to the producer A p a r t f r o m Filmnews a n d Cantrills Filmnotes grumbling mentioned above, the issues there has n o t b een m u c h consistent coverage o f the contained no reviews. This was the only time state o f i n d e p e n d e n t film m a k in g in A u s tr a lia ov er editorial was affected by outside pressure9; the th e last d e c a d e . . .

In the biography at the end of his book, Herd AFC made it clear no marketing loan would be lists articles and interviews of particular impor­ forthcoming if reviews were included. As it was tance. Cinema Papers has easily the most felt that the Cannes issue’s principal role was number of entries, some 50 per cent more than the promoting of the Australian films and not the magazine (though an absence of reviews did Filmnews.

Cinema Papers has also pioneered the study displease several critics), the AFC’s condition of documentary filmmaking in Australia, so it was accepted by the publishers. is hard to know why this prejudice exists; the facts just don’t support it.

C o n so lid a tio n

O verseas R e sp o n se Foreign recognition of Cinema Papers came quickly, with journals such as Film in Britain printing items about its inception and brief reviews of single issues. Then, in late 1975, came major recognition in the International Film Guide. This annual publication is the only one in the world to list and evaluate the leading film periodicals. There is a main section and then “ Other Magazines” . In the 1976 edition, Cinema Papers had its first entry in the latter section: O n e o f t h e w o r l d ’s m o s t i m a g i n a t i v e l y d e s i g n e d m o v i e q u a r t e r l i e s , its l a r g e f o r m a t e m b r a c i n g a h o st o f p ictu res, c ap su le c o m m e n ts , a n d serious r e v ie w s a n d i n t e r v i e w s . C o l o u r t i n t i n g a d d s i m p a c t to the la y o u t.7

The next year Cinema Papers was up-graded to the main section, making it one of the elect 19.

It is the only Australian magazine to have been so listed. In 1983, the main section was reduced to only 15 entries. The one on Cinema Papers reads: S till t h e l a r g e s t f i l m m a g a z i n e i n t h e w o r l d , w i t h its gig an tic f o r m a t p e rm ittin g sp len d id p h o t o r e p ro ­ d u c t i o n , t h i s A u s t r a l i a n b i - m o n t h l y is a c u n n i n g m ix o f rev iew s, in te rv ie w s, n e w s, a n d h a r d i n d u s t r y k n o w h o w t h a t w ill b e o f i n t e r e s t f a r b e y o n d the b o u n d a rie s o f A u s tra lia .8

The IFG's view of Cinema Papers as one of the world’s leading film periodicals is shared by the Federation International des Archives du Film (FIAF), which indexes the top international film journals: Cinema Papers is the only Aus­ tralian film magazine to be fully indexed.

International awareness of Cinema Papers is as important as recognition in Australia, for the magazine is the primary source of information about Australian films for world film buyers, critics and historians. This role was envisaged from the start as being of paramount impor­ tance, and is one reason why the editors decided the magazine should not be parochial or selfapplauding. A magazine that is obviously too kind in its reviews, or too laudatory in its articles, would quickly lose credibility. That would help neither the magazine nor the industry.

Naturally, some film producers took a dim view of what they saw as a too critical approach to Australian films, particularly in the Film Reviews. One producer even complained to the 6. Filmnews, October 1983, p. 13.

7. Peter Cowie (ed.), International Film Guide 1976, Tantivy Press; London, p. 601.

8. International Film Guide 1983, p. 467.

It was originally intended that the members of the editorial board (Beilby, Mora and Murray) would alternate in the position of managing editor. However, Mora had returned to Europe in 1974 and his input was restricted to that of a few articles. Beilby and Murray then decided to alternate with one-year editorships in an attempt to combine film production and pub­ lishing, thus encouraging a healthy interchange between the two. Beilby was production super­ visor on Mad Dog Morgan during an “ off” stretch while Murray wrote, and directed Denial (1974) and, later, the short feature, Summer Shadows (1977). However, the alternating theory did not work in practice (it was difficult to synchronize) and, as a result, Murray has edited 35 (and co-edited one) of the first 44 issues.

While the managing editors, with input from the contributing editors, largely control the editorial, it is the writers who should take credit for its quality. Film criticism, research and journalism were in their infancies during the 1960s, though journals such as Annotations on Film and the Sydney Cinema Journal did print lively and informed pieces. But there was little sense of direction, in part because there was no feature industry on which to focus.

Many critics in the early 1970s wrote for Lumiere and the early editions of Cinema Papers, and historians such as Andrew Pike and Ross Cooper were beginning to publish the early stages of their excellent research. With Cinema Papers' reappearance in 1973, and the demise of magazines such as Lumiere10, most of these writers were soon being published in the one source. This enabled Cinema Papers to become the forum it had intended to be, one which willingly published disparate views. It is thus extraordinary to find how often one, as editor, is assumed to have agreed with (or insisted upon) everything published in the magazine. One is frequently stopped in one’s tracks with an indignant, “ But how can you say you like that film? Your reviewer tore it to pieces.”

Not only is there independence of thought, there are individual styles and interests. Tom Ryan’s rigorous analyses of the films of Brian De Palma contrast with the witty reviews of 9. The only other attempt was when one executive of the AFC suggested that Cinema Papers’ applications for funds would be more favourably received if the magazine stopped running advertisements from over­ seas companies. His suggestion was rejected.

10. It has been alleged that Lumiere folded because the Film and Television Board diverted funds from it to Cinema Papers. This is incorrect; Lumiere was invited at the time of Cinema Papers’ inception to apply for another grant but declined to do so.

‘star’ biographies by Brian McFarlane, just as interviews with Peter Weir and Michael Thornhill contrast in style and content with those with Paul Winkler and Andrew J. Psolokoskowitz.

It is not the place here to evaluate the skills of the many contributors to Cinema Papers', their work stands for itself. However, a look through the past 43 issues indicates the growing depth and quality of film writing in Australia [see Box 5]. Cinema Papers by no means has a monopoly on fine writing, in its magazine or associated publications, but it has played, and will continue to play, a key role as a forum for the best film writers, whatever their areas of interest.

In tandem with the increased editorial standard there has been a steady increase in sales. Starting with only 4000 in 1973, sales now approximate 15,000. This includes subscription sales in more than 60 countries, making the magazine more widely distributed than, say, Screen International (which sells 9000 copies).

In fact, Cinema Papers is now one of the world’s five or six top-selling critical film journals, on a par with Film Comment in the U.S.

Box 5 C in e m a P a p e r s Initiatives T h e Interview P ro d u c tio n R e p o rt

Film ography In P r o d u c t io n Festival R eview s P i c t u r e R e v ie w s

R e v ie w S e c t i o n B o o k R e v ie w s Index C olum ns T he Q uarter F e a tu re C hecklist S o undtracks G u id e to the i A u s tra lia n Film Producer I F ilm C e n so rsh ip L istings 1 In tern atio n al P ro d u c tio n R o u n d -

( K e n G . H a l l , N o . 1, 1974 ) (T h e C a rs th a t A te P a r is , N o . 1, 1974) (R aym ond L ongford, N o . 1, 197 4 ) ( N o . 2 , 1974 ) ( C a n n e s , N o . 3, 197 4 ) (fram e en larg em en ts o f V ir id ia n a a n d U n c h ie n a n d a lo u , N o . 3, 1974) ( N o . 4 , 19 74) ( N o . 4 , 19 74) ( N o . 5, 19 75) ( N o . 5, 19 75) ( N o . 6, 1975 ) ( N o . 6, 19 75) ( N o . 6, 1975 ) ( P a r t 1, N o . 8, 1976 )

'!

i!

UP B ox-office G rosses F ilm m a k e r s Service a n d Facility G u id e Forum fN ew Z ea la n d R e p o rt T elev isio n S e c tio n Film S tu d y R eso u rces I G uide O th er C inem a C annes Su p p lem en t T elevision S u p p le m e n t D irector M o n o g ra p h

1

New Z ea la n d S u pplem ent N ew Z e a la n d S e c tio n T elevision S ection C a n a d a Su p p lem en t New P ro d u c ts and Processes C o lo r P o ste r C o lo r Pages C han n els M agazine

( N o . 10, 1976) ( N o . 11, 19 77)

( N o . 12, 1 977) ( P a r t 1, N o . 12, 1977 ) ( N o . 12, 19 77) ( N o . 12, 197 7 ) ( N o . 13, 19 77) ( N o . 16, 19 78)

; !

i = ;

b Si 1 | 1

| 1 Í | ;

?

I

( N o . 16, 1978) ( N o . 17, 1978) ( N o . 2 2 , 1979 ) (P e te r W eir, insert N o . 2 6 , 198 0 ) ( N o . 2 7 , 1 980) (N o.

(N o.

(N o.

(N o.

28, 29, 30, 30,

1980 ) 1980 ) 1980 ) 1980)

( M e l G i b s o n , N o . 35, 19 81) ( N o . 3 6 , 19 82 ) ( I n s e r t N o . 3 7 , 198 2 )

:| (

CINEMA PAPERS March-April — 45

Tenth Anniversary Supplement

A Personal History o f Cinema Papers

C hanges In 1976, Robert Le Tet joined Cinema Papers Pty Ltd as a financial adviser (he also became a director in 198011). Le Tet, who had worked at Crawford Productions and AAV, was at the time a freelance consultant before becoming managing director of The Film House Pty Ltd, and, among other positions, a consultant to and then director and deputy chairman of the Melbourne radio station, EON-FM. Le Tet’s contribution to Cinema Papers was particularly significant in two areas: change of frequency and diversification.

In 1979, the magazine changed from a (base) 96-page quarterly to an 80-page bi-monthly.

The aim was to amortize overheads against six issues instead of four, and thus improve the company’s balance sheet and cash flow. The change to bi-monthly also enabled the maga­ zine to carry more news-type information and be more up-to-date.

Going bi-monthly proved a success and was appreciated by readers. Instead of sales falling, as feared, they increased. And although adver­ tising revenue per issue dropped, the annual total increased. So in two ways the change of frequency strengthened the magazine.

The rationale for diversification was that the projected annual deficit had stopped reducing and was beginning to worsen. As the Australian Film Commission, which had absorbed the Film, Radio and Television Board, indicated it could not increase its annual funding level, this meant extra funds had to be found elsewhere.

The decision was to move into film-related publishing ventures which would hopefully return a profit.

The diversification, overseen by Beilby while Murray ran the magazine, commenced in a major way with the Australian Motion Picture Yearbook, first published in 1980 in association with the New South Wales Film Corporation.

Its appearance was welcomed by the industry, which had not had access to the mass of information listed in its pages, and the book sold sufficient copies (2500) to nearly break even.

Subsequent editions appeared in 1981 (also in association with the NSWFC) and in 1982 (under the Four Seasons imprint). By then, sales had increased to 4000 including several hundred overseas. Each edition was edited by Beilby, the third in partnership with Ross Lansell.

Other early ventures included Film Produc­ tion in the State o f Victoria (1979, in associa­ tion with the then Victorian Film Corporation), edited by Murray, Film Expo 80 (1981, published for the Film and Television Produc­ tion Association of Australia and the NSWFC) and The Australian Film Producers and Inves­ tors Guide (1978), edited by Beilby. This was a subscription service based on the highlyregarded “ Guide to the Australian Film Pro­ ducer” , published in 19 parts in Cinema Papers. Unfortunately, the Investors Guide never fully got off the ground, and folded.

A much more successful project was The New Australian Cinema (1979), edited by Murray. This was the first book to analyze thematically Australian features and shorts since 1970. Published by Thomas Nelson Aus­ tralia, in association with Cinema Papers, it quickly sold its print run and was reprinted in 1980.

Also published in association with Thomas Nelson was Australian TV: the first 25 years, edited by Beilby. It continued the growing coverage and interest in Australian television begun in Cinema Papers (No. 13).

Then, in 1981, Cinema Papers published The Documentary Film in Australia (in association with Film Victoria). Edited by Lansell and Beilby, it was a pioneering work. But it was costly to produce, and ended up draining the magazine’s resources instead of supplementing them. This in itself threatened the continuance of the publishing program. Even with an enviable track record, the effects of even one ‘failed’ project was becoming a risk Cinema Papers could barely afford to take.

This concern, plus an absence of risk capital, led to a scaling down of the diversification program. Beilby left Cinema Papers at the end of 1981-82 to head a new publishing venture, Roscope Publishers12, set up to publish the Motion Picture Yearbook and several other yearbooks in a joint venture with Thomas Nelson. This meant that the only projects which could be initiated were those that could be

11. The directors of Cinema Papers Pty Ltd have been: Peter Beilby (1976-84); Scott Murray (1976-84); Philippe Mora (1976-84); Robert Le Tet (1980-83); and Keith Robertson (1981-82).

To avoid confusion with the magazine, the company’s name is not italicized in the text.

12. Beilby left Roscope in mid-1983 to head The Film House Television Pty Ltd. There, he produced Aus­ tralian Movies to the World (Glenn and Murray, 1983) and Drive to Win (Trevor Ling, 1984). He is also producer of Anna (Gordon Glenn) and Oh You Beautiful Doll (Sue Cram and Marianne Latham), both in production.

46 — March-April CINEMA PAPERS

Above: the diversification publications. Opposite page: articles from Cinema Papers.

handled by the magazine editor in any spare moments. Thus in 1982-83 only one project was started, Brian McFarlane’s Words and Images (1983), published by Heinemann Publishers Australia, in association with Cinema Papers.

In this book, McFarlane examines 10 Austra­ lian novels and the films made of them since 197°.

In all, the diversification program was a success, with most of the projects listing a profit. More important, they collectively represent a significant contribution to film and literary culture in Australia.

In terru p tio n s Cinema Papers had been published continu­ ously from September 1973 to July 1983 when the publication was stopped, due to financial insolvency. The reasons for this are complex, in part due to shifts in the relationship between Cinema Papers Pty Ltd and the AFC. As mentioned earlier, the AFC absorbed the Film, Radio and Television Board. It was not a happy merger, many senior executives in the AFC resenting having to take on the likes of the Experimental Film Fund; it was seen as lowering their self-image as merchant bankers to the film industry. They were less interested in film culture (despite the wording of the AFC’s governing Act), and some questioned what they saw as Cinema Papers’ aloofness from the film industry. While the Film and Television Board valued an independent, critical journal, some within the AFC felt the magazine should be more a servant to its philosophies and interests.

“ i

Mg***

\ And, whereas the Film, Radio and Television Board had instructed that Cinema Papers be set up as a privately-owned company, the AFC was now arguing that the magazine should be controlled by an industry membership (as with the Australian Film Institute).

The issue that brought everything to a head was money. Since 1977, Cinema Papers has been assisted financially by deficit funding from the AFC: Cinema Papers would predict the annual, financial-year deficit and then apply to the AFC for that amount. In 1973, the grant represented 100 per cent of the expendi­ ture budget; by 1981-1982, it had dropped to only 10 per cent, quite a gain on the road to self-sufficiency.

At the same time, the AFC began granting less than the requested amounts. In the three financial years from July 1980 to June 1983, Cinema Papers’ requests were cut back by $42,000 (or 32 per cent).

These cut-backs were crippling and difficult to understand. Perhaps the annual grants were tied to earlier Film and Television Board levels ($9000 per issue in 1974; $8333 in 1982-83); perhaps the cut-backs represented an AFC suspicion of the size of the projected deficit, fuelled by having to deal daily with producers notorious for inflating their claims.

Of course, there were many other factors that contributed to Cinema Papers’ financial plight, and had Cinema Papers been granted its requests in full it still would have been in the red. And if the AFC is guilty of unnecessary cut-backs, Cinema Papers is guilty of having requested too little. Knowing the AFC would

make annual grants of only $40,000 to $50,000 Cinema Papers tried to produce the magazine for that, aware that substantially higher funds were required.

As well, there were the vagaries of the diver­ sification program. This was worsened when a total absence of capital meant only one special project could be initiated in 1982-83.

Another contributing factor to the unhealthy position at the end of 1982-83 was the poor state of the film industry. Unsettled by changes in the tax legislation and generally hampered by the severe economic recession, the industry went through a lean phase. This had a major and detrimental effect on advertising sales.

The net result of all the above factors, and several others, was that Cinema Papers was faced at the end of 1982-83 with a large deficit.

Given changes in the Companies Act, it became illegal to trade knowing one had a deficit one did not have a reasonable belief could be met.

This meant the accumulated loss had to be liquidated and the subsidy for the next financial year granted or Cinema Papers would have to cease its operations.

In June 1983 Cinema Papers applied to the AFC, starkly setting out its financial position.

One hope was to convince the AFC about the extent to which Cinema Papers felt it had been underfunded over the years. The application then proposed a scheme whereby the AFC and the various state film bodies would together meet the deficit and adequately fund the magazine in 1983-84.

While the application proposed a general course of action, it did not request specific

.tsftf*ftW “5;.^s2^ViW t>

amounts of money from specific corporations.

It was, hopefully, a basis for discussion. But the AFC, alarmed by the size of the deficit and disappointed it had not been informed of the situation earlier, rejected the application outright. One week later another letter came from the AFC enquiring about when Cinema Papers was going into liquidation and what would happen to the masthead and copyright.

Given the AFC’s rejection, Cinema Papers had no alternative but to cease publication voluntarily and on July 22 all staff were laid off. On the basis of legal advice, Cinema Papers then sought a 120-day moratorium from its creditors while it attempted to solve its financial plight. This proved a lengthy and exhausting process.

Applications to Film Victoria and the South Australian Film Corporation were rejected. No reply has been received from the Queensland Film Corporation to the July 15 application (things really do move slowly up North!). The only options were to raise funds privately (three offers were forthcoming) or change the AFC’s mind.

Finally, after months of negotiation, and involving the advice and help of a Cinema Papers Action Committee13, an agreement was reached between Cinema Papers and the AFC and Film Victoria. It is worth mentioning here because it will have a major effect on the magazine in time to come.

13. The committee comprised, apart from Cinema Papers directors and staff, Alan Finney, Geoff Gardner, Natalie Miller, Jill Robb, Tom Ryan and Julie Stone.

CINEMA PAPERS March-April — 47

A Personal History o f Cinema Papers

The Future 1984 . . .

C in e m a P a p e rs P ty L td h a s n o w so ld th e c o p y rig h t a n d asse ts to a n e w ly -fo rm e d p u b lic c o m p a n y , lim ite d b y g u a r a n te e , w h ic h h a s a lso tak e n on th e su b sc rip tio n lia b ility .

The d ire c to rs o f M T V P u b lish in g L im ite d are: P e ter B e ilb y , Jill R o b b ( p r o d u c e r ) , N a t a l i e M ille r (d istrib u to r a n d p ro d u c e r), A la n F in n e y (h ead o f m a rk e tin g at R o a d sh o w ) a n d T o m R y a n ( l e c t u r e r ) ; o t h e r s a r e still t o b e a p p o i n t e d .

A s p a rt o f th e d e a l, th e A F C a n d F ilm V i c to r i a h a v e w r i t t e n o f f a ll o u t s t a n d i n g l o a n s a n d in v e s tm e n ts (th e N S W F C h a d a lre ad y g e n ero u sly w ritte n o f f an o u ts ta n d in g in v est­ m e n t i n t h e s e c o n d Australian Motion Picture Yearbook). A s w e l l , t h e A F C h a s g r a n t e d $ 8 0 ,0 0 0 a n d F ilm V ic to ria $ 2 7 ,2 7 7 . T h is c o v e rs th e p u rc h a s e o f assets a n d th e fin a n c in g o f th e p u b l i c a t i o n o f t h r e e i s s u e s o f Cinema Papers b y J u n e 3 0 ( o f w h i c h t h i s i s s u e is t h e f i r s t ) . D u r i n g th at tim e a p u b lis h in g and m a rk e tin g c o n s u l t a n t w ill e x a m i n e all a r e a s o f p r o d u c t i o n a n d m a n a g e m e n t, a n d re p o rt b ack to th e M T V d i r e c t o r s o n w h a t h e f e e l s is t h e m o s t f e a s i b l e p u b lis h in g a n d m a n a g e m e n t s tru c tu re . T h is c o u ld in v o lv e a c h a n g e o f f r e q u e n c y o r f o r m a t.

T h e f i n a l d e c i s i o n lie s w i t h t h e d i r e c t o r s .

A new m an a g in g e d ito r is a l s o to be a p p o in te d , to re p la c e th is a u th o r , w h o , a fte r 10 y e a r s w i t h t h e p u b l i c a t i o n , b e l i e v e s it is i n t h e j o u r n a l ’s b e s t i n t e r e s t t o h a v e a f r e s h i n p u t .

N o t o n l y w ill t h e M T V d i r e c t o r s a n d s t a f f b rin g new id ea s to th e m a g a z in e , b u t a n n u a l, o p e n m e e t in g s w ill b e h e ld in S y d n e y a n d M e lb o u r n e , in itia lly , to in v ite r e s p o n s e f r o m Cinema Papers' r e a d e r s .

T h e n e t r e s u l t o f a l l t h e s e c h a n g e s is t h a t Cinema Papers c a n l o o k f o r w a r d t o t h e f u t u r e .

Its fin a n c ia l support ap p ears sta b le , w ith in cre ased fu n d in g fro m th e A F C a n d F ilm V i c t o r i a , a n d it c a n n o w f u l f i l i t s r o l e a s A u s ­ t r a l i a ’s n a t i o n a l f i l m m a g a z i n e w i t h c o n f i d e n c e .

It w i l l , o f c o u r s e , b e a d i f f e r e n t m a g a z i n e .

H o w , o n e w ill h a v e t o w a it a n d se e . ★

Tenth Anniversary Supplement

Box 6 Staff Editors P e te r B eilby, S c o tt M u r r a y

Contributing Editors A n t o n y I. G i n n a n e , G r a h a m S h i r l e y , R o d B ish o p , D av id E lfick , N o el P u r d o n , R ic h a rd B rennan, G o rd o n G len n , A n d re w Pecze, J o h n R e id , J o h n O ’H a r a , T o m R y a n , B asil G ilb e r t, M a rg o L e th le a n , Ia n B aillieu, F re d H a r d e n , B rian M c F a rla n e

Designers K eith R o b e r ts o n , E r n ie A l t h o f f

Assistant designers A n d re w Pecze, T ess B aster, L o u ise L a v a ra c k , L iz M a c k i e , M e r e d i t h P a r s l o w

Business consultant R obert Le T et

Business manager W illia m M o r a

Office managers G le n d a D o d d , M a ry R e ic h en v a ter, M a u ree n H arvey, N im ity J a m e s , T rish H u n t, P a tric ia A m ad

Secretarial E liz a b e th T a u b e r t , S u s a n K o r c h m a , G illian G o o d h art, L isa M athew s, Anne S in clair, H e a th e r P o w le y

Office assistance G illian H e h ir, J a c q u e lin e B a rte r

Sub-editing M a u r i c e P e r e r a , P a t O ’N e i l l , H e l e n G r e e n w o o d

Proof-reading A rth u r Salto n

Advertising representatives B a rb ara G u est, M ax in e G o d ley , Sue A dler, Sue M u r r a y , C h ris D a v is, P e g g y N ic h o lls

Advertising consultant M arcu s C o v e n try

Publicity N a ta lie M iller

Research M arg o L ethlean, J e n n y T ru s tru m

Photography G o r d o n G le n n , V irg in ia C o v e n tr y , J e a n - M a r c Le P e c h o u x

Editorial assistance A ckno wledgments T h e a u t h o r w o u l d lik e to r e c o r d h e r e his a p p r e c ia tio n to th e fo llo w in g fo r th e ir a s s is t­ ance and su pport d u rin g Cinem a Papers' p e rio d o f a d ju s tm e n t: A ll th o s e r e a d e r s w h o w r o t e to th e A F C g iv in g th e ir o p i n io n s o f th e m a g a z i n e a n d a r g u i n g f o r c o n t i n u e d f u n d i n g ; t h e A F C , in p a rtic u la r J o e S k rz y n sk i, P h illip A d a m s , D a v id S tr a tto n a n d M u r r a y B ro w n ; F ilm V ic to ria , p a rtic u la rly T erence M cM ahon and John K e a rn e y ; th e N ew S o u th W a le s F ilm C o r p o r a ­ tio n , esp ecially Paul R io m falv y ; Cinem a Papers s t a f f m e m b e r s P a t r i c i a A m a d a n d H e l e n G re e n w o o d fo r w o rk in g p a rt-tim e fo r fo u r m o n th s , w ith o u t a n y e x p e c ta tio n o f fin a n c ia l r e w a r d ; t h e Cinem a Papers A c t i o n C o m m i t t e e and his fe llo w d ire c to rs; sev eral personal f r i e n d s w h o g a v e g r e a t s u p p o r t ; I a n B ail lie n ; A n to n y I. G in n a n e; Sue M urray; Peggy N ic h o lls; L es P r a d d ; D a v id W h ite ; th e m a n a g e ­ m e n t a n d s ta f f at T h e F ilm H o u s e fo r th eir c o ­ o p e r a tio n a n d th e u se o f fa cilitie s, e sp e c ia lly T rish F o ley ; and, m ost im p o rta n t, th o se c red ito rs w h o g av e C in e m a P a p e rs th e tim e a n d e n c o u r a g e m e n t t o s o r t o u t its a f f a i r s .

T h e a u t h o r a l s o w i s h e s t o t h a n k s i n c e r e l y a ll Cinema Papers s t a f f a n d c o n t r i b u t o r s s i n c e S e p te m b e r 1973.

T h e e a r l y s e c t i o n s o f t h i s a r t i c l e a r e b a s e d , in p a r t , o n a s t u d y o f Cinema Papers w r i t t e n b y E w a n B u rn e tt.

48 — March-April CINEMA PAPERS

Sue A dler, A n d re w Pecze

Assistants G e o f f P a r k e r, B e lin d a S y m e , R o d B ish o p , B ruce W eb ste r, A n g ela Ju rje v ic , R ichard C o o n e y , P h illip E d m o n d s , R o b e rt N o v a k , K ay M a th e w s , N o r m a n I n g r a m , K itty K o m p e , J a n D aw son, P eter Je n so n , Ju d ith A rn o ld , M ark H i l ls , P e t e r K e lly

Correspondents Ken Q u in n e ll, P a t E d g a r, P h ilip p e M o r a , D a v id H a y , D avid J o n e s , A n d re w Pike, Je re m y T hom as, Tom Ryan, Jan D a w s o n , D avid B ra n d e s, M e a g h a n M o rris, R o b e rt S c h a r, G ail H e a th w o o d , D avid T e ite lb a u m , M ik e N ico laid i, E rica S h o rt

Contributors S unila A b e y s e k e ra , P h illip A d a m s , Sue A d le r, Thom as G u tierrez A lea, C am eron A llan, D ennis A ltm an, B arbara A lysen, L in d say A m o s , K evin A n d e r s o n , N a d y a A n d e r s o n , R obin A n d e r s o n , M a r t h a A n s a r a , B re n d an A rch er, Ju d ith A r n o ld , A r th u r A u stin , Jo h n A very Ju lie J a m e s B ailey, l a n B aillieu, D a v id B a k e r , Jo h n B arnett, G ra h a m B arry, M a ry n B a te m an , P e t e r B e il b y , I n a B e r t r a n d , M e r v y n D . B i n n s , Rod B is h o p , S te v e Bisley, T e r r y B ourke, B a rb a ra B oyd, P e ter B oyes, D a v id B ra n d es, M arcu s B reen, R ich a rd B re n n a n , D avid B ro u s, M ira n d a B row n, A nth o n y B u ck ley , N igel B uesst, E w a n C . B u r n e tt, T im B u rsta ll, G e o f f B urton R o la n d o C a p u to , M ike C h a n n e l, Ja c k C lan c y , K a t h a r i n e L. C l a n c y , J o c e l y n C l a r k e , G i l b e r t

C o a t s , M a r c u s C o l e , Bill C o l l i n s , R o b e r t C o n n , K eith C o n n o l ly , R o ss C o o p e r , M ic k C o u n i h a n , B rian C o u rtis, B arbara C reed, C h ristin e C re m e n , S te p h en C ro fts P a u l D avies, J a n D a w s o n , S u s a n D e r m o d y , Beryl D o n a l d s o n , E . M . D o n n a c h i e , J o r n D o n n e r, J o h n D o w d in g D r P atricia E d g a r, R ay E d m o n d s o n , U rs E gger, D a v id E lf ic k , B o b E llis, D e b i E n k e r T ra d e r F a u lk n e r, A la n F in n e y , K ate F itz ­ p a trick , John F laus, John Fox, R ichard F r a n k lin , F r e d a F re ib e rg , E ric F u llilo v e A n n G a m e, G e o ff G a rd n e r, S tephen G a rto n , M e r r y n G a t e s , D r P e t e r R . G e r d e s , B a sil G i l b e r t , A n t o n y I. G i n n a n e , V e r i n a G l a e s s n e r , M ic h ie G le a s o n , G o r d o n G l e n n , J o h n G o l d lu s t, L ynette G o r d o n , L eo n G o r r , H e len G re e n w o o d , Ian G riggs Jim i H afizji, K en G . H a ll, S a n d r a H all, F re d H a r d e n , D enise H a re , M ik e H a rris , M ichael H a rv e y , D a v id H a y , P e te r H a y , G ail H e a th w o o d , N ick H e r d , D o r o th y H e w e tt, S o lru n H o a a s , B a rre tt H o d s d o n , B ru c e H o d s d o n , C ecil H o lm es, Ian H o rn e r, B ruce H o rsfie ld , J o h n H u g h e s , I a n H u n t e r , I v a n H u t c h i n s o n , A n n e B. H utton N o rm an Ingram L iz J a c k a , C l y d e J e a v o n s , C h r i s t i n e J o h n s t o n , Sue J o h n s to n , D ave Jo n e s, Ian Jo nes D o n K en n ed y , S te p h en K e n n e tt (Scott M u rra y ), B a rry K in g , P e t e r K in g , Jill K i t s o n , M a r i K u t t n a J o h n L a n g e r, R o ss L a n s e ll, D a v id L ascelles, R obert Le T et, C u rtis L evy, J o h n Ley, C hris L ong, Jo a n L ong, P a t L o n g m o re , B arry L ow e M a rg are t M c C lu sk y , J im M c C u llo g h , B rian M cF arlan e, P. P. M c G u in n e ss, G rant M c L e n n a n , Steve M cM illin F io n a M a c k ie , Steve M a c le a n , A lm o s M a k s a y , P eter M alo n e, Ju d ith M an n in g , S tephen M a rsto n , A d ria n M a rtin , A n d re w M a rtin , P e ter M a rtin , Freya M a th ew s, Sue M a tth e w s, G e o ff M a y e r, M o n t e M iller, K e n M o g g , V icki M o llo y , V ince M o n t o n , M a r y M o o d y , P h ilip p e M o r a , A lbert M o r a n , J o h n M o r a n , M e a g h a n M o rris, P e ter M o rris, E d d ie M o ses, J im M u r p h y , J o h n C . M u rra y , S cott M u r r a y R o n N a g o rc k a , D ave N a s h (R ick T h o m p s o n ) , D e n n is W a y N ic h o ls o n , M ik e N ic o la id i, P hil Noyce V in c e O ’D o n n e ll, D e s m o n d O ’H a r a , A la n O s b o r n e

O ’G r a d y ,

John

P e ter P a g e , J a n e t P a r a m o r e , B a rrie P a t ti n s o n , D av id P e a rce , J e f f P e c k , A n d r e w P h illip s, A n d re w P ik e , M a rg o t P in k u s , T e rry P la n e , Inge P ru k s, Noel P u rd o n Lyn Q u ale, Ken Q u in n ell Les R a b in o w ic z, E rw in R a d o , T h e lm a R a g as, M a r k R a n d a ll, E ric R e a d e , J . H . R e id , M ik e R ic a r d s , C e c ilia R ice, J a m e s R ic k e t s o n , K e n n R o b b , D avid R oe, S am R o h d ie , D a sh a R o ss, E d R ossner, T o m Ryan Je n n ife r S a b in e, N. N. S a c h ita n a r d , D av e S a rg e n t, R o b ert S ch ar, Jim S c h e m b ri, M o n iq u e S c h w a rz , K eith S c o tt, B ria n S h e e d y , L in d s a y S h e l t o n , G r a h a m S h i r l e y , E r i c a S h o r t , N e il S in y a rd , M a rg a re t S m ith , C liv e S o w ry , M a rk S p ra tt, Sue S p u n n e r, T o m S ta ce y , R ay S ta n le y , A n to in e tte S ta rk ie w icz , L esle y S te r n , M e g S t e w a r t, M a r k S tiles, A le x S titt, R ansom S t o d d a r d ( A n t o n y I. G i n n a n e ) , L u c y S t o n e , D avid S tra tto n , Janet S trick lan d , E rrol S u lliv an , P a u l S w eet, B o b b i S y k es Sue T ate, M a x T a y lo r, P hil T a y lo r, D avid T e ite lb a u m , J e re m y T h o m a s , R ick T h o m p s o n , A l b i e T h o m s , R o g e r O . T h o r n h i l l ( A n t o n y I. G in n an e), John T itten so r, Danny T orsh, G e o rg e T o si, V ic to ria T r e o le , B a rry T u c k e r , J o h n T u llo c h N arcissa V a n d erlip B rian W a lsh , M . T . W a s s o n , P a u lo W e in b e rg e r, P e t e r W e s tf ie ld , D a v id W h i t e , H o w a r d W illis, Ian W ilso n , U ri W in d t A rn o ld Z able, Jek eb s Z a lk a n s

selection of photographs commissioned for Cinema Papers

Phil Oiju-P: direr>Oi ’ : ' m

rr '5962

Ponch Hawkes; actress Helen Morse; 1982

Gordon Glenn; pr<

Adams; 1976

CINEMA PAPERS March-April — 49

Tenth Anniversary Supplement

Photo Gallery

Phiilip Morris; animator Bruce Petty; 1979

Ruth Maddison; producer Geoff Burrowes and director George Miiier; 1982

—

Peter Thompson; director Tim Burstail; 1979

Gordon Gìenn; director John Power; 1977

50 — March-April CINEMA PAPERS

Ponch Hawkes; filmmakers Corinne and Arthur Cantilli; 1979

Tenth Anniversary Supplement

Gordon Gienn; director Peter W eir; 1973;

Peter Thompson; jirector Kevin Dobson; ¡98P

Ceöp Saunders; director Phillip Noyce; 1977

Photo Gallery

Leon Saunders; director Tom Cowan and daughter; 1977

Peter McLean; director Jim Sharman

1979

e n Scott; director Ken Cameron; 1979

Warren Scott; director-producer Michael Thornhill; 1979

CINEMA PAPERS March-April — 51

Photo Gallery

Tenth Anniversary Supplement

Leon Saunders; producers James and Ha! McElroy; 1977

Peter Hendrie; producer Antony i. Ginnane; 1978

Leon Saunders; Terry Jackman (Hoyts); 1977

Peter Hendrie; producer-director John Lamond; 1978

Peter McLean; scriptwriter Margaret Kelly and producer Joan Long; 1981

52 â&#x20AC;&#x201D; March-4pril CINEMA PAPERS

Gordon Glenn; producer Pat Lovell; 1976

-,

.

-

f. ;Ç:J Photo Gallery<

Tenth A n n ive rsa ry S upplem ent

Sue Adler;

oducer Pat Fink; 1979

Vince O ’Donnell; editor Max Lemon; 1976

miwÆmËm’, ____ 1

Ponch Hawkes; producer Richard Mason; 1979

Ponch Hawkes; distributor-producer Syívie Le Clezio;

Peter McLean; scriptwriter Bob Etlis; 1980

1975

Gordon Glenn; director of photography Russell Boyd; 1974

Sue Adler; Michael, Felippa and Christopher Pate; 1977

CINEMA PAPERS March-April — S3

m

Government Support for the Film Industry Phillip Adams Chairman, Australian Film Commission

.

Funds, Fiddles and Follies Some months ago the Australian Film Commis­ sion (AFC) announced the appointment of Kim Williams as chief executive-designate. At the time I expressed delight that someone of Kim’s calibre had been foolish enough to accept this important position. Kim may have been amused when he heard this but I wonder if he will be laughing in six months time. By then he will have been bad-mouthed by a hundred dis­ appointed applicants, bloodied from his political joustings and jostled by besieging com­ plainants, seers, bagmen and visionaries.

The AFC spends much of its time saying nyet to people, hearing the same word echo in the gloomy corridors of Canberra and, occasion­ ally, when everything comes together and there is a film on the screen, standing in the back row and applauding the result. But there will be few thanks and no Oscars for Kim. At the end of his term he will join Joe Skrzynski in exile in Tuscany and begin work on his melancholy memoirs.

Government support for the arts is really a euphemism for fiddling and funding. It is something people in suits do to people in T-shirts. What’s more, it is something you do largely by the seat of your pants: there are lots of rules but no formulae. You have to use your wits and read between the lines on the pieces of paper and faces in front of you. You can’t consult a computer or a crystal ball.

This being the case, how do you judge the value of government support, the finesse of the fiddlers and funders? Certainly not by their rhetoric or dress sense. Perhaps the answer is to apply the Hollywood rule: that you are only as good as your last picture, or, in this case, funding decision.

But that is a pretty tough yardstick. Most filmmakers want to talk about their next pic­ ture, not the one they just finished, just as anglers prefer to recall only the one that got 54 — March-April CINEMA PAPERS

away. It is a human foible and funding bodies are not exempt.

The truth is that patrons, whether private benefactors or bodies corporate, are dwarfed when the dust has settled by the triumphs and follies of those they support. They are like the scaffolding on buildings: ungainly and temporary structures dismantled and forgotten when the building has finally taken shape.

However, for those who insist you are only as good as the last thing you did, the evidence is in your hands: the most recent decision of the AFC was to lend its support to this 10th Anni­ versary Issue, which I now commend to you.

Government Film Funding (State) Paul Riomfalvy Chairman, New South Wales Film Corporation

The Holy Grail If there has been a single strand running through most Australian attitudes to film­ making in the past decade, it is this: the search for a magic formula for The Great Australian Movie. We have meant several things by Great: implicit in the use of the word have been artistic achievement, cultural importance and enter­ tainment. The GAM would be something which audiences would both admire and make profitable.

The magic formula has been our holy grail, something which, we have told ourselves, can be found with just a bit more time, effort and knowledge. Indeed, every six months or so, one or more opinion-leaders in the film industry have jumped up and announced that they have found it — well, maybe. Like a medieval alchemist crying “ Eureka” , we have delivered, our pronouncements. They have been as varied and contradictory as the following: We must aim modestly at successful arthouse distribution. We must make films for the popular, mainstream market. Our models should be the best of European cinema. No, we have more to learn from American films. We must spend much more money on production.

We must keep our budgets very low. People are

rapt in rediscovering their past through period films. That might have been true but the market has become saturated with “ nostalgia” ; we must use contemporary themes. Overseas stars are essential to international sales. Overseas actors are a waste of money (besides being culturally impure). The subject-matter of our films should be more international. The most • interesting subjects are those based on our national experience and culture. Profit lies in American cinema distribution. No, the cinema is dying; our best commercial hope lies in the new ancillary markets. Both propositions are wrong because they imply one-off motion pictures; we should be making mini-series for television instead. And so on.

Often, a formula has an immediate attraction because of very recent experience. Thus, the success of films such as Picnic at Hanging Rock and Caddie led to a rush to buy the rights to a lot of old Australian novels. The Man from Snowy River was taken as a validation of big budgets and high promotional expenditure. In contrast, Paul Cox has probably singlehandedly been responsible for the recent advocacy of low-budget films.

A formula can owe its derivation as much to failure as to success. This explains the backlash against period films after the disappointing response to The Irishman, The Mango Tree and the like. I well remember the fears expressed by a number of people when the New South Wales Film Corporation decided to invest heavily in My Brilliant Career in 1978. “ Not another period film?” was the wail. “ You’re making a mistake. The public is sick of nostalgia.” In their anguish, they ignored the fact that “ p erio d ” does not necessarily equal “ nostalgia” and that a film set at the turn of the century could have contemporary rele­ vance. Eventually, we, too, were driven to tears — all the way to the bank.

This points to the problem with most of the formulas which have been advanced for the salvation of the Australian film industry: they have generally suffered from the logical fallacy of arguing from the particular to the general.

This is not to say that they never contain elements of truth. Thus, it is interesting to observe that the most profitable Australian films have not depended for their success, either in Australia or elsewhere, on the box­ office attraction of overseas stars. (While two of those films — The Man from Snowy River and Breaker Morant — had foreign performers

Tenth Anniversary Supplement

in key roles, they were chosen for performance, not for any so-called “ marquee” power.) Simi­ larly, the best prospects for many Australian films in North America might lie in the ancillary markets. But this has not prevented Mad Max 2 and The Man from Snowy River from breaking into the mainstream American theatrical market. Nor did it stop My Brilliant Career and Breaker Morant, for example, from doing good business on the American art-house circuit.

My belief is that, as it did for knights on white chargers in the Middle Ages, the search for a holy grail by Australian filmmakers has proved, and will continue to prove, fruitless.

There is no magic formula. What matters are talent and good ideas, and these are unquantifiable and unpredictable — in other words, incapable of reduction to some kind of theorem. In saying this, I am mindful of something which the chairman and chief executive of Universal Pictures, Lew Wasserman, the doyen of Hollywood filmmakers, once said: if he could be certain of a film’s earning potential before its release, he would not be sitting in his office earning a salary but would set up a one-man clairvoyancy business.

Even what he earns in his present job would pale into insignificance alongside what he would make if he could be so clairvoyant.

This is not a matter for despair; it is simply a reality. For, without the aid of formulas, Australian filmmakers — producers, directors, technicians, actors and actresses — have achieved a lot in the past 10 years. In measurable terms, they have made some highly successful films and have won a host of awards.

Perhaps more important, they have achieved two immeasurable results: they have helped lift Australians’ consciousness of their own place and culture, and they have created a greater overseas awareness of our country. Even if we have not made the greatest film ever (or even The Great Australian Movie), these are large achievements.

It remains true, however, that many more films fail than succeed commercially. This is so throughout the film world, not just in Australia. Nevertheless, at this stage of its development — and in the foreseeable future — the Australian film industry cannot be economically viable, independent of govern­ mental assistance. Government film-funding bodies remain an important source of pro­ duction finance, although the federal tax incentives have boosted private investment (and tax incentives are a form of official assistance anyhow). And they continue to provide most of the funds for script and project development.

That is why the state and federal film-funding bodies need the continued support of their respective governments.

There is another reason for the continued existence of a variety of government funding bodies and this takes me back to my starting point. Holy grails have a habit of being as perpetually alluring as they are permanently elusive. All of us in the film industry are guilty, at one time or another, of thinking we have hit upon a good formula for filmmaking. This means that, if there were only one source of funds for development and production, the film industry would tend to lurch from one attempt at achieving a magic formula to another. As long as there are varied sources of funding — state, federal and private — there can be different objectives and different visions. That way we can keep on making worthwhile films — in spite of ourselves.

What I have said might seem somewhat irreverent. So be it. A touch more irreverence, towards ourselves, would not go astray in our industry. The end result of our labors can, of

The Industry Comments

course, be very important, both in terms of the cultural and entertainment objectives and the financial responsibility we have. But, as individuals, I do not think we have to take ourselves nearly as seriously as we so often do.

As I said before: what we need are talent and good ideas, not self-importance.

Actors and Announcers Equity Janette Paramore NSW Divisional Secretary, Actors and Announcers Equity

The achievements of the Australian film industry during the past 10 years have been positive and swift. In a few years, the industry has won recognition at home and abroad.

In spite of this, the ‘knockers’ continue to forecast its doom and heap negative criticism on its achievements.

From having no feature film industry at all, Australian films have moved from The Adven­ tures of Barry McKenzie to My Brilliant Career with breathtaking speed. This is no mean feat when one considers that film is a high-risk business with each product taking years to complete.

Australian films have achieved an important place in local distribution and exhibition, and won audiences across the world; the ratio of box-office success for Australian films in Aus­ tralia is slightly better than that of imported product; Australian actors have received inter­ national awards; and Australian actors, writers and directors are frequently wooed by the major studios.

It must be recognized that without the support and intervention of Australian govern­ ments, both at the state and federal level, the artistic achievements could not have been realized.

The requirements that television commercials be produced locally, the Australian content regulations for television, the subsidization of theatre, the establishment of the National Institute for Dramatic Art and the Australian Film and Television School provided the skilled crews, writers and actors necessary for the film industry to develop. The role of the various government film bodies is obvious in script development, investment, loans and marketing assistance. The introduction of the tax incentives for film was simply a progression in government support for Australian film.

When the package of government support is looked at in toto, whatever failings each individdual piece in that package may have, it is none­ theless an achievement in the overall develop­ ment of Australian film.

It is to the credit of the creative people working in the industry that not only have they the skill to produce, direct, write, film and act in films of worth, but that they have also had the initiative and determination to seize on opportunities, ride out hard times and lobby governments to build an industry where one had ceased to exist.

However, the industry is still young. It requires further fostering and continued commitment to reach its full potential.

One of the greatest dangers to the continued vitality of Australian film is the reluctance to foster new talents. In the current climate of investors wanting key personnel on films to have held the same positions in previous suc­ cesses, and with some government bodies looking in the same direction, there is a danger

that the industry will simply churn out “ more of the same” , and lose much of its vitality.

Certainly neither My Brilliant Career nor Mad Max would have been made with such restric­ tions, and yet both are landmarks in Australian cinema.

During the next 10 years I would like to see Australian films provide more roles for actresses. Apart from the prettier period pieces, Australian cinema has offered few good parts for women. It is important that writers and pro­ ducers take stock of the culture they are creating and its worth if Australian film continues to portray women in stereotyped roles or not even represent them at all. From the end of 1979 to mid-1982, only 12 per cent of roles which received billing in Australian films were roles for women. Furthermore, if one looks at the nature of the roles during that period, many of them received very little screen time and the majority were passive.

I also believe it is essential that on-going perform ance workshops be established involving professional directors, writers and actors. It is essential, if Australian films are to improve in quality, that professional actors have access to workshops with good teachers, as actors in other parts of the world do. It is also essential that writers and directors gain experience in performance since they are dealing with that craft in practising their own.

Currently there is no forum where this occurs.

Now that additional time is available to complete a film under the tax concessions, it is hoped that more time will be given to pre­ production. Pre-production, particularly for actors, has been virtually overlooked in the Australian industry. Rarely is the actor given pre-production time for research, characterdevelopment, accent work or rehearsal with the director. Time invested in these areas would enhance the quality of the finished product and assist the shoot.

It is also important that government now extend its intervention, which has provided the basis for a viable production industry, into distribution and exhibition. The product is there and has proven its worth. The market place into which that product must go is struc­ tured in such a way as to disadvantage one-off suppliers such as Australian producers. The market place needs to be opened up; only government can do that, and there is little point supporting the production of film if it is dis­ advantaged at the selling point.

Whatever the future holds for Australian cinema, as long as it continues to be controlled

by Australians and promote an Australian cul­ tural identity, its achievements will continue.

Children’s Television Patricia Edgar Director, Australian Children’s Television Foundation

Ten years ago the Children’s Television Advisory Committee (CTAC), in a report to the Australian Broadcasting Control Board, con­ demned the low standard of children’s programs produced by the television industry.

The programs, the CTAC said, failed to meet the spirit of the Production Guidelines for Children’s Television Programs published in June 1971. The programs were unimaginative, low-budget, confined to dead programming slots and children turned away from them in droves.

In 1981, two years after the introduction of new guidelines for children’s programs by the CINEMA PAPERS March-April — 55

The Industry Comments

Australian Broadcasting Tribunal (ABT), the Children’s Program Committee (CPC), the ABT’s advisory committee, made the same kind of critical comments that had been made almost a decade earlier. The CPC criticized stations for meeting the letter rather than the spirit of the guidelines. They decried the lack of diversity, the high level of repeats, the dearth of any Australian children’s drama and the lack of initiative by stations. So what has been achieved in 10 years and what can we look forward to in the future?

The first breakthrough for the decade came with the public inquiry into self-regulation for broadcasters in 1977. The ABT recognized the poor performance of stations in the area of children’s television and recommended both the establishment of a system of “ C” classification for programs specifically designed for children aged between six and 13 years, and the formation of a Children’s Program Committee to oversee the development of this concept.

Only “ C” classified programs were to be broadcast between 4 and 5 p.m. Monday to Friday. The Government accepted these recom­ mendations and the CPC was formed in November 1978 with the requirements for “ C” classified programs being introduced from July 1979.

The CPC began with high hopes. Nothing less than a new dawn in children’s television was envisaged in which programs would have the same resources, human and financial, as their adult counterparts. The results fell far short of this expectation.

The regulation of children’s television is a new field. Only in Australia has the body responsible for monitoring the commercial television industry taken on the challenge of regulation; each step has been experimental.

The CPC soon recognized that the system needed tuning if regulation were to be successful. Two years after its creation, the CPC concluded there had been limited successes and significant failures resulting from its work. A number of high-quality, overseas programs had been shown which most certainly would not have been shown without the ABT’s requirements. In addition, there were Aus­ tralian-made programs on air which would not have been produced. The problems of children’s television continued to be publicized, largely because of the CPC’s existence.

However, the high level of repeated programs, the lack of diversity, the pushing of programs beyond the young age level to attract older audiences, and the lack of high-quality productions remained as problems. For the next three years the ABT ignored the CPC’s requests to tighten the regulatory system. The stations flouted the guidelines and the ABT took no action until October 1983 when it released the CPC’s revised program standards for public comment. These standards are welldrafted and tighten the loopholes that had been evident. Repeats have been limited. The standards require 50 per cent of first-release Australian material to be played between 4 and 5 p.m.; they require a diversity of program types and an eight-hour, high-quality children’s drama quota from each network to be broadcast each year beginning July 1984. The ABT is expected to have promulgated the standards by late February 1984. It has taken five years of work by the CPC to create this regulatory framework and this achievement is significant. However, to make programs which will attract children involves far more than standards; it takes creative talent, ideas, pro­ duction expertise and money.

The second major breakthrough in the past decade in the area of children’s television was the establishment of the Australian Children’s 56 — March-April CINEMA PAPERS

Tenth Anniversary Supplement

Television Foundation (ACTF). After a number of government inquiries, a Senate Standing Committee report and the hard work of a number of groups and individuals, the Australian Education Council decided to establish a Working Group to look at the feas­ ibility of establishing such a Foundation. That investigation led to the ACTF’s incorporation in March 1982.

The ACTF’s major function is to act as a catalyst bringing to children’s television the film and television industries’ best resources.

This is done by encouraging the development, production and transmission of programs through script development, productionoriented research, providing production invest­ ment finance and other appropriate forms of assistance to program makers. The Foundation also works to raise the profile of children’s television in the community by running workshops and seminars, providing speakers, arranging screenings, and publishing papers and study guides on relevant topics.

The past 10 years have brought significant changes in the area of children’s television in Australia, but the main results are yet to be seen on the television screens. A regulation system can provide only the framework; a foundation can take risks independent producers and stations would not take to develop new and exciting projects: in the end, the stations must co-operate if children’s television is to succeed.

The position the ABT takes is of funda­ mental importance in this process. Standards must be enforced. No station executive enjoys the process of public accountability that the licence renewal system could provide. The machinery is all in place to make stations accountable. The ABT can wield the stick but there must also be a carrot. Alongside the work of the ABT and the work that the ACTF is doing to stimulate the creative development of programs, there needs to be an improvement in the atm osphere surrounding children’s programs so that quality becomes a matter of broadcaster prestige.

This is difficult to achieve in Australia because of the cross-ownership of the media.

There is virtually no intelligent criticism of children’s television, or television in general, in the daily press or in magazines in Australia.

Most media discussion of television is aimed at the promotion of programs which does little to spark a competition to excel. Few journalists understand the complexities of producing television for children or the potential of children’s television. Through letters, articles, publicity campaigns and awards, programming achievements can be recognized.

Although the groundwork has been laid in the past 10 years for an Australian children’s television industry, the next 10 years will tell if it is going to succeed. Unless the community gets behind the organizations that are now in place, children will continue to miss out.

Distribution and Exhibition Alan Finney National Director, Marketing and Distribution, Roadshow

Meeting Great Expectations In the years leading up to the early 1970s, it seemed as though there were films from the U.S., France, Italy and Britain . . . and then there were Australian films. That Australian

films were shown at all was due to the sense of obligation felt by the distributors and exhibitors, and the pressure applied by the film community. A lot of heat and urgency was generated by people who were determined, without really knowing why, that Australia have a film industry.

By the late 1970s, this sense of urgency had reached the stage where expectations about what the Australian film industry could produce had been raised too high. Films began falling far short of expectations and the public began to greet each new Australian film with the attitude, “ Here is another Australian film being foisted on us.” In part, the public was reacting to the fact that every Australian film was being described as the best Australian film ever — at the urging of the producers.

Today, the energy and urgency have dissipated somewhat and the people handling Australian films have more confidence in them, and in themselves. They realize that distributing an Australian film is essentially similar to hand­ ling a film from any other country: that is, each film must be considered on an individual basis and on its merits.

The public’s expectation of Australian films has also become more realistic, taking the attitude that locally made films will be the same as films from other countries — some will be good and some will be bad — without the obligation Australian films have had to carry in the past: that they are the best ever.

The pressure on distributors and exhibitors from producers has also lessened as the latter became more sensible and more attuned to the marketplace. In the early 1970s, producers used to be concerned that the distributor was not spending enough money on the launch of a film. Even today one still encounters producerswhose first question is: “ What is your adver­ tising budget?” If it is not $250,000, they become frantic on the mistaken assumption that there is a direct causal relationship between the advertising dollar and the box-office: that is, the more you spend the more you are going to make.

Producers are now realizing that it is not wise to seek distribution with a distributor who does not share their commercial expectations of the film and, second, that the distributor’s judgment about the financial possibility may be accurate in that there is no sense spending money putting a film in the marketplace only to lose it; it may be better to aim solely for video­ cassette, television or overseas sales. There are many films released in the U.S. and other territories that are never seen outside the borders of their country of origin and, alter­ natively, many that are never seen in their country of origin.

Obviously, not all the judgments of a dis­ tributor are correct but it is also difficult to give a professional judgment about a film which disagrees with that of the filmmaker.

What one is saying, in effect, is: “ After all the trouble you have gone to and money you have spent, no one is going to see it.” Of course, there are options in this situation and one of these is to screen the film in “ one city tests” .

Instead of spending money on a national release, one has a test launch in Melbourne or Sydney to get some idea of the film’s appeal to the public and to test the marketing approach.

Not every Australian film has or should have a market launch like those for Man from Snowy River or Phar Lap — for example, Careful, He Might Hear You and Man of Flowers. Jane Ballantyne [co-producer, Man of Flowers] and Paul Cox [co-producer and director] were met with great relief and delight

by Roadshow when they said “ We’re concerned you don’t spend too much.”

'i p

K

m

:: !

¡¡§¡1

te d by S c o tt M urray tnaobucSon Oyt<anG.Ha8

MOTION PfCTUR. .

The Australian M otion Picture Yearbook 1 9 8 3 ............................... p .

Worrfs and Images ................................................................................. p . J 77ie iVei£>Australian Cinem a ................................................................ p . 4 Australian TV: The First 2 5 Years ...................................................... p . 4 The Documentary Film in A ustralia .................................................... p . 4 Cinema Papers Subscriptions ............................................................... p . 5 Cinema Papers Back Issues ................................................................... p . 6 Order F orm ............................................................................ p p • 7 and 8

■u-

Edited by Peter Beilby and Ross Lansell

A U STR A LIA N

MOTION PICTURE YEARBOOK 1 9 8 3

The third edition o f the Australian Motion Picture Yearbook has been totally revised and updated.

The Yearbook again takes a detailed look at what has been happening in all sections o f the Australian film scene over the past year, including financing, production, distribution, exhibition, television, film festivals, media, censorship and awards.

A s in the past, all entrants in Australia’s most comprehensive film and television industry directory have been contacted to check the accuracy o f entries, and many new categories have been added.

A new series o f profiles has been compiled and will highlight the careers o f director Peter Weir, composer Brian May and actor M el Gibson.

A new feature in the 1983 edition is an extensive editorial section with articles on aspects o f Australian and international cinema, including film financing, special effects, censorship, and a survey o f the impact our film s are having on U.S. audiences.

$25

R e a c tio n s to th e S e c o n d E d itio n “. . . an invaluable reference for anyone with an interest — vested or altruistic — in the continuing film renaissance down under . . . ”

Variety “The most useful reference book for me in the past year . . . ” Ray Stanley

Screen International “The Australian Motion Picture Yearbook is a great asset to the film industry in this country.

We at Kodak find it invaluable as a reference aid for the industry. ” David Wells

Kodak ”. . . one has to admire the detail and effort which has gone into the yearbook. It covers almost every conceivable facet of the film industry and the publisher’s claim that it is ‘the only comprehensive yellow page guide to the film industry’ is irrefutable. ”

The Australian

“Anyone interested in Australian films, whether in the industry or who just enjoys watching them, will find plenty to interest him in this book. ”

The Sydney Sun-Herald “This significant publication is valuable not only to professionals but everyone interested in Australian film. ”

The Melbourne Herald “May I congratulate you on your Australian Motion Picture Yearbook. It is a splendidly useful publication to us, and I ’m sure to most people in, and outside, the business. ” Mike Walsh

Hayden Price Productions “Indispensable tool of the trade. ” Elizabeth Riddell

Theatre Australia

“The 1981 version of the Australian Motion Picture Yearbook is not only bigger, it’s better — as glossy on the outside as too many Australian films try to be and as packed with content as many more Australian films ought to be . . . ’’

The Sydney Morning Herald “I have been receiving the Cinema Papers Motion Picture Yearbook for the past two years, and always find it to be full of interesting and useful information and facts. It is easy to read and the format is set out in such a way that information is easy to find. I consider the Yearbook to be an asset to the office. ” Bill Gooley

Colorfilm ”. . . another good effort from the Cinema Papers team, and essential as a desk-top reference for anybody interested in our feature film industry. ”

The Adelaide Advertiser

mm

Words and Images is the first Australian book to examine the relationship between literature and film. Taking nine major examples of recent films adapted from Australian novels — including The Getting of Wisdom, My Brilliant Career and The Year of Living Dangerously — it looks at some of the issues in transposing a narrative from one medium to the other. This lively book provides valuable and entertaining insight for all those interested in Australian films and novels.

The author, Brian McFarlane, is Principal Lecturer in Literature at the Chisholm Institute of Technology and is a Contributing Editor to Cinema Papers, Australia’s leading film journal. He has published many articles on Australian and other literature and film.

He is also the author of a book on Martin Boyd’s “ Langton” novels, is the editor of the annual collection of literary essays, Viewpoints, and is the co-editor of a forthcoming anthology of Australian verse.

Contents 1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

11.

From Page to Screen Wake in Fright Picnic at Hanging Rock The Getting of Wisdom The Mango Tree The Chant of Jimmie Blacksmith My Brilliant Career Monkey Grip The Year of Living Dangerously The Night the Prowler Martin Boyd on Television: Lucinda Brayford and Outbreak of Love 12. Appendices: Australian novels on film; short stories; poems

210 pp

¿A.

$12.95 Published by Heinemann Publishers Australia association with Cinema Papers.

The f ir s t comprehensive book on the A ustralian film revival

$14.95

THE NEW AUSTRALIAN CINEM A In this major work on the Australian film industry’s dramatic rebirth, 12 leading film writers combine to provide a lively and entertaining critique.

Illustrated with 265 stills, including 55 in fu ll color, this book is an invaluable record for all those interested in the New Australian Cinema.

The chapters: The Past (Andrew Pike), Social Realism (Keith Connolly), Comedy (Geoff Mayer), Horror and Suspense (Brian McFarlane), Action and Adventure (Susan Dermody), Fantasy (Adrian Martin), Historical Films (Tom Ryan), Personal Relationships and Sexuality (Meaghan Morris), Loneliness and Alienation (Rod Bishop and Fiona Mackie), Children’s Films (Virginia Duigan), Avant-garde (Sam Rohdie).

AUSTRALIAN TV The First 25 Years

A U S T R A L I A N T V The f i r s t 25 years records, year by year, all the important television events. Over 600 photographs, some in fu ll color, recall forgotten images and preserve memories o f programmes long since wiped from the tapes.

The book covers every facet o f television programming — light entertainment, quizzes, news and documentaries, kids ’ programmes, sport, drama, movies, commercials . . . Contributors include J im M urphy, Brian Courtis, Carrie Hutchinson, Andrew M cKay, Christopher Day, Ivan Hutchinson.

A U S T R A L I A N T V takes you back to the time when television fo r most Australians was a curiosity — a shadowy, often soundless, picture in the window o f the local electricity store.

The quality o f the early programmes was at best unpredictable, but still people would gather to watch the Melbourne Olympics, Chuck Faulkner reading the news, or even the test pattern!

A t first imported series were the order o f the day. Only Graham Kennedy and Bob Dyer could challenge the ratings o f the westerns and situation comedies from America and Britain.

Then came The M avis B ram ston Show. With the popularity o f that rude and irreverent show, Australian television came into its own. Programmes like N um ber 96, The Box, A g a in st the W ind, Sale o f the C entury have achieved ratings that are by world standards remarkable.

A U S T R A L I A N T V is an entertainment, a delight, and a commemoration o f a lively, fast-growing industry.

I

1■

$14.95

THE DOCUMENTARY FILM

IN AUSTRALIA Documentary films occupy a special place in the history and development o f Australian filmmaking. From the pioneering efforts o f Baldwin Spencer to Damien Parer’s Academy Award-winning Kokoda Front Line, to Chris Noonan’s Stepping Out and David Bradbury’s Frontline, Australia’s documentary filmmakers have been acclaimed world-wide.

The documentary film is also the mainstay o f the Australian film industry. More time, more money and more effort go into making documentaries in this country than any other film form — features, shorts or animation.

In this, the first comprehensive publication on Australian documentary film, 50 researchers, authors and filmmakers have combined to examine the evolution o f documentary filmmaking in Australia, and the state o f the art today.

2 0 8 pp

$12.95

O M V

<a W A

...one of the most richly informed and reliable of film periodicals”. peter cowie INTERNATIONAL FILMGUIDE 1

y e a r

(

6

is s u e s ) $ 1 8

2

y e a r s

(1 2

is s u e s ) $ 3 2

3

y e a r s

(1 8

is s u e s ) $ 4 6

$4

Subscriptions 12

Bound Volum es

Ezlbinders

(each)

(each)

(to the price of each copy, add the following)

$67.70 (Surface)

$33.30 (Surface)

$19.00 (Surface)

$1.20 (Surface)

S76.20 (Air)

S114.30 (Air)

$36.50 (Air)

$19.90 (Air)

$3.35 (Air)

$25.20 (Surface)

S46.40 (Surface)

$67.60 (Srface)

$33.30 (Surface)

$19.00 (Surface)

$1.20 (Surface)

S40.50 (Air)

$81.00 (Air)

S121.50 (Air)

$37.10 (Air)

$20.95 (Air)

$3.35 (Air)

3. Hong Kong India Japan Philippines China

$25.20 (Surface)

$46.40 (Surface)

$67.60 (Srface)

$33.30 (Surface)

$19.00 (Surface)

$1.20 (Surface)

$48.90 (Air)

$97.80 (Air)

$146.70 (Air)

$40.00 (Air)

$22.00 (Air)

$5.15 (Air)

4. North America Middle East Canada

$26.40 (Surface)

$52.80 (Surface)

$79.20 (Srface)

$33.30 (Surface)

S19.00 (Surface)

$1.40 (Surface)

$55.20 (Air)

$110.40 (Air)

$165.60 (Air)

$43.20 (Air)

$23.95 (Air)

$6.20 (Air)

26.40 (Surface)

$52.80 (Surface)

$79.20 (Srface)

S33.30 (Surface)

S19.00 (Surface)

$1.50 (Surface)

$61.20 (Air)

$122.40 (Air)

$183.60 (Air)

$45.00 (Air)

$25.00 (Air)

$7.20 (Air)

issues

18 issues

$25.20 (Surface)

S46.40 (Surface)

$38.10 (Air)

Zone New Zealand Niugini

2. Malaysia Singapore Fiji

5. Britain Europe South America

B ack Issues

NOTE: A "Surface Air Lift (air speeded) service is available to Britain, Germany, Greece, Italy and North America. Subscriptions: 6 issues — $43.80; 12 issues — $83.60; 18 issues — $123.40.

Bound Volumes (each) — $35 20. Ezibinders (each) — $20.75. Back Issues — add $4.30 per copy.

B O U N D

V O L U M

E S

ORDER VOLUMES 7, 8 and 9 NOW

EZIBINDERS

(7: numbers 25-30; 8: numbers 31-35; 9: numbers 36-41)

Vol Volumes 3 (9-12) and 4 (13-16) are also available. available.

STRICTLY LIMITED EDITIONS H a n d s o m e l y b o u n d in b l a c k w i t h g o l d e m b o s s e d letterin g . E a c h v o lu m e c o n ta in s 5 0 0 -o d d p a g e s , lav ish ly illu stra te d , w ith • • • •

•

E x clu siv e in terv iew s w ith p ro d u c e r s , d irec to rs, a cto rs a n d technicians V a lu ab le h isto rical m a te ria l o n A u s t r a l i a n f i lm p r o d u c t i o n F ilm a n d b o o k re v ie w s P ro d u c tio n surveys a n d rep o rts f r o m th e sets o f lo cal a n d in te rn a tio n a l p ro d u c tio n B o x -o ffice re p o rts a n d g u id es to film p r o d u c e r s a n d in v e s to r s

$40

p e r volum e

Ezibinders fo r Cinema Papers are available in black with gold embossed lettering to accommodate your unbound copies.

Individual numbers can be added to the binder independently, or detached i f desired. This new binder will accommodate 12 copies.

$15

' wmÊÊÊm.

■

BACK ISSUES Take advantage o f our special offer and catch up on your missing issues. M ultip le copies less than half-price! onemab \ pe^

Number 1 January 1974

Number 2 April 1974

Number 3 July 1974

David W illia m so n . Ray Harryhausen. Peter Weir.

G illian Arm strong. Ken G. Hall. Tariff Board Report.

Antony I. Ginnane. The C ar* That Ate Part».

Violence in the Cinema.

Alvin Purple Frank M oorhouse. S andy H a rbu tt.

F ilm U n d e r A lle n d e Nicholas Roeg. Between W art

John P a p a d o p o lo u s .

W illis O'Brien. The McDonagh Sisters. Richard B re n n a n . L u is B u ñ u e l.

The True Story of Eskimo Nell

Number 14 October 1977 Phil Noyce. Eric Rohmer.

John Huston. Blue Fire Lady S u m m e r f ie ld Chinese Cinema.

Number 22 July-August 1979

Number 15 January 1978 Tom C o w an, F ra n c o is Truffaut, Delphine Seyrig.

The Irishman The Chant of Jimmie Blacksmith. Sri Lankan Cinema. The Last Wave.

Number 24 December 1979 January 1980

Number 10 September-October 1976 Nagisa Oshima. Phillippe Mora. Gay Cinema. John Heyer. Krzysztof Zanussi.

M a rc o F e rre ri. M a rc o Bellocchio.

Number 11 January 1977

Number 12 April 1977

Number 13 July 1977

Emile de Antonio. Aus­ tralian Film Censorship.

Sam A rk o ff. R o m an P o la n s k i. The P ictu re Show Man Don't Party.

Storm Boy.

Kenneth Loach. Tom Haydon. Bert Deling Piero Tosi John S cott. John Dankworth. The Getting of W is d o m J o u rn e y Among Women

Louise Malle. Paul Cox. John Power. Peter Sykes.

Bernardo Bertolucci. F.J. H olden. In S earch of Anna.

Index: Volume 3

Number 17 August-September 1978

Number 18 October-November 1978

Bill Bain. Isabelle Hup­ pert. Polish Cinema. The Night the Prowler. Pierre Rissient. Newsfront. Film Study Resources.

Index: Volume 4

John Lam ond Dlmboola In d ia n C in e m a . S o n ia B o r g . A la in T a n n e r .

Cathy's Child The Last Tasmanian

Number 25 February-March 1980

Number 26 April-May 1980

Number 27 June-July 1980

Chain Reaction David P u ttn a m . C e n s o r s h ip .

Stir. Everett de Roche.

Touch and Go Film and Politics.

The Films of Peter Weir.

Charles Joffe Harlequin Nationalism in Australian Cinema The Little Con­ vict.

Index: Volume 6

Patrick. Swedish Cinema.

J o h n D u ig a n . S te v e n Spielberg, Dawn! Mouth to Mouth. Film P eriod­ icals.

Bruce Petty. Albie Thoms.

N ew afront. F ilm S tu d y R e s o u r c e s . K o s ta s Money Mover». The Aus­ tra lia n F ilm and T e le ­ vision School.

Index: Volume 5

Brian Trenchard Smith.

Palm Beach. B ra z ilia n Cinem a Jerzy Toeplitz.

C o m m u n ity T e le v is io n .

A rthur Hiller.

Number 33 July-August 1981

Number 36 January-February 1982

Number 37 March-April 1982

John Duigan on Winter of Our Dreams Government and the Film Industry Tax and Film Chris Noonan Robert Altm an Gallipoli Roadgames Grendel

Kevin Dobson, Blow Out, W om en In D ra m a .

M ichael Rubbo, Mad Max 2. Puberty Blues

S te p h e n M a c L e a n on Starstruck. Jacki Weaver, Peter Ustinov, W omen in Drama, Red*, Heatwave.

Number 19 January-February 1979 A n t o n y I. G in n a n e Jerem y Thomas. Blue Fin. A n d re w S a m s . A s ia n C in e m a S p o n s o re d Documentaries.

Number 20 March-April 1979 Ken C a m e ro n . F re n ch C inem a Jim S h arm an.

My Brilliant Career Film S tu d y R e s o u rc e s . The Night the Prowler.

The New Zealand Film In d u s try . The Z Men. Peter Yeldham . Maybe Thlt Time Donald Richie.

G r e n d e l, G r e n d e l, Grendel

Number 28 August-September 1980

Number 29 October-November 1980

The Films of Bruce Beresford. Stir M elbourne and Sydney Film Festivals.

Breaker M orant Stacy K e ach. Roadgam es

Bob Ellis. Actors Equity D e b a te U r i W in d t C ru is in g The Last Outlaw. Philippine C in­ ema The Club

Number 38 June 1982

Number 39 August 1982

Number 40 October 1982

Number 41 December 1982

G e o ff B u rr o w e s and George Miller on The Man F ro m S n o w y R iv e r , James Ivory, Phil Noyce, Joan Fontaine.

Helen Morse on Far East, Norwegian Cinema, Two Law s, M e lbo urn e and S y d n e y F ilm F e s tiv a l reports, Monkey Grip

Henri Safran, Moving Out, Michael Ritchie, Pauline Kael, W endy Hughes, Ray B a rr e tt, R u n n in g on Empty.

ig o r A u z in s , L o n e ly Hearts, Paul Schrader, P eter Tam m er, Lilia n a Cavani, We of the Never Never, Film Awards, E.T..

1 or 3 or 5 or 7 or

2 copies $4 each 4 copies $3.50 each (save $0.50 per copy) 6 copies $3 each (save $1 per copy) more copies $2.50 each (save $1.50 per copy)

O v e rs e a s r a te s p. 5

6

Number 42 March 1983

Number 43 May-June 1983

Mel Gibson, Moving Out, John Waters, Financing Films, Living Dangerous­ ly, The Plains of Heaven.

Sydney Pollack, The Dis­ m is s a l, M o v in g O u t, Graeme Clifford, Dusty, Gandhi, 3-D Supplement.

Note: issues number 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 21, 23, 30, 31, 32, 34 and 35 are out of print.

Please start

renew

my subscription with the next issue. If a renewal,

please state Record No. (Details) Mr/Ms

Delivered to your door post free

Given Name

Surname Title: Company: Address:^

Country:_

Postcode

Telephone

Telex

If you wish to make a subscription to Cinem a Papers a gift, cross the box below and we will send a card on your behalf with the first issue. □

Office use only

Gift subscription from (name of sender)..................................................

Order Information Delivery method:

First Issue No.

Amount Paid

Standing Order:

Last Issue No.

Order Date:

Renewal code:

Complimentary code:

Coded Information Category code:

Sub-agent code

Member status

Area code: Alphabetic:

2 ,. S a c k Issues 1 or 3 or 5 or 7 or

O v e rs e a s r a te s p. 5

2 copies $4 each 4 copies $3.50 each (save $0.50 per copy) 6 copies $3 each (save $1 per copy) more copies $2.50 each (save $1.50 per copy)

To order your copies place a cross in the box next to your missing issues, and fill out the form below. If you would like multiple copies of any one issue, indicate the number yoi require in the appropriate box.

□ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ D O 1

□ 29

3.

2

□

3

10

11

□

□

□

37

38

33 36

12

□

13

□

39

40

14

□

15

□

41

16

17

18

19

42

22

23

25

26

27

28

43

B ound

O v e rs e a s r a te s p. 5

Please send me bound volumes of □

20

□

7 (issues 25-30)

□

O

1 (issues 1-4)

8 (issues 31-35)

□

□

4 (issues 13-16)

9 (issues 36-41) at $40 per volume.

Volumes 2, 3, 5 and 6 out of print.

4. Ezibinders Please send me

O v e rs e a s r a te s p. 5 copies of Cinem a P a pe rs’ Ezibinder at $1 5 a binder.

Sub-total Please tu rn o v e rle a f

$

U K L M L K

h U K M

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- • -----------------------------------------------------------

5 , A ustralian M otion Picture Yearbook 1983

Please send me

11

1 9 8 1 /8 2 19 8 0

CHcopies of the 1983 Yearbook at $25 a copy (Foreign: $35 surface; $45 airmail).

Please send me — copies of the 1981/82 Yearbook at $15 a copy (Foreign: $30 surface; $40 airmail).

Please send me

EH copies of the 1980 Yearbook at $15 a copy (Foreign: $30 surface; $40 airmail).

$

6. Words and, Images EH copies of Words and Images at $12.95 a copy (Foreign: $18 surface; $24 airmail).

Please send me

$

7, The N ew Australian Cinema Please send me

EH copies of The

New Australian Cinema at $14.95 a copy (Foreign: $20 surface; $26 airmail).

Australian TV: The First 25 Years

8.

Please send me

$

■

EH copies of Australian TV: The First 25 Years at $14.95 a copy (Foreign: $20 surface; $26 airmail).

$

9. The D ocum entary Film Please send me

EH copies of The Documentary Film in Australia at $12.95 a copy (Foreign: $18 surface; $24 airmail).

■ C a rrf

$

fo rw ard s u b -to ta l from p s 7

$

T o ta l

$

Name.................................................................................................................................

Address........................................................................................................................... ............................................................................................. Postcode...........................

All foreign orders should be accompanied by bank drafts in Australian dollars only.

All quoted figures are in Australian dollars.

Allow four weeks for processing. ||||

Bankcard No.

Expires

/

/

I II II I ED ED ED ED ED ED EH EH EH EH EH Signature ............................................

N B* Please m ake a ll cheques to: —

.—

------------------------------------- —

v ic t^ ia ^EreeV,imited’ North Melbourne, 3051 Telephone: (03) 329 5983 Telex: AA 30625 and quote “ Cinema Papers ME230”

-------------------------

—

--------------------------—

-—

l ■ w ■

Tenth Anniversary Supplement

The Industry Comments

Roadshow had an idea for a budget that corres­ in the past few years these have become more Lalai — Dreamtime and Floating (Michael ponded exactly with theirs. It is a development numerous. Film Australia’s The Human Face Edols, 1976). we applaud because it would be irresponsible to of China, produced by Suzanne Baker, In 1975, the Australian Film Commission spend massive amounts of money that will not screened on TEN-10 in 1980. In 1981, ATN-7 (AFC) replaced the AFDC. The next year it significantly increase one’s return at the box­ aired Stepping Out after its director, Chris took over the work of the Australia Council’s office and which would diminish any potential Noonan, negotiated a special deal with Film, Radio and Television Board which profit for producers and investors. sponsors to avoid breaking the film for com­ became the basis for the AFC’s Creative The question of whether marketing methods mercials. In 1983, the ABC finally showed Development Branch (CDB), formally estab­ have become more sophisticated or more tar­ David Bradbury’s Frontline (after a much- lished in 1978. geted towards a specific audience, or whether publicized initial rejection), and ATN-7 bought Since the mid-1970s, the CDB, along with the the market has changed, is difficult to answer. Robin Anderson and Bob Connolly’s First AFC’s Project Development Branch, has Marketing methods are neither sophisticated Contact. Also in 1983, Alec Morgan and Gerry become a major source of funding for docu­ nor do they change very much; we really tend to Bostock’s Lousy Little Sixpence and Marian mentary filmmakers and those funds have been do the same things again and again. Some Wilkinson’s Allies1 screened in Sydney city pivotal to an increase in production. The range marketing tools and approaches are more cinemas (ones that are independently pro­ of themes being treated and styles being appropriate for a particular film; probably the grammed, but representing an improvement employed has also blossomed. key question is: “ Which of the rather stereo­ nonetheless on past years). And First Contact Ironically, television, normally unadven­ typical and established set of procedures do we broke the box-office record at the Sydney turous, helped show the way. In 1969, the ABC apply to this film?” Why people go into a Opera House cinema. Then, in January 1984, began the series, Chequerboard, which ran into cinema to see a particular film, apart from the Harvey Spencer and Richard Tanner’s feature the mid-1970s and introduced a new style of mass audience phenomena such as E.T. and Aussie Assault opened at Hoyts in Sydney and social documentary.

Return of the Jedi, is an unknown. No one Melbourne, almost certainly a first for a docu­ Among the social issues of the early 1970s knows why before the event. Everyone knows mentary. Of course, the topic, Australia’s was the beginning of the “ second wave” of why after the event.

America’s Cup win, helped. feminism. A handful of self-taught filmmakers These days most local documentaries are pro­ began the Sydney Women’s Film Group and One of the most pleasant surprises of the past 10 years was Breaker Morant. Long and duced for industry, or turned out by the began producing films to promote feminist detailed meetings were held between Roadshow government production houses for depart­ ideas. The group’s first films, Woman’s Day and an enthusiastic Matt Carroll [producer] mental, community or educational use. These 20c (1973), Home (1973) and A Film for Dis­ about a film no one could have predicted would films are the staple product at Film Australia cussion (1974), are still popular. become so successful. It was essentially a court­ where a few titles stand out as innovative or Other early titles include Patricia Edgar’s room drama, admittedly structured so the engaging, among them Joan Long’s Passionate Got At (1972) and Barbara Creed’s Homo­ action appeared and reappeared throughout, Industry (1973), Mr Symbol Man (Robert sexuality: A Film for Discussion (1975). In about three not entirely attractive people, and Kingsbury and Bruce Moir, 1975) and The International Women’s Year, 1975, the South not with what the industry calls an “ up­ Human Face of China (1979).

Australian Film Corporation (SAFC) and Film Some documentaries, such as those by the Australia produced documentaries on women’s ending” ; it did not look as though it had “ break-out” possibilities. However, the film Leyland brothers or Malcolm Douglas, are pro­ issues. From the SAFC came four films under duced specifically for television, and a small the general title 1:1 and, from Film Australia, was not just successful, it was incredibly so.

Most Australian films being made on the number are made independently, usually with Jane Oehr’s Seeing Red and Feeling Blue, a budget levels operating at this time can’t expect the aid of government funds. film about menstruation, remembered in part For several decades, until the beginning of for the controversy over Film Australia’s final to recoup money within Australia. Until Aus­ tralian films make a significant inroad into the 1970s, “ docum entary” was almost cut. other major markets, they are hardly likely to synonymous with the Commonwealth Film More recently, women’s films have been Unit (now Film Australia). The merged more adventurous in style, and less easily cate­ see any significant returns.

The video market is obviously another area newsreel giants Cinesound and Movietone con­ gorized. Certainly the most ambitious and where Australian producers can look for a tinued production into 1970, but their glorious important documentary, however, has been For return, particularly if the film was not commer­ days were long gone. Twenty years earlier, the Love or Money (Margot Oliver, Megan cially successful in the theatres. However, the two companies had each been documentary as McMurchy, Jeni Thornley and Margot Nash, video market has only taken off in a major way well as newsreel and feature producers. Cine- 1983), a two-hour compilation of the history of in 1983, and I believe it is too early to judge sound even won an Oscar in the documentary Australian women’s working lives. what its effect on cinema attendance will be and category, for its newsreel, The Kokoda Trail In the 1970s, the Aboriginal land rights what return it will provide for Australian (Damien Parer, 1942). movement was also gathering steam. Ales­ In the 1950s, major documentary producers sandro Cavadini documented the black producers. included Kingcroft Productions and the Shell struggle, including the pitching of the tent Film Unit, with which John Heyer made the embassy in front of federal parliament in magnificent The Back of Beyond (1954). Ningla A-Na (1972). Together with Carolyn During that period also the Waterside Workers Strachan he made Protected (1976), about a Federation Film Unit made 11 films in a rare 1957 strike by Palm Islanders, We Stop Here union venture into film production.

(1978) and Two Laws (1981). Curtis Levy Through the 1960s and early 1970s the most filmed Sons of Namatjira (1976) and MalBarbara Alysen numerous independent documentaries were bangka Country (1976); Geoffrey Bardon Television reporter and producer surfing films. Their producers, among them recorded traditional artists in A Calendar of Bob Evans, Paul Witzig, Albert Falzon and Dreaming (1977) and Mick and the Moon Documentaries are the Cinderellas of the film David Elfick, side-stepped traditional dis­ (1978); and director of photography, Michael business. Those who make them are not feted tribution problems by creating their own outlets Edols, made the lyrical Lalai — Dreamtime and by the media the way feature filmmakers are; in halls and clubs along the coast of New South Floating (both 1976). the films themselves do not always fit the Wales.

Recently, Aboriginals have become more Surfing film producers such as Elfick were involved in documenting their own campaigns. popular conception of cinema. But, in the past decade, it is the documentary more than the able to draw on loan funds from the Australian Community leader Essie Coffey worked with feature which has revealed the depth of talent Film Development Corporation (AFDC), Martha Ansara and Alec Morgan on My and imagination in the local industry. Aus­ established in 1970. In the early 1970s, other Survival as An Aboriginal (1979), and Gerry tralian documentaries have proved more con­ documentary filmmakers turned to the Film, Bostock collaborated with Alec Morgan on sistently successful overseas, critically and Radio and Television Board of the Australian Lousy Little Sixpence (1983). commercially, than most of the much-vaunted Council for the Arts (subsequently the Aus­ In 1978, concern about the environment was features which have secured foreign distri­ tralia Council) which assisted films such as voiced through Woolloomooloo (Pat Fiske, Tidikawa and Friends (Jef and Su Doring, Denise White and Peter Gailey) and Green City bution.

Until recently, however, a local, indepen­ 1971); Protected (Carolyn Strachan and Ales­ (Richard Cole), two films about the “ green dently made documentary was likely to be sandro Cavadini, 1976); Niugini — Cultural bans” on development in Sydney. More screened only by the Sydney Filmmakers Co­ Shock (Ian Stocks and Jane Oehr, 1975); and recently the battle for Tasmania’s Franklin operative, the Australian Film Institute or River has prompted titles such as The Last Wild Perth Institute of Film and Television, and the 1. In 1983 A S IO to ld th e H o p e R o y a l C o m m iss io n th a t River (Mike Cordell, 1980).

A llies w as b eing fu n d e d by th e K G B , a c h a rg e d en ie d chances of a sale to local television were, at These are but a few of the issues taken up by a n d rid ic u led by th e film m a k e rs. It w as a n u n e x p ec te d best, slim. independent filmmakers. Other issues have a n d u n a ttra c tiv e m ile sto n e fo r A u s tra lia n in v estig ativ e d o c u m e n ta ry film m ak e rs.

There have always been some exceptions, but been covered by institutions such as the Aus­

Docum entaries

CINEMA PAPERS March-April — 57

The Industry Comments

tralian Film and Television School (AFTS) which, since its first, interim training course in 1974, has produced a diverse series of docu­ mentaries, from Phil Noyce’s irreverent profiles of a guru and a bikie leader in Castor and Pollux (1974), to Peter Gray’s examination of masturbation in People Don’t Talk About It (1977), and Gilly Coote’s witty view of the virtues of condoms in Getting it On (1977).

In 1977, the AFTS also produced a “ training film” , a dramatized-documentary called Me and Daphne (Martha Ansara and David Hay) which detailed the working lives of women employed in a chicken-processing plant. The film became a cause celebre when the AFTS took legal action to prevent its release.

Although most Australian documentaries are made by institutions, it is those made inde­ pendently, by self-employed producers and directors, which have proved the most sig­ nificant. Theatrical and television screenings have ensured a large audience for some.

Tom Haydon’s The Last Tasmanian (1978) attracted international attention and caused some dissension at home when Aboriginal and white activists questioned the accuracy of its title and its impact on land-rights demands by today’s Tasmanian Aboriginals. David Brad­ bury’s Frontline (1979), profiling Vietnam-war correspondent Neil Davis, has been widely seen around the world and was nominated for a 1981 American Academy Award, only the fifth Aus­ tralian film to be nominated. Chris Noonan’s Stepping Out (1980) has introduced a world­ wide audience to a new view of the intellectually handicapped and chalked up a host of awards along the way.

Many of Australia’s most impressive docu­ mentaries have been shot offshore, among them Tidikawa and Friends (Jef and Su Doring, 1971); Gary Kildea’s Trobriand Cricket (1976); Changing the Needle (Martha Ansara, Mavis Robertson and Dasha Ross), the 1981 film of a drug rehabilitation centre in Vietnam; Angels of War (Andrew Pike, Hank Nelson and Gavan Daws, 1982), about the treatment of Papua New Guinean natives during the war in the Pacific; and First Contact (Robin Anderson and Bob Connolly, 1983), documenting the first European excursions into the New Guinea highlands. The latter two, along with Frontline and For Love or Money, signal Australian filmmakers’ new-found enthusiasm for com­ pilation documentaries, after the success of Peter Luck’s television series, This Fabulous Century.

Among the success stories, Alby Mangels’ World Safari deserves a mention. A crudelymade travelogue, it became one of the top­ grossing Australian films of 1980-81. It was a success because of its basic appeal and because Mangels and his partner took charge of the film’s exhibition. In the style of the surf film­ makers, they turned screenings in the bush, and in country and suburban halls into drawcard events with enviable returns.

Success has brought a form of strength to local documentary filmmakers: the market is widening, but still very limited. Moreover, documentary filmmakers had to lobby hard to have their films included in the Fraser Govern­ ment’s 1981 package of tax concessions for investors in Australian films. And lobbying continues to try to win a better deal for the AFC’s Creative Development Branch, usually short of funds and still a crucial source of backing for many documentary filmmakers.

58 — March-April CINEMA PAPERS

Tenth Anniversary Supplement

Film Criticism Adrian Martin Tutor in Film Studies, Melbourne College of Advanced Education

Ten years of Australian cinema: what is it that has kept me hanging in there during all that time as a film critic, promoting or debunking this film or that, engaging in serious polemical arguments and generally prescribing the best direction for our national cinema?

The answer is a sad, tired, disillusioned one word: duty. Not exactly the duty of a patriot plugged into the “ I love Australia” , gung-ho nationalism which by now is the official policy of most local film institutions; more like the duty reluctantly internalized by a citizen who has been nagged into obedience by the solemn voices of “ Australian film culture” . For any local person, who loves films, it seems that Australian cinema must, by necessity, be the most important item on the film agenda.

Magazines such as Cinema Papers and Film­ news, university, college and school courses everywhere, and the general orientation of public debate all testify to this on-going, urgent need.

Yet, there is a trick, a sleight-of-hand in­ volved in all this. The struggle with the fabulous dream of an Australian cinema is waged in an eternal present: there is always a side to take, some tactical skirmish to be nego­ tiated. Duty propels itself forth on one proviso: don’t look back; amnesia is the handy, terminal condition of Australian phantom “ film culture” , for its history is a veritable skeleton closet of embarrassments. The drive to save the Australian cinema at any cost has led to a consistent overestimation of films as aesthetic marvels and significant cultural events. It is enough to make a film buff cry.

When I reflect on what I have written or thought, I wonder how I always managed to inflate samples of the local product so they would fit overseas models of excellence. Are Peter Weir and Fred Schepisi really the match in intelligence and complexity of Martin Scorsese and Alan Paluka? Are Bruce Beresford and Tim Burstall really as tough and efficient filmmakers as John Carpenter and Brian DePalma? Can Paul Cox ever hope to be as spectacularly pretentious an art-house director as Werner Herzog? Do Pure Shit and Greetings from Wollongong still look like authentic expressions of street-wise urban experience? Do Against The Grain and Serious Undertakings truly herald the flowering of a radical Australian avant-garde?

This is not to imply that any of these film­ makers or films should now be unceremoni­ ously dumped into the ashcan of history; rather that without the rhetoric that once accom­ panied them and the glimmer of a forever latent Australian cinema their accomplishments appear relatively slight. And, lest we forget, relativity is important.

A steadily growing disenchantment with the whole ‘ball-game’ of bold “ Australian film culture” came to a head for me with films such as Far East and Starstruck. When Australian films tried directly and lovingly to fulfil some of the richest traditions of narrative cinema, in picaresque genres such as the romantic melo­ drama and the musical, their fundamental impoverishment became clear once and for all.

There is no real style in the Australian cinema, style being the organic, dynamic and physical process whereby meanings are expressed and kicked around. Sure, there is style as ornamentation (Phil Noyce) and kitsch

(Gillian Armstrong); there is meaning as bland, dramatic statements within a drearily realistic, television-style functionalism (John Duigan and Tom Cowan); but nothing resembling a fruitful, integrated marriage between the two.

This has a lot to do with the fact that Australian film culture is barely a film culture at all but instead a desert where the fast-diminishing species of people, fanatically saturated in the historical appreciation of the cinema through film societies and the like, overlaps less and less with the species of bright, young film-school technicians who are likely to become Aus­ tralia’s official filmmakers.

It used to be said of Australian films that they portrayed “ recessive heroes” ; today it is the filmmakers who suffer from this trait, as demonstrated by a real fear of full-blooded filmic expressiveness and an arrogant disdain of the cinema’s languages and traditions.

In my view, beyond several films such as Breaker Morant which make their mark at about the level of a decent tele-movie, Aus­ tralian cinema adds up to a few, truly stylish films by any standards, such as Mad Max, The Last Wave and Chain Reaction; a genuine odd­ ball director who deserves his piece of midnight movie-cult fame (Jim Sharman); a few film­ makers who can be depended upon to deliver the conventions expertly and playfully (Tim Burstall and Richard Franklin); and, on the fringe, a singularly rich and strange modernist masterpiece, Michael Lee’s The Mystical Rose.

But there is no equivalent of Raging Bull, no The Devil, Probably, no Passion. As “ engaged” an Australian film critic as I might sometimes be, I have to confess that my heart is elsewhere.

Film Studies (NSW) Susan Dermody and John Tulloch Lecturer in film, New South Wales Institute of Technology; and Associate professor, English and Linguistics, Macquarie University

During the past 10 years, film and television study has become established in several courses at tertiary institutions in Sydney: the New South Wales Institute of Technology (NSWIT), University of NSW, Macquarie University, and Sydney University, as well as segments of courses at Kuringai CAE and Sydney College of the Arts, and the promise of future develop­ ments at Nepean CAE. There are even signs of an off-shoot in screen studies becoming estab­ lished in the Full-Time Program of the Aus­ tralian Film and Television School (AFTS); at present the Open Program runs a kind of piggy­ back graduate diploma in media study in which students accrue credit points from courses offered elsewhere in Australia.

These courses have had fluctuating fortunes; the most secure seem to have been those which have been integrated into degrees as areas of major study, as at NSWIT and perhaps Macquarie, rather than being grafted on to existing course structures. Such courses have seemed to flourish best when it is possible to do film and television production work alongside theory and history.

During the past decade there have been fluctuating theoretical emphases, too. One has moved through what has been cheekily dubbed the “ post-British” phase and is now negotia­ ting the “ post-structural” one. The first of these followed (almost word for word at times) the British translation and discussion of predominantly French writing in the unstable nexus of work derived from Freud and Marx, via models out of Suassurean linguistics. The

Tenth Anniversary Supplement

second has moved on, with rather less con­ viction, and only a remnant (a figment?) of political purpose, through a wave of reaction to that Althusser-Lacan moment. The degree of ‘determinacy’ thought possible in the earlier phase is now gone, lost entirely in the signifying play of textuality with itself. The social con­ science has been replaced, in post-structural­ ism, by the gourmet appetite.

Not everybody finds that they can get by on this regime of cuisine minceur (you can have fun with it, but can you live on it?). The present phase is partly one of groping for new starts in theory, that derive more genuinely from our own place, with less of the anxious genuflection towards the metropolis (that is always else­ where) which has characterized much of Aus­ tralian theory in the past.

This movement in film theory (which at times has had more affinity with film and literary avant-gardes than with broader and more popular forms) was partly accompanied and partly checked, along the way, by developments in television theory.

Another .way to chart the educational fortunes of this period is to look at the change in teaching texts in screen and media studies. In 1974 there was a.delicate publishing shift against the earlier American and British traditions, with the appearance of Raymond Williams’ Television: Technology and Cultural Form and Stan Cohen and Jack Young’s The Manufacture o f News. From then on the whole pattern of media coursework changed with a flow of detailed textual studies of television elections (The Television Election, Trevor Pateman), football on television (.Football on Tele­ vision, Ed Buscombe et al), television history (Television and History, Colin McArthur), current affairs and its audience (.Everyday Tele­ vision Nationwide and The Nationwide Audi­ ence, Charlotte Brunsdon and David Morely) and soap opera (Coronation Street, Richard Dyet et al; Crossroads, Dorothy Hobson) were backed by the appearance every few years of a new ‘essential’ textbook, such as James Curran et al’s Mass Communication and Society.

The Open University was mainly responsible for the flow of media textbooks and study guides, and the British Film Institute (BFI) published the detailed program monographs with production studies such as Manuel Alvarado and Ed Buscombe’s Hazell: The Making o f a Television Series which acted as a welcome check to the more exclusively meta­ theoretical preoccupations of its journals.

State-funded institutions such as the BFI, the Open University and the Birmingham Centre for Contemporary Cultural Studies established media and cultural studies to the extent that today the most significant media series from mainstream publishers (e.g., Macmillan’s Communication and Culture series, edited by Stuart Hall and Paul Walton, and Methuen’s Studies in Communication, edited by John Fiske) would be inconceivable without the input of these institutions.

In Australia, the situation has been very different. Until recently, film and media academic research has been kept alive by indivi­ duals such as Henry Mayer (in the area of media, political theory and public policy) and dedicated film historians, such as Andrew Pike, Ross Cooper and Ina Bertrand (all with early theses on Australian cinema).

State-funded institutions such as the Austra­ lian Film Institute (AFI) and the AFTS, which might have played a role comparable with that of the BFI and Open University, looked in other directions. It was not until 1981 that the AFI (in partnership with Currency Press) launched its Australian Screen series which, though little and late, did enter the inter­

The Industry Comments

national debate under the guidance of Sylvia Lawson. And, partly because of Lawson’s industry background, the series gave an emphatic “ conditions of production” slant to the “ new questions being asked about the rela­ tions of text and context, art and industry; story, society and culture; screen and audi­ ence” .

Since then, theoretically informed books negotiating “ text and context” have appeared (or are in preparation) on television current affairs (.Programmed Politics, Phillip Bell et al); Bellamy (Bellamy: The Making o f a Tele­ vision Series, Albert Moran); Doctor Who (Doctor Who: The Unfolding Text, John Tulloch and Manuel Alvarado); current Aus­ tralian cinema (The Screening o f Australia, Susan Dermody and Liz Jacka; The New Aus­ tralian Cinema, Scott Murray [editor]) and Australian silent cinema {Legends on the Screen, John Tulloch); Australian ‘actuality’ film {Australian Cinema: Industry, Narrative and Meaning, Stuart Cunningham); women in Australian film {Women in Australian Film, Lesley Stern); as well as a film reader {Austra­ lian Film Reader, Albert Moran and Tom O’Regan) and an important Australian media textbook {Australian Commercial Television, Bill Bonney and Helen Wilson) to augment McQueen’s pioneering Australian Media Monopolies. In addition, there has been the important language, text and discourse work of Kress, Hodge and True {Language as Ideology, Gunter Kress and Bob Hodge; Language and Control, Roger Fowler, Gunter Kress, Bob Hodge and Tony True), not to mention the various theoretical journals which have struggled (with little or no institutional support) into the 1980s.

Theoretically, then, the development of film and media publishing in Australia and abroad has been encouraging in the past 10 years and has reflected the changes in film education and studies. If there is no book on media theory to match Terry Eagleton’s Literary Theory (though Terry Lovell’s Pictures o f Reality comes close) that is due, in part, at least, to the institutional and political differences between literature and mass communication at tertiary level. The conservative opponents of media theory are differently placed, because media courses are often seen to have a career outcome. Students of literature tend to move harmlessly into the teaching of more students of literature, whereas media students carry the threat of infiltrating and changing the nature of the various industries.

Perhaps this is why a book like Bonney and W ilson’s Australian Commercial Media received, in a misinformed fashion, a fearfully contemptuous review in b & t which railed against the teaching practices at NSWIT, where the authors teach, rather than attempting to grasp the book.

The reviewer’s suggestion that there was far more to be learned by propping up the bar at the journalists’ club points to an industry and education gulf which is the business of bodies such as the AFI and the AFTS to negotiate (as well as being a constant consideration for writers in the field). There is a widespread doubt, however, that either body is equipped or motivated to accept this responsibility, and move beyond a cosmetic or parasitic solution to the problem of relating to industry and media studies. Groups such as Women in Film and Television are showing more courage in this respect and are trying to interest members in questions of theory as well as questions of pro­ fessional survival.

The gap is possibly less yawning between theory and independent film practice. The question is how far contemporary theory and

practice excite one another, and produce new possibilities for films being made, for the dynamics of the local “ film community” (independent filmmakers, distributors and exhibitors, writers and publishers, teachers and students as well as audiences) and for film studies course construction.

Attitudes to that question have been chang­ ing for some time, on both sides of the divide.

Again, it is interesting that feminist filmmakers were the first to make the crossing between theory and practice back at the time of the Minto film theory weekend in late 1978, and the formation of Feminist Film Workers. But, at the same time, they were moving into the strange and contradictory territory of “ marxistfeminism” , and only the most hardy tried to set up camp there. Since then the history of Filmnews has largely been the history of this changing attitude, its successes and failures.

But there are new stirrings. The Creative Development Branch (CDB) of the Australian Film Commission and the Women’s Film Fund have recently been moved and goaded into being less of the unconscious of this relation­ ship, and more of its conscience. The CDB has begun to fund forums for academics and film­ makers (and those who are both), such as the Australian Screen Studies Association in New South Wales weekend seminar on Independent Film and Authorship in late 1983. It is inviting the occasional theorist to sit on assessment panels, and even giving grants to film publish­ ing projects.

What is needed for a lively and interesting independent film culture in Australia is free interplay with an environment of theory and discussion willing to take on questions of aesthetics, film form, performances, new tech­ nologies, radical practices and radical meanings. In Sydney, at present, there are only the faintest, most uncertain glimmerings of a milieu in which that could possibly begin to take place and grow. Much will depend on pending and recently filled appointments in the AFC. Much more will depend on the intellec­ tual courage of people in the Sydney film community.

G eoff Mayer Lecturer in Media Studies, Phillip Institute of Technology

Film Studies, Cinema Studies, Media, Visual Communication and Visual Language are some of the disguises concocted by people who wish to get paid for watching, and talking about, films. Not that there is anything really wrong with this: gynaecologists and train drivers also get paid for pursuing interests developed in their adolescence. However, it has been some­ what of a battle for the visual linguists (i.e., the practitioners of film studies) to attain the deserved amount of academic respectability from the tertiary institutions and a bemused public; the latter has generally regarded films as entertainment and, therefore, outside the para­ meters of an education system which has always insisted that learning must be a painful experience.

The pioneers in this field in Australia, as far as I am aware, were John C. Murray and Gil Brealey, two members of the English Depart­ ment of Coburg Teachers’ College who, from the start of the College in 1960, made Film Study available in each of the three years of the CINEMA PAPERS March-April — 59

The Industry Comments

Primary Diploma course. The College also conducted an annual two-week film festival based on a director or theme of historical interest: Eisenstein in 1961, D. W. Griffith in 1962, Silent Comedy in 1963, etc.

While there were isolated pockets of activity in this field in the 1960s in tertiary institutions — Bill Perkins in Tasmania, for example — there was little sign of widespread development.

There were, of course, those regular visits of English literature students from the secondary schools to screenings of the literary classics, but that did little to promote an interest in film in its own right. It should also be noted that film­ making became established in certain institu­ tions far more easily because of the supposed vocational opportunities and the fact that the results of the course could be measured in tangible terms.

In the early 1970s, marked by Whitlam and the rapid growth in tertiary enrolments and accompanied by the renaissance of the Australian film industry, a climate existed which fostered the widespread development of Film Studies in the institutions. In Victoria, at least, the formation of the Tertiary Screen Educators of Victoria, and its annual con­ ferences, and for secondary and primary teachers the Association of Teachers of Film and Video (the genesis of ATOM), with its publication of Metro magazine, provided much needed focal points around which this area of study could develop.

Also significant was the range of film courses offered by the Media Centre, and John Flaus and Ian Mills in particular, at the newly estab­ lished La Trobe University, and the subsequent three-year Cinema Studies course. Since that time film study has become part of a number of universities in every state; even Melbourne University has had a very timid flirtation with it.

Subsequent flowering has included the estab­ lishment of the Australian Film and Television School, particularly the work of its Open Program and the National Graduate Diploma Scheme which operates in every Australian state. There is also the biannual film conference conducted by the Australian Screen Studies Association (ASSA) in New South Wales and, to dem onstrate the sophistication and legitimacy of the discipline, there is another biannual conference which explores the inter­ relationship between Film and History.

The early years at the Coburg Teachers’ College in the 1960s approached the teaching of film through close analysis and a concern with the ways in which it communicates: camera composition, lighting, editing, sound, etc. To this end a range of short films and extracts was combined with popular feature, foreign language and silent films.

Since that time each institution has worked out its area of film study suitable for the interests and expertise of its staff and students against the background of the shifting overseas currents: the early auteur approach, the interest in generic films, Facan and psychoanalytic concerns, A lthusser, M etz, stru ctu ral linguistics, Fevi-Strauss, Propp and the emphasis on narrative discourse have all shared the limelight at one stage or another.

Whatever the label, however, film studies is still in its formative stages; the basis of any course in the study of film must still be an attempt to illuminate the complex relationship between the artefact (film), the communicators and the audiences.

Tenth Anniversary Supplement

National Film Archive Ray Edmondson Curator, National Film Archive

“Orphan o f the Wilderness ” . . . or “The Breaking o f the D rought“?1 T h e N a t i o n a l F ilm A r c h i v e is m o r e t h a n a n i n s t i t u ­ t io n . I t is t h e m a n i f e s t a t i o n o f a n i d e a , a n d o n e o f th e m o s t r e m a r k a b l e , a n d le a s t r e m a r k e d , c u l t u r a l d e v e l o p m e n t s o f t h e la s t 4 0 y e a r s h a s b e e n t h e f e r t i l i z a t i o n o f th is id e a , s p o n t a n e o u s l y a n d s i m u l ­ ta n e o u s ly , th r o u g h o u t th e w o rld . ( E r n e s t L in d g r e n , C u r a t o r o f th e N a t i o n a l F ilm A r c h i v e , L o n d o n , in 1 970)

Those words from the doyen of film archivists, even more apt now than in 1970, prefaced my report to the Australian Film and Television School of a five-month, world-wide study of film archives which Cinema Papers published in a condensed form in its December 1974 issue.2 That I was the first Australian to under­ take such a project indicated the underdevelop­ ment of local film archive activity compared with, for example, Europe or North America.

The report, and especially Cinema Papers' con­ densation, was widely read. It subsequently influenced the setting up of the autonomous New Zealand Film Archive and is now being re­ read as the future of Australia’s National Film Archive (NFA) has become a major issue in recent months.

Cinema Papers and the NFA are, in a sense, of the same vintage. The NFA was established as a definable staff unit of the National Library in 1973 (though its origins go back to the 1930s). Although the growth of staff and resources has in no way kept pace with its development in other ways, it has clearly come of age. In 10 years, its collections have increased five-fold and usage 10-fold. Sophisti­ cated systems and standards have developed from simple beginnings. It has produced film archivists with individual reputations and inter­ national perspective. Its place in the industry and film culture has been established: as a repository, an indispensable resource, a source of ideas and material. It has contributed to many hundreds of productions. Its collection growth has made possible much of the Aus­ tralian content of film education, research and analysis.

As a result of “ The Last Film Search” , film restorations and the overseas “ Cinema Aus­ tralia” retrospectives, the NFA has begun to give substance to its cultural role of not only acquiring and preserving the moving image heritage but also making it tangible and accessible to the world. The operative word is begun. So will 1984 be the end of the beginning?

The past 10 years have been a pioneering adventure. So, at a different level, will the next 10 years. All being well, what might one hope to find on walking into the NFA in 1994? At the risk of indulging some wishful thinking, I venture some personal ideas of the NFA a decade from now.

One would, I hope, find an institution with a high profile, sufficiently autonomous in its collections, activities and thinking to com­ prehend the whole nature of the moving image in society (be it as art, technology, entertain­ ment, communication, history, industry or 1. For those who do not recognize them: the titles of two classic Australian feature films made in 1936 and 1920 respectively.

2. Cinema Papers, No. 4, p. 342.

60 — March-April CINEMA PAPERS

whatever) in its own right and not as an aspect of something else. It would reflect — accur­ ately, I hope — the rising cultural status of the medium. The NFA would have a sense of its own necessity as a concept conceived in response to the nature and social impact of a 20th Century popular medium. Its commitment to the highest standards of preservation would be given meaning by an equal commitment to making the moving image heritage accessible in every sense of the term, then and in the future.

As the trustee of that heritage, it follows that the NFA would, by definition, be committed to the future of the medium. So it would be neither a graveyard for old films nor a mere passive service of demands and enquiries, but a positive and stimulating force, and a point of reference for community and industry.

It would surely be much easier to find and use. Wherever its headquarters are eventually located, it would have a substantial presence in Sydney and Melbourne, and access centres in other capitals. Its headquarters would have functional importance, giving advice and making facilities for preservation, storage, public and private viewing, study, discussion, exhibition, a moving image museum and so on available to the public, the industry and other institutions as well. Monumental? No. Practical and necessary? Yes. As well as being a service resource, it would be a cultural focus and tourist attraction.

Perhaps there would be standing sets from famous films on display for public enjoyment (as well as the preserved film itself); or the chance to view films of all formats projected in a cinema equipped to exhibit them as they were meant to be seen; or the opportunity to enjoy a silent film with live music accompaniment knowing that the skills of this obsolete art have been revived and nurtured by the NFA? Though hardly affluent, it will be far better funded and have better resources than at present; it will also be entrepreneurial in raising income to supplement its government grant.

The work of film archives, as a charge on the public purse, will be better understood — and defended — in its own right. Hopefully, by this time, nothing of permanent value would be in danger of loss through insufficient funding.

Similarly, selection and acquisition activity would be sufficiently developed to survey and record all Australian production and exhibi­ tion. The NFA would be acquiring all material of permanent value — maybe with the aid of an equitable statutory deposit system — before there was any likelihood of loss.

The NFA’s relationship to the industry and the film culture will have become closer and more organic; it will be an obvious part of its infrastructure, with daily acquisition and access contact, cross-use of facilities and exchange of staff. Its relationship to other cultural bodies will be more clearly defined, including its relations with other bodies engaged in film archives in Australia and Asia-Pacific. It will have established a role as a co-ordinator, centre of expertise and a support agency.

Internationally, it would have reached a parity with kindred institutions in other coun­ tries and would be contributing its share to the development of its field world-wide. It would be adequately representing and promoting the Australian moving image heritage overseas.

It will be far more accessible and be making full use of computer and video technology. For the researcher, the collection will be much larger, more diverse, better documented and a greater percentage of it will be accessible. There will, hopefully, be no artificial limits on access (such as the current restrictions). Beyond this, the NFA would initiate, support and promote activities which made the heritage more acces­

Tenth Anniversary Supplement

sible to the community at large, possibilities limited only by imagination.

The original 1974 report, complemented and extended by many others since, is still read because it, and they, are still valid. Much of this “ future scan” is implicit in that respect, because the experiences of other countries are signposts for Australia.

Although Australia is among the first nations to discern and realize the narrative and docu­ mentary potential of the cinema back in the 1900s, it has taken it a long time to begin to evaluate its cultural status in relation to that of the other arts — and to recognize that status institutionally. The NFA should reflect Australia’s pride in a long and significant heritage, and be recognition of the profound social impact of the moving-image media on the nation which was born with it. Is it possible, and appropriate, that by 1994 Australia could have one of the world’s leading and most innovative film archives? Time will tell.

O bservations Bob Ellis Scriptwriter

Ending at the Beginning After 10 years (or however long it has been since Stork so farcically fertilized the test tube baby Australians are now so awkwardly proud of) it is good that The Thorn Birds has turned up at long last to show how it might have been otherwise: the American has-beens, American accents, Mexican stucco, Jacobean plot-lines and the blue, forgettable gumless vistas, with Brownie’s token chest asweat in the overlit foreground. How well we have done, in one way or another, in beating that rap at least.

Imagine Steve McQueen in Sunday Too Far Away, Marie Osmond in The Getting of Wisdom, Sissy Spacek in My Brilliant Career, Sylvester Stallone in Newsfront, Richard Pryor in The Chant of Jimmie Blacksmith; Richard Gere, one could say now, is Mad Max 4, and Jack Lemmon is the Man of Flowers.

That, at least, never happened, though Ricky Schroeder in The Earthling did, as did Kristy McNichol in The Pirate Movie and Joseph Bottoms (preferred by Tim Burstall to John Travolta) in High Rolling, and other fortune­ losing national shames too numerous to mention, or bad to release, such as A Danger­ ous Summer, Midnite Spares and Turkey Shoot, which also include the post-Weir oeuvre of James and Harold McElroy, and the man so disarmingly described by David Puttnam as Tony Inane.

But other, odd things did happen, certain random habits of mind that became our proudest traditions.

I have often thought of a monograph in the Andrew Sarris manner called The Sun Never Rises, a study of the work of Ken Hannam (Break of Day, Sunday Too Far Away, Summerfield, Dawn!), or Henri Safran’s fond­ ness for films that kill large waterfowl: can a single vision be at work here? What moves these small, dark, ABC-trained men to themes of the loss of childhood companionship and youthful hope while the great, yellow, filtered sun beats down? Can it be, perhaps, the money? Perish the thought. What moves Carl Schultz to films in which young children cause beloved adults to die in multiple shipwrecks?

Yet, they are only part of a larger national perception, so apparent in our cinema, of the

The Industry Comments

pointlessness of every effort, since nothing ever changes and you end at your beginning. Aunt Edna recaptures Bazza. Judy Davis rejects Sam Neill. Don’s party doesn’t win the election.

Petersen fails the exam. Breaker is taken away and shot. Jimmie Blacksmith is taken out and hanged. Ned Kelly is taken out and hanged.

Mad Dog Morgan is shot, decapitated and his scrotum given to Frank Thring. Phar Lap is taken out and stuffed. Richard Moir gives up looking for Anna. Jack Thompson in Sunday ends up broke and lonely as he began. The Man of Flowers ends up rich and lonely as he began.

The boy in Careful, He Might Hear You ends up with his original auntie, and glummer now he has seen the world. Mr Perceval the pelican is shot; so is the Wild Duck, but more economically with the same bullet as its young mistress. The crippled boy in Let The Balloon Go is dragged down off his tree. The crooks in Bush Christmas mosey on down the road un­ punished. Bill Hunter, in Newsfront, grim and principled as ever, loses his wife and mistress but keeps his limp.

Square one, it seems, prevails. In our end is our beginning. Winners are only acceptable if, like Phar Lap and Gough Whitlam, they end badly, or if, like Mad Max and the couple in A Town Like Alice, they suffer deeply and prosper only modestly at the end. A nation born of convict, political fugitive and secondchance blood will not too readily forgive young spunks who make easy millions overnight as they do in Starstruck and Undercover, or in the forthcoming Olivia! The Movie or whatever.

Fatty Finn’s crystal set is reward enough. We must learn to be content with the dull sweet continuum of our ordinary lives. Cathy has her child back (back in migrant poverty, that is something), the Lonelyhearted losers have at least each other and the boy in The Devil’s Playground has at least escaped his confine­ ment — the best you can expect in a bitter, agnostic Australian universe (the first agnostic society ever, I think), whose modesty of expectation must be served. Ah, so we are to be shot at dawn are we? That’s not so bad.

Of course it has led to a certain sameness in our cinema (as my old gag, The Mango Tree, The Last Mango, The Devil’s Mango, In Search of Mangoes, Storm Mango, Blue Mango, Mango Too Far Away, My Brilliant Mango, Mad Mango, Mango Morant, Mouth to Mango, The Chant of Jimmie Mango, The Cars that Ate Mangoes, Man of Mangoes, Cathy’s Mango, We of the Mango Mango, The Man from Mango River, and so on, so cornily evidenced); a certain resistance in the Aus­ tralian audience to traditional storyline fiction (most films that do well here are either about the sensitive adolescence of some dead writer or some factual incident that once made headlines, and most story films such as The Chain Reaction and Goodbye Paradise do badly); a resistance to punchlines and car chases and shoot-outs and ghosts and gangstresses and vampires and flying saucers (an agnostic society low on God is also dark on His by-products); and a fondness for family and love and country doctors and ordinary human problems and the half-remembered past. But that’s not so bad. It compares well with 8 mo key and the Bandit and Freebie and the Bean and Starsky and Hutch and Porky’s II; less well with Chariots of Fire, Star Wars and the Bond movies, and the last three Fellinis and the last four Bergmans.

However, you can’t have everything. What you have, enjoy.

I would, myself, have preferred more Austra­ lian films actually to come to an end — leaving the central shearer’s strike out of Sunday Too Far Away, the death of Caddie’s lover out of Caddie, Anna out of In Search of Anna,

Cathy’s husband out of Cathy’s Child, the flying saucer out of Picnic at Hanging Rock and the last wave out of The Last Wave, and replacing them all with farewell subtitles, seems to be rather over-headily artistic — and less Australian directors to accept world acclaim for cutting them off in mid-stream, for mainly budget reasons.

But, of course, a film director’s prime aim in these past decades has not been so much, as Stanley Kubrick and Peter Weir proved, the conquest of art as the conquest of journalism. I decided last year the method was to behave with confidence, hold the shot, bring up the classic music and give the interview. And if, as in the recent oeuvres of Weir, Schultz and Cox, the film doesn’t quite add up, why all the better. It is something for people to argue about and journalists to waste words on. And that’s where the money is, and the earthly reputation. One of the most commercially successful directors, Sandy Harbutt, who made Stone and is bad with journalists, has disappeared without trace; one of the most commercially unsuccessful directors, Fred Schepisi, who is good with journalists (he gives good interviews), is judged our finest flower. It is important to know where the money is and the reputation. It is in the Sunday papers.

In all, a middling good 10 years I think. The next 10, so obsessed with money and calcula­ tion and youth, will be much, much worse.

Production Richard Brennan P ro d u c e r

Ten years ago the revived Australian film industry was largely peopled by producers and directors whose backgrounds were in lowbudget filmmaking. Poverty proved the parent of invention and in 1972-73 approximately half of the films proved commercially successful.

Then, in 1975, Sunday Too Far Away was screened in the Director’s Fortnight at Cannes and the overseas legend of our plucky little industry was born. Perhaps because it was a Phoenix industry, overwhelmingly dependent on government support, its practitioners never seemed to suffer more than flesh wounds. But these days, the forms of financing that have evolved to support the larger budgets of films have altered the rules of the game.

The current indications are that production will be down in 1984. Since June 30, 1983, The Coolangatta Gold is the only feature film with a substantial budget to have gone into production.

The decrease in taxation benefits to investors is partly to blame, and these seem to have been very imperfectly understood. A film offering benefits of 150 per cent for deductible items and 100 per cent for non-deductible items may offer overall benefits as low as 125 per cent. By contrast, a film offering benefits of 133 per cent for deductible items, in which the non­ deductible items have been picked up by an entity not seeking tax benefits (e.g., the Aus­ tralian Film Commission or a state corpora­ tion), is in a more attractive position.

The rub may be the reduced benefit of net income from exploitation of the film: formerly 50 per cent, now 33 per cent. Benefits can only be reduced when income has been generated, and I suspect this partly accounts for the increased emphasis on low-budget filmmaking.

Several letters have recently appeared in the papers from brokers and entrepreneurs whose Concluded on p. 100 CINEMA PAPERS March-April — 61

Leading film critics and industry personnel list their favorite 10 (or 11 or, even, 13) Top Ten Australian film s released since 1970. There were no restrictions as to gauge or length.

Phillip Adams C hairm an, Australian Film Com m ission

In no particular order . . .

it was just bloody marvellous. From the first frames (the camera drifting up the river) and the first note of [Bruce] Smeaton’s music you knew' you were seeing a marvellous piece of work.

The

C hant

of

J im m ie

B l a c k s m ith

(Fred Schepisi, 1978). Schepisi’s (Alex Stitt, hyperbolic self-promotion was a two1981). For its verbal and visual magic. edged sword. We all fell on it with A small masterpiece that was dismissed and misunderstood because it didn’t fit blood-stained axes. But at its best, it was marvellous. You can see why into the grid system of Australian Pauline Kael has the hots for Fred. movies.

K o s ta s (Paul Cox, 1979). Still Cox’s D o n ’s P a r t y (Bruce Beresford, 1976).

Inept in parts, but still the best piece of best, I think. Angered by the way it had been ignored by all and sundry, I ensemble acting I have seen from an decided to back him with L o n e ly Australian cast.

H e a r t s . But I still think that K o s ta s is T h e P l u m b e r (Peter Weir, 1979). superior to both L o n e ly H e a r t s and Weir’s most austere little film. Deriva­ M a n o f F lo w e r s . A strong, simple and tive from Harold Pinter’s The Care- honest film. But, oh, the ending! laker and The Dumb Waiter (the same h e G r e a t M a c A r th y (David Baker, dramatic proposition: an interloper T1975).

Reviled at the time and now for­ challenges the incumbent for the gotten. I am not being perverse when I ownership of the premises) but say it is another misjudged movie, with remarkably compelling. more ideas in its little finger than most B r e a k e r M o r a n t (Bruce Beresford, films have in their entire feature 1980). Kubrick did it better in P a t h s o f length. Out of control and chaotic, it G lo r y and I am not. for a moment, finally disintegrated like D i m b o o l a . It endorsing Beresford’s right-wing was far less than the sum of its parts. politics. But Australia’s Lieutenant But, ah, the parts! The helicopter Callev was powerfully, elegantly pre­ arriving in the small town to sented by Beresford who was, for the Smeaton’s Fellini-ish music. The use first time in his career, in complete of real-life grotesques such as Lou control of his material.

Richards and Jack Dyer. The undeni­ T h e G e t ti n g o f W is d o m (Bruce Beres­ able Australianness of the comedy. We ford, 1977). Beresford again, and all owe David Baker an apology. grossly underrated by Australian C a r e f u l , H e M ig h t H e a r Y o u (Carl critics. The first of the “ new wave” Schultz, 1983). For all the opposite features about a winner — after all reasons. Its European elegance, Vis­ those films with detumescent central conti in the Sydney suburbs. Over­ characters. done, overblown, overstated and yet The D e v i l ’s P l a y g r o u n d (Fred wonderfully compelling. I think what I Schepisi, 1976). Probably the best of liked about it most was its passion. the lot. A couple of Arthur Dignam’s Too many Australian films are emo­ scenes were over the top but the rest of tionally constipated. Suddenly, here G re n d el G re n d el G re n d e l

62 — March-April CINEMA PAPERS

was one that pulled out all the organ stops.

G a llip o li (Peter Weir, 1981). Weir and Williamson in love! I struggled against it, but was deeply affected by the film.

Was seen to be blowing my nose when the lights came up.

G o in g D o w n (Haydn Kennan, 1983).

Ninety minutes of chaos and ratbaggery that will go down in history as the film that launched the cinematic career of the multi-talented and com­ pletely unmanageable David Argue.

S u n d a y T o o F a r A w a y (Ken Hannam, 1975). Saw' it again in China. Stands up very, very well. Reminds you just how very, very good Jack Thompson can be. Devoid of pretension. Not too heavy with the myth-making. Made me realize why I have always liked Mick Y’oung. . . . and about a dozen others that jostle for a place in my affections . . .

A u s t r a l i a n S u r f (Michael Blakemore, 1981), L a la i — D r e a m t im e (Michael Edols, 1975) and T i d i k a w a a n d F r i e n d s (Jef and Su Doring, 1971).

Rod Bishop Phillip Institute of Technology, Melbourne

1.

2.

N e w s f r o n t (Phil Noyce, 1978) M o u t h t o M o u t h (John Duiaan,

1978) 3. B r e a k e r M o r a n t 4. M a d M a x 2 5. P u r e S h it (Bert Deling, 1975) 6. S e c o n d Jo u rn e y (to U lu ru )

(Arthur 1981)

and

Corinne

Cantrill,

7.

T h e Y e a r o f L iv in g D a n g e r o u s ly

8.

L o v e L e tte rs fro m T e ra lb a R o a d

(Peter Weir, 1982) (Stephen Wallace, 1977)

Peter Beilby

9.

10.

In alphabetical order:

1975) S unday T o o F a r A w ay W a l k a b o u t (Nicolas Roeg, 1971) W a k e in F r i g h t (Ted Kotcheff, 1971) Y a c k e tty Y a k (Dave Jones, 1974)

And as a footnote I would also in­ clude: A P e r s o n a l H i s t o r y o f t h e

(Dirk

de

Bruyn,

1982)

The Film House TV, Melbourne

B re ak e r M o ra n t D o n ’s P a r t y T h e D e v il’s P l a y g r o u n d M a d M a x 2 (George Miller, 1981) M a n of F l o w e r s (Paul Cox, 1983) P ic n ic a t H a n g i n g R o c k (Peter Weir,

Y a c k e t ty Y a k E x p e rim e n ts

Richard Brennan Producer, Sydney

1.

M a x M a x (George Miller, and M a d M a x 2 2. T h e D e v i l ’s P l a y g r o u n d 3. G a llip o li 4 . P u r e S h it 5. B r e a k e r M o r a n t 6. M o u th to M o u th 7. M y B r i ll i a n t C a r e e r (Gillian

strong, 1979)

1979)

Arm­

Tenth Anniversary Supplement

8 . D o n ’s P a r ty 9. S u n d ay T o o Far A w a y 10.

T h e M a n fr o m H o n g K o n g (B ria n T r e n c h a r d S m i t h , 19 7 5 ) T h is is s u c h a b o r i n g lis t t h a t I t h o u g h t I w o u l d in c l u d e C h r i s M a u d s o n ’s lis t w r i t te n t w o y e a r s a g o a n d s h o r t l y b e f o r e h is d e a t h : 1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

P u r e S h it N e w sfr o n t S tir ( S t e p h e n W a l l a c e , 19 8 0 ) M ad M ax T h e F J H o ld e n ( M ic h a e l T h o r n ­ h ill, 1 9 7 7 ) W a k e in F r ig h t T h e C h a n t o f J im m ie B la c k s m ith P a lm B e a c h ( A l b i e T h o m s , 19 7 9 ) T h e L a s t W a v e ( P e t e r W e i r , 1 977) In S e a r ch o f A n n a ( E s b e n S t o r m , 1979)

C lo s e , b u t n o t c lo s e e n o u g h : 2 7 A ( E s b e n S t o r m , 1 9 7 3 ), D a lm a s ( B e r t D e lin g , 1 9 7 3 ), B e tw e e n W a r s ( M ic h a e l T h o r n h i l l , 1 9 7 4 ), T h e D e v i l ’s P la y g r o u n d a n d M o u t h to M o u t h .

Top Ten

G a llip o li L o n e ly H e a r ts ( P a u l C o x , 1 9 8 3 ) M o u th to M o u th M o v in g O u t ( M ic h a e l P a t t i n s o n , 1 9 8 2 ) M y B r illia n t C a r ee r N e w s fr o n t P ic n ic a t H a n g in g R o c k T h e Y e a r o f L iv in g D a n g e r o u s ly

Barry Cohen Minister for Home Affairs and Environment, Canberra A l t h o u g h Cinema Papers a s k e d f o r m y 10 a ll - t im e f a v o r i t e A u s t r a l i a n f i lm s , I h a v e i n c l u d e d 11 w h ic h a r e o f s u c h a h ig h s t a n d a r d t h a t I f e lt it u n f a i r t o e li m in a t e o n e . I n n o p a r t i c u l a r o r d e r : M y B r illia n t C a r e e r T h e M a n f r o m S n o w y R iv e r ( G e o r g e M ille r , 1982) P h a r L a p ( S im o n W in c e r , 1 983) D o n ’s P a r ty Sunday T o o Far A w ay B r ea k er M o r a n t C a r e fu l, H e M ig h t H e a r Y o u G a llip o li T h e C h a n t o f J im m ie B la c k s m ith T h e Y e a r o f L iv in g D a n g e r o u s ly A n d a l t h o u g h F a st T a lk in g (K e n C a m e r o n ) h a s n o t b e e n r e le a s e d , I b e lie v e it is o f e q u a l s t a n d a r d t o t h e above.

B r ea k er M o r a n t. B e n e a th t h e m a n l y h e r o ic s , o u r o l d m a t e th e u g ly A u s t r a ­ lia n c o n f r o n t s t h e u g ly B r it h e s p r a n g fro m . . . a p ro v o c a tiv e c a n o f w o rm s w r i t h in g w i t h in w e l l- h a n d le d a c t i o n a d v e n tu re a n d c o u rtro o m d ra m a .

S to r m B o y ( H e n r i S a f r a n , 1 9 7 6 ). A r t ­ less in n o c e n c e , n a t u r a l w o n d e r a n d t r i u m p h i n g g o o d n e s s c o m b i n e d w ith a b e g u ilin g s e n s itiv ity .

M y p a in fu lly -re d u c e d s h o rt-lis t in ­ c lu d e s T h e C h a n t o f J im m ie B la c k ­ sm ith , M y B r illia n t C a r e e r , S tir , T h e L a st W a v e , G a llip o li, 2 7 A , T h e C a r s T h a t A t e P a r is ( P e t e r W e ir , 1 9 7 4 ).

Jill Crommelin The West Australian, Perth

In n o p a rtic u la r o rd e r: T h e O f f ic e P ic n ic M o u th to M o u th P ic n ic a t H a n g in g R o c k G a llip o li D o n ’s P a r ty The O dd A n gry S h ot (T o m J e ffre y , 1979) M y B r illia n t C a r ee r N e w s fr o n t T h e C h a n t o f J im m ie B la c k s m ith P har L ap

Debi Enker Keith Connolly The Herald, Melbourne

In n o p a r t i c u l a r o r d e r : S u n d a y T o o F a r A w a y . In s p i t e o f s t r u c t u r a l f la w s , o u r f i n e s t a c h i e v e ­ m e n t t o d a t e in s o c ia l r e a l is m . C e r ­ t a i n l y th e b e s t p o r t r a y a l o f A u s t r a l i a n s a t w o r k , t h e s h e a r e r s c o m i n g o v e r w ith s y m p a th y a n d h u m o r in a n a u t h e n t i c e n v ir o n m e n t .

Lonely Hearts: joint No. 7.

N e w s f r o n t . A c o n v in c i n g , t e c h n i c a ll y i n v e n tiv e l o o k a t t h e r e c e n t p a s t t h a t succeeds in c e le b ra tin g y e s te rd a y w i t h o u t c o a t i n g it in n o s t a l g i a .

Nigel Buesst

W in te r o f O u r D r e a m s ( J o h n D u i g a n , 1981). N ic e ly w o r k s s e v e ra l p r o v o c a ­ tiv e s o c ia l th e m e s i n t o a n i n v o lv in g p e rso n al d ra m a .

Melbourne Filmmakers Resource Book (Editor)

T h e D e v i l ’s P la y g r o u n d . A d e li c a t e a n d to u c h in g e v o c a tio n o f lo s t ig n o r ­ a n c e t h a t m a k e s m o r e c e l e b r a t e d r ite s o f - p a s s a g e e x e r c is e s se e m l ik e The

I n n o p a r t i c u l a r o r d e r b u t w ith t h e tw o f ilm s b y P e t e r W e ir in a d e a d - h e a t :

March o f Time.

T h e O f f ic e P ic n ic ( T o m C o w a n , 1972) B r ea k er M o r a n t G e o r g e a n d N e e d le s ( G r e g D e e , 1 9 7 0 ) F ir st C o n t a c t ( R o b i n A n d e r s o n a n d B o b C o n n o lly , 1982) M y B r illia n t C a r e e r S c a r y P a s s e r s b y ( C h r i s K e n n e d y , 19 8 2 ) C a r e fu l, H e M ig h t H e a r Y o u S o n s o f N a m a t j ir a ( C u r t i s L e v y , 1 9 7 5 ) H o m e s d a le ( P e t e r W e i r , 1 9 7 1 ) T h e P lu m b e r ( P e t e r W e i r , 19 7 0 ) M a n o f F lo w e r s

Dean Chamberlin The Advocate, Melbourne

In a l p h a b e t i c a l o r d e r : B reak er M o ra n t C a t h y ’s C h ild ( D o n a l d C r o m b i e , 1 9 8 3 )

Cinema Papers, Melbourne

In a l p h a b e t i c a l o r d e r : T h e C lin ic ( D a v id S te v e n s , 1983) H e a tw a v e ( P h i l N o y c e , 19 8 2 ) L o v e L e tter s fr o m T e r a lb a R o a d ( S te p h e n W a l l a c e , 1977) M ad M ax M ad M ax 2 M o n k e y G rip N e w s fr o n t P ic n ic a t H a n g in g R o c k T h e P lu m b e r W a lk a b o u t

John Flaus “ Film Buffs’ Forecast” , 3RRR, Melbourne

1. B r ic k w a ll ( P a u l W i n k l e r , 1 9 7 4 ) 2 . W a r ra h (A rth u r and C o rin n e C a n trill, 1982) 3 . M y stic a l R o s e ( M ik e L e e , 1 9 7 6 ) 4. P u r e S h it 5. G o in g D o w n 6 . Id ea D e m o n s t r a t io n s P a r t 1 ( M ik e P a r r a n d P e te r K e n n e d y , 1972) 7. S o n s o f N a m a tjir a 8. P ic tu r e s f o r C itie s ( J e f f W e a r y , 1982) 9. K ali ( B r e n d o n S t r e t c h , 1 975) 10.

K T a p e O n e ( J i m W il s o n , 1 9 7 4 ) T h e film s u s e d h e r e h a v e b e e n c h o s e n o n th e b a s is o f c o m p a r i s o n w ith w o r l d s t a n d a r d s u s in g th e c r i t e r i a o f i m a g i n a ­ t i o n , s e n s itiv ity a n d e x p l o r a t i o n o f th e m e d iu m a s w e ll a s t h e l i k e l i h o o d o f th e film b e in g o f e n d u r i n g s i g n i f ic a n c e .

Gordon Glenn Australian Movies to the World (Co-writer, co-director)

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

N e w s fr o n t B r ea k er M o r a n t M ad M ax 2 S u n d ay T o o F ar A w a y D o n ’s P a r ty L o n e ly H e a r ts P ic n ic at H a n g in g R o c k 8 . M o u th to M o u th 9 . Q u e e n s la n d ( J o h n R u a n e , 1 9 7 4 ) 10. Y a c k e tty Y a k

T h e G e ttin g o f W is d o m . A n o t h e r q u i e t l y - e f f e c t i v e r i te s o f p a s s a g e r e c o l ­ le c tio n t h a t d o e s j u s t i c e t o t h e o r i g in a l n o v e l ’s b i o g r a p h i c a l a n d p h i l o s o p h i c a l th ru sts.

P ic n ic a t H a n g in g R o c k . N e v e r m in d th e flim s y s t o r y , fe e l t h e a t m o s p h e r i c q u a lity ! S till t h e m o s t p o e ti c a l ly v is u a l A u s tra lia n fe a tu re .

Don Groves

P h a r L a p . In t h e a g e o f “ c ’m o n A u s s ie , c ’m o n ” , a p l e a s i n g l y a u t h e n t i c a n d m o d e ra te re n d itio n o f p o p u la r le g e n d .

Variety, Sydney

T h is is a p e r s o n a l v ie w :

M o n k e y G rip ( K e n C a m e r o n , 1 9 8 2 ).

T h e c h a ra c te rs a re a ll-to o -re c o g n iz a b le c h ild -a d u lts in te lle c tu a liz in g th e ir e s s e n tia l h e d o n i s m , b u t t h e f ilm is c o rre sp o n d in g ly m a tu re .

L o n e ly H e a r ts . I m p e r f e c t l y - s c r i p t e d s o c ia l c o m e d y t h a t n e v e r t h e l e s s w o r k s b e a u t i f u l l y b e c a u s e , in s p ite o f t h e i r c o n triv e d o d d itie s , th e c h a ra c te rs r e m a in p o i g n a n t l y b e li e v a b l e .

Sunday Too Far A way: joint No. 5.

The Devil's Playground: joint No. 7.

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

G a llip o li B r ea k er M o r a n t M ad M ax 2 W in te r o f O u r D r e a m s P ic n ic a t H a n g in g R o c k M y B r illia n t C a r ee r T h e M an fro m Snow y R iv e r C a d d ie ( D o n a l d C r o m b i e , 1 9 7 6 ) T h e D e v i l ’s P la y g r o u n d D o n ’s P a r ty

CINEMA PAPERS March-April — 63

Top Ten

Sandra Hall The Bulletin, Sydney

In no particular order: T h e Y e a r o f L iv in g D a n g e r o u s ly T h e D e v il’s P l a y g r o u n d W in t e r o f O u r D r e a m s B re a k e r M o ra n t T h e G e t ti n g o f W is d o m M o n k e y G r ip M o u t h to M o u t h T h e C h a n t o f J i m m i e B l a c k s m i th N e w sfro n t In S e a r c h o f A n n a

Paul Harris “ Film Buffs’ Forecast” , 3RRR, Melbourne 1. S tir 2. N e w s f r o n t 3. T h e D e v il’s P l a y g r o u n d 4. M a d M a x 2 5. B e tw e e n W a r s 6. B a c k r o a d s (Phil Noyce, 1977) 7. F r o n t l i n e (David Bradbury, 1979)

8 . 21A

9.

P u r e S h it 10.

M o n k e y G rip

Tenth Anniversary Supplement

since worked with bigger budgets and better-known performers but his very human, well-observed and concerned film about youth adrift remains in the mind.

N e w s f r o n t. Still one of the most original and technically skilful of recent Australian films. One of our few movies to even attempt to com­ ment on the recent political past.

P ic n ic a t H a n g i n g R o c k . Finally un­ satisfying, but the haunting and imaginative quality of this film has not yet been undimmed by time or even commercial television as a recent tele­ cast proved.

S t o r k (Tim Burstall, 1971). Lots of things don’t work too well in this film, but Bruce Spence does. Besides, with­ out the public acceptance of this one, would we have an industry at all?

S u n d a y T o o F a r A w a y . The first feature produced by the South Austra­ lian Film Corporation remains one of the most attractively “ Aussie” of our movies, a well-observed, well-acted and likeable film.

W a k e in F r i g h t . Powerful look at the Australian ugliness, too powerful even for most Australians when first released.

W a lk a b o u t.

Constantly fascinating mix of myth, mystery, romanticism and sex. Photographed and directed by Nicolas Roeg, and stamped with his highly individual style.

John Hindle

9 . H o d d l e S t r e e t S u ite ( J o h n D u n k ­ l e y - S m ith , 1 977) 10. O c é a n P o i n t L o o k o u t ( C o r i n n e a n d A r th u r C a n tr ill, 1978) I h a v e t e n d e d t o f a v o r s o m e f ilm s f r o m t h è r e c e n t b o o m in S u p e r 8 m m f ilm s .

Brian McFarlane Cinema Papers, Melbourne

In n o p a r t i c u l a r o r d e r : M y B r i ll i a n t C a r e e r T h e Y e a r o f L iv in g D a n g e r o u s l y R o a d g a m e s (R ic h a rd F r a n k lin , 1981) W a k e in F r i g h t P ic n ic a t H a n g i n g R o c k B re ak e r M o ra n t G a llip o li L o n e ly H e a r t s W a lk a b o u t T h e F J H o ld e n T h e C h a n t o f J i m m i e B l a c k s m i th

Picnic at Hanging Rock: No. 4.

Tina Kaufman Filmnews, Sydney

Here is my list of 10 films from the past decade. I don’t want to say best or favourite, but rather that these are the ten films which worked best for me when 1 first saw them, and that the impression each one left has stayed strong.

P u r e S h it L o v e L e tte rs fro m T e ra lb a R o a d T h e F J H o ld e n N e w sfro n t M a d M a x and M a d M a x 2 S tir M o n k e y G r ip W r o n g S id e o f th e R o a d (Ned Lander,

ABC-TV, Green Guide (The Age), Melbourne

1. G a llip o li W in t e r o f O u r D r e a m s B re ak e r M o ra n t 4. N e w sfro n t 5. S t a r s t r u c k (Gillian Armstrong,

2.

3.

1981) S ta rs tru c k G o in g D o w n

1982) 6.

7.

D u s ty (John Richardson, 1983) T h e G e t ti n g o f W is d o m 8. T h e Y e a r o f L iv in g D a n g e r o u s ly 9. M o u t h t o M o u t h 10. S t o r m B o y

Scott Murray

Dougal MacDonald

Cinema Papers, Melbourne

The Canberra Times, Canberra

Ivan Hutchinson

The fun five:

The Seven Network and Video Age, Melbourne

K itty a n d th e B a g m a n

Australia still has to make a great movie, but certainly it has made some fine entertainments. Since my personal preference in that sort of film is still pretty basic — a strong narrative, a literate script, some genuine concern for the characters and professional technical skills — here, in alphabetical order, a “ 10 Best’’ since 1970, including two made by overseas directors which still must count as Aussie films since both present aspects of our country and way of life that the local boys haven’t touched on.

B r e a k e r M o r a n t . One would hardly complain about the quality of films from Australia (or anywhere else) if they were as well acted, written and directed as this adaptation of a good play by Kenneth Ross.

T h e L a s t W a v e . In my book, Peter Weir’s most satisfactory film to: date.

Eerie, disturbing and finely crafted.

M a d M a x 2 . Not a great film, but cer­ tainly a great action movie. One sequel that is better than the original.

M o u t h t o M o u t h . John Duigan has 64 — March-April CINEMA PAPERS

1. W a l k a b o u t W a k e in F r i g h t 3. P ic n ic a t H a n g i n g R o c k 4. M a d M a x 2 5. M a d M a x 6. A P e r s o n a l H i s t o r y o f th e A u s t r a ­ lia n S u r f 7. G o o d b y e P a r a d i s e 8. B r e a k e r M o r a n t 9. S u n d a y T o o F a r A w a y 10. T h e L a s t H a r v e s t ( J e f f B r u e r , 1 9 7 7 )

2.

(Donald Crom-

bie, 1982) T he O d d A n g ry S h o t B u d d ie s (John Dingwall, 1983) G o o d b y e P a r a d i s e (Carl Schultz, M ad M ax 2

1983)

The admirable five: L o n e ly H e a r t s M a n o f F lo w e r s M a n g a n n in i e (John Honey, S tir T h e D e v il’s P l a y g r o u n d

1980)

Gallipoli: joint No. 5.

Adrian Martin Neil Jillett

C o m m e n ts : (i) P r e d o m i n a n c e o f l it e r a c y a d a p t a ­ tio n s a m o n g b e s t A u s t r a l i a n f ilm s h a s b e e n s t r i k i n g , le a d i n g t o a f a in t l y c a u t i o u s , d e c o r o u s c in e m a . (ii) I f th is lis t c o u ld b e v e r y s lig h tly e x te n d e d I w o u ld a d d N o r m a n L o v e s R o s e ( H e n r i S a f r a n , 1 9 8 2 ), th e o n ly a t t r a c t i v e A u s t r a l i a n c o m e d y , a n d S t e p h e n W a l l a c e ’s S tir . P e r h a p s H e a t w a v e . (iii) T h e lis t h a s t h e l o o k o f c lic h é b u t P e t e r W e ir s e e m s t o m e t h e c le a r w in n e r a m o n g d i r e c t o r s . (iv ) I a m s t r u c k b y t h e s c a r c i ty o f f ilm s m a k i n g a liv e ly e n g a g e m e n t w ith c o n te m p o ra ry A u s tra lia a n d m a y , in c o n s e q u e n c e , b e o v e r - v a l u in g T h o r n h il l ’s T h e FJ H o ld e n .

M o u t h to M o u t h a n d W i n t e r o f O u r D r e a m s se e m th e o n l y o t h e r c o n te n d e r s in t h e f ie ld a n d t h e y b o th , a d m ira b le as th e y a re , ru n o u t o f n a rra tiv e p u f f .

T h e ‘s e c o n d 1 1 ’ is: L o n e ly H e a r t s , T h e D e v i l ’s P l a y ­ g r o u n d , T h e L a s t W a v e , P e t e r s e n ( T im B u r s t a ll , 1 9 7 4 ), B e tw e e n W a r s , F r o n t ­ lin e , S till L if e s ( L is a R o b e r t s , lo n g v e r s i o n , 1 9 7 8 ), M o u t h t o M o u t h , M o n k e y G rip , P h a r L a p , B o n d i ( P a u l W in k l e r , 1 9 7 9 ).

Melbourne State College

The Age, Melbourne

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

P ic n ic a t H a n g i n g R o c k H e a tw a v e W in t e r o f O u r D r e a m s M a n o f F lo w e r s S tir T h e G e t ti n g o f W is d o m L o n e ly H e a r t s M o v in g O u t S ta rs tru c k S to rm B o y

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

M y s tic a l R o s e M ad M ax T he L ast W ave J o u r n e y to th e E n d o f N i g h t ( P e t e r T a m m e r , 1981) M a n le s s ( M a r i a K o z ic , 1 981) M r S u z u k i C o m e s to A u s tra lia ( P a u l F l e tc h e r , 1981) D re a m s C o m e T ru e (J a n e S te v e n ­ s o n , 1982) W a t e r m e lo n B a b ie s ( A l a n V a n d e r m e id e , 1983)

Bert Newton The Nine Network, Melbourne

In n o p a r t i c u l a r o r d e r : T h e M a n f r o m S n o w y R iv e r P h ar L ap F a tty F in n (M a u ric e M u r p h y , 1980) S unday T o o F a r A w ay L o n e ly H e a r t s T h e C lu b (B ru c e B e re s fo rd , 1980)

Tenth Anniversary Supplement

Top Ten

T he O dd A n gry S h ot P e te r s e n G a llip o li B reak er M o ra n t

L o n e ly H e a r ts M ad M ax 2 M o u th to M o u th Su nd ay T o o Far A w ay D e v i l ’s P la y g r o u n d M o n k e y G rip T h e N ig h t th e P r o w le r ( J i m S h a r m a n , 1978) 8. L o v e L e tte r s f r o m T e r a lb a R o a d 9 . L a la i — D r e a m tim e 10. G o o d b y e P a r a d is e

Kathleen Norris In a lp h a b e tic a l o rd e r: B reak er M o ra n t F r o n tlin e L a la i — D r e a m t im e L o n e ly H e a r ts M ad M ax 2 1 0 0 a D a y ( G i l li a n A r m s t r o n g , 1 9 7 3 ) A P e r s o n a l H is t o r y o f th e A u s t r a lia n S u rf T h e P la in s o f H e a v e n ( I a n P r i n g l e , 1982) S t a t io n s ( J a c k i e M c K i m m i e , 1 9 8 3 )

1. T h e P ic tu r e S h o w M a n ( J o h n P o w e r , 1977) 2 . T h e C h a n t o f J im m ie B la c k s m ith 3 . M y B r illia n t C a r e e r 4 . B reak er M o ra n t 5 . G a llip o li 6 . P ic n ic a t H a n g in g R o c k 7. S u n d ay T o o F ar A w a y 8. T h e L a st W a v e 9 . W e o f th e N e v e r N e v e r ( I g o r A u z in s , 1982) 10. M a d M a x

Tom Ryan 3AW and Cinema Papers, Melbourne

In a d d i t i o n t o t h e f ilm s lis te d a b o v e , s e v e ra l w h ic h e m b o d y a n A u s t r a l i a n c o n n e c tio n o f so m e s u b s ta n tia l k in d , y e t w h ic h c a n n o t p r e c i s e ly b e c a l l e d “ A u s tr a lia n ” , d e se rv e m e n tio n . T w o

M ax M ax B reak er M o ra n t W a lk a b o u t W a k e in F r ig h t Sunday T o o Far A w ay G a llip o li S tir T h e C h a n t o f J im m ie B la c k s m it h M o n k e y G rip P u r e S h it

Raymond Stanley

The Mike Walsh Show, Sydney

Screen International, Melbourne N o.

2.

“ f o r e i g n ” f ilm s w h ic h s t a n d o u t f o r m e in th is c o n t e x t a r e W a lk a b o u t a n d W a k e in F r ig h t ( a ls o know n as O u tb a c k ). A n d t w o f ilm s m a d e a b r o a d b y film m a k e rs w h o h a v e d o n e th e m a j o r i t y o f t h e i r w o r k in A u s t r a l i a a r e a ls o , it c a n b e a r g u e d , m o s t p r o p e r l y in c lu d e d h e re : B a rb a ro sa (F re d S c h e p is i, 19 8 2 ) a n d T e n d e r M e r c ie s ( B r u c e B e r e s f o r d , 1 9 8 2 ). B o t h f i lm s , a lo n g w ith P s y c h o 2 ( R i c h a r d F r a n k ­ lin , 1 9 8 3 ), s e r v e a s a c le a r i n d i c a t i o n o f th e h a p p y m a rria g e o f A u s tr a lia n film ­ m a k e rs to w o rk in g c o n d itio n s o u ts id e A u s tra lia .

A n d , fin a lly , th e re a re a n u m b e r o f A u s t r a l i a n f ilm s t h a t I v a lu e , in w h o le o r in p a r t , e v e n i f I c a n n o t f i n d a p l a c e f o r t h e m in t o d a y ’s lis t o f 10: f ilm s s u c h a s B o n j o u r B a lw y n ( N ig e l B u e s s t, 1 9 7 1 ), M y s tic a l R o s e , M e n a c e ( J o h n H u g h e s , 1 9 7 5 ), H o d d le S tr e e t S u ite , B e tw e e n W a r s, T h e P lu m b e r a n d R oad gam es.

T h is is a p e r s o n a l l is t, in n o p a r t i c u l a r o r d e r , a n d m u s t i n c l u d e K e n H a l l ’s D a d a n d D a v e C o m e to T o w n , d e s p i te it b e in g o u t s i d e t h e p a r a m e t e r s .

1. Breaker M o r a n t 2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

S tir L o n e ly H e a r ts W a k e in F r ig h t P ic n ic a t H a n g in g R o c k T h e D e v i l ’s P la y g r o u n d B reak o f D a y T h e P ic tu r e S h o w M a n P e te r s e n W eekend of Shadow s J e f f r e y , 1 978)

(T o m

The Australian, Sydney

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

Andrew Saw The National Times, Sydney

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

M y B r illia n t C a r ee r T h e G e ttin g o f W is d o m B r ea k er M o r a n t G a llip o li N e w sfr o n t W a k e in F r ig h t D a d a n d D a v e C o m e to T o w n ( K e n G .

H a l l, 1 938) T h e D e v i l ’s P la y g r o u n d B r ea k o f D a y P har Lap

Evan Williams

I n a lp h a b e t i c a l o r d e r : T h e A lt e r n a tiv e ( P a u l E d d e y , 1 9 7 8 ) C a r e fu l, H e M ig h t H e a r Y o u T h e L a st W a v e M ad M ax M ad M ax 2 P e te r s e n P ic n ic a t H a n g in g R o c k W e A r e A ll A l o n e , M y D e a r ( P a u l C o x , 1977) W e o f th e N e v e r N e v e r Y a c k e tty Y a k

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

Mike Walsh Mad Max 2: j o in t

Leader of the Federal Liberal Party, Canberra

Peter Thompson Sunday, Sydney

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

Australian Film Institute, Sydney

Andrew Peacock

Graham Shirley Australian Cinema: the First Eighty Years (co-author)

M a n o f F lo w e r s Su nd ay T o o Far A w ay T h e D e v i l ’s P la y g r o u n d M o n k e y G rip M y B r illia n t C a r e e r T h e C h a n t o f J im m ie B la c k s m it h B reak er M o ra n t L o n e ly H e a r ts M o v in g O u t W e o f th e N e v e r N e v e r

T h e C h a n t o f J im m ie B la c k s m ith G a llip o li P ic n ic at H a n g in g R o c k B reaker M o ra n t M y B r illia n t C a r ee r T h e G e ttin g o f W is d o m G o o d b y e P a r a d is e L o n e ly H e a r ts S to r m B o y N e w sfr o n t

A ls o a p p r o a c h e d : G r e g B r i g h t ( Australian Film Review)-, C o rin n e C a n trill (film m a k e r); J o h n H a n r a h a n ( The Sun, S y d n e y ) ; t h e P rim e M in is te r, R o b e rt J . H a w k e ; J o h n H in d e (A B C ra d io ); S ta n J a m e s (The Adelaide Advertiser)-, a n d A n n e ­ M a r i e d e ll ’O s s o ( The Sydney Morning

Herald)

B reaker M o ra n t: No. 1.

Bill Shanahan Shanahan’s Management, Sydney

David Stratton Network 0/28, Sydney

In n o p a r t i c u l a r o r d e r : T h e D e v i l ’s P la y g r o u n d N e w sfro n t M y B r illia n t C a r ee r G a llip o li M ad M ax 2 G o o d b y e P a r a d is e L o n e ly H e a r ts M o n k e y G rip T h e Y e a r o f L iv in g D a n g e r o u s ly C a r e fu l, H e M ig h t H e a r Y o u

N e w sfro n t: jo i n t N o . 2.

F o u r m o r e I w o u l d h a v e lik e d t o in c lu d e : D o n ’s P a r t y , T h e C h a n t o f J im m ie B la c k s m it h , M o u t h t o M o u t h a n d M a n o f F lo w e r s .

j n n o p a rtic u la r o rd e r: W a k e in F r ig h t Sunday T o o Far A w ay T h e L a st W a v e M o u th to M o u th T h e C h a n t o f J im m ie B la c k s m it h L o v e L e tte r s fr o m T e r a lb a R o a d N e w sfr o n t M ad M ax 2 M o n k e y G rip M a n o f F lo w e r s

THE TALLY A s m a n y lis ts a r e n o t o r d e r e d , t h e f o l lo w in g t a l l y is b a s e d o n o n e v o t e p e r e n tr y . T h e m o s t v o t e d f o r f ilm s a r e , th u s : 1. B r e a k e r M o r a n t 2. M ad M a x 2 N e w sfr o n t 4 . P ic n ic a t H a n g in g R o c k 5 . G a llip o li Su nd ay T o o Far A w ay 7 . T h e D e v i l ’s P la y g r o u n d L o n e ly H e a r ts 9. M y B r illia n t C a r e e r 10. T h e C h a n t o f J im m ie B la c k s m ith

23 v o te s 16 16 15 14 14 13 13 12 11

R u n n e rs-u p : M a d M a x , P a lm B e a c h , T h e C lin ic

CINEMA PAPERS March-April — 65

The state o f the Australian film industry and its future direction has been a topic vocally debated since the industry’s revival in 1970. A t a Murdoch University (Perth) seminar in October 1983, producers Phillip Adam s and A ntony I. Ginnane spoke to opposing points o f view.

In his speech, “Requiem fo r the Australian film industry”, Ginnane examines what he sees as mistakes o f the past decade, particularly in the area o f government funding, and gives clear indication o f how he sees the industry best surviving in the future.

Adams, in responding to Ginnane, gives his personal views as to what he sees worthy in the Australian cinema and why it should be encouraged and supported.

Antony I. Ginnane

Perhaps the only qualification I can really claim for being here tonight is that I think I am one of only two producers currently working in Australia to have made a feature film [ H a r l e q u i n 1] in Western Australia in the past 20 years. I may not be a local, but hopefully that credential will prevent my being considered a complete outsider.

1.

H a rle q u in (1980). Director: Simon Wincer. Producer: Antony I. Ginnane.

66 — March-April CINEMA PAPERS

In thinking of a title for my address this evening, I jotted down “ Requiem for the Aus­ tralian Film Industry” but, having spent some time talking with Phillip Adams since his elevation to the chairmanship of the Australian Film Commission (AFC), perhaps I should revise that title. In any event, it would be useful to start with some history of the Australian film industry.

Ten years ago, a government-backed Tariff Board Inquiry into the exhibition and distribu­ tion of film in Australia made a series of recom­ mendations aimed at nurturing, initially by direct government subsidy, an Australian feature film production industry. In 1970, the Federal Parliament had passed the Australian Film Development Corporation (AFDC) Act which created an investment bank with funds available for investment in Australian films which met certain criteria. To be eligible, the project needed to be an “ Australian film” .

Section 4(1) of the Act defined “ Australian film” to mean, inter alia, . . . a film that had been made, or will be made, wholly or substantially in Australia . . . And, in the opinion of the Corporation, has or will have a significant Australian content.

Section 4(2) stated, . . . In forming an opinion whether a film has or will have a significant Australian content the Corporation will have regard to the subject matter of the film; the place or places where the film was or is to be made; the places of residence of the persons taking part in the making of the film, including authors, musical composers, actors and

technicians; the source from which the money to be used in the making of the film will be derived; the ownership of the shares or stock in the capital of any company concerned in the making of the film; the ownership of the copyright in the film, and any other matters that it thinks relevant.

In 1973, the Tariff Board Inquiry hoped that in the medium term the local film industry would become self-supporting, eliminating the need for continued government subsidy. In part C of the report, referring to theatrical films, the Board stated on page 14, . . . It has also been the Board’s aim to foster the provision of commercial finance for the film industry, partly because this is a desirable long­ term objective, and partly because it considers that the large entrepreneurial element in financing film production can be more appropriately and efficiently supplied by commercial interests. The development of such facilities will take time and require encouragement, and the assistance pro­ visions recommended have been designed to do this. Among other things the degree of govern­ ment assistance accorded to different films will vary and will be importantly influenced by the proportion of risk and equity its commercial supporters are willing to accept. As their com­ petence and confidence increases with experience and development of the industry, government participation is expected to decline. [Author’s italics.]

Unfortunately, many of those advocating the passing of the AFDC legislation and, in 1975, the Australian Film Commission legislation had no desire for the industry ever to be self­ supporting, claiming that it should develop

Tenth Anniversary Supplement

along the lines of a Swedish or Eastern Euro­ pean industry, continually government-sup­ ported and contributing to the development and enrichment of Australian identity and culture. The Australian Film Commission A ct 1975 and then the incentives introduced under amendments to the Australian Income Tax Assessment A ct 1936, beginning in 1977, continued to refer to “ significant Australian content” as the criterion by which a film became eligible for either AFC assistance or the tax incentives. The 1977 amendments placed that matter in the hands of the Minister for Home Affairs. Subsection 1(a) of Section 124(k) of the Income Tax Assessment A ct effec­ tively reiterated the definition of an “ Austra­ lian film” as per the original Australian Film Development Corporation A ct (quoted above), with some modifications.

So, during the past 10 or 15 years, the term “ significant Australian content” , as we shall see, was to become the mallet by which the legs of a commercial, free-enterprise film industry were broken time and time again. Trade unions, federal and state bureaucrats and, ultimately, parliamentarians have succumbed during the past five years, and a “ significant Australian content” has been translated to read “ exclusive Australian content” . This happened despite the continuing evidence that Australia’s most successful films included key overseas content, from Rachel Roberts in Picnic at Hanging Rock, Richard Chamberlain in The Last Wave and Edward Woodward in Breaker Morant to, more recently, Kirk Douglas in The Man from Snowy River, Ron Leibman in Phar Lap and Linda Hunt, Michael Murphy and Sigourney Weaver in The Year of Living Dangerously — not to mention most of my own productions. It may be debatable whether overseas content was a plus, but it was certainly not a detriment to those films’ success.

The so-called theory behind this galloping chauvinism was that the purpose of the film incentives, direct and indirect, has been to stimulate an aspect of Australian culture. But what is “ Australian culture” ? When my company spends $1 million providing work for actors, technicians and associated industries in Perth in 1979 for our production Harlequin, or a year later $1.5 million in Adelaide for The Survivor, or a year later in Cairns $2.5 million for Turkey Shoot, has Australian culture been enhanced? Has Australian culture been abandoned if the subject matter technicians and artists are working on is international or non­ Australian in setting and international in appeal? Was Shakespeare betraying British culture when he wrote Coriolanus or Julius Caesarl Is culture to be defined as an artistic endeavour that appeals only to a university graduate more than 30 years-old who earns at least $50,000 a year, or is there such a thing as “ pop culture” ? How do you account for millions of people between the ages of 12 and 30 years being scared and exhilarated by the internationally-oriented Mad Max, Patrick or Turkey Shoot? These films are completely in tune with their time. While many taxpayers may profoundly regret it, these commerciallysuccessful films are “ pop culture” . Many Aus­ tralians refuse to admit that a very significant part of Australian culture overlays, and is identical to, contemporary American culture.

As embarrassing as it may be to my friend Mr Adams, we have many things in common with our American allies. From McDonalds and Coca-Cola to Star Wars: these are the frames of reference for today’s cinema audience.

Many ‘international’ Australian films have made significant statements about our society, its moral values and moral dilemmas: Mad Max dealt with the responsibilities of the individual

Two Views

to society; Harlequin with the dilemma of power, greed and success versus personal happiness; and Turkey Shoot warned about a fascist society in the future. These themes were not uniquely Australian, nor were they uniquely American. They were at least western and perhaps even universal. They all made a statement about our culture and our -society.

They were all criticized because the Australian physical locale and the story setting were described as either being somewhere in the U.S. or some non-specific location. Was our cultural expression really retarded by this change in setting? “ Significant Australian content” — read as “ exclusive Australian content” — has proved a strait-jacket which has followed the industry through the 10B legislation into the most recent 10BA legislation. The device of certification as an Australian film has not been based on any intelligent point system, as was the case in Canada, nor was it based on any expenditure criterion, such as the British Eady scheme — although the Tariff Board, it should be noted, used an expenditure criterion as one tier of its proposed definition of Australian film.

Instead, it is ultimately based on ministerial discretion, which on the one hand allows no certainty to anybody — witness The Return of Captain Invincible — and yet allows ministers who come to their portfolios tabula rasa, as far as the industry is concerned, to be progressively influenced against internationalism by AFC bureaucrats who would, no doubt, be redundant if ever the Australian film industry became self-supporting. In my opinion, the intentions and strategy of the AFC, as film mandarins, have been totally and utterly wrong, from its initial interpretation of its parlia­ mentary mandate to its most recent, behindthe-scenes lobbying for the latest tax cuts.

I think it is invaluable and informative to consider the way in which English-speaking Canada, faced with a similar problem as Aus­ tralia (i.e., to create a film industry from nothing), acted. Canada, like Australia, uses English as its main language, has an even greater proximity to, and is culturally-influ­ enced dramatically by, the U.S. and had no tradition of a film industry.

The Canadian government in 1967 set up the Canadian Film Development Corporation (CFDC). The original CFDC Act was, in many ways, a model for the AFDC Act and the research behind it was heavily drawn upon by the Australian Tariff Board Inquiry. By 1979, the CFDC’s activities, coupled with private investors’ ability to write off 100 per cent of their investment in the certified Canadian film over 12 months, as well as a buoyant securities market for film public issues, created a vibrant film industry with a number of spectacular suc­ cesses at the world box-office.

Speaking in October 1979 at a University of California seminar on “ The Law of Canadian Film Production” 2, the then president of the CFDC, Mike McCabe, set out three assump­ tions that lay at the base of the CFDC’s invest­ ment in Canadian films: 1. t h e o b j e c t iv e r e m a i n e d t h e c r e a t i o n o f a f e a t u r e f ilm i n d u s t r y a s a n e l e m e n t o f C a n a d a ’s c u l t u r a l life ; 2. th e in te n tio n o f th e C a n a d ia n p a r lia m e n t w a s t h a t , t o t h e e x t e n t p o s s i b l e , t h is i n d u s t r y b e s e lf-s u s ta in in g a n d n o t a n o n -g o in g d e p e n d a n t o f g o v e rn m e n t; a n d 3 . u n le s s t h e C a n a d i a n i n d u s t r y w a s c o m m e r c i a l l y s u c c e s s f u l, w h i c h w o u l d m e a n t h a t a l o t o f p e o p l e w a n t e d t o p a y t o s e e its f i lm s , t h e c u ltu r a l o b je c tiv e w o u ld n o t b e a c h ie v e d . I t w o u l d n o t b e a c c e p t a b l e t o c r e a t e f i lm s o n l y f o r a s m a ll e li t e , n o r c o u l d s u c h a n e lite p r o v i d e t h e r e v e n u e s n e e d e d t o a ll o w C a n a d i a n c r e a t o r s t o c o n tin u e to c re a te .

Those objectives, which clearly mirror the Aus­ tralian situation, required, said McCabe, a 10-point strategy. Let us examine this strategy and see how, in virtually every instance, the AFC moved in exactly the opposite direction, and how the formulation and interpretation of the 10B and 10BA incentives further prevented such a strategy being properly implemented.

Before we do so, however, it is worthwhile charting briefly the success or failure of McCabe’s strategy, as clearly its own relevance to the Australian situation is if it was or could have been successful.

2. N. Roberts and B.E. Haleman (eds), Syllabus on the Law o f Canadian Film Production, University of Southern California.

CINEMA PAPERS March-April — 67

Tenth Anniversary Supplement

Two Views

An enormous amount of ill-informed com­ ment has appeared in Australian media as to the success or failure of the years 1979, 1980 and 1981 in Canada. The AFC-based position has been that the Canadian experience was a failure, either because it did not manage to sustain the industry boom through 1982 or because the films created were internationallyorientated productions as opposed to specific­ ally indigenous works. The facts are that during that period a number of Canadian films became huge, world box-office successes, notably the youth comedy Porky’s, which became 20th Century-Fox’s second biggest world-wide grosser in 1981-82, grossing $80 million; Meat­ balls, which became a surprise summer hit in 1981 for Paramount, grossing world-wide $20 million plus; the Jack Lemmon starrer Tribute, which grossed $15 million for Fox; the string of successful Canadian horror films from David Cronenberg — Rabid, The Brood and Scanners — which amongst them grossed $60 million world-wide; minor thriller successes such as Prom Night and Terror Train; the prestige vehicles such as Quest for Fire and Atlantic City, with Burt Lancaster; and the occasional situation comedy such as MiddleAge Crazy.

Most of these films were criticized by purists for being set in Midville U.S., rather than Midville Canada, but they provided a real industry in Toronto with world-wide recogni­ tion for Canadian producers, technicians and facilities and, in my view, were just as repre­ sentative of Canadian culture as low-budget, indigenous, financially-disastrous productions such as Don Shebib’s Going Down the Road.

What caused the boom to burst in 1982 was not the lack of world-wide, positive box-office to Canadian product, but the decision by the Revenue Department to switch the capital, costallowance write-off from 12 months to two years. This, combined with the unrealistic, pro­ jected, proceeds cash-flow schedules provided by inexperienced Canadian producers in 1979, 1980 and 1981, Canadian public offer docu­ ments, and the greater attractiveness of certain real estate tax shelters, meant investors moved out of Canadian film in 1982. The Canadian scene was quiet in 1983; whether it will boom again in 1984 will largely depend on circum­ stances not directly related to the performance of Canadian films to date.

It is important to remember, however, as I turn now to McCabe’s 10 objectives, that his plan worked in Canada and could have worked here. The current Canadian problem is not caused by the failure of McCabe’s strategies but by rug-pulling on the part of Canadian Revenue and government. So let us now look at McCabe’s objectives.

1. McCabe: If we are to have a feature film industry, its base must be a group of entre­ preneurs who raise the money, assemble the creative team, get the film made and sell it. We must, therefore, focus on developing and supporting producers.

My comment: The AFC and the state corporations consistently champion writers and directors at the expense of producers.

The Australian Film and Television School focuses on directorial training. The Euro­ pean style of filmmaking was fostered by the AFC, the state funding bodies and their followers in the specialist film media.

2. McCabe: A country the size of Canada is not going to have an unlimited number of producers. We must reinforce the success­ ful ones, cut out the unsuccessful and keep our eyes open for new talent.

My comment: To the extent the AFC or the state funding bodies did prom ote producers, the view was that either they 68 — March-April CINEMA PAPERS

should support frequently those who are at least successful but culturally pure (the New South Wales Film Corporation’s view), or they should not be seen to be supporting a successful producer more than once or twice (the AFC’s view).

Spread the money around. Bring in more and more new talent. Talent for what? To lose more and more public money, of course!

3. McCabe: Unless Canadians are prepared to have access to foreign films limited and the exhibition of Canadian films legally required, we are going to have to make films that can compete with the best in the world because: (a) in Canada itself, we have to match the best films produced by other countries if we are to convince Canadians that they should pay their money to see our films; (b) if we are to have the stars and the pro­ duction values that will bring Canadians to see our films, the budgets will be too high to recoup our costs in our own relatively small market; and (c) we must, therefore, earn revenue in the rest of the world, and to do this we must have the themes, the stars and the production values to meet our com­ petition.

My comment: The AFC and the state corporations, by and large, consistently endorsed the extremist policies of the Actors and Announcers Equity Association of Australia and, to a lesser extent, the Australian Theatrical and Amusement Employees Association in relation to the importation of overseas artists and specialist technicians. Despite the paucity of local screenwriters, any suggestion of imported screenplays was an anathema, so that the Australian content sections of 10B and 10BA prevented our productions being packaged to international standards.

4. McCabe: We must not be afraid to associate with people in other countries who can help us compete, but we must ensure that we do not lose control to them.

We must use the association with others to promote and develop our own producers, directors, actors and crews.

My comment: Here the AFC and the 10BA draftsmen really threw the baby out with the water. No meaningful attempt was made by either the AFC or the AFDC to enter into any co-production treaties of any form, although some half-hearted negotia­ tions proceeded with France. The AFC failed to design a practical and useful co­ production treaty with the U.S., even though the U.S. was an obvious market for every Australian film if it were to be com­ mercially successful. Nor did negotiations ever proceed with Britain, Canada or New Zealand. On the other hand, the most rigorous protections and overkill were built into the 10BA legislation to ensure that not only did control stay with Australians, but virtually everything else as well.

5. McCabe: We must have a conscious strategy for developing and promoting our own directors, writers, performers and technical people. We must create our own stars.

My comment: Here at least the AFC tried, with its publicity machine and its huge presence over the years at the Cannes Film Festival, but, generally, the few Australian stars that we have (for example, Bryan Brown and Helen Morse) were created by television — the Crawfords, Hector and Henry, and Grundy’s, and the new rash of

mini-series — rather than features. Only Mel Gibson, Jack Thompson and Judy Davis can really be said to have emerged exclusively from features. The AFC’s promotions were either infested with koalas or women’s legs, and were generally uninspired.

6. McCabe: Given that we make top-quality films we must market them more aggres­ sively at home and abroad, and we must take steps to get our films into distribution and exhibition systems where we are unfairly restricted.

My comment: Here both the AFC, by its marketing department, and the New South Wales Film Corporation (NSWFC), by the establishment of the Australian Films Office Inc. in Los Angeles, attempted to create structures to market the films pro­ duced, but the AFC’s marketing officers privately admitted that the type of pro­ duction generated only merited European television, American art-house and limited American cable release. To help justify their existence they concentrated on giving our films away to every film festival that wanted to show them. Australian films came and went as the flavor of the year in Europe, New York, etc. Very few dollars came back. Only Mad Max 2, The Pirate Movie, The Man from Snowy River, The Year of Living Dangerously and, to a lesser extent, Gallipoli have received proper world-wide distribution by a major to date.

By proper distribution, I mean full, main­ stream, theatrical distribution, followed by cable, television and video release world­ wide. To a lesser extent, via a combination of major and independent distributors, Patrick, Mad Max, Turkey Shoot, The Chain Reaction, Harlequin and Return of Captain Invincible have also received some measure of proper distribution.3 Eleven titles out of some 300. The NSWFC’s Aus­ tralian Films Office Inc. has become a joke, with hundreds of thousands of dollars spent on an operation that has never really had marketable films to sell, My Brilliant Career being the exception.

7. McCabe: The CFDC should use its limited budget to lever other funds into the film industry. CFDC money should be spent when the risk is highest and the money scarcest — the development stage — to help the producer get the package together.

My comment: Rather than levering funds into the film industry, the AFC has consist­ ently lobbied against attempts to take the industry out of its control by placing its funding in the hands of private enterprise.

In the 1982-83 tax year, it campaigned against United American and Australasian Film Productions Pty Ltd (UAA) and other groups attempting to raise money via Section 51(1) of the Income Tax Assess­ ment Act, ultimately succeeding in having Part IV(A) of that Act used against them.

If these groups had been embraced, who knows where the industry might now be, particularly as UAA only invested in pro­ duction that had guaranteed profits.

Following the 1982-83 tax year, when at least it seemed as if the marketplace had accepted the 10BA shelter and was con­ sidering making independent investment decisions that displeased the AFC, Joseph Skrzynski, the AFC chief executive on whose advice [Minister for Home Affairs] Barry Cohen relied (excessively in my 3.

Since th e tim e o f th e sp eech , L onely H earts h a s also received a su ccessful d istrib u tio n in th e U .S . — E d .

Tenth Anniversary Supplement

opinion), with the help of the AFC’s political contacts, organized the reduction of the 150 per cent deduction to 133 per cent and a dramatic increase in the AFC’s funding, attempting, yet again, to shore up its position.4 8. McCabe: Some of the CFDC’s budget should continue to be available for films of cultural significance and where new and promising talent is involved. Even here, however, we must insist upon some possi­ bility of commercial return. The absence of that possibility means that few people will see the film and little money will be returned to the producer so that he or she may continue to produce.

M y comment: Clearly, what has happened over the past 10 years is the exact reverse of that philosophy, where the AFC has lobbied to make “ culturally significant” the sole lodestone for investment.

9. McCabe: The CFDC must work to create a situation in which the institutions and investors that finance other industries are brought into the film industry.

M y comment'. My comments here are as for point 7.

10. McCabe: The rules of the game must be Ala d M ax: “A u s tr a lia ’s m o s t su ccessfu l f i l m ” (G innane). stabilized for four or five years so that the CFDC and the tax incentive can do the job Sells report was fatally flawed, and that the they were designed to do: create an Australian film industry was in an excessively economically-viable film industry. healthy state. Why? Instead of nine films out of M y comment: The rules of the film game in 247 making a profit, 20 had made a profit. A Australia have been tinkered with on at better average than the U.S.’s one out of ten, least a dozen occasions during the past 10 says the AFC, ignoring the fact that in the U.S. years. The AFC consistently lobbied to the “ one out of ten” takes $100 million to $200 change the ground rules, from 1OB (100 per million and pays for the other nine flops a cent write-off in two years) to 10BA (150 hundred times over. Whereas Australia’s most per cent write-off in one year with the film successful film Mad Max has only recouped its to finish in the same year), through 10BA meagre budget 60 times and no others out of (150 per cent write-off in one year with the that 247 have exceeded three to four times film to finish one year after investment), recoupment. through 10BA (133 per cent write-off in Now what does the future hold? Clearly, one year). Tragically, each change has been nobody has a crystal ball, but the following is at a critical period in the development of a my scenario, or at least possible scenario, for self-sufficient local film industry — most the Australian film industry during the next 24 notably the last — and without much con­ months or so: sultation with the people who make up the 1. vastly reduced production output as private film industry. At the same time, the AFC investment rejects the new incentives as has interfered with the certification insufficiently attractive; process, first trying to take it over and then 2. what production there is — say six to 10 giving it back to the Department of Home films a year in the next two years — will, Affairs. It has lobbied against Section through the AFC’s involvement and the 51(1), interfered with discussions relating topping up of the budget process, become to the prospectus provisions of the even more indigenous in content and no Uniform Companies Code, etc. No more commercial in their results. The AFC’s industry during the past 10 years has had track record of investment in films is no the ground rules changed more often than better, and probably worse, than the the film industry. Who is to blame? In industry’s average; large measure, the blame must lie with the 3. the industry will revert back to a cottage AFC. industry, causing inestimable damage to the Despite the tragedy of mis-planning and lifestyles of those technicians and other individuals who have made long-term mistakes, the AFC has managed, from time to financial career commitments based on con­ time, to even present its own ‘gallows humor’. tinuous employment in the film industry.

Most notable of recent was when James Similarly, those small- to medium-facility Mitchell, former executive director of the Film and Television Production Association of Aus­ companies that have geared up, based on a tralia, commissioned a report from Deloitte, certain level of production, will now come under massive financial pressure and the Haskins and Sells which showed that of the 247 three or four production companies aspiring films produced from 1970 to 1982 only nine to semi-continuous production activity will returned a profit to investors. Skrzynski then have to completely scale down; had AFC operatives do some quick telephone research, which included asking producers, in 4. at the end of this two-year period, unless there is a change in federal government, and whose film they [the AFC] had invested, perhaps even if there is (as Treasury, having whether they had made a profit. As a result, the seen the incentives cut back, will not easily AFC was pleased to trumpet to the world lay allow any government to reinstate them at and trade press that the Deloitte, Haskins and earlier higher levels), I believe this Govern­ ment will either further reduce the incentives 4. S k rzy n sk i h a s d e fe n d e d his a n d th e A F C ’s ro le in th e re d u c tio n o f 150 p e r c en t to 133 p e r c en t. S k rzy n sk i has to 100 per cent write-off, with additional, said t h a t th e G o v e rn m e n t w as in sisten t on a re d u c tio n to increased AFC funding, or, alternatively, it 100 p e r c en t a n d t h a t he a n d o th e rs fo u g h t to keep th e may eliminate any write-off, coloring film re d u c tio n to a m in im u m . H e th u s sees th e fin al 133 per investment once again as a capital item with cen t as a c o n sid e ra b le v icto ry . — E d .

Two Views

a total reversion to direct government funding, which is clearly more in accord with Labor Party policy; and 5. either of these solutions will mean that the goal of those who wish to create a smallscale, Swedish-style film industry will have been achieved, although, in my view, they may be surprised to find that most of our Bergmans have already been discovered.

That is the likely future. But perhaps I can suggest an alternative, complete restructuring of the film industry incorporating the following: 1. the abolition of the AFC with any responsi­ bility for limited funding of cultural projects for cinema by the present Creative Develop­ ment Fund being handed over to the Australia Council or some similar organiza­ tion, saving $6 million a year; 2. the abolition of the certification division of the Department of Home Affairs; 3. all investment in films to attract 100 per cent write-off, provided only that the manage­ ment and control of the production com­ pany is Australian and that a certain per­ centage of the labor cost be expended on Australian residents and nationals; and 4. film investment and film income to remain eligible for all other incentives generally available to Australian export industries (for example, the export incentives).

This scenario would allow the film industry to operate on the rules of the investment marketplace: i.e., a reasonable expectation of profit. Investors and their advisers would be free to make bona fide commercial assessments of projects available in the marketplace, without the direct or indirect interference of the AFC or the Department of Home Affairs.

Should the government desire to recognize specifically the speculative, high-risk nature of film investment, which it might well choose to do, any special incentives should be geared to film income: i.e., some continuance or exten­ sion of the currently exempt film-income provisions, a results-based incentive.

Arrangements akin to the above have been responsible for the recent, rapid resurgence of the British industry, both from the perspective of viable commercial productions — e.g., Gandhi or Chariots of Fire — and as a world­ wide production facility — e.g., Superman, the Bond films and Star Wars, etc. This is the intelligent way to proceed.

CINEMA PAPERS March-April — 69

Two Views

Tonight’s debate has been raging in the Australian film industry since 1906: the internationalists versus the nationalists. When the historic film Ned Kelly was being shot at about that time, another Australian pioneer filmmaker was filming Buffalo Bill. So those two streams have been arguing and fighting tooth and nail ever since.

I am going to talk anecdotally as opposed to structurally, so let me give you a few images which seem, to me, to be what the Australian film industry is all about.

Tony Ginnane has talked about the international scene. Frankly, I don’t give a damn about the industry elsewhere. The reason we want a film industry is because Australia needs one. One of my first films was a film called Hearts and Minds, a documentary on Vietnam with Bruce Petty1. Bruce was, and is, a genius. He wrote and drew a cartoon, which has always haunted me. It showed a big screen, and sitting in front of it was a little, passive Australian family staring glumly at it. On the screen were the following words: “ Have your emotions lived for you tonight by American experts.’’ And that was the way it was!

I grew up on a diet of American pop art: Captain Marvel, Superman, Batman and Robin, John Wayne . . . In 1958, I remember being involved in a May Day march. I wasn’t a member of any union but they couldn’t get any actors to march because it was the time of McCarthyism. We found ourselves an old, broken-down hearse, and a very thin actor called Ron Purnell, who was wonderfully cadaverous. We walked around the streets of Melbourne, behind the wharf laborers and in front of the Painters and Dockers, with Ron tolling the knell and calling out, “ Australian television is destroying Australian talent.” And I remind you that at the time there was no Australian material on Australian television at all. In fact, the actors’ stipend (radio ‘soapies’ such as “ When a Girl Marries” ) had been knocked on the head. As we walked around the streets of Melbourne people called out, “ Australians haven’t got any talent.”

This was a time when a fellow called Lee Gordon would book the Festival Hall in Melbourne, put on “ has-beens” and “ never weres” from the U.S., and audiences packed into the rafters.

I grew up in a world where we never heard the Australian accent from a radio; you certainly never heard it from a film soundtrack.

The only time you heard the Australian accent was if a footballer or a jockey were being 1. H e a r ts a n d M in d s (1 9 6 8 ). D i r e c t o r , p h o t o g r a p h y , e d itin g : B r u c e P e t t y . P r o d u c e r : P h i l l i p A d a m s .

70 — March-April CINEMA PAPERS

Tenth Anniversary Supplement

interviewed. The news readers on the ABC had a mock-BBC accent; disc jockeys used a mock­ Los Angeles accent. That did not seem to be healthy. From it flowed a cultural inferiority, a figurative forelock-tugging sense of subservi­ ence. I think it was A.D. Hope who coined the phrase the “ cultural cringe” . It was very much a part of our lives; many of you may be too young to remember, but it was very real then.

I see danger if we take Tony’s line and become an international industry, and by “ international” Tony unequivocally means an American industry, make no mistake about it.

His argument is that the U.S. is the film industry and to plug into that international dynamic means you make films for the U.S., or films which Americans will accept.

A couple of years ago, Kirk Douglas arrived in Australia to star, stereophonically, in The Man from Snowy River, and I got a phone call asking me to come to the Hilton Hotel in Melbourne to discuss the project with Kirk Douglas. (I thought it was rather beaut, because the Hilton was built on the corner where I used to sell my papers for five pence a dozen.)

I was greeted at the door of the Douglas’ hotel suite by a very charming Belgian woman in her sixties: his wife. I was immediately impressed because I thought he would be on to his thirteenth bimbo by then!

I must say here that I am not anti-Douglas.

He has been an extraordinary man and a very brave filmmaker. He broke the embargo on the Hollywood Ten, by hiring Dalton Trumbo; he also gave Stanley Kubrick his break; and it was really his idea to get Milos Forman to do One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest, not his son’s. I had every reason to respect the man.

So, I sat opposite the most famous orifice in Hollywood (with the possible exception of Linda Lovelace) and gazed into that cavernous dimple, as he said, “ I’ve got a great idea for a movie, Phil.” I asked, “ What is it, Kirk?” He said, “ I want you to read this script by a very clever young Californian writer.” I said, “ Well, look, they come by the truck load; there is a room full of them at the office. Would you just tell me what it is all about.” He again insisted that I read the script, to which I replied, “ Look, I am a good listener, you are a great actor. Tell me the idea!” So he went into ‘star mode’ and said, “ It’s 1840 and I arrive in Perth. I am a cowboy out here to shoot kangaroos. After shooting ’roos for a while they want me to shoot. . . I think you call them

Abos?” “ Yes Kirk, Abos” , I said. So he continued, “ I’m shooting roos and Abos and then I get a change of heart.” I asked, “ About the roos or the Abos, Kirk?” And he said, “ About the Abos, Phil.” He could see he was losing me, so he skipped through the plot a bit and went on: “ So I organize a revolution of Abos.” I can just imagine how my black, radical friends are going to like this! A cowboy organizing a revolution of Abos! So he skips to the end. “ The end is just fantastic” , he said. “ There is a big, bald hill across the Panavision screen, and I come over the top riding tall in the saddle. Behind me are 30,000 Abos!” I had to interrupt. “ Kirk,” I said, “ the Aboriginals are nomadic people; I think you’ve got them mixed up with Zulus or Apaches.” He said, “ Don’t tell me about movies, Phil.” And I said, “ Don’t tell me about Abos, Kirk.”

That was the end of that encounter, but it is not the end of that encounter in terms of the threat to the industry. We needed a film industry because, as Bruce Petty said, our emotions were being lived for us by American experts. I grew up in the world where we never saw an Australian on television or on the cinema screen; all we saw was imported. We had been fighting British wars for generations and now it was all the way with L.B.J. There was simply no energy to give ourselves a new direction. (David Williamson and I have often discussed this and we feel that had we lived in Germany we probably would not be so gung-ho about nationalism because the Germans seem to have used it rather lethally on more than one occasion.) To live in a country that had taken a pummelling like ours — which felt so “ off­ Broadway” — was really quite degrading.

The impetus for the film industry did not come out of an industry push at all. We did not have an industry. We had a few people making documentaries, we had television commercials and that was about it. I bought a clock-work Bolex camera, and I made a feature film.2 It took $6000 and six years to do it working at weekends with Brian Robinson, who now runs the Swinburne film school, the best in Australia. At the end it wasn’t bad; parts of it were in focus. There was no sync in the sound; it was, literally, Sellotaped together. We didn’t have an editing bench, or anything. But it won 2. J a c k a n d J ill: a P o s t s c r ip t (1 9 7 0 ). P r o d u c e r s , d i r e c to r s , s c r i p tw r it e r s : P h i l l i p A d a m s , B r i a n R o b in s o n .

Tw o im ages f r o m P h illip A d a m s a n d Brian R o b in s o n ’s Jack a n d Jill: a P o stsc rip t, sh o t on a c lo c k -w o rk B olex.

644 Victoria Street North Melbourne, Victoria. Australia 3051. Phone: 329 5983

Dear Subscriber,

Thank you for your patience in awaiting this next, special double issue of Cinema Papers.

As you are aware, the magazine went through a difficult financial period last year, resulting in the cessation of publication. An account of the resolution of those financial problems and of the revival of Cinema Papers is inside this^ issue (see nA Personal History of Cinema Papers"); the net result was the formation of MTV Publishing Limited, a public company limited by guarantee, which is now the publisher of the magazine.

One condition of the sale of the magazine by Cinema Papers Pty Ltd to MTV Publishing Limited was that MTV Publishing take over the subscription liability. This was agreed, and 3-H subscribers to Cinema Papers will have their subscriptions met by MTV Publishing. Part of this agreement was that this double issue (No. 44-45) count as two issues.

The directors and staff of Cinema Papers Pty Ltd would like to thank here all those subscribers who wrote to the Australian Film Commission and others expressing their regard for the magazine and arguing for its continued support. That support is now assured under a new arrangement with the Australian Film Commission and Film Victoria. The future for the magazine is bright.

Tenth Anniversary Supplement

some awards: it won an award in Perth, two awards at the Adelaide Festival and it won the first Australian Film Awards feature prize.

I couldn’t get it released; no one would touch it with a barge pole. But I learnt there was no great mystique about making a film. You point a camera, shots come out and you stick them together. It’s not that hard. It suddenly seemed to me that Australians, perhaps, could make them.

At about the same time (as Tony well remembers because he was involved in the culture then) there was a lot of filmmaking around Carlton and Melbourne. Melbourne had the biggest film festival in the world, in terms of ticket sales. We also had the biggest film society movement and a very good film . critic, a fellow called Colin Bennett (The Age), who later became stultifyingly dull, but who was then quite good. Quiz show personality (and now Minister for Science and Technology) Barry Jones had a talk-back radio program — the first in Australia — and also had a latenight television program, Encounter, which was a sort of sub-Parkinson production. This was about the time when the Prime Minister, Harold Holt, was drowned. So there was movement at the station to see who was going to be the new Prime Minister.

The horse metaphor is correct, because all the thoroughbreds were being assessed at the Melbourne Club, which is where our Prime Ministers are traditionally chosen. But Barry tipped an outsider: John Gorton. He had Gorton on the talk-back radio program and on the television show, and the media momentum from those interviews got Gorton’s juggernaut rolling. Suddenly, Gorton was Prime Minister.

And he believed Barry Jones to be his lucky rabbit’s foot.

Barry had Gorton’s ear and I had Barry’s ear, and we used the link to some effect. We started arguing that we needed a film industry.

Just before his disappearance, Holt had actually prepared a list of people to advise him on film. The list was given to Gorton and he asked who Holt would have chosen. When Gorton crossed all those candidates off, my name survived. So that was the mechanism.

We wrote Gorton’s speeches and we started cajoling him in such terms as: “ You don’t want to be like Harold Holt and go for all those poofter arts, all that opera, etc. Movies, mate; that’s the go.” We talked about the John Gorton Film School and the Gorton Awards and all that sort of stuff. It is funny, because

Two Views

later on you had to change your technique.

With Bill McMahon you yelled and with Gough Whitlam it was: “ Only you are a Renaissance man. Only you are a Medici.” “ Quite right, Phil!”

Thus, original impetus for a film industry came largely out of the Melbourne film culture.

It was, in Tony’s terms, pretty soppy. It was not concerned at all with making money, and it was not terribly concerned with the rest of the world. We just felt it might be a nice idea to make films with our own voices, and our own landscapes, to dream our own dreams.

I wrote a one-sheet report to Gorton and it started off with a bit of interesting plagiarism; “ We hold these truths to be self-evident” were the first words. I then went on to say it was about time that we heard our own voices, etc.

The report never even went to Cabinet. Gorton just pushed it through.

That was a lesson we learnt from Andre Malraux who was for a while De Gaulle’s Minister for the Arts. Malraux said, “ The trick is to make the Prime Minister the Minister for Film. Then you get the money out of the Treasury and the Minister is too busy to interfere.” Whereas, if you get junior ministers, as we have often found to our cost, they can’t get the money and they interfere all the time. So our trick, right from day one, was to have Gorton, Whitlam, Wran, Dunstan and the rest of them as Ministers for Film.

My report recommended three things: an Experimental Film Fund, a film school and an Australian Film Development Corporation (AFDC). We had to start from scratch. There was nothing established to build on. We were opposed by the Packers, by the ABC, and by Greater Union and Hoyts Theatres. None of these interest groups wanted an Australian industry. It was a pain in the neck. They fought it tooth and nail, but we got it through.

The idea was that the Experimental Film Fund gave money to anyone who had an idea.

Anything was experimental. A film on a seeing eye dog or a hovercraft was experimental in Australia in those days. It didn’t matter; a film was experimental. From that exercise you would select some of the brighter kids and send them to film school. Out of that school would come producers, directors and writers, who would then be funded by the AFDC and go on to greater things. ' In the interim, however, Gorton was deposed — self-immolated or whatever — and suddenly we had a problem with a man called Peter

Howson. Howson tried to scrap everything, but it was too late — though he did succeed in stopping the film school.

I was on the Australian Film and Television School’s interim council, so I decided I would resign on This Day Tonight, which I did, very noisily. The next morning I received a phone message that the Prime Minister would call me in half an hour. Another call: “ The Prime Minister would call in 20 minutes” , then “ 10 minutes” and, by then, I was getting a bit nervy. Finally, I picked the phone up and a little voice said, “ Hello Phil.” It was Prime Minister McMahon. I had never met him, nor had I met his wife (and that is important because of the punch line). He said he quite understood how upset I was and he promised a film school. Not just any film school, but the best film school . . . and Sonia sends her love!

Out of the Experimental Film Fund came people of the calibre of Peter Weir, and a lot of the early films such as Stork, a moderate success prior to The Adventures of Barry McKenzie — the film for which I still have to apologize 15 years later3. So much was generated by the Experimental Film Fund. The middle link — the film school — was missing, of course, until Whitlam came along and put it in place.

I make no apology for the fact that we have a national industry. I make no apology for it being a nationalized industry. I say it constantly: we live by whim of government. I believe that if the rug were pulled, the only films to survive in that free market would be horrific horror and porn. There is very little evidence that anything else would survive.

I also make no apology for the fact that the film industry will stay subsidized. Whether the government does it through taxation incentives or through direct grants is almost irrelevant. All art is subsidized. If we had the free market applying in Australia, you could close the art galleries, you could close the opera, the ballet, the theatre, the lot. It is all subsidized. You either want it or you don’t. If you want it, you have to pay for it.

However, a lot of things Tony says about the track record of the Australian Film Commis­ sion (AFC) are correct. I received a letter the other day from a departing AFC commissioner who gave me a list of the films that the AFC had said “ no” to and it was a who’s who of the films that it should have backed.

The picking process is awfully hard. It is one thing to eliminate films that lack quality, lack originality, but it is very hard to know what is going to win. Even when Star Wars was finished, 20th Century-Fox didn’t really know what it had. Fox almost gave it a minor release, until one of the studio executive’s kids saw it and liked it.

The world is full of stories like that, about films that even the great gurus of Hollywood passed on. If they were as clever as all that, they would be making more successes themselves. So I think the film industry will remain subsidized.

I never promised Gorton anything else. My original report to Gorton emphasized that subsidies would be a permanent arrangement.

On the other hand, I am not against international films. I don’t for a minute want us to keep making navel-gazing and narcissistic films. On the same day that I got my Koala stamp (my commission as AFC chairman) from the Governor-General, all hell had broken loose over Robert Caswell’s documentary-drama for the ABC, Scales of Justice. At a press conference after my appointment I said that 3. The Adventures of Barry McKenzie (1972).

Director: Bruce Beresford. Producer: Phillip Adams.

CINEMA PAPERS March-April — 71

Two Views

while at the AFC I hoped we would make just as many things to make people just as angry.

There is one thing about Australian films which has bored me of late: their tendency to flatter our ethos, the tendency to say nice things about Australia. I hope we will make more con­ fronting films, a great many more films which admit to our regional realities, more films like Peter Weir’s The Year of Living Dangerously or John Duigan’s Far East. I hope to see more films that admit the fact that we are the second most multi-cultural nation on earth after Israel.

In my view, our natural market is not the U.S. but Europe. Tony would say that is because we make tired, defeatist, intellectual films for bored university graduates. I suggest it is because we make films for grown-ups. The Australian industry has tended to make films for people more than 25 years-old. (That is because we are so old and geriatric! We have not made any films at all for the young target group.)

I dismiss, with withering contempt, the tendency to bucket the past 10 or 15 years of Australian filmmaking. We are regarded as a great filmmaking country. Today Tony showed me American reviews of Lonely Hearts, the film I did last year with Paul Cox4. Andrew Sarris of Village Voice, one of the toughest critics in America, said that Lonely Hearts was the latest evidence of what he described as “ the continuing miracle of Australian film” . I think it has been a miracle. There have been some dreadful films, but there have been some marvellous ones as well. • How does one judge “ international suc­ cess” ? I made Lonely Hearts with Cox because no one would touch him with a barge pole in a so-called free market. Cox had made a couple of very low-budget films, one called Kostas which, perhaps, one or two of you might have seen. I thought Kostas was shamefully handled: no one would release it. I knew his problem.

When we made The Adventures of Barry McKenzie, the first film made with government money in the old AFDC days, I took it to the major theatre chains — Hoyts and Greater Union Theatres — whose enmity to me and to Australian film was total. They told me to stick it!

I then noticed that Ryan’s Daughter had been running for ever in two cinemas — one in Melbourne and one in Sydney — for no good reason. No one was going. The only reason they 4 . L o n e ly H e a r t s (1 9 8 2 ). D i r e c t o r , s c r i p t w r i t e r ( w ith J o h n C la rk e ): P a u l C o x . P r o d u c e r: J o h n B.

Murray. Executive producer: Phillip Adams.

Tenth Anniversary Supplement

were running it was because they could not get a replacement. The oligopoly was blocking film supply. So we put Barry McKenzie on and the rest is history; it went on to be a huge success.

Kostas couldn’t get out, any more than The Devil’s Playground could get out! When Fred Schepisi made The Devil’s Playground, he only got it released because I let him have my cinema, withdrawing Don’s Party for him.

Lonely Hearts, which won the Australian Film Award (in 1982) as the best film in a field of 37, could not get a local release5. So the Australian film scene, after all, is not quite as nice as people might make out.

Don’s Party was, to say the least, ethnic. I never thought it would travel beyond Melbourne and Sydney. Indeed, it didn’t go well in Adelaide, and they hated it in Brisbane.

However, it was a smash in Tel Aviv and in West Berlin, and it was one of the top 10 films of the year in Venezuela (where, I have always thought, they probably confused it with Don Quixote).

Tony and I both had films open in New York a couple of weeks ago. Tony’s was Turkey Shoot, which is not an anti-fascist parable. It is the pornography of violence and probably the most violent film I have ever seen. I was so moved by it at the Australian Film Awards screenings that I lumbered out of the theatre and went down to the loo. That episode made the front page story in the Melbourne Truth: “ Adams walks out on Lynda Stoner” , it said.

The film’s publicity people then used that as a poster to get other people to go and see it!

Lonely Hearts is now playing in four New York cinemas and is becoming the cultural frisbee being tossed to the other ‘thinking capitals’, such as Boston and San Francisco. By contrast, Turkey Shoot opened simultaneously in about 9000 cinemas. I am delighted that Tony makes those sorts of films, but can’t we make ours, too? There is room for us all. It is rather important that when our Prime Minister goes to the White House, the “ first lady” of the U.S., Nancy Reagan, says that Bryan Brown is her favorite actor (having replaced Gene Autry!). That is an enormous cultural achieve­ ment.

Tonight, Australian films are probably screening in about 40 or 50 countries. Almost universally, the films talked about are the films that Tony dismisses. The films that might 5. T h e film w a s d i s t r i b u t e d b y p r o d u c e r J o h n B .

M u r r a y a n d e x h ib i t e d b y H o y t s in M e l b o u r n e a n d S y d n e y . M u rra y say s b o th H o y ts a n d R o a d sh o w

offered to distribute the film.

L o n e ly H ea rts: the la test eviden ce o f ‘‘th e con tin u in g m iracle o f A u stralian f i l m ” (A n d rew Sarris).

72 — March-April CINEMA PAPERS

'7

hope we will make more confronting films , . . which Far

adm it to o u r region al realities, m o re f ilm s lik e . . .

E a st” (A dam s).

make the money are Tony’s “ mid-Pacific films” , as I call them. I just cannot accept Tony’s model. To me, the English film industry died when it accepted his postulate. The British film industry was pretty good. You might remember the Ealing comedy days, Sir Michael Balcon, Alexander Korda and others. It was, once, a great industry. Then they decided to go the American route and to make ‘mid-Atlantic films’.

For 10 or 15 years the British technicians were working, • making the Superman and James Bond films. They were doing the technical work for a lot of the big Hollywood blockbusters, but no British idea was seen on the screen. There was no sense of British identity. Now, with David Puttnam following our techniques and our tactics, the British are making films like Chariots of Fire and Gandhi.

David has learnt a lot from our industry and he and his colleagues have given Britain an industry again.

If Australians not only have their emotions lived for them by American experts, but also start becoming ventriloquial dolls for those Americans, what the hell have we achieved? It is tantamount to asking Sidney Nolan to stop painting Ned Kelly and start doing Texans.

Tony is right about the U.S. being the centre of the film industry, but it is also probably the centre of the novel; the U.S. is probably the centre of fine art. Do we tell all our artists in Australia to start doing American stuff? The idea would be abhorrent.

Tony’s energies are prodigious; I have often regretted that he is not in the mainstream! If he had been producing Peter Weir or Bruce Beresford, it would have been terrific for Peter and Bruce.

Another thing that has to be said about ‘‘internationalism” . I don’t think an Austra­ lian film is defined as Australian by where it is shot. It is defined by its attitude to its material.

For example, I don’t think it would be out of character to film an Australian version of a Shakespearean work. I wholeheartedly agree that we should not be narcissistic and narrow; that we should take a global view. But I will not tolerate, nor would I want to be a part of, a film industry which only made ‘mid-Pacific films’ for all those rich Americans. Let us have a rich, diverse school of filmmaking. We got into this industry for one reason: to give ourselves a national voice, to give ourselves a sense of national purpose and a national identity, and to throw that away would be a disaster and a fiasco. ★

On location , on time Phone S ydney (02) 331 3 3 1 4 (02) 331 6626

British Taxi Trucks

1 1a L e ich h a rd t S treet D a rlin g h u rst NSW 2010

Set and prop transportation specialists

MOTION PICTURE SERVICES specializing in • A A T O N • A R R IF L E X • B E L L & H O W E L L • C .P . • • E C L A IR • C A N O N & Z E IS S L E N S E S • • C U S T O M M O D IF IC A T IO N S • Lens collim atio n & re p a ir facilities for all film & video len ses as w ell as still p ho to g rap h ic repairs.

k

1st FLOOR, 29 COLLEGE ST GLADESVILLE NSW 2111 PH: (02) 816 3371

COMPLETION

(AUSTRALASIA)

PTY LTD

We are pleased to be o f service to the Film Community

LON DO N

•

LOS AN GELES

•

SYD N EY

13/75 Darling Point Road, NSW, 2027, Australia Telephone: (61 ) (02) 32 483 2 Telex: AA75095 ‘ Filmkr'

Film Victoria congratulates CINEMA PAPERS on its TENTH ANNIVERSARY

ALBIE THOMS PRODUCTIONS PTY LIMITED FILM & TELEVISION PRODUCERS

Recent productions: PALM BEACH (feature), SURFMOVIES (documentary), ROCK AROUND THE WORLD (tv series), THE BRADMAN ERA (documentary), JOK — THE WILD ONE (tv special).

In development: REVOLT IN PARADISE (feature), THE BIG SMOKE (feature), MAKING A SPLASH IN THE WORLD (doco), FROM NECK-TO-KNEE TO NUDE (doco).

Enquiries: P.O. Box 409, Spit Junction 2088 Telephone (02) 969 7468

Did you know that the Tasmanian Film Corporation has a full 16 mm and 35 mm dubbing suite, 60 ft. x 46 ft. studio, broadcast quality 1” video control room, video O.B. van, caméras, lights, all grips gear including elemac dolly and crâné? And crews with features, docos and commercials experience under their belts?

If you didn’t know what we can do for your next production, you’ll understand why the Tasmanian Film Corporation has been AUSTRALIA’S BEST KEPT SECRET — until now.

Call us

TASMANIAN FILM CORPORATION PTY. LTD

DON'T LISTEN TO WHAT THEY RE SAYING ABOUT SOLNDFIRM S NEW POST PRODUCTION FACILITY. You wouldn’t want to hear from anyone else that Soundfirm designed a computer program to interlock sprockets, multitrack and video for the first time.

O r that the combination of editing rooms, sound and film transfer capabilities and mixing studios makes Soundfirm a unique sound facility all under the one roof.

O r that Soundfirm’s Dolby stereo mixing theatre brings the latest Lucas film THX monitoring system to Australia.

O r that Roger Savage is offering a Sound Design Service to supervise your soundtrack from script to screen.

O r that Soundfirm’s post sync studio uses a novel method of high speed film and video projection for effects and dialogue replacement to image.

S o don’t listen to those bar stool experts-Come and see for yourself what our state of the art facility can do for your next film or video production.

Call now for a demonstration or booking (03) 690 8488

im

im

I

i

$0 II NDF ITill

1-3 Bowen Road, Moonah, 7009

Phone: (002) 30 3531

Soundfirm Pty Ltd 169 Bank St., South Melbourne Vic.

Producer...................................................Yoram Gross Best boy....................................... Gary Scholes T ra in e r................................................Jack Pros D irector..................................................... Yoram Gross P u blicity..............................................G ary Daly R u n n e r....................................... Kate Ingham Scriptw riters............................................... Greg Flynn, Cast: Graeme Blundell (Alvin Purple), Gerry C a te rin g ..................................... John Faithfull Sont (Melvin), Lenita Sillakis (Gloria), Jon Yoram Gross Mixed a t ...................................................... Atlab Based on the original idea Finlayson (Burnbaum), Tina Bursill (Dee), Laboratory.................................................. Atlab b y ...........................................................Yoram Gross David Argue (Cameraman), Abigail (Mrs Lab. lia iso n .................................. Peter Willard P hotography.......................... Graham Sharpe Simpson), Colin McEwan (Col Simpson), Length.................................................... 93 mins Assoc, p ro d u c e r....................................Sandra Gross VaJma Pratt (Dulcie), Greg Stroud (Ferret).

G a uge....................................................... 35mm Length.................................................... 80 mins Synopsis: Melvin is the son of the famous Shooting stock................................3247, 3294 G a u g e .......................................................35mm Alvin Purple and has the same problem that Cast: Jason Connery (John Aspinall), Diane Synopsis: Needing electrical power for their his father had, i.e., girls can't leave him Cilento (Mrs Aspinall). country town, the inhabitants decide to dam alone. However, unlike his father, Melvin Synopsis: The story of a young man at ACT TWO To ensure the accuracy of your a nearby river. However, standing between can’t cope with it. Gloria comes to his rescue university in 1965. He is a sporting cham ­ entry, please contact the editor of Prod, com pany................................ P 8 L Prods their dream and its realisation is a motley and he then finds out that his real father was pion, academically brilliant and from a this colum n and ask for copies of P rodu cer.................................................Richard Brennan band of bush creatures. In this fast-paced Alvin Purple (now a burnt out sex symbol), wealthy family and is searching for a our Production Survey blank, on D irector......................................Rodney Fisher tale that marries live action and animated exploited by his manager, Burnbaum. True meaning for his life. which the details of your produc­ Scriptw riter.................................... Ray Harding characters, both the native and domestic love and comedy wins through and Melvin tion can be entered. All details THE COCA-COLA KID finds salvation in the arms of Gloria. animals are fighting for what they believe is m ust be typed In upper and lower BLOWING HOT AND COLD right.

P rodu cer...........................................David Roe case TERRA AUSTRALIS Prod, co m pany......................... Celsius Prods D irector.................................Dusan Makavejev Editor's note: All entries are THE ELOCUTION OF BENJAMIN Producers.................................. Basil Appleby, Scriptw riter................................................ Frank Moorhouse supplied by p ro d u ce rs/p ro d u cProd, com pany........................................Yoram Gross FRANKLIN Based on the short stories Rosa Colosimo tion com panies, or by their agents.

Film Studio Director........................ Brian Trenchard Smith C in e m a P a p e rs cannot, therefore, Producer...................................................Yoram Grossb y ............................................................ Frank Moorhouse Prod, com pany..............................M & L Prods S criptw riters............................................... Rosa Colosimo, Photography................................ Dean Semler a c c e p t re s p o n s ib ility fo r the D irector.....................................................Yoram Gross P rodu cer...................................Hilary Linstead Reg McLean Sound recordist............................. Mark Lewis correctness of any entry.

Scriptw riters............................................... Greg Flynn, D irector.................................Richard W herrett Script e ditor........................... Everett de Roche Prod, designer....................... Graham W alker Scriptw riter..............................Steve J. Spears Yoram Gross Scheduled release........................Easter 1985 Exec, producer......................................Cinema Enterprises Photography.......................... Graham Sharpe Based on the play b y ............. Steve J. Spears Cast: Giancarlo Giannini (Nino), Arkey Co-producer...........................Sylvie Le Clezio Assoc, p ro d u c e r....................................Sandra Gross Assoc, producers..................... W ilton Morley, Lighting Whitely (Sally).

1st asst d ire c to r.....................Michael Falloon Consultant z oologist...................

Dr M. Archer Peter Davis cam eram an.............. Mick Von Bornemann Synopsis: The story of a friendship between Costume d esigner......................... Terry Ryan Director of model d e s ig n ....... Norman Yeend Cast: Gordon Chafer (Robert O'Brien).

Camera operator...................................... Bruce Hillyard two men who struggle to conquer differences Cast: Eric Roberts, Greta Scacchi.

Length.................................................... 80 mins Synopsis: An innocent relationship between Focus p u lle r......................................Phil Cross of culture, temperament and values in order Synopsis: An American, trouble-shooting G a uge.......................................................35mm an eccentric, elderly teacher and a 12 -yearC lapper/loader........................Ann Darrouget to survive the dangers of their adventures executive from the Coca-Cola com pany is Synopsis: Traces the adventures of a race old boy is destroyed by public suspicion and Key g r ip ....................................Peter Kewshaw and achieve the goal. The action moves from sent to Australia on a mission. of primitive people who landed 40,000 years prejudice.

G affer....................................... ... Bruce Gailey the vast expanses of the Australian desert to ago on the northern shores of a strange THE COOLANGATTA GOLD E lectrician....................................

Noel Canus the peaks of treacherous, snow-capped continent, inhabited by creatures such as MY FIRST WIFE Boom operator............................. Grant Stuart mountain ranges.

Prod, com pany............ ...................... Angoloro marsupial lions, carnivorous lizards and Prod, com pany....................................... Dofine Art d ire c to r...................................................Mike Hudson Producer...................... .................John Weiley giant wombat-like animals.

Producers.............................Jane Ballantyne, M ake-up.................................................. Patricia Payne Director......................... ..................Igor Auzins COMING ATTRACTION Paul Cox W ardro be..........................

Lucinda M cGuigan Scriptw riter.................................. Peter Shreck THE WRONG WORLD Prod, com pany..........Brookvale Investments D ire cto r................................................Paul Cox Ward, a ssista n t..................Michael Chisholm Based on the original idea Dist. com pany.......................Stagedoor Prods Prod, com pany..................... Seon Film Prods Standby p ro p s .................................. Rob Steel S crip tw riters...................................... Paul Cox, b y .............................. ............... Peter Shreck Producer........................................ Brian Jones Producers..................................................Bryce Menzies, Set de co ra to r......................... Andrew Mitchell Bob Ellis Photography............... ............Keith W agstaff D irector...........................................Brian Jones Ian Pringle Photography....................................Yuri Sokol Asst set decorator..................... M arlin Perkins Photography..................................John Ruane Director............................................................IanPringle E ditor................................................ Tim Lewis Set construction.....Studio Set Constructions Editor............................ ...............

Tim W elburn Sound recordist.........................Russell Hurley Scriptwriters................................................... IanPringle, Prod, d esigner................................ Asher Bilu Asst e d ito r..........................................Annabelle Sheehan Prod, designer............. ........................Bob Hill Prod, de sig n e r...................................Sid Smith Doug Ling Assoc, producer...........Tony Llewellyn-Jones Neg. m a tch in g ..........................Carol Parsons A ssoc.producer................... Brian D. Burgess C om poser...................................... Dave Evans Photography.................................... Ray Argali Prod, accountant................. Santhana Naidu Musical d ire c to r...................................... James McCarthy Prod, co-ordinator............Rosslyn Abernathy Exec, produce r..............................Brian Jones E d ito r................................................ Ray Argali Producer’s assistant...................... Jo Stewart Sound editor.................................... Tim Jordan Unit m anager.............. ............. Keith Heygate Prod, acco u n ta n t................ W allis, McMullen C om poser.................................. Eric Gradman Length................................................. 90 mins Editing assistan ts................... Adrianne Parr, Prod, accountant........ ..................Lea Collins and Small Exec, produce r..........................Basia Pushka G a u g e ...................................................... 35mm Fiona Strain 1st asst director........... ............. Colin Fletcher Assoc, producer......................................... John Cruthers Lighting cam eram an..................... John Ruane Cast: John Hargreaves, W endy Hughes.

M ixer...............................................John Herron Producer’s assistant... ......Elizabeth Timothy Prod, m anager...................................... Andrew Wiseman Camera ope rator...........................John Ruane Synopsis: A contemporary story about a Location sound tra n s fe r........

Eugene W ilson Casting..................................................Forcast, Unit m anager.............................Daniel Scharf Sound editor...............................Russell Hurley broken marriage.

Still photography...........................Suzy Woods Michael Lynch Prod, accountant.......................Caroline Fyfe M ixer............................................Russell Hurley O pticals..................Victorian Film Laboratory Key g r ip ........................ .............. Peter Mardell Laboratory............................................. Cinevex 1st asst director.......................................... Lucy McLaren Title designer.................Optical and Graphics A FORTUNATE LIFE G affer............................ .................Mick Morris B udget..................................................$150,000 2nd asst d ire c to r...................................Cristina Pozzan Tech, adviser.....................................Rosemary Crossley Art d irector................... ...........Owen Paterson Prod, com pany.. ...........PBL Prods Length.....................................................90 mins C o n tin u ity.............................. Fiona Cochrane Runners........................................ Evelyn Vinyl, Costume d esigner..............Camilla Exec, producer..

Rountree .........

Ian Bradley G a u g e ............................................Super 16mm Focus p u lle r............................. Jenny Meaney Steven Bennett, Construction manager ............... Ray Pattison Producer............ ........ Bill Hughes Shooting s to ck..........................................Kodak Clapper/loader......................... Mandy Walker Phillip Healy G a u g e ..........................

D irectors............ .....35mm anamorphic ......Marcus Cole, G affer...........................................................Greg Harris Synopsis: First rock and roll erotic movie.

Publicity......................................Babette Smith, Shooting Chris Thompson Art director...........................................Christine Johnson W endy Day stock.......

Kodak Eastmancolor 5247, 5293 S crip tw riter....... ...........Ken Kelso Asst art director......................................... Chris Kennedy COMING OF AGE C a terin g........................................Kris Frohlick Synopsis: A young athlete's conflict with his Script editor....... ....... Marcus Cole Best b o y ................................. John Cummings Prod, com pany...........Brookvale Investments Mixed a t ........................................................ Rim Australia ambitious father.

Assoc, producer ......Mike Midlam R u nner..................................................... Odette Snellen Laboratory.................................................... VFL Dist. com pany....................... Stagedoor Prods C a s tin g .............. ..........Maura Fay EPIC Length.................................................

100 mins Lab. liaison..................................... John Harley Producer..........................................Brian Jones P ublicity............. ........ Lyn Quayle G auge.................................................

Super 16 Prod, com pany..........................

Yoram Gross B udget......................................... $1.047 million D irector............................................ Brian Jones Shooting stock................................... Fuji 8521 Film Studio Length.....................................................96 mins Scriptw riters.................................. Brian Jones, NO NAMES NO PACKDRILL Cast: Richard Moir (Trueman).

P roducer.....................................

Yoram Gross G a u g e ....................................................... 35mm David King Synopsis: A contemporary drama.

Prod, com pany............Phillip Emanuel Prods Director....................................... Yoram Gross Shooting stock............................ Eastmancolor Photography.................................. John Ruane Dist. c o m p a n y................................. Roadshow Scriptw riters............................... John Palmer, Cast: Angela Punch McGregor (Jessica) Sound recordist.........................Russell Hurley P rodu cer...................................................Phillip Emanuel Yoram Gross Drew Forsythe (David), Wallas Eaton (Dr E d itor...........................................Russell Hurley D ire c to r.................................................. MichaelJenkins Based on the original idea Rowell), Simon Chilvers (Warren Metcalfe) Prod, de sig n e r....................................Sid Smith S crip tw riter................................................... BobHerbert Monica Maughan (Vera Peters), Mark Butler b y .............................................

Yoram Gross C o m poser.......................................Dave Evans P R O D U C T IO N Based on the play b y .................................. Bob Herbert (Dr Munroe), Liddy Clark (Sally), Phillippa Assoc, p ro d u c e r........................ Sandra Gross Exec, producer...............................Brian Jones Photography................................. Peter James Baker (Sister Waterman), Alistair Duncan Prod, supervisor......................... Janette Toms Prod, acco u n ta n t................. W allis, McMullin C o-producer................................................Ross Mathews Animation d ire c to r..................... Athol Henry (Hopgood), Charles Tingwell (the judge). and Small Prod, m anager....................................Sue Wild Studios....................Yoram Gross Film Studio S yn opsis: The true story of Jessica Lighting cam eram an................... John Ruane THE BOY WHO HAD EVERYTHING Prod, se c re ta ry ....................................Suzanne Donnelly Laboratory...........................................Colorfilm Hathaway and Annie O 'Farrell and their fight Camera o pe rator......................... John Ruane C a sting................................................... Forcast Budget..........................................$1.25 million to win freedom from an institution for the pro­ G affer........................................ Mark G ilfedder Prod, com pany................... Alfred Road Films Synopsis: No Names No Packdrill is based foundly retarded Length.................................................... 75 mins Dist. com pany........................................... Hoyts Sound editor............................. Russell Hurley on Bob Herbert's stage play which is set in (live action and animation) P roducers...............................Richard Mason, M ixer.......................................... Russell Hurley Sydney in 1942 and is about a relationship G a uge.......................................................35mm Julia Overton Mixed a t .................Film Soundtrack Australia THE CAMEL BOY between Harry Potter, an American marine Synopsis: An exciting and magical journey D irector.................................Stephen Wallace Laboratory............................................. Cinevex Prod, com pany........................... Yoram Gross who is AWOL, and Kathy, a singer in a local in search of the secret of life. This is the story S criptw riter...........................Stephen W allace B udget.................................................... $52,000 night club, who harbors him from the police Film Studio of a journey of battle with the spirit of earth, Based on the original idea Length..................................................... 75 mins Producer...................................... Yoram Gross and MPs. fire and wind. b y ....................................................... Stephen Wallace G a u g e .......................'............................... 16mm Director.........................................Yoram Gross Photography................................ Geoff Burton Shooting sto ck..........................................Kodak S crip tw rite r..................................John Palmer SON OF ALVIN Sound re c o rd is t........................................... Tim Lloyd Scheduled relea se.................... O ctober 1983 Based on the original idea Editor..........................................................Henry Dangar ............... Memorelle Cast: Angela Menzies-Wills, Dave Evans.

Prod, com pany..... b y ..............................................Yoram Gross Prod, designer............................................ RossMajor ...Village Roadshow Synopsis: A joyful, som etim es sad, but Dist. c o m p a n y......

P O S T -P R O D U C T IO N Assoc, p ro d u c e r........................Sandra Gross C om poser.............................Ralph Schneider ............Jim McElroy mostly hilarious fantasy voyage through the P rodu cer..............

Prod, supervisor.......................Narelle Hopley Prod, m anager............................................. RodAllan ..........John Eastway realms of sexual experience to total open­ D irector..................

Director of a n im a tio n ................. Ray Nowland Prod, secretary......................................... Cathy Flannery ....Morris Gleitzman ness. A celebration of life and our freedom to S criptw riter............

Studios.................... Yoram Gross Film Studio .......Ross Berryman Prod, accountants.................... Jill Coverdale, Photography........ enjoy it.

ANNIE’S COMING OUT B udget.......................................... $1 25 million ............... Paul Clark Howard W heatley Sound re c o rd is t...

Length..................................................... 75 mins Prod, c o m pany....... .............. Film Australia 1st asst d ire c to r..........................................Mark Turnbull ........ David Huggett E d ito r....................

COMING UNSTUCK G auge.............................................. ........35 mm P roducer.................. ..................Don Murray 2nd asst d ire c to r........................................... IanPage ...........Jon Dowding Prod, d esigner.....

Prod, com pany...........Brookvale Investments Voices: Barbara Frawley. Ron Haddrick, D irector.................... ................... Gil Brealey 3rd asst director............................Julie Forster ...........Tim Sanders, Assoc, producers .

Dist. com pany...................... Stagedoor Prods John Meillon, Robyn Moore, Michael Pate.

Scriptw riters............

C o ntinuity.................................... Daphne Paris W ilm a Schinella ........ Chris Borthwick, Producer.......................................Brian Jones Synopsis: An adventure story based on the ..Fiona McConaghy Casting consultants....................................M&L Casting John Patterson Prod, co-ordinator Director......................................... Brian Jones journeys of the explorers at the beginning of Lighting c am eram a n...................Geoff Burton Based on the novel ............Mark Canny Unit m anage r.......

Photography................................ John Ruane this century. ........ Kathy Rushton Camera operator..........................Geoff Burton .. .Rosemary Crossley Prod, accountant.. by............... ..........

Sound recordist.........................Russell Hurley Focus puller......................................Derry Field ...........David Clarke 1st asst director. .. and Anne McDonald E d itor........................................................RussellHurley THE GREAT GOLD SWINDLE P hotography............

C lapper/loader.............................................. GillLeahy .............. John Titley Mick Von Bornemann 2 nd asst d ire c to r..

Prod, de sig n e r...................................Sid Smith Sound re cordist......

Key g rip ..................................................... Lester Bishop .....Brett Popplewell ......Rodney Simmons 3rd asst director ...

Prod, com pany.................Indian Pacific Films C o m poser.....................................Dave Evans E d ito r....................... ............Lindsey Frazer ....Stephen Dobson Ass: g rip ............................................. Geoff Full Camera operator ..

Producer................................................ Barbara Gibbs Exec, producer............................ Brian Jones Prod, designer........

G a ffe r.............................................Ian Plummer ................. Ian Jones Focus p u lle r.......... ...........Robbie Perkins D irector.........................

John Power Prod, acco u n ta n t..........i ...... W allis, M cMullin C om poser............... ......Brian Breheney E lectrician...............................Patrick O ’ Farrell ............. Simon W alker C lapper/loader......

S crip tw rite r.........................

David W hite and Small Exec, producer....... ..........Barry Hanson Boom operator..............................................PhilKuros .................. Don Harley Key g rip ..................

Based on an original idea Lighting cam eram an................... John Ruane ............. Ken Conner Assoc, p ro d u c e r.....

Costume d e s ig n e r..................................... RossMajor ................... Ian Adkins Asst g rip ................. b y............. .................................... David W hite Camera ope rator..........................John Ruane Prod, supervisor..... ........ Lindsay Foote ............Colleen Clarke G a ffe r....................

M ake-up............................................... Margaret Lingham P h otog rap hy........................ David Sanderson Sound edito r............................................RussellHurley Prod, co-ordinator... ...... Steve Haggarty ....................Jo Stewart Boom o pe rator......

W ardrobe.................................................. Jenny Miles Sound recordist.......................................... Mark Lewis M ixer.........................................................RussellHurley ........ Sandra Tynan ............Colleen Clarke Costume designer Ward, assistant............................................Meg HuntProd, m anager......

E d itor............................................ Sara Bennett Laboratory............................................ Cinevex Prod, secretary....... ....... Kirsten Veysey ....................Jo Stewart Props b u y e r................................................. Peta Lawson M ake-up.................

Art d ire c to r................................Bernard Hides Length..................................................... 90 mins Prod, accountants... ................Joan Wright, .....Felicity Schoeffl Standby props.............................................. Igor Lazareff Hairdresser...........

Exec, producer...................................... MichaelThornhill G a u g e ....................................................... 16mm ...............Gail Mayes Asst editor............................................... Pamela Barnetta Geoff Appleby W ardro be..............

Assoc, produce r........................................David W hite Synopsis: W hat’s at the end of the rainbow 1st asst director.......

Sound e d ito r...............................................Dean Gawen ................Gerald Letts Keith Handscombe Props buyer...........

Prod co-ordina tor................... Pamela Borain is not necessarily gold, but it could be.

2 nd asst d ire c to r..... ....... Nick Hepworth ......................Judy Fox Editing assistant.................Am anda Sheldon Standby props......

Location m anager........................Tony Barrett C o n tin u ity................ .................... Linda Ray ................... Jill Eden M ixer.................................... Julian Ellingworth Set decorator........

Prod, secretary....................................... Maggie Hegarty DOT AND THE KOALA Script edito r............. ............... Betty Archer ...Geoff Richardson Set construction....

Asst m ix e r.............................................. MichaelThomas Prod, accountant........ Moneypenny Services Casting.....................

Prod, co m pany.......................

Yoram Gross Still photography...

Still photography................................... Carolyn Johns ........ Carolyn Johns ................... Joe Scully 1st asst d ire c to r.......................................... Mark Turnball Casting consultants Film Studio ..........Mitch Matthews .........M y rad eG root Dialogue coach......................Claire Crowther Dialogue c o a c h .....

2 nd asst d ire c to r.................. Sue Pemberton

FEATURES

PRE-PRODUCTION

PRODUCERS AND PRODUCTION COMPANIES

CINEMA PAPERS March-April — 75

Production Survey

C o n tin u ity............................... Chris O ’Connell Prod, assistant . ..Natalie W entworth-Sheilds 2nd unit pho tograph y...............................Louis Irving Harvey (Lois), Mitchell Faircloth (Dr Allen).

STREET HERO Casting....................................................... M & L Synopsis: After 1990, when Melbourne was 1st asst d ire c to r......................................... Peter W illesee G affer.........................................Warren Mearns Prod, com pany.................... Paul Dainty Films Focus p u lle r.................................... John Brock divided by bitter class war and a wall, people 2nd asst d ire c to r...............................Phil Rich Electrician.................................... Alan Dunstan Dist. com pany...........Roadshow International stopped reading Dostoïevski and other Clapper/loader.......................................... Geoff McKell 3rd asst d ire c to r.........................................Geoff Barter Boom ope rator......................... Jack Friedman Produced b y ...............................................Julie Monton Key g r ip ...................................Karel Akkerman boring novelists altogether. Instead they had 2nd unit director....................... M urray Francis Art d ire c to r...........................................Igor Nay Director................................Michael Pattinson great fun re-staging O live r on mullock G a ffe r..........................................................Craig Bryant 2nd unit cam eram an........... Frank Hammond Asst art d ire c to r............................................Kim Darby S criptw riter................................................... Jan Sardi Boom o p e ra to r....................... Jack Friedman heaps throughout the inner city.

2nd unit focus p u lle r.................Bill Hammond Costume d esigner....................................... Jan Hurley Based on the original idea b y ..........Jan Sardi M ake-up.......................................... Jan Stokes C o ntinuity....................................Daphne Paris Make-up...................................................... Judy Lovell Photography..........................................

Vincent Monton H a irdre sser.................................... Jan Stokes Producer’s assistan t................................ Diana Davison Hairdresser................................................Ziggy WHERE THE GREEN ANTS DREAM C Sound recordist..........................................Gary W ilkins W ardro be..............................Lesley McLennan asting.........................................................Nene Morgan W ardro be...................................................Anna Wade Editor...................................... David Pulbrook Prod, com pany....................... W erner Herzog Ward, a ssista n t...........................................Stev Riches Lighting cam eram an.................................David Eggby Ward, assistant............................... Mary Keep Prod, designer....................... Brian Thomson Filmproduktion Props b u y e r..........................Philip Monaghan Focus pulle r.............................. Kim Batterham Standby w ardrobe.................................... Fiona Nicolls Com poser.............................................. various Dist. com p a n y........................ Newvision Film Standby p rops......................Michael Tolerton Clapper/loader........................... Steve Arnold Props buye rs............................. Martin O ’Neill, Exec, producer..............................Paul Dainty Distributors (Australasia) Special effects................................Brian Cox, Key g rip ..................................Graham Lichfield Peta Lawson Prod, m anager..............................Helen W atts Director.................................... W erner Herzog Michael Simpson Asst g rip .............................................. Roy Mico Standby p ro p s ................... Karan Monkhouse Unit m anager...................Michael McGennan Scriptwriter...............................W erner Herzog C a rp e n te r....................................... Alex Dixon G affer...............................................Roger Wood Set dressers...............................Martin O'Neill, Prod, secretary................................... Elizabeth Symes Additional dialogue.............................Bob Ellis Asst e d ito r.......................................Emma Hay Assistant e le c tric ia n ................ Douglas Wood Peta Lawson Prod, accountant...................................... Craig ScottBased on the original idea Still photography......................................... Skip W atkins Sound re co rd ist..............................Ross Linton Scenic a rtis t...............................................Peter Harris (Moneypenny Services) b y .......................................... Werner Herzog Story consultant................... Shirley Windham Boom o p e ra to r..................Graham McKinney Set construction....................................... Danie Daems 1st asst d ire c to r.................... Stuart Freeman Photography.............. Jorg Schmidt-Reitwein Best b o y .............................Guy Bessell-Brown Art director...................................................Terry Stanton Asst editor................. Catherine Sheehan 2nd asst director..........................................PaulHealey Sound recordist.........................................Klaus Langer R unner....................................................... Kelvin Sexton Asst art d ire c to r..................... Marcus Skipper Musical director......................William Motzing 3rd asst d ire c to r................Murray Robertson Editor.................... Beatte Mainka-Jellinghaus C a tering........................................ Big Belly Bus M ake-up.................................. Rina Hofmanis Sound e d ito r..................... ........... Les Fiddess Continuity................................... Helen Gaynor Exec, producer...........................................LuckiStipetic Laboratory............................................Colorfilm W ardrobe........................................................LynAskew Still photography...........................................Jim Townley Producer's secretary.............. Beverley Frost Prod, co-ordinator...... Tony Llewellyn-Jones Lab. lia is o n ..................................... Bill Gooley Ward, a ssista n t.......................... Sandy Beach Title designer...............................................FranBurke Extras casting.....................Monica Pellizzari Financial controller............... Santhana Naidu B udget..................................................$750,000 Props b u ye r.................................Richard Kent Language c oa c h ...................................... Claire Crowther Camera operator................David W illiamson Prod, assistant........................ Maria Stratford Length.................................................... 96 mins Standby p ro p s ........................................... Harry Zettel Best b o y ..................................... Alleyn Mearns Focus puller..............................Robert Murray C ontinuity....................

Christine Ebenberger G a u g e ........................................................16mm Special e ffe c ts ..........................Monty Feiguth R unners..................................................... Henk Prins, Clapper/loader........................ Rex Nicholson Camera operator........................................ JSR Scheduled release..............................Mid-1984 Asst editor.......................... Frans Vandenburg Gary Freeman, Key g rip .......................................Greg Wallace Focus p u lle r............................................

Rainer Klausmann Cast: John Hargreaves, Tony Rickards, Music performed b y .............................. Various Artists Colin Tregenza, Asst g rip ..................................................... Barry Brown C lapper................................................... W erner Herzog Robert Hughes, Chris Haywood, Brian Stunts co-ordinator................................... Grant Page Stephan Elliott G a ffe r........................................................... RobYoung Loader....................................................

Michael Edols Marshall, Barbara Llewellyn, Barrie Barkla.

D rive r...................

Christian Hoppenbrouwers Publicity.................................................. Babette Smith Boom operator.......................Mark W aziutak Camera assistant.................................... Rainer Klausmann S yn opsis: Dram atized account of the Still photography..............................Bliss Swift.

Unit publicist............................................ Penny Hammer Art director.............................................. RobertDeanKey g r ip .......................................... Vit Martinek swindling of the Perth Mint of more than $1 Jim Townley C a terin g...................... Sue and John Faithfull Costume designer................ Norma Moriceau million in gold, in 1982.

2nd unit photography........................... MichaelEdols Best b o y .................................Philip Golom bick Mixed a t ......................................................Atlab M ake-up..................................Deryck de Niese Electrician.............................................Manfred KleinR u nner....................................... Kerry Jackson Laboratory................................................. Peter Willard H airdresser..........................................Amanda Rowbottom Boom operator...........................................Peter Rappel Publicity............................. International Public G auge....................................................... 35mm REUNION W ardrobe........................................... Aphrodite Dowding Art d ire c to r...................................................... UliBergfelder Relations (Bruce Glen) Shooting stock............................ Eastmancolor Standby wardrobe...................................FrankiHogan Prod, com pany......................................... SAFC Asst art director...................................... .Trevor Orford C a te rin g .......................................... Plum Crazy Cast: Gosia Dobrowolska (Nina), Ivar Kants Props b uye r............................Sally Campbell Producer...................................................Harley Manners W ardrobe................................................Frankie Hogan Mixed a t .................................................... United Sound (Julian!, Anna Jemison (Anna), Steve Bisley Standby p ro p s..........................................

Harry Zettel Director....................................................... Chris Langman (Melbourne sequences) Laboratory............................................Colorfilm (Viktor), Debra Lawrance (Helena), Ewa Brok Set decorator......................... Sally Campbell Scriptwriter.............................................Graham Hartley Special e ffects............................ Brian Pearce Lab. lia is o n .......................................Bill Gooley (Mrs Bronowska), Joel Cohen (young Construction m anager..........Ken Hazelwood Based on the novel Music performed in part Budget........................................................... $1.2 million Daniel), Tim McKenzie (Roy McKenzie), Asst e d ito r.............................. Annette Ringer When We R an b y ................................... Keith Leopold b y ......................................................W andjuk Marika Length............................................................. 105mins Halina Abramowicz (Ella).

Neg. m atch ing....................................Colorfilm Photography.................................... Ernie Clark Still photography................................ Paul Cox G a u g e ........................................................35mm Synopsis: Love story set against the epic No. of s h o ts .................................................. 530 Sound recordist......................................... Lloyd Carrick C atering......... Sergio Albrigo (Coober Pedy), Shooting s to c k ..................... Kodak ECN5247 background of post-war m igration to Musical co-ordinator...................................

Red Symons E d ito r...................................................... Andrew Prowse Early Morning Risers (Melbourne) Cast: Steve Rackman (Rhino Jackson) Mark Australia.

Music research.....................................Anthony O 'GSenior rady desert wood collector Prod, designer................. Alistair Livingstone Hambrow (LD Jones), lain G ardiner (TM), Music performed b y .............................. various artists and water c a rrie r.................... Alfie Keszler Exec, produce r..................................Jock Blair Alyson Best (Clare Hampton), Kristoffer Sound edito rs ........................Bruce Lamshed, Assoc, producer........................................... RonSaunders Asst desert wood collector Greaves (Sausage Johnson), David Bracks THE SLIM DUSTY MOVIE Terry Rodman Prod, co-ordinator................................... Margo Tamblyn and water carrier......Tony Llewellyn-Jones (Lionel), James G. Steele (Mole), Garry Still photography.......................................David Simmonds Prod, m anager................................. Jan Tyrrell Laboratory...................Cinevex (Rushes only) Kliger (Waldo Jackson), Norman Coburn Prod, com pany............The Slim Dusty Movie O pticals................................................Colorfilm Prod, accountant........................ Frank Evans Lab. liaison...................................Bruce Braun Producer................................. Kent Chadwick (Walter W illiams), Debbie Matts (Maureen).

Tech, advisers...........Bob Bicherton (drums), 1st asst d ire cto r.......................Robert Kewley G auge...................................................... 35mm D irector.........................................................RobStewart Synopsis: Three days and nights of anarchy Les Fagin (orchestra) 2nd asst director........................................ John Rooke Post-production.......Munich, West Germany Photography............................................. David Eggby, in the life of Bullamakanka.

Best b o y ..................................................... Colin Williams 3rd asst d ire cto r....................................Lindsay Smith Cast: Bruce Spence (Hacked), Ray Barrett Dan Burstall 3rd electrician.................................Laurie Fish C o ntinuity........................................Ann Walton (Cole), Wandjuk Marika (Milidjbi), Roy Location sound supervisor............Paul Clarke THE CITY’S EDGE Unit p ub licist.......................................... Roland Rocciocelli C a sting.................................................... Audine LeithE d ito r.............................................................KenSallows Marika (Dayipu), Colleen Clifford (Miss C atering.....................................................Helen W right Prod, com pany................................... Eastcaps Camera o pe rator...................................... David Foreman Strehlow), Norman Kaye (Ferguson), Basil Com poser........................................ Slim Dusty Laboratory...........................................

Colorfilm Producers......................................

Pom Oliver, Focus pulle r.............................................. Martin Turner Clarke (Blackwell), Ray Marshall (Coulthard), Assoc, producer........................................ Brian Douglas Lab. lia is o n .....................................Bill Gooley Errol Sullivan C lapper/loader................. David Wolfe-Barry Ralph Cotterill (Fletcher), Gary Williams Prod, supervisor........................................ John Chase Budget........................................................$2.23 million D ire cto r.....................................

Ken Quinnell Key g rip ..................................................... Lester Bishop (Watson).

Prod, co-ordinator.............. Melanka Comfort Length..................................................100 mins Scriptw riters............................. Robert Merritt, Asst g r ip ............................................... Geoffrey Full Prod, m anager.......................................... Juliet Grimm Synopsis: “ You have ravaged the earth with G auge.......................................................35mm Ken Quinnell G a ffe r........................................................Trevor Toune your mines; don’t you see that you have Location m anage r.................... Phil McCarthy Shooting s to c k ......Eastmancolor 7247, 7294 Based on the novel E lectrician................................ Keith Johnson ravaged my body?’ ’ (Sam Woolagoodjah).

Prod, secretary....................... Cathy Flannery Scheduled release.....................

August 1984 b y ........................................

W. A. Harbinson Boom ope rator.................... Chris Goldsmith We belong to the world of song where people Prod, accountant....................Graeme Wright Cast: Vince Colosimo (Vinnie), Sigrid P hotography...............................................Louis Irving Art director..............................................Herbert Pinter share everything.

1st asst director............................................RayBrown Thornton (Gloria), Sandy Gore (Bonnie Sound recordist............................... Noel Quinn Asst art d ire cto r..................................... Stewart Way2nd asst director................................... MichaelMcIntyre Rogers), Bill Hunter (Det. Sgt Fitzpatrick), E d ito r............................................. Greg Roped Make-up..................................................... Helen Evans 3rd asst director......................................... Brian Gilmour Ray Marshall (George), Amanda Muggleton Ad d ire cto r.................................... Robed Dein H airdresser................................................ Sash Lamey C ontinuity...............................................Andrea Jordan (Miss Reagan), Peta Toppano (Vinnie’s Assoc, p ro d u ce r........................Barbara Gibbs W ardrobe..............................Louise Wakefield Producer’s assistant.............................. Jennie Crowley mother), Peter Sardi (Joey).

Prod, m a n a g e r..................................... Barbara Gibbs Props buye rs.....................................Barry Hall, C asting..............................................Lee Larner Synopsis: A lot of things start happening Unit m anager.......................................Adrienne Read Ken James Lighting cam eraman....................David Eggby A W A IT IN G R ELE A S E when a good-looking boy with a bad future Prod, acco u n ta n t........................M oneypenny Standby props.............................................. Igor Lazareff Camera o pe rators................................... David Connell, meets a radical and sensitive music teacher Services, Special e ffe cts ........................................... Brian Pearce Clive Duncan, who channels him into big-band rock music.

Anthony Shepherd Set construction........................................Derek Mills Nino Gaetano Martinetti 1st asst d ire cto r.......................................... Mark Turnbull Asst edito r............................................... Denise Haratzis Focus pulle rs................................... Ian Jones, THE ULTIMATE SHOW 2nd asst d ire c to r............................................Ian Page ABRA CADABRA Sound edito r..............................................Frank Lipson Greg Ryan C o n tin u ity........................................................Liz Badon Prod, com pany.................................... Ultimate Show Editing a ssista n t..........................................RexWatts Clapper/loader....................Leigh M ackenzie Prod, com pany .....................

Adam s Packer C a s tin g ....................................................... Susie Maizels Dist. com pany............................Valhalla Films Stunts co-ordina tor................................Dennis HuntCamera assistant.........................................RexNicholson Film Prods Focus puller........................... Jerem y Robbins Producers...................................................Barry Peak, Still photography...................... Corrie Ancone Key g rip .........................................................JoelW itherdon P ro d u c e r..................................................Phillip Adams Clapper/loader...........................................

Derry Field Chris Kiely M echanic....................................................... Eric BattyHelicopter a erials..............................Kerry Lee D ir e c to r ................................. Alexander Stitt Key g r ip ......................................................S tuad Green D irectors.................................................... Barry Peak, Best b o y ...................................................... Keith Johnson Louma crane operator........... Geoffrey Brown S c rip tw rite r...........................

Alexander Stitt G a ffe r............................................................ Reg Garside Chris Kiely Runner...................................................... Mason Curtis Gaffer.........................................................Stuart Sorby Based on the original Boom o p e ra to r.......................................Andrew Duncan Scriptw riters..............................................Barry Peak, P u blicity..................................................... Suzie Howie Electrician..............................David Parkinson idea by .............................. Alexander Stitt Costume d esigner....................Anthony Jones Chris Kiely Unit publicist.............................................. Suzie Howie Boom operator..........................................Steve Haggerty Sound recordist ..............Brian Lawrence, M ake-up..........................................Viv Mepham Based on the dramatic C a te rin g ......Frank Manley (South Australia), Art director.................................................Leslie Binns AAV Australia H a irdre sser................................... Viv Mepham fragment b y ................Leo Tolstoy (Tolstoi) John W elch (Sydney) Asst art director...........................Peter Kendall C o m p o s e r................................................. Peter BestStandby wardrobe....................................Roger Mork Photography......................

Malcolm Richards Laboratory............................................Colorfilm Art dept assistant..................................... Derek Wyness Exec, producer .......................Phillip Adam s Standby p ro p s .......................Jock McLachlan Sound recordists...........Murray Tregonning, Lab. lia is o n ..................................................... BillGooley Costume d e s ig n e r.......................Jane Hyland Assoc, p r o d u c e r .................................Andrew Knight Scenic a d is t...............................................David McKay Lindsay Wray, B udget........................................... $1 65 million Costume m aker........................................ SandiCichello Prod, secretary ............................Janet Arup Arm ourer......................................... Brian Burns Don Borden Length............................................................ 100minsM ake-up.................................................. Kirsten Veysey Anim ation director ................. Frank Hellard Editing assistant..................Josephine Cooke Editors...........................................................RayPond, G a uge....................................................... 35mm Hairdresser.............................................Felicity Schoeffl Key a n im a to rs ......................................... Anne Jolliffe, Stunts co-ordinator................................... Grant Page Barry Peak Shooting s to ck ......................................... Kodak Wardrobe supervisor.............................Margot Lindsay Gus McLaren, Motorbike stunts...........................................Guy Norris Prod, designer...............................................

Ian McWha Cast: Carmen Duncan (Eve), Michael Props m aster.................................John Moore Steve Robinson, Best b o y .................................Sam Bienstock C om poser...................................................John McCubbery Aitkens (Riley), Shane Briant (Terrier), Standby props............................................Barry Kennedy Ralph Peverill Flunner..........................................................

Judy Rymer Exec, producer.............................

Bret Mattes Redmond Symons (Pitt), Nicholas Eadie Set decorator............................................ David O ’Grady Painting supervisor ............Marilyn Davies C a terin g................................ DJ & CJ Location Assoc, producer........................... Warren Lee (Toe), Annie Jones (Chrissie).

Assoc, e d ito r................................................RobScott Director special fx Catering, Prod, co-ordinator..........

Michael McCubbery Synopsis: Eve and Riley were lovers. Now, Neg. m atch ing................................... Colorfilm p h o to g ra p h y.................... M ike Browning John W elch Prod, m anager.................................. Ray Pond 17 years later, Riley wants to pick up the Music production............................... Rod Coe Art d ire c to r ...................................... Alexander StittPost-production....................Studio Clip Joint Prod, secretary.......................... Terry Bourke threads. But there was more to their past Music performed b y ........................Slim Dusty Musical director ........................... Peter Best Laboratory................................................... Atlab Prod, accountant........................Maree Mayall than is first e vid e n t.

Sound e d ito rs ............................................ Dean Gawen, Tech, a d v is e rs ....................M ike Browning, Lab. lia is o n ....... .......................... Greg Dohedy Prod, assistant........................... Roger Currie Ken Sallows, Volk Mol Cast: Tom Lewis, Hugo W eaving, Katrina 1st asst director..................................... George Elovaris Rob Scott S tu d io s ................................................... Al et al SILVER CITY Foster, Mark Lee, Ralph Cotterill.

3rd asst d irector.................

Drago Mlenovich Asst film and Laboratory ...............................Victorian Film Synopsis: The story of a strange love affaire 2nd unit d ire c to r.................Malcolm Richards Prod, co m p a n y...................................Limelight Prods sound editor.......................................Virginia Murray Laboratories C ontinuity............................Adrian Duvernet in a world of young outsiders living on the M ix e r........................................................ Gethin Creagh Dist. com pany............................................Hoyts Length ................................................ go mins edge.

Casting c onsultants.............................. Actor’sAgency Producer..................................................... Joan LongStill photography.......................................David Parker Gauge ............................ 35mm Panavision, Lighting cam eram an................................ John Ogden D irector................................Sophia T urkiewicz Titles anim ation........................................... MaxBannah Triangle 3D Clapper/loader........................................ Hands Robins FAST TALKING O pticals................................................ Colorfilm S criptw riters........................................... Sophia Turkiewicz, Shooting s to c k .........................Eastm ancolor Key g rip .......................................... Kerry Boyle Thomas Keneally Title designer.................Optical and Graphics Prod, com pany.......................... Oldata Prods Voices: Jac k i W eaver, John Farnham , Asst g r ip .........................................

Jim Dunne M echanics.................................................Kevin Bryant, Based on the original idea P roducer...................................................... RossMatthews Hayes Gordon, Gary Files, Jim Smilie, G affer.......................................................... Gary Scholes b y ..........................................................Sophia Turkiewicz Merv Ellis D irector........................................Ken Cameron Hamish Hughes.

Art d ire c to r..................................................... IanMcWha R unner......................................................Katina Boweil Photography................................................John Seale Scriptw riter..................................Ken Cameron Synopsis: W ill A bra Cadabra thwart the Costume designer..............Chong and Merkel P u blicity....................................................... PattiMostyn Sound recordist..........................................Mark Lewis Photography............................... David Gobble plans of rotten B. L. Z'B ubb and nasty Klaw, M ake-up....................................................

Pietra Robins E d ito r...................................... Don Saunders Unit publicist................................................ PattiMostyn Sound re co rd ist............................................Tim Lloyd the Rat King, to control all of the known and Hairdresser............................................... Pietra Robins C a te rin g ................................Beeb Fleetwood, C om poser...............................W illiam Motzing E d ito r...........................................David Huggett unknown universe?

W ardrobe................................................ Marion Boyce Catherine Calvert Prod, m anage r.........................................Susan Wild Prod, designer...............................................NeilAngwin Ward, assistan t............................ Kate Seeley Unit nu rs e ....................................................... Liz Kerin Location unit m anage r.............................Chris Jones Composer................................. Sharon Calcraft BULLAMAKANKA Props....................................................... George Elovaris Studios....................... Spotswood, Melbourne Asst unit m anager............................... Matthew Binge Prod, co-o rd in a to r......................................... Liz W right Asst editor..................................................Diane Harper Mixed a t ............................................... Colorfilm Prod, se cretary..................Suzanne Donnelly Prod, com pany.......................... Bullamakanka Prods Prod, m anage r............................................Dixie Betts No. of s h o ts ..................................................

662 Laboratory........................................... Colorfilm Prod, accou ntan ts......................................Alan Marco, Dist. com pany....................................Lone Star Location m anager/unit Musical d ire c to r................... Doug Saunders Lab. lia is o n .................................... Bill Gooley Deborah Eastwood Pictures International manager....................................................Peta Lawson Music performed b y .............................

Expertz (Moneypenny Services) Budget............................................ $2.3 million P rodu cer.....................................David Joseph Prod, accountant......... M oneypenny Services Length............................................................ 105minsN arrator........................................................TirelMora 1st asst d ire cto r.................... Michael Falloon D irector....................................... Simon Heath Prod, assistant........................... Carol Hughes Still photography............

Michael McCubbery 2nd asst d irector........................................Philip RichG a u g e ....................................................... 35mm Scriptw riter................................. Simon Heath 1st asst d ire c to r............................. John Rooke Publicity.................................Sylvia Bradshaw Shooting s to c k ........ Panavision anamorphic, 3rd asst d ire c to r.................................... MichaelFaranda Based on the original 2nd asst d ire c to r...................................Tim othy Higgins S tu d io s....................Doug Saunders, Preston Dolby stereo soundtrack 2nd unit d ire c to r.........................................Judy Reim er idea b y .....................................Simon Heath 3rd asst d ire c to r................................... Anthony Heffernan Laboratory............................................ Cinevex Scheduled release............... August 1984 C o ntinuity.............................................. Therese O 'Leary Photography............................... David Eggby C o n tin u ity........................................................ Liz Badon Budget................................................... $70,000 Cast: Slim Dusty, Joy McKean, Anne Kirk­ Producer’s assistan t...............Andrena Finlay Sound recordist.......................... Ross Linton Casting........................................................ M & L Length.............................................................. 85 minsEditor............................................................John Scott patrick, Stan Coster, Buddy W eston, Gordon Producer’s secretary........................... Georgia Martin Focus p u lle r........................Peter Menzies jun.

G auge....................................................... 16mm Casting.......................................................Alison Barrett Parsons, Buck Taylor, David Kirkpatrick, The Exec, p ro d u c e r..........................David Joseph C lappe r/loa der...................................Geraldine Catchpool Shooting s to c k .............................. Ektachrome Travelling Country Band, John Blake (Slim Extras ca stin g ................................................. Jo Hardie Assoc, producer......................M urray Francis Key g rip ....................................... Lester Bishop Scheduled release......................................April1984Prod, supervisor......................................... Irene Korol Dusty as a young man), Dean Stitworthy Camera o perator..................................... Danny Batterham Asst g rip ..............................................G eoff Full Cast: Mary-Anne Fahey (Sarah Pink), Prod, co-ordinator...................................... Sally Ayre-Smith Focus pu lle r................................................Derry Field(Slim Dusty as boy), Sandy Paul (Joy Special f x .................................................. Reece Robinson Michael Bishop (Bear), Tracey Callander McKean as young woman).

Prod, m anager........................................... Irene Korol C lapper/loader...................... Robyn Peterson G affer.........................................Miles Moulson (Ronnie), Tiriel Mora (Alvin), Simon Thorpe Unit m anager..........................Toby Shepherd Camera attach m en t..................................Chris ColeSynopsis: A country and western road Boom o p e ra to r.........................Jack Friedman (Sammy), Gary Adams (Bob), Deborah Force musical spanning 40 years: the life and times Prod, secretary........................................... Sally Ayre-Smith Key grip ........................................................ FlossErikson Costume designer..................................... Terry Ryan (Trish), Jason Van de Velde (Simon), Tracey of Slim Dusty.

Asst g rip ....................................................Robert Verkerk Prod, a ccou ntan t...................................... Peter Dons Standby w a rd ro b e .......................................Rita Crouch

76 — March-April CINEMA PAPERS

Production Survey

G a u g e ........................................................35mm STRIKEBOUND C om poser.......................................... Iva Davies Cast: Gregory Harrison (Carl W inters), Arkie Assoc, pro d u ce r..........................Tim Sanders Prod, co m p a n y............................... TRM Prods W hiteley (Sarah Cameron), Bill Kerr (Jake Assoc, e d ito r...........................Jeanine Chialvo P rodu cers...................................

M iranda Bain, Cullen), Chris Haywood (Benny Baker), Prod, co-ordina tor............. Fiona McConaghy Tim othy W hite David Argue (Dicko Baker), Judy Morris Transport m a n a g e r.................... Ralph Clarke D irector...............................Richard Lowenstein (Beth Winters), John Ewart (Barman), John Location unit m anager............... Gerard Elder Scriptw riter........................ Richard Lowenstein Howard (Cameraman).

Asst unit m anage r................. Terry Shepherd Based on the original S yn opsis: After the disappearance of an Prod, s e c re ta ry ........................................ Leone Thomas research b y .....................W endy Lowenstein American woman cam paigning against the Bus. affairs m a n a g e r.................... Mike W ilcox Photography.........................Andrew de Groot slaughter of kangaroos, her husband Fin. controller................................................ Rob Fisher Sound re c o rd is t.......................... Dean Gawen attem pts to avenge her death.

Prod, accountant................... Elaine Crowther E d itor..................................................Jill Bilcock 1 st asst d ire c to r..................... Stuart Freeman Prod, d e s ig n e r................................Tracy W att 2nd asst d ire c to r.............................Chris Short Exec, p ro d u c e rs .............................Erik Lipins, STANLEY 3rd asst d ire c to r.........................................Janet M clver Don Fleming, Prod, com p a n y............................. Seven Keys 2nd unit d ire c to r.................... Arch Nicholson M iranda Bain 2nd unit cam eram an................................... Billy Grimond G roup of Companies Prod, consultant.................M ichael Bourchier 2nd unit focus p u lle r .................................. John Brock P ro d u c e r.................................... Andrew Gaty Prod, co-ordina tors.................................... Julie Stone, 2nd unit clapper/loader............................. Mark Sullivan D ire c to r....................................... Esben Storm Chris W arner 2nd unit e le c tric ia n ........................................ IanPlum S crip mertw riter.................................Esben Storm Prod, a cco u n ta n t.................................... Mandy Carter 2 nd unit co-ordinator/ Photography...............................Russell Boyd 1st asst d ire c to r.........................Robert Kewley asst d irector..................................... Ian Page Sound recordist.............................. Mark Lewis 2nd asst d ire c to r.................... Brendan Lavelle 2nd unit continuity......................................Gaye Arnold Editor................................................................ BillAnderson 3rd asst d ire cto r..(..................... Mandy W alker 2nd unit art d ep artm ent.......... Nick McCallum Prod, d e s ig n e r...........................................O wen W illiam s C o n tin u ity ................................................ Andrea Jordan 2 nd unit Exec, p ro d u c e r..............................Brian Rosen Camera ope rator............................ Paul Eliot Assoc, produce r...................................W arwick Ross sound recordist.............. Phillip Hollingdale Focus p u lle r................................................David Knaus 2nd unit runner....................... George Tsoutas Prod, m anager......................Antonia Barnard C lappe r/loa der......................Steve McDonald 2nd unit g r ip ........................... Paul Thompson Location m anager..................... Tony Winley Key g r ip .........................................................Jack Lester C o ntinuity............................................... Daphne Paris Prod, s e cretary.......................... Julie Forster ONE NIGHT STAND G affer.......................................... Colin W illiam s Casting consultant..................................... Faith Martin Prod, accountant....................... Kevin W right PRISONERS Boom o p e ra to r............................ Jacquie Fine Prod, com pany...................... Astra Film Prods Focus p u lle r..............................Steve Dobson 1st asst d ire c to r.........................................Steve Andrews Art d ire c to rs .................................Neil Angwin, Dist. co m pany............................. Hoyts-Edgley Prod, com pany ....................Endeavour Film Clapper/loader............................................Colin Deane 2nd asst d ire c to r...........................Chris W ebb Harry Zettel P roducer................................................. Richard Mason M anagem ent (No. 2) Key g r ip ...............................Merv M cLaughlin 3rd asst d ire c to r........................Richard Hobbs Asst, art d ire c to r.................... M cGregor Knox D irector........................................................ John Duigan — Lem on Crest 2nd unit d ire c to r......................................... Colin Fletcher G rip............................................. Peter M aidens Costume designer..........................

Jenny Tate S crip tw rite r................................................. John Duigan Dist. com pany .................. 20th Century-Fox Asst g rip.........................................................Rick Bartsch C o n tin u ity .............................. Therese O 'Leary M ake-up...................................Deryk de Neise Based on the original idea Film C orporation Special fx unit m anage r............................ Mark Canny Executive producer’s Assistant M ake-up....................................... Nick Seymour b y ...............................................................John Duigan P ro d u c e rs .........................Antony I. Ginnane, G a ffe r...........................................................John Morton assistant......................................... Rosie Lee Hairdresser................................ G eorge Huxley P h otog rap hy................................................ Tom Cowan John Barnett 1st e le c tric ia n ...................... Jonathon Hughes C a s tin g ....................... Michael Lynch, Forcast W ardrobe................................................. Frankie Hogan D ir e c to r ...................................................... Peter W erner Sound recordist..........................................Peter Barker 2nd e le c tric ia n .............................................. NeilGamblin Camera o p e ra to r....................... Nixon Binney Ward, assistan t...............Lynn-Maree M ilburn E ditor................................................John Scott S crip tw riters ...........................M eredith Baer, 3rd electrician........................ Mark Nancarrow Focus p u lle r............................................... G eoff Wharton Props supe rvisor....................Paddy Reardon Prod, designer................................Ross Major Hilary Henkin Generator o pe rator...................................... Tex Foote C lapper/loader.......................Robyn Petersen Props b u y e r............................Harvey Mawson C o m poser............................................... W illiam Motzing Based on a story b y ............. M eredith Baer Key g r ip ............................................ Ray Brown Boom o pe rator............................................ Jack Friedman Standby p ro p s ........................M cGregor Knox Exec, producer......................................... Simon W incer Photography ........................Jam es Glennon Art d ire c to r.................................................... NeilAngwin Asst grips.....................................Stuart Green, Special e ffe c ts ............................................ Clive Jones Sound r e c o rd is t.........................................G ary W ilkins Assoc, pro d u ce r......................................... Julia Overton Supervisor of m ake-up.............Bob McCarron G eordie Dryden Special effects asst....................................David Hardie Editor ............................................. Adrian Carr Prod, supervisor......................................... Julia Overton Make-up a rtis t......................................... W endy Sainsbury 2nd unit ph o to g ra p h y..................Louis Irving Set d e co ra to r........................ Andrew Mitchell Prod, d e s ig n e r.................................... B ernard Hides Prod, co-ordinator.......................................Julie Forster Make-up a s s is ta n t................... Ivonne Pollock G a ffe r..................................... Brian Bansgrove Construction m anager...................................BillC handler Exec, produce rs .............David Hemm ings, Prod, accountants.....................Jill Coverdale, H airdresser................................................ Maria Schiavettl Electrician.......................................Colin Chase Asst editors...............................................

Robert Grant, Keith Barish, Howard W heatley W ardrobe d esigner..................Helen Hooper Boom operator.............................. Steve M iller Jaqui Horvath Craig Baum garten 1st asst d ire c to r....................... Deuel Droogan Art director..............................Owen Paterson Ward, ass is ta n t........................ Brendan Boys Sound e d ito rs .............................

Dean Gawen, Assoc, p roduce r .......................... Brian Cook 2nd asst d ire c to r.................................. Anthony Heffernan Props buyers/set dressers....M arta Statescu, Make-up designer...................................... Lloyd James Frank Lipson Unit m anager ..........................M urray Newey 3rd asst d ire cto r......................................... Tony Mahood David Bowden Make-up a r tis t........................Robin Pickering Stunts co-ordinator/ Prod, secretary ...........................Jenny Barty Standby p ro p s ........................................... Harry Zettel C o n tin u ity.......................................... Linda Ray H airdresser.............................Jan Zeigenbein safety o ffice r.......................

Chris Anderson Prod, accountant ....................Stanley Sopel Lighting cam eram an...................................Tom Cowan Special fx m echanical W ardrobe designer............... Robyn Richards Still ph o to g ra p h y................. Steve McDonald, Asst a c c o u n ta n t.................... Tony W hyman Camera o p e ra to r.........................................Tom Cowan body technician..................... David Yardley Ward, assistan t......................Cheyne Phillips Vladim ir O sherov Prod, a s s is ta n t.................

B arbara W illiam s Lighting..................................Joseph Pickering Special fx m echanical P ro p s ........................................................... Lissa Coote O p tica ls.........................................................VFL Prod, tra in e e ........................Tim C oddington Focus p u lle r........................................... Richard M erryman head te chnician........................................ Tad Pride Props buye r...............................................Martin O ’ Neill Tech, a d vise r.......................................

Bill Hall 1st asst d ire c to r ................

Terry Needham Clapper/loader........................................Felicity Surtees Special fx external Standby p rops.............................................Colin Gibson Best b o y .................................................... Adrian Cherubin 2nd asst directors .................. Kevan O'Dell, Key grip ...................................................Graham Litchfield tech n ic ia n ...................................Nik Doming C h ore ography........................... Robyn Moase Runners..........................................

Serge Zaza, Jonothan Barraud Asst g rip ......................................................... Roy Mico Special fx external Set deco rator..............................Blossom Flint Daniel Scharf, 3rd asst d ir e c t o r ............................. G eoff Hill 2 nd unit technician’s assts............ Alan McGuiness, Scenic a rtis t..............................Len Arm strong Geoff Smith C o n tin u ity .................. Jacqueline Saunders p h o tograph y....... Marie-Pierre Juillem inot, Caroline Jones, C a rpe nte rs................................. Les Seaward, Unit d o c to r.....................Dr C hristopher Brook D irector’s a s s is ta n t.......................Cass Coty Peter Harron, Lewis Morley, Gordon McIntyre, Paul Fawdon, Unit p u b lic is t...................................

Julie Stone P roducer's assistant: Frank Hammond, Jesse Currell, Kieron O ’Connell, Paul McKey C a te rin g .................................... Kristina Frolich Asst to M r G innane __ Sylvia Van Wyk Joseph Pickering, Marilyn Pride Asst editor............................... Cathy Sheehan Post-production.............................Mike Reed Asst to M r Barnett ...........Frances Gusn Richard Merryman, Eye te c h n ic ia n ......................... Bill Perryman S o u n d .................................................. Transfers Film Post Production Casting: Ron Bollman Tracking vehicle d riv e r........ W illiam W ilmont Production Services L ab ora tory.....................................................VFL Australia — M & L Casting Consultants Construction m anager...........Ken Hazelwood Special fx ph o to g ra p h y............Mirage Effects Stunts c o-ordinator................................... Grant Page Lab. lia iso n ...............................

Bill Harrington, New Zealand .......................

Diana Rowan Construction s upe rvisor.........

Bob McCarron G a ffe r..............................................G eoff Maine Still photography......................Carolyn Johns Steve Mitchell Cam era ope rator ........................David Burr Asst e dito r.................................................. Paula Lourie E le ctricia n ................................................. Alleyn Mearns Best b o y ........................................Paul G antner L e n g th ...................................................100 min.

Focus puller ....................

M alcolm Burrows Edge num berer......................Ashley Grenville Boom o pe rator........................................... Chris Goldsmith R u nners.....................................Chris Barnum, G a u g e ........................................................

35mm C la p p e r/lo a d e r...................................... Roland Caratl Dubbing e d ito r....................................... Andrew Stuart Costume d e s ig n e r..................................... Ross Major Catherine Bishop Screen ra tio .............................................. 1:1.83 Cam era dept, tr a in e e ......... W illiam Grieve Stunts c o-ordina tor..................................... Max Aspin M ake-up................................................M argaret Lingham P u b lic ity ....................... Rea Francis Company Shooting stock.............................Eastm ancolor Key g r ip ............................. G raham e Marden S tu n ts ...........................................................Glen Boswell, H a irdre sser..........................................M argaret Lingham C a terin g.......................................Kevin Varnes Cast: Chris Haywood (Wattie Doig), Carol Asst g r ip s .................................G ary Carden, W ardrobe...................................................Jenny Miles Deanna North Studios....................................................... Seven Keys Burns (Agnes Doig), Hugh Keays-Byrne Richard Scott Still photography................................... Carolyn Johns Props b u y e r..................................Peta Lawson Laboratory........................................... Colorfilm (Idris Williams), David Kendall (Edward G a ff e r ......................................................

W arren M earns W rangler....................................................... Dale Aspin Standby p ro p s ............................................. Nick MacCallum Lab. lia is o n ......................................................BillGooley Birch), Nik Forster (Harry Bell), Rob Steele E le c tric ia n s................................ M urray Gray, Special fx m echanic................................. David Thomas Special e ffects.........................................Mirage Effects, Budget............................................................... $4 million ( C h a rlie N e ls o n ), A n th o n y H a w k in s Ian Beale Best b o y .......................................................Craig Bryant Chris Murray, Length...................................................106 mins (Sergeant), Marion Edward (Meg), Reg Lighting dept, t ra in e e ............................. John Kaiser R unner.....................................Henry Osborne David Hardie, Cast: Graham Kennedy (Norm Norris), Nell Evans (Ernie).

Boom o p e ra to r....................... M ark W asiutak P u blicity.............................................. Gary Daly Brian Cox Campbell (Amy Benton), Peter Bensley S yn opsis: In 1936, the miners in the small A rt d irector .................... Virginia Bienem an C a te rin g ....................................................... John Faithful (Stanley), M ichael C raig (Sir Stanley C h oreography........................................Pamela French South G ippsland town of K orum burra C ostum e designer .......

A p hro dite Kondos Sydney liaison..................................................Jo Hardie Set c onstruction........................................Danle Daems, Dunstan), Max Cullen (Berger), David Argue barricaded them selves in the main shaft of M ake-up ......................................... Jose Perez Broken Hill lia iso n .....................................Derek W yness Brian Hocking (M orris N orris), Lorna Lesley (Cheryl the Sunbeam colliery, dem anding better pay Make-up assistant ............ Robin Pickering Laboratory...........................................Colorfilm Asst e dito rs ....................... Frans Vandenburg, Benton), Betty Lucas (Lady Dunstan), Susan and conditions. Their story is that of the H airdresser ................................... Joan Petch Lab. liaison.......................

Richard Piorkowski, Phillippa Harvey W alker (Doris Norris), Jon Ewing (Reg).

Australian Labor Movement of the 1930s.

W ardrobe ................................ Julia M ansford Megan W illiams Musical co-ordinator....................... Phil Punch S yn opsis: The film is about an eccentric W ard, assistant ...................G lenis Hitchens, Cutting ro o m s ..............................................FPS Sound edito r.......................... Marc van Buuren young m illionaire whose one aim in life Is to Elizabeth Jowsey Budget........................................................... $3.5 million become normal.

Editing assistan t.......................................Lynne W illiam s W ardro be dept, tra in e e ......... Jude Crozier M ixer........................................................... Julian Ellingworth Props b u y e r............................................... PaulDulleu Asst m ix e r...............................................MichaelThomas Standby p r o p s .......................Trevor Haysom, Still photography........................................... Jim Sheldon M orris Quinn O pticals........................................................ Atlab Dressing props ......................... M ike Becroft R unner................................................ Bizzi Bodi Art dept, tra in e e s ................ Francey Young, P u blicity............Michael Edgley International Jerem y Chunn Unit p u b licist............................. Ruth E. Wilson Scenic artist .................................. Ray Pedler C a te rin g .......................................................John Faithfull P a in te r ......................................... Paul Radford Mixed a t ....................................................... Atlab S tand-by stage hand ...............Adrian Lane Laboratory................................................... Atlab Set construction .......................Trevor M ajor Lab. lia is o n ...................................Peter W illard Asst e d it o r ............................. Virginia M urray SHARMILL FILMS CATALOGUE Length............................................................... 93 minsEditing dept, trainee . .. Vicky Yiannoutsos G a u g e ........................................................ 35mm Still p h o to g ra p h y ........................................ Rob Tucker Shooting s to ck............................................3247,3293Tech, adviser ..........................Greg Newbold Scheduled release................................... March 1984Unit n u rs e ....................................Toni O kkerse Cast: Tyler C oppin (Sam), Cassandra Best boy ............................................Ian Philp Delaney (Sharon), Jay Hackett (Brendan), Publicity: Saskia Post (Eva).

W o rld w id e ...................... Dennis Davidson S yn opsis: Four young people are trapped in Associates the Sydney O pera House on the night W orld A u s tra lia ............................................... Carlie Deans W ar 3 breaks out. A com edy with a sting in New Zealand ...C o n s u ltu s New Zealand the tail!

Unit p u b lic is t..............................................Tony Noble C a te rin g ............................... David W illiams, The com plete 16mm &35/17-5m m Location Caterers PLATYPUS COVE S tu d io s ..........................N orthern Television, CODE NUMBERING SERVICE Prod, co m p a n y ..............................Independent Prods Auckland, New Zealand P ro d u c e r...................................................... Geof Gardiner L a b o ra to r y ..........................................Colorfilm E stablished re lia b ility through many D irector.........................................................Peter Maxwell Lab. liaison .................................Dick Bagnall S crip tw rite r............................................. Charles Stamp Length ............................................... 95 mins feature film s , te le v is io n series P hotography.............................Phil Pike A.C.S. G a u g e ........................................................35m m PLEASE PHONE OR WRITE TO: Sound recordist.............................................Don Connolly and docum entary film s.

Shooting s to c k ..........................Eastm ancolor E d itor............................................................... Bob Cogger Cast: Tatum O'Neal (C hristie W ilkens), D o r o th y O ’N e il Exec, pro d u ce r..................................... Brendon Lunney Colin Friels (Nick Skinner), Shirley Knight In te rsta te return w ith in 24 hours Prod, c o -o rd in a to r.......................... Dixie Betts ( V ir g in ia W ilk e n s ), D a v id H e m m in g s Prod, secretary................................ Fiona King (S u p e rin te n d e n t W ilkens), B ru n o Law ­ at a c o m p e titiv e o v e ra ll c o s t.

Prod, accountant........................................ Peter Layard rence (Peeky), Ralph C otterill (Holmby), 1st asst d irector........................................... Tony W ellington John Bach (Bodell).

27 STONNINGTON PLACE 2nd asst d ire cto r.......................................... PaulCallaghan Synopsis: Romeo and Juliet: R -rated and Also providing a specialised TOORAK 3142 3rd asst d ire c to r..................................... MichaelFaranda updated to a New Zealand prison.

C o n tin u ity................................................... Jenny Q uigley PHONE: (03) 20 5329, (03) 20 1389 RUSHES SYNCHRONIZING SERVICE C a s tin g ................................Mitch Consultancy RAZORBACK C lappe r/loa der............................................Sean M cClory TELEX: 39089 Cam era a ssista n t..........................Keith Bryant Prod, c o m pany............ M cElroy and M cElroy Key g rip ................................................... Graham Litchfield Producer.......................................................... HalM cElroy New Theatrical releases: 2nd unit ph o to g ra p h y................................ Greg Hunter, D irector.................................................... RussellM ulcahy Garry M aunder Scriptw riter.............................Everett de Roche G a ffe r..........................................................Derek Jones Based on the novel b y ...............................Peter Brennan Boom o pe rator............................................Steve M iller P hotography.................................Dean Semler Art d ire c to r..................................................... Ken James Sound supervisor.............................. Tim Lloyd M ake-up.......................................................Fiona Spence Editor................................................................ BillAnderson W a rd ro b e .................................................... Fiona Spence Prod, d e s ig n e r...........................................Bryce W alm sley M ake-up/hairdresser..................................... Viv Mepham W ard, a s s is ta n t.....................Kerry Thompson Props buyer/set d re s s e r..........David Bowden Props b u y e r............................. Brian Edmonds Standby p ro p s ..........................Nick M cCallum Standby p ro p s .............................. Igor Lazareff C onstruction m an....................................... Brian Hocking Asst e d ito r .................................M ichelle Cattle Editing assistants................Danielle W iesner, Stunts c o -o rd in a to r........................Peter W est Glen Auchinachie Still photography.......................Bruce Haswell Safety and stunts Best b o y......................................... M att Slattery co-ordinator..................................Peter W est P u b lic ity ....................... Rea Francis Company Best b o y ..................................... Richard Curtis Unit p u b lic is t................................... Annie Page Asst best b o y ................................Hugh W orrell C a te rin g ..................................... Jem s Catering R u n n e r........................................................Claire O ’ Brien L ab ora tory.................................................... CFL C a tering......................................................Fillum Lab. lia is o n ................................... Cal Gardiner T u to r......................................G rant McDonald Length................................................... 100 mins B u dget................................................. $900,000 G a u g e .................. !.................................... 16mm Length......................................................95 mins Shooting s to c k ....... Eastm ancolor 7247/7293 G a u g e .................................................. Super 16 Cast: Tony Barry (Frank Wilson), Allen Bick­ Cast: Rod Zuanic (Steve Carson), Toni ford (Ted Finch), Aileen Britton (Gran Allaylis (Vicki), Chris Truswell (The Moose), Mason), Simone Buchanan (Jenny Nelson), G ail S w eeny (N arelle), Dave G odden Carmen Duncan (Margaret Davis), Bill Kerr (Warren), Peter Hehir (Ralph Carson), Steve (Mr Anderson), Martin Lewis (Peter Nelson), Bisley (Redback), Tracy Mann (Sharon), John Ley (Leo Baldwin), Paul Smith (Jim Denis Moore (Yates), G ary Cook (Al Carson).

Mason), Henri Szeps (Winston Bell).

S yn opsis: A contem porary com edy. The S yn opsis: Saboteurs, attem pting to cripple story of a young urban “ bushranger” the tug-boat, Platypus, and put her owner fighting for survival in Sydney’s oppressed out of business, are thwarted by young deck­ western suburbs. hand, Jim Mason, who is anxious to clear himself of suspicion of the sabotage.

\

/

I NOTHING I »BUT THE BEST

ATOMIC CAFE WASN’T THAT A TIME NOT A LOVE STORY THE ANIMALS FILM GAL YOUNG UN MIDDLE AGE SPREAD THE TREE OF WOODEN CLOGS A nd m a n y m ore titles

Sharmill Films

FILMSYNC 388 Clarendon Street South Melbourne Victoria 3205

\

(03) 6 9 9 907 9

/

ASCENDANCY CAM M INA CAM M INA

CINEMA PAPERS March-April — 77

Michael [d

a

ta

international

ANNOUNCE THE RELEASE O F

JUST O N E NIGHT TO LIV E THE REST O F YOUR LIFE

MICHAEL EDGLEY INTERNATIONAL HOYTS THEATRES Presents an Astra Film Production ONE NIGHT STAND with TYLER COPPIN CASSANDRA DELANEY JAY HACKETT SASKIA POST and featuring MIDNIGHT OIL in concert production designer ROSS MAJOR director of photography TOM COWAN editor JOHN SCOTT music WILLIAM MOTZING associate producer JULIA OVERTON executive producer SIMON WINCER producer RICHARD MASON written and directed by JOHN DUIGAN

SEASON COMMENCES APRIL 5 SYDNEY & MELBOURNE

Production Survey

on location in Dallas, Texas and Sydney, THE WILD DUCK .

C larrissa Patterson, Edge num b e re r..........................................Kathy Cook G affer.......................................................... Roger Wood Jock M cLachlan Australia.

Musical d ire c to r...................... Bruce Smeaton Boom o p e ra to r..............................................Keir Welch Prod, com pany...........................................Tinzu Standby p ro p s..............................

Igor Lazareff Sound edito r................................

Paul Maxwell Art director...................................

Ron Highfield Dist. c o m p a n y ..................................Roadshow Asst art d ire c to r........................................ Phillip Chambers Special e ffe c ts ................................... Brian Cox Dubbing e d ito r...............................Peter Foster MAN OF FLOWERS P ro d u c e r.................................................... Phillip Emanuel Scenic a rtis ts ............................ Brian Nickless, Costume d e s ig n e r..................................... Jane Hyland Editing assistan ts.......................................Anne Breslin, D irector...........................................Henri Safran Prod, c o m p a n y............. Flowers International G illian Nicholas M ake-up....................................................... Sally Gordon Em m a Hay Based on the play Dist. c o m p a n y ..................................Roadshow H a ird re s s e r...................................................W illiKenrick C arpenters.....................M ichael Fearnhead, Stunts c o -o rd in a to r................................... Peter W est b y .................................................Henrik Ibsen P roducers.............................. Jane Ballantyne, Grant Ford, Still photography......................... Chic Stringer Stand-by w a rdrobe................................. M argot Lindsay Photography.................................. Peter Jam es Paul Cox Steven Volich, Animal w ra n g le r........................................ Steve Phillips Props b u y e r............................................Alethea Dean Sound recordist......................Syd Butterworth D ire cto r.................................................Paul Cox Ian Day Standby pro p s.......................................... Shane Rushbrook Best b o y ......................................................... Ken M offatt E d ito r...............................................................Don Saunders S crip tw rite rs.....................................P a ulC ox, Construction m a n a g e r.................

Ray Elphick Set c o n s tru c tio n ........................................

Peter Tem pleton R u n n e rs .......................................................Peter Brown, Prod, designer.............................. Darrell Lass Bob Ellis Unit runner.................................................. Fiona Sullivan Asst e d ito r...................................Marcus Darcy Shane W alker C o m p o se r...................................Simon W alker Photography.................................................

YuriSokol Neg. m a tc h in g ............................................Atlab Standby unit ru n n e r.................................

Jam ie Egan C a te rin g .....................Take One Film Catering Exec, p ro d u c e r......................................... Phillip Emanuel Sound re cordist...........................Lloyd Carrick Sound e d ito r............................Andrew Steuart C arpenter................................................. W ayne Allen Mixed a t ................................................ Colorfilm C o -p ro d u ce r.............................. Basil Appleby E d itor...............................................................Tim Lewis Editing assistan ts....................... Robin Judge, Stunts co-ordinator.......................................Bob Hicks Laboratory............................................ C olorfilm Prod, m a n a g e r................................ Susan Wild M usic...................... Excerpts from D onizetti’s Lab. lia is o n ......................................................BillGooley Editing asst............................. Leslie Mannison Louise Innes Unit m anager.........Rosanne Andrews-Baxter Lucia di Lam m erm oor Supervising sound Length..............................................................100 mins.

Still pho tograph y......................................... Bliss Swift Prod, s e c re ta ry ............... Suzanne Donnolley Assoc, producer...........Tony Llewellyn-Jones mbick ixer....................................................... Roger Savage G a u g e .................................35mm anam orphic Elecs best boy.............................................Philip G olom Prod, a ccou ntan ts.....M oneypenny Services, Prod, accountant.................... Santhana Naidu Shooting s to c k .......................................... Kodak Sound m ix e r........................Julian Ellingworth Publicity.......................................................... Ken Newton Valerie W illiam s Prod, assistan ts......................Maria Stratford, M edia Consultants Still pho to g ra p h y............................. Tony Potts Cast: Terence Donovan, Susan Lyons, 1st asst d ire cto r..........................................David Munro Virginia Baillieu C atering........................................Ken Sharpies Title d e s ig n e r............................. John Stoddart Harold H opkins, Steve Bisley, M artin 2nd asst d ire c to r ...........................................Kim Anning C o ntinuity.............................................. Jennifer Tosi R unners................................Elizabeth Symes, Unit n u rs e ............................................... Rhonda Arthur V a ughan, Is abelle A n derson, D orothy 3rd asst d ire c to r.......................................Steven Otton A ssista nts.................................................... Luba Bilu, Length............................................................... 97 mins.

Richard Hobbs Alison, Steven Grives, Emil Minty, Nikki C o n tin u ity ......................................Sian Hughes Juliet Bacskai-Cox Gemmell, Mark Kounnas.

Cast: Colin Friels (Mike), Harold Hopkins Unit p ublicist...................................... Chris Day Producer s assista n t...................... Debra Cole Director’s a ssista n t.................................. Patric Juillet S yn opsis: A young Englishwom an finds C a te rin g ....................................................... John Faithful (Johnny), Kris M cQuade (Stella), Simon Casting co n s u lta n ts .................................. M itch M athews Camera o p e ra to r.....Nino Gaetano M artinetti herself in Australia at the end of W orld W ar Studios.................................................. Supreme Chilvers (Alfred), Norman Kaye (George), Lighting cam eram a n................................. Peter James Focus p u lle r..........................Christopher Cain 2. A romantic dram a unfolds as she takes Post-production fa c ilitie s ..................Spectrum Dennis M iller (Andy), Lisa Peers (Jennifer), Cam era ope rator................. Danny Batterham Ciapper/loader.....................

Leigh M ackenzie Andrew Sharp (Peter), Bruce Spence (Ted), work as a governess to the children of a Mixed a t ....................................................... Atlab Focus p u lle r............................Andrew McLean Laboratory................................................... Atlab G rip .............................................. David Cassar Dinah Shearing (Merl). tim ber baron in NSW. C lappe r/loa der........................................Conrad Slack Art director................................................. Asher Bilu S y n opsis: An action dram a based on two Lab. lia is o n .................................................. Greg Doherty Key g r ip ...................................Graeme Mardell W ardrobe........................................................Lirit Bilu miners digging for sapphires. Filmed on Length.................................................110 mins Asst g r ip ....................................................... Gary Cardin Props............................................................... Lirit Bilu location in Emerald, Queensland.

G a u g e ........................................................ 35mm G a ffe r............................................................. M ick Morris Asst e d ito r...................................................Peter McBain Screen ra tio ....................................A nam orphic E lectrician..................................... M att Slattery Music performed b y ........ M ontserrat Caballe Shooting s to c k ................... Kodak 5247, 5293 Boom o p e ra to r................................Noel Q uinn and Jose Carreras with the BUSH CHRISTMAS Cast: W endy Hughes (Vanessa), Robyn Art d ire c to r............................................ Igor Nay New Philharm onic O rchestra Nevin (Lila), Nicholas G ledhill (PS), John Prod, com pany....................... Bush Christm as Costum e d e s ig n e r.................................... David Rowe conducted by Jesus Lopez Cobos H argreaves (Logan), G eraldine T urner M ake-up.......................................................Helen Evans Prods Ltd/Barron Film s Ltd BMX BANDITS Sound e d ito r.............................. Terry Rodman (Vere), Isabelle Anderson (Agnes), Peter Liv U llm ann’s Dist. com pany............................................ Hoyts M ix e r............................................Jam es Currie W hitford (George), Colleen Clifford (Ettie).

Prod, c o m p a n y ............................BMX Bandits haird resse r...............................................Mara Schiavetti P ro d u c e rs .....................................................PaulBarron, Sound tran sfer........................ Eugene W ilson S yn opsis: Set in Sydney in the 1930s, this is Dist. c o m p a n y........................ Nilsen Premiere Gilda Baracchi H a ird re sse r................................................ Suzie Clem ents Still photography.....................Maria Stratford, the poignant story of a small boy caught up P rodu cers...........................Tom Broadbridge, W ardrobe s u p e rvise r................................ Terry Thorley Director........................................................ HenriSafran Virginia Baillieu in a bitter custody battle between two sisters.

Paul Davies W a rd ro b e .................................................... Fiona Nicolls S crip tw riter.................................................... Ted Roberts C a tering............................... M andalis T averna Director........................ Brian Trenchard Smith Props b u y e r.................................................Brian Edmonds Based on the novel b y ..............................Ralph Smart Studios............................................................The Joinery INNOCENT PREY S crip tw riter........................ Patrick Edgeworth Property m aste r........................................... Mike Fowlie P h otog rap hy........................M alcolm Richards Mixed a t...................................................Hendon Studios Based on a screenplay Prod, com pany.....................Crystal Film Corp.

Asst standby p ro p s ................................Carolyn Polin Sound recordist.............................................DonConnolly Laboratory.............................................

Cinevex b y ................................................ Russell Hagg Producer...................................................... Colin Eggleston E d ito r..............................................................RonW illiams Set d eco rator......................... Ken M uggleston Length................................................................ 91mins Photography..................................... John Seale D irector......................................................... Colin Eggleston Prod, designer..........................................DarrellLass Set dresser....... j .................... O livia Isherwood G a u g e ........................................................ 35mm Sound re c o rd is t..................... Ken Hamm ond S criptw riter...................................................Colin Eggleston Exec, p roduce r............................................ PaulBarron Scenic a rtis ts ................................................. Ray Pedlar, Shooting sto ck............................................... Fujicolor E d ito r..................................................

Alan Lake Based on the screenplay Prod, m anage r...........................................Kevin Powell Billy Malcolm First re lea sed...................................Septem ber 1983 Prod, designer..................................Ross Major Construction Location m a n a g e r.................................... David Adermbann y ................................................................. RonMcLean Cast: Norman Kaye (Charles Bremer), C om poser.................................................... Colin Stead Prod, secretary......................................... Penny W allPhotography............................................Vincent Monton c o -o rd in a to r..............................................Stan W oolveridge Alyson Best (Lisa), Chris Haywood (David), Assoc, producer................... Brian D. Burgess Prod, accountant.......................................Marie Brown Sound recordist............................................. Bob Clayton Construction fo re m a n ............. Dennis Donelly Sarah W alker (Jane), Julia Blake (Art Unit m a n a g e r...........Carolynne C unningham Editor........................................................... Pippa Anderson 1st asst director......................................... David Munro C arpenters....................................................ErrolG lassenbury, Teacher), Bob Ellis (Psychiatrist), Barry Prod, s e c re ta ry .................Rosslyn Abernethy 2nd asst director................................Ian Kenny Prod, d e s ig n e r............................................ Larry Eastwood W ayne Allan Dickens (Postman), Patrick Cook (Copper­ Prod, acco u n ta n t................... Candice Dubois 3rd asst d ire c to r................ M urray Robertson C om poser........................................... Brian May Construction assistant............G eorge Zam m it shop Man), Victoria Eagger (Angela), W erner Prod, assistant........................Joanne Rooney C o ntinuity................................... Jenny Q uigley Exec, pro d u ce r................David G. B. W illiams Art departm ent r u n n e r.................. Fiona Mohr Herzog (Father), Hilary Kelly (Mother).

1st asst d ire c to r............................................Bob Howard C a sting...........................................................Dee Neville Prod, co-ordinator................Terri Martin (U.S.) Asst edito r.............................................Marianne Rodwell S yn opsis: Charles Brem er is a rich recluse asst d ire c to r............................................. Ian Kenny Clapper/loader........................................... Gene Moller Prod, m anager..................C harles Rotherham Edge n u m b e re r........................................ Simon Sm 2nd ithers who collects works of art and indulges in 3rd asst d ire c to r............... M urray Robertson Camera assistan t..........................John Ogden Location m a n a g e r......Dee Molineaux (Aust.), Transport m anager..........C lark Film Services obsessive rituals. During the course of the C o n tin u ity .......................................... Linda Ray Key g rip ........................................... Paul Holford Susan Oswalt (U.S.) T utor/cha perone.............Johanna Kauffmann film we learn the source of these rituals and Producer’s assistant............. Libby Thomson Asst g r ip ........................................................Tom Hoffie Prod, secretary........................... Michael Davis D ubbing e d ito r....................................Tim Chau its effect on Charles and the people around C a s tin g ........................................................Susie Maizels G a ffe r......................................................... Derek Jones Still photography............................................ Jim Townley Prod, liaison........................................Ned Dowd him.

Casting cons u lta n ts.........Mitch Consultancy Sound assistant.................................... Graham Aderm ann controller...................... David Hando Dialogue c o a ch ...........................................Mitch M athews Financial Camera o p e ra to r........................................

John Seale M ake-up................................................

Vivienne Rushbrook Prod, accountant.........................

Sherryn Mak Anim al han dler............................... Dale Aspen MOLLY Focus pulle r................................................Steve Mason W a rd ro b e ................................................... Fiona Nicholas Best b o y ..........................................................Reg Garside Prod, assis ta n ts......................... J. Grey Smith, Clapper/loader........................................... Derry FieldProperty m aste r.......................................... Mike Fowley Generator o p e ra to r.............Jonathon Hughes C liff Breedlove, Prod, com pany...................................... Troplisa Key g r ip ....................................................... Peter Mardell Set dresser................................................ Martin O ’Neil R u n n e r..................................................... Roxane Delbarre Annette Hoffman, Dist. c o m p a n y .................. Greater Union Org. Asst g rip s ......................................................G ary Carden, Asst edito r............................... Pippa A nderson Lenore Locascio (U.S.) D riv e rs ........................................ Jam ie Barnes, P ro d u ce r................................... Hilary Linstead Music performed b y ..........The Bushwackers Phillip Shapiera, 1st asst d ire c to r...................Margot Snellgrove Tracy Lock D ire cto r...........................................................Ned Lander W rangler...................................... Graham Ware Boris Janjic P u blicity........................................... W endy Day 2nd asst directors............. Steve O tton (Aust.), S criptw riters...............................................Phillip Roope, G a ffe r............................................................. Reg Garside Asst w ra n g le rs ..............................Andy Clarke, Receptionist/ Dawn Easterling (U.S.) M ark Thomas, E le c tric ia n .................................Sam Bienstock Robert Frewin te le p h o n ist.................................. Vicki Traino 3rd asst Ned Lander Boom operator................................ Steve M iller Best b o y .........................................................Ted W illiam s C a te rin g ......................................Kaos Catering directors...........

Catherine Richards (Aust.), Based on a story Art d ire c to r................................................... Ross Major R unner...... .......................................Steve Often Cast: Liv Ullm ann (Gina), Jerem y Irons Susan Oswalt (U.S.) b y ............................................................. Phillip Roope, Publicity........................................... Rae Francis W ardrobe m is tre s s ................................... Leslie Turnball (Harold), Lucinda Jones (Henrietta), John C ontinuity...................... Briony Behets (Aust.), Mark Thomas, C a te rin g ........................................................JEM Catering W ard, assistant......................................... Jenny Miles M eillon (Old Ackland), A rthur D ignam Anne Rapp (U.S.) Hilary Linstead Laboratory................................................... Atlab Props buyer..............................................Derrick Chetwyn Casting director...................... Rody Kent (U.S.) (Gregory), M ichael Pate (Wardle), Colin Croft P hotography.............................Vincent Monton B u dget..................................................$950,000 Standby p ro p s ............................................... Igor Lazareff Extras' co-ordinator ....Sheila Anderson (U.S.) (Mollison), Rhys M cConnochie (Dr Roland), Sound re co rd ist..........................................Lloyd Carrick Length............................................................... 96 mins Special e ffe c ts ........................................... Chris Murray, Focus p u lle r...............................Kim Batterham Marion Edward (Mrs Summ ers), Peter de Editor........................................................ Stewart Young G a u g e ........................................................ Super 16mm David Hardie C lapper/loader.......................................... Robyn Peterson Salis (Peters).

Com poser/m usical d ire c to r.....Graeme Issac Shooting S to c k ........................................... 7247 Kodak Asst e d ito rs ...... .'............................................Jim W alker, S yn opsis: Based on Henrik Ibsen’s play of Camera assistants..........................Henri Tirl, Exec, p ro d u ce r...................................... Richard Brennan Cast: Nicole Kidman (Helen), Mark Spain Sue Blaney the same name. The tragic story of a young, Robert Guerrero (U.S.) Assoc, producers......................................Phillip Roope, Stunts c o-ordinator.......................................Bob Hicks (John), James Wingrove (Michael), Manalpuy Key g rip s ................................ Brendan Shanley (Aust.), blind girl and her love for a wild duck.

M ark Thomas (Manalpuy), John Ewart (Bill), John Howard Stunts/riding d o u b le s ............................... Craig White, Prod, supe rviso r....................................Barbara Gibbs Michael Dunson (U.S.) (Sly), Venetta O 'M alley (Kate Thompson), Jim O ’ Neill, Dolly g rip .................................... Key Kolb (U.S.) Location m anager..................................... Phillip Roope THE WINDS OF JARRAH Peter Sumner (Ben Thompson), Maurice Robbie Moreton G affer............................................................ Miles Moulson Prod, se cre ta ry ........................A drienne Read Still pho tograph y......................................... Bliss SwiftHughs (Carroll), The Bushwackers (Band).

Prod, com pany......................Film Corporation Asst ele c tric s ................................................Mark Friedman Prod, a cco u n ta n t................................... Howard W heatley BMX tech, a d v is e r........................................ Des W hite S yn opsis: A com edy-adventure re-make in­ of W estern A ustralia Location a u d ito r........... Kathye Tarpley (U.S.) 1st asst d irector........................................... Tony W ellington volving the m anager and lead singer of a R u nner..................................Kim ball Anderson P rodu cers.................................... M ark Egerton, Boom operator................................. W ayne Bell 2nd asst d ire c to r.................................Ian Page band that goes bust.

Marj Pearson P u blicity...........................................................Jan Crocker, Art director....................................................Larry Eastwood C o n tin u ity.........................................Ann W alton D ire c to r........................................ M ark Egerton International Public Relations Costum er............. Rondi Hilstrom-Davis (U.S.) Producer’s assistant...................................Jean Bevins C a te rin g ....................................................... Kaos Catering S crip tw riters......................................... Bob Ellis, C a sting........................................................ M & L Asst c ostum er............Mary G olzgraeffe (U.S.) CAREFUL, HE MIGHT HEAR YOU S tudios................................... Mort Bay Studios Anne Brooksbank M ake-up.................................. Derryck de Neise Focus p u lle r................................................... Kim Batterham Prod, com p a n y ...............Syme Entertainm ent Laboratory............................................Colorfilm Director of p ho to g ra p h y............G eoff Burton H a irdre sser............................ Derryck de Neise C lapper/loader...........................................Steve Arnold P roducer...........................................................Jill Robb Lab. lia is o n .......................................Bill Gooley Sound re co rd ist.......................... G ary W ilkins W ardrobe.......................................................Ruth Manning Key g r ip .......................................................Bruce Barber D ire c to r.......................................... Carl Schultz G auge..........35mm, Panavision, Anam orphic E d ito r............................................ Sara Bennett Ward, a s s is ta n t...........................Kerri Barnett Asst g rip .................................................. Graham Young S crip tw rite r.............................M ichael Jenkins Shooting s to c k ..........................................Kodak Prod, de sig n e r........................ G raham W alker Props.....................................Anita Dallas (U.S.) G affer............................................................ Miles Moulson Based on the original idea C o m poser................................ Bruce Smeaton Cast: David Argue (Whitey), John Ley Props b u y e r.................................................. Sally Campbell E le c tric ia n ............................... Richard O ldfield b y................................. Sum ner Locke Elliott Assoc, producer.......................... Cara Fames (Moustache), Brian Marshall (Boss), Angelo Standby props..................... Karen Monkhouse Boom o p e ra to r........................Andrew Duncan Photography................................................ John Seale d’Angelo (PJ), Jam es Lugton (Goose), Prod, su p e rv is o r........................Su Arm strong Set decorator............Michael O 'Sullivan (U.S.) Art d ire c to r......................................Robert Dein Sound recordist......................Syd Butterworth Nicole Kidman (Judy), Brian Sloman (Creep), Loc. m anager........................................ Phil Rich Asst e d ito rs ..............................Shirley Kennard (Aust.), Costume d e s ig n e r....................................LaurelFrank E d ito r......................... Richard Frances Bruce Peter Browne (Fearsome Police Constable), Unit m anage r...............................Peter G ailey Mark Manos (U.S.) Make-up/ Prod, d e s ig n e r............................................ John Stoddart Bill Brady (Police Sergeant).

Prod, s e cre ta ry.......................... Carol Hughes Sound assistant............................................ PaulGleeson hairdresser....................................... Elizabeth Fardon C om poser....................................................... RayCook S yn opsis: The adventures of two 15-yearM ix e r..........................................Gethin Creagh Prod, a ccou ntan t....................... Peter Sjoquist W ard, assistant....................Lesley M cLennan Prod, m anager........................ Greg Ricketson olds living in Manly.

1st asst d ire c to r...................... M ichael Falloon Dubbing e d ito r.............................. Gina Lennox Props b u y e r..................................................... R 0 Bruen Unit m anager/location 2nd asst d ire c to r..................................Phil Rich Asst dubbing e d ito r....................... Diana Priest Standby p ro p s ............................................Clark M unro m anage r................Carolynne C unningham 3rd asst d ire c to r.........................Mark Lam prell Stunts co-ordinator..................... Randy “ Fife” Special e ffe cts .......................................... Reece Robinson BUDDIES Prod, secretary............................Lynda House C o n tin u ity ....................................Daphne Paris Safety consu ltant................... Peter Arm strong Circus c o n s u lta n ts ....................................... Tim Coldwell, Prod, acco u n ta n t.......................................Craig Scott Prod, c o m p a n y ...................................J D Prods Extras c a s tin g .............................Klay Lam prell S tu n ts ................................ Andy Clarke (Aust.), Bom ber Perrier Producer.......................................................John Dingwall (M oneypenny) Casting consu ltants...................Alison Barrett Anne Rapp, Asst e d ito r ................................................. Lesley Mannison D irector......................................................... Arch Nicholson 1st asst d ire c to r.......................................... Colin Fletcher Camera o p e ra to r................. David W illiam son Ben E. Loggins, M usic perform ed b y ....................................M ick Conway, 2nd asst d ire c to r........................................... Sue Parker S c rip tw rite r.................................................. John Dingwall Focus p u lle r..............................David Foreman Jacki Resch, Jim Conway, 3rd asst director........................... Tom Blacket Based on the original idea C lapper/loader.............................G illian Leahy Greg Brazzel (U.S.) Dave Clayton, b y............................................................... John Dingwall C ontinuity...................................................... Pam W illis Film school attachm ent/ Still photography................... Jeff Nield (Aust.), Jim Niven, P h otog rap hy.............................................. David Eggby Producer’s ass is ta n t..................Judy Hughes cam era a ssista n t.............. Nick M cPherson Peter Calvin (U.S.) G eoffrey Hales C a s tin g .................................................... Forcast Sound recordist.......................................... Peter Barker Key g r ip ...........................................................Rob Morgan Best b oys...................... Richard Curtis (Aust.), Sound e d ito rs ....................................Greg Bell, E d itor.......................................................... M artin Down Lighting c am eram an..................................John Seale Asst g rip .................................................. G raham Shelton Bill Schwarz (U.S.) Helen Brown, Prod, d e s ig n e r........................... Phillip W arner Camera o p e ra to r........................................ John Seale Underwater p h o to g ra p h y..........David Burr & Runner......................................... Jam ie Mirams Ashley G renville Assoc, pro d u ce r......................................... Brian Burgess Focus pu lle r................................. Steve Mason Production Divers Unit publicist.............................. Sherry Stumm M ix e r.................................................. Phil Judd C lapper/loader........................................... Derry Field Prod, c o o rd in a to r.............Rosslyn A bernethy G a ffe r.................................Graham Rutherford C atering...................................... Kaos Katering, Still p h o tograph y.............................. Carol Ruff Key g rip .........................................................Ross Erickson Loc. m anager...........................................Narelle Barsby Boom o p e ra to r......................... M ark W asiutak Kathy Moss, Additional ph o to g ra p h y.............................M ark Manion Prod, s e c re ta ry ......................................Rosslyn Abernethy Asst g rip s ....................................................... Roy Mico, Art d ire c to r.............................Steve Am ezdroz Helen Rixon W ra n g le r......................................... Don Tregear Prod, a c c o u n ta n t.......................................... Lea C ollins Robert ver Kerk Costum e d e s ig n e r.........................David Rowe Laboratory............................................ Colorfilm Best b o y ...................................................Richard Curtis G a ffe r.............................................Reg Garside Asst, a c c o u n ta n t......................................Candy Dubois M ake-up.........................Lesley Lam ont-Fisher Lab. liaison........................................Bill Gooley, R u n n e r.....................................Duncan Stem ler Best b o y ..................................... Sam Bienstock Loc. asst...........................................Jane Cook Standby w a rd ro b e ........................ Jenny Miles Richard Piorkowski C a te rin g ..........................................Plum Crazy, 1st asst director......................................... Phillip Hearnshaw E le c tric ia n ............................ Jonathon Hughes W ard, assistant.........................Penny Gordon Len gth................................................... 103 mins C hristina Norm an 2nd asst director..........................................Keith Heygate Boom o p e ra to r.............................................NoelQ uinn Props buyer............................... Anni Brow ning G a u g e ..................-..................................... 35mm Mixed a t .....................................................United Sound 3rd asst d ire c to r......................................M arcus Skipper Art d irector.................................... John Carroll Standby p ro p s .................................. Tony H unt Scheduled release...............March 1984 (U.S.) Lab ora tory.............................................Colorfilm Asst art d ire c to r......................John W ingrove C o n tin u ity ...........................................Linda Ray Special e ffe c ts ............................................C hris Murray, Cast: P. J. Soles (Cathy), Kit Taylor (Joe), Lab. lia is o n .................................... Bill Gooley C a sting........................................................A lison Barrett Costume d e signer.................................... Bruce Finlayson David Hardie Grigor Taylor (Rick), Martin Balsam (Sheriff Len gth...................................................... 8 8 mins M ake-up/hair............................................... Anne Pospischil Camera o p e ra to r........................

C live Duncan P a inter....................................... Len A rm strong Baker), John W arnock (Phillip), Susan G a u g e .........................................................35mm Focus puller............................................Algenon Sucharov H airdresser/m ake-up..........................Rochelle Ford Carpenters....................................... John Rann, Stenmark (Gwen), Richard Morgan (Ted), Shooting s to c k ............. Kodak 5247 and 5293 C lappe r/loa der........................................... Leigh McKenzie Stand-by w a rd ro b e ................ Julie C onstable Keron Stevens, Debi Sue Voorhees (Hooker), Karen Radcliffe First re le a se d .................................... December 1983 Key g r ip ....................................................... Peter Mardell W ard, assistants............................................. Liz Keogh, Bob M cLeod, (Casey), Bill Thurm an (Jim Gardner), Joe C a st: C la u d ia K arvan (M axie), G arry G rip’s best b o y ....................................... M ichaelNelson Linda M apiedoram, Berryman (Billy Joe), Harlan Jordan (Riley), Brian Childs McDonald (Jones), M olly as herself, Ruth Asst, g r ip ................C olin Livingstone-Pulloch C hris Klingenberg, Tyress Allen (Fletcher).

Set co n s tru c tio n ........................ Dennis Smith, C racknell (Mrs Reach), Reg Lye (Old Dan), Standby ca rp e n te r........................ Jam ie Egan M iranda Skinner Synopsis: W hat is it about Cathy that makes Bill Howe M ellissa Jaffer (Jenny), Slim de G rey Special fx su p e rv is o r.................................C hris M urray ProjJS b u y e rs .............................................Sandy W ingrove, Asst e d ito r.................................Lynne W illiam s men want to kill her? A suspense thriller shot (Tommy), Leslie Dayman (Bill Ireland), Robin

IN RELEASE

CINEMA PAPERS March-April — 79

Production Survey

Laurie (Stella), and members of the Flying Fruit Fly Circus.

S yn opsis: A fairy tale adventure about an 11 -year-old girl who inherits a dog that sings.

Set dressers/props buye rs..... Jenny Green, between a mysterious, would-be killer and a Photography......................... Therese O ’ Leary Larry Meltzer, nervous employer. Who poses the bigger C om poser..................................... Colin Timms Prod, m anage r................... Kimbel J. A. Hann David McKay threat?

Laboratory................................................ Atlab Standby p ro p s .......................................... Karan Monkhouse Length.................................................... 25 mins Choreography...................... Leigh Chambers BUSHFIRE PHAR LAP G a u g e .......................................................16mm Construction a s s is ta n t............Derek Wyness Prod, com pany...........W hite Vaughton Prods Shooting s to ck.........................Eastman 7293 Scenic artist.......................... Michael Chorny Prod, c o m p a n y ................John Sexton Prods/ Dist. com pany.......................South Australian Synopsis: A young man discovers the secret Carpenters............................ Paul Vosiliunas, Michael Edgley International Film Corporation of the underworld when he falls into a man­ John Miles, Producers.......................................Kate White, P roducer.................................... John Sexton hole and is set to work in the underground John Parker, Peter Vaughton factories of Brisbane.

Stan Ruch, Director....................................... Simon W incer S criptw riter................................ Trevor Farrant Ian Day, S crip tw rite r................................................David Williamson AUSSIE ASSAULT Based on the novel by.................. John Jones Michael Patterson ONEWAY TICKET TO Photography................................ Russell Boyd Photography................................Toby Phillips Prod, com pany.........Sportsmaster Programs Construction m anager......... Ron Sutherland Sound recordist.............................. Gary Wilkin YEERONGPILLY C a s tin g .........................................Audine Leith Dist. com pany..........Sportsmaster Programs Art dept, assistants..................Juliette Otton, Prod, d e sig n e r........................ Larry Eastwood Laboratory..........................................Colorfilm Producers........................................ Garry Holt, Prod, com pany........... Brisbane Independent Nick Reynolds Prod, supervisor........................ Richard Davis Length....................................................

48 mins Bill Scholer Filmakers Sound e d ito r.........................Marc Van Buuren Prod, co-ordinator....................Cathy Flannery G a uge...................................................... 16mm Director.................................... Harvey Spencer Producer................................... John Darmody Assistant e dito r...........................................VickiAmbrose Prod, m anager.......................................... Paula Gibbs Synopsis: The holocaust of an Australian S criptw riter.............................

Harvey Spencer Director..................................... John Darmody Asst sound editor.......................................Karin W hittington Unit m a n a g e r...................................Philip Corr bushfire enables a 16-year-old country lad Photography.................................... Alan Grice, Scriptw riter................................. Robert Morris M ixer.......................................................... Roger Savage Prod, secretary................................... Elizabeth W right with an inventive streak, nicknamed Scrap Peter Hopwood Length.................................................... 15 mins Dialogue e d ito r.............................................Tim Jordan Prod, accountant....... Moneypenny Services, Iron Kid, to win his spurs.

Sound recordist............................. Ross Linton G auge.........

S 8 mm for transfer to %in. video Asst dialogue e d ito r.......

Annabelle Sheehan Androulla Editor...........................................

Peter Fletcher Synopsis: One m an's dream, one m an’s Still pho tograph y....................................Patrick Riviere Asst prod, accountant....................................JillCoverdale Composer.........................................Mario Millo THE CLEANING nightmare on the Brisbane rail system.

R u nners.................................................... Annie Peacock, Prod, assistant............................................Julia Ritchie Exec, producer.............................................

Dick Tanner Henry Osborne 1st asst d ire c to r......................................Murray Newey Prod, com pany.................. Long Lunch Films ON GUARD Prod, m anager........................... Neil Matthews Unit n u rses............................ Michael Brooke, 2nd asst d ire c to r............... Michael Bourchier P roducer............................. Stephen Mepham Helicopter p ilo t...........................................

Terry Lee Sue Cowan Prod, company...................Red Heart Pictures 3rd asst d irector.......................Deuel Droogan D irector.................................................... RobertGrant Prod, secretary................... Bronwyn Meredith Publicity.........................................Annie Page Dist. company................................ Ronin Films 4th asst director................Christopher W alker S criptw riters............................ Ian McFadyen, Prod, accountant...........................................Jim Tree Unit publicist............... Rea Francis Company C o ntinuity........................................................ Jo Weeks Steve Kearney, Producer...................... Digby (Janice) Duncan Neg. m atching................... Chris Rowell Prods C a terin g........................................John Welch Producer’s a ssista n t...................................... DiHolmes Neill Gladwin Director...................................... Susan Lambert Music performed b y ...........Glenn Shorrock, Post p ro d u c tio n .................... Spectrum Films Scriptw riters..............................................Sarah Gibson, C a sting...................................................... Alison Barrett Based on the original idea Mario Millo Mixed a t ........................................................Film Australia Susan Lambert Camera o pe rator...................................... Nixon Binney b y ................................Los Trios Ringbarkus O p tica ls.............................Optical and Graphic Laboratory................................................Atlab Focus puller............................... Peter Menzies Sound recordist...........................Sean Meltzer Based on the original idea Title designer..............................................Peter Newton Lab. lia iso n ...................................Jim Parsons Clapper/loader....................Geoffrey Wharton Editor............................................................. GuyMillerb y ............................................................Sarah Gibson, Publicity................................................W heatley Organization Length.................................................. 100 mins Susan Lambert Key g rip ........................................................ .RayBrown Com poser................................................ W ilbur Wilde Mixed at........................................United Sound G a u g e ...................................................... 35mm Photography.............................................Laurie Mclnnes Asst g rip s ...............................................Geordie Dryden, Prod, m anager......................... Andrew Morse Laboratory............................................ Colorfilm Screen ra tio ................................. Anamorphic Sound recordist.................................. Pat Fiske Stuart Green Prod, accountant.................................... NewellLock Lab. liaison...................................................... BillGooley Shooting s to ck.............................5293 & 5247 Editor................................................... Catherine Murphy Asst, dire cto r.......................... Andrew Morse G a ffe r.......................................................... Brian Bansgrove Length...............................................................72 mins First released................................March 1984 Composer....................................... Stray Dags Continuity................................. Annie McLeod Electrician.................................... Colin Chase G a uge........................................................ 16mm Cast: Genevieve Picot (Libby), John Walton Assoc, producer......................... Sarah Gibson Lighting cam eram an.............................. Martin McGrath Boom ope rator.........................Mark Wasiutak Shooting s to c k ...................................... 7247/93 (Fred), Michael Pare (Max Wylde), Sandy Prod, m anager........................... Sabina Wynn Focus p uller............................................ Murray Ware Art d ire c to r............................... David Bowden Progress..............................................In release Gore (Nina), Peter Phelps (Theo), Andrew Prod, assistants.........................................Laura Zusters, Key g r ip .................................................. Marcus McLeod Asst d esigner.................................... Lisa Elvy First released............................... January 1984 Sharp (Arthur Burley), Caz Lederman (May G affer.......................................................... Mark Gilfedder Mandy King, Costume d esigner..................................... Anna Senior Synopsis: The people, power, politics and Burley), Wallas Eaton (Mr Breedlove), Sue Suzanne Keys Electrician.......................................Mark White M ake-up....................... Lesley Lamont-Fisher the inside story behind the Am erica’s Cup Leith (Alice).

1st asst directors........................... Gilly Coote, Art director...............................................S.A.M. Hairdresser...............................................CherylWilliams contenders, Challenge 12 and Australia 2, S ynopsis: A romantic comedy set in Sydney Penny Chapman, Costume designer.................................... LTRB W ardrobe supervisor........................... Graham Purcell during their battle to win the most coveted in the frenetic, energetic 1920s. It is about Jan Kenny Props buyer..................Samantha Meadmore W ardrobe sta n d b y...................................... Rita Crouch prize in all sporting history. ’ coming of age; about a girl Libby McKenzie, Props/standby............................... David Gray Continuity............................................. Elizabeth Barton Asst wardrobe standby..............................LeahCocks a man Fred Burley and his business — The Camera operator........................... Erika Addis Computer fx ..................................Greg Bissett, Props b u ye r................................................Clark Munro Berlei Undergarment Company — and an AUSTRALIAN MOVIES TO THE Focus puller/ Michael Trudgeon Standby p ro p s .................. Karan Monkhouse Australia emerging from the sedate tradi­ Set construction............................. Phil Worth camera assistant................................... Rene Romeril WORLD Set decorator........................... Sally Campbell tions of Edwardianism into a period of Camera assistant........................................Jane Castle Neg. m atching..................................... Warwick Driscoll Scenic a rtis t................................... Peter Harris Prod, com pany.......................Film House T.V. dramatic change.

Key g r ip ................................................Sue Kerr Music performed Asst p a in te r.................................Tony Babicci Producer......................................... Peter Beilby G affer.............................................................DebCollins b y .................... Fairlight Computer Systems C arpenters......................... Errol Glassenbury, Directors................................................. Gordon Glenn, Boom ope rator................................ ..Sue Kerr Programmed b y .................................... Duncan McGuire Peter Watson, Scott Murray Sound editor............................................. Bruce Lamshed Assistant recordist...............................Bronwyn Murphy Christopher Reid Scriptwriters........................................... Gordon Glenn, Art d irector..................................................... Jan Mackay M ixer.......................................................... Bruce Lamshed Set construction........................................ Brian Hocking Scott Murray Hairdresser...................................Mark of Zorro Still pho tograph y........................... Jeff Busby D raug htsm an.................... Marc Schulenberg Photography.............................................. David Haskins O p tica ls........................................................ VFL Standby props.......................................... ...Julie Wiggins Art dept runner.................................. Geoff Full Sound recordist................................Ian W ilson Art dept assistant................................... Victoria Treole Title designer..................... Michael Trudgeon Still photography........................ David Parker Editor............................................John Dutton Mouse wrangler....................... W endy Harmer Asst editors.....................................................Vic Smith, W rangler...................................... Heath Harris Exec, pro d u ce r..........................

Robert Le Tet ANNA Josephine Cooke Publicity....... Transnational Communications Best b o y........................................................PaulGantner Assoc, producer.............................. Trish Foley Neg. m atching...................Chris Rowell Prods C a tering.............................. Rosco Ellis-Jones Prod, com pany...................... Film House T.V. P u b licity..................................................... Suzie Howie Asst e d ito r................................................

Jenny Price Sound editor............................................ Denise Haslem Mixed a t .......................................................Film Australia, C a terin g.......................... Chris Smith "F e a st” Dist. com pany............................... Film Victoria Neg. m atching...................Victorian Negative M ixer..........................................................United Sound Richmond Recorders (score) Producer.........................................Peter Beilby (Sydney), Cutting Service Laboratory....................................................VFL Still photography...................................... Sandy Edwards Helen W right Director................................................... Gordon Glenn M ixer..........................................David Harrison O pticals.................................................Colorfilm Budget................................................... $57,000 Scriptw riter.................................Gordon Glenn (Melbourne) N a rrator...................................................... John Stanton Title d esigner................................................ Jan Mackay Length.................................................... 26 mins Photography..................................... Yuri Sokol Budget.............................................................. $5 million P u blicity.......................Rae Francis Company Runner......................................................Glenys Rowe G auge............................................................S 16 Sound recordist................................... Ian Ryan Mixed a t ................................. Film Soundtrack Cast: Tom Burlinson (Tommy Woodcock), Publicity................................................... Glenys Rowe Shooting s to c k ................................. ECN 7247 Editor........................................................... John Dutton Laboratories................................................VFL, Martin Vaughan (Harry Telford), Judy Morris Catering.............................................. Kate Muir Cast: Steve Kearney, Neill Gladwin (Los Exec, p roduce r...........................Robert Le Tet Cinevex (Bea Davis), Dave Davis (Ron Leibman).

Post-production fa c ilitie s......Studio Clip Joint Trios Ringbarkus).

Assoc, producer.............................. Trish Foley Length.................................................... 96 mins S yn opsis: The story of the w orld’s greatest Post-production Synopsis: Two inept office cleaners on their Unit m anager.............................................Tony Shepherd G auge......................................................

16mm services..............Superfine Motion Pictures racehorse, set against the backdrop of the first night in an ultra-modern office block.

1st asst d ire c to r.......................... Peter Askew Shooting stock..............................................FujiNeg. Great Depression of the 1930s. It tells of Their incompetence angers the computer­ Mixed at..................................................... United Sound 3rd asst director.......................... Jim Mavridis First released........................................

O ctober 1983 Laboratory............................................Colorfilm Phar Lap’s sudden rise to national fame and ized security complex running the building, C o ntinuity......................... Joanne McLennan Synopsis: The story of the international suc­ the controversies surrounding his career, in­ which disposes of the problem in the appro­ Lab. liaison............................................... Megan Williams Camera operator.........................James Grant cess of Australian film s from the mid-1970s. priate manner. cluding attempts on his life before the. 1930 Budget..................................................$142,000 Focus puller...................................... Chris Cain Length.....................................................50 mins Melbourne Cup. The story moves to the U.S Key g r ip ........................................David Cassar with Phar Lap’s success at the w orld’s G auge........................................................16mm AVANT GARDE — Boom operator............................... Ray Phillips NIGHT OF SHADOWS richest horserace, and his untim ely death in Shooting stock..................... Kodak 7247, 7293 Arl director............................................Stephen McCarthy AUSTRALIAN STYLE Prod, com pany......................................... Shark Attack mysterious circumstances.

Progress............................................... Awaiting release M ake-up........................................................Kim Anderson Dist. com pany...........................................M & L Prod, com pany............................... Gittoes and Cast: Libby Clark (Amelia), Jan Cornall W ardrobe......................................Kathy Maher Producer............................. Sandra Alexander Dalton Prods UNDERCOVER (Diana), Kerry Dwyer (Adrienne), Mystery Asst e d ito r...................................... Jenny Price Director.................................... Brian Thomson Producers...............................George Gittoes,Carnage (Georgia), Tracy Mann (Jane), Neg. m atching.......................W arrick Driscoll Prod, com pany.............................. Palm Beach Scriptw riter.............................................. RobertEagle Gabrielle Dalton Gillian Hyde (Lorraine), Robyn Gurney (Kay), Sound edito r.......................... Terry Rodman Pictures Photography...........................................RussellBoyd D irectors................................. George Gittoes, Martha Ansara (Ruth Flood), Gayle Rankin C a terin g..................................... Lucille Rogers P roducer........................................ David Elfick Sound recordist.........................................PeterBarker Gabrielle Dalton (Dina Fetherington).

Mixed a t ................ Film Soundtrack Australia D irector.......................................David Stevens Editor......................................................... Henry Dangar Scriptw riters........................... George Gittoes, Synopsis: Utero, a medical multi-national, is Laboratory............................................ Cinevex S crip tw riter............................ Miranda Downes C om poser.............................................. Groove Gabrielle Dalton secretly developing new techniques in bio­ Lab. liaison.................................. Bruce Braun Based on the original idea Exec, p roduce r....................... Hilary Linstead Photography..............................George Gittoes technology.

The future of motherhood and Length.....................................................45 mins by.........................................................Miranda Downes Prod, assistants....................Hugh Hamilton, Sound recordists....................

Peter Lipscomb, human reproduction will be affected by these G a u g e ....................................................... 16mm Photography................................ Dean S e nior Peter Terakes Gabrielle Dalton experiments. The women take action into Shooting stock......................................... Kodak Sound recordist...........................Peter Barker Asst, director....................................... Ian Page Editors.....................................

Michael Balson, their own hands. They resolve to sabotage Progress.................................. Post-production E ditor............................................ Tim W ellborn C o ntinuity.........................................Liz Barton George Gittoes Utero and make a political documentary for Cast: Mary Sitarenoxs (Anna), Llewellyn Exec, p ro d u ce r...................... Richard M. Toltz C a sting.........................Anne Churchill-Brown M usic.............................

Martin W esley Smith, television to be screened after the “ crim e” .

Rees (Tom), Nick Lethouris (Michael), Prod, su p e rvise r........................... Lynn Gailey Focus puller........................ Geoffrey Wharton Ian Fredericks, Marilyn O ’ Donnell (Joan), Mickey Camilleri Prod, co-ordinator............................. Catherine Phillips Clapper/loader.............................................SueBrooks Jon Rose (Michelle), Gary McConville (Chris), Susan Knapman Key g rip .......................................................Tony Larkins REVENGE OF THE MANGO and many more Arnold (Sister), Dina Mann (Welfare Officer), EATERS Location m anager.....................................Steve Knapman G affer..........................................................Peter O ’Brien Lighting cam eram en.................................David Berry, Jan Friedl (Receptionist), Bronwyn Thomas Unit manager................................Chris Jones Boom operator..............................................Jan McSweeney George Gittoes, Prod, com pany....................................... Mango Prods (Social Welfare).

Prod, se c re ta ry ............................Julia Ritchie Art d ire c to r.............................. Sally Campbell Simon Smith, P roducers................................Steve Rhodes, Synopsis: Drama about the problems facing Prod, accountants.....Moneypenny Services, Costume de s ig n e r.......................... Roger Kirk W alt Deas Martin Saunders, a young Greek mother who has a handi­ Debbie Eastwood, M ake-up................................................... Lesley Vanderwalt and more John Darmody capped child.

Alan Marco H airdresser............................................. Lesley Vanderwalt C lapper...................................... Scott Brawley D irector......................................................

Janet Lane Assistant unit W ardro be..................................................Karan Monkhouse Camera assistants....... Bruce Shillingsworth, Scriptwriters.......................Michael Meadows, m a n a g e r.................................................Hugh Hamilton THE BODYGUARD Standby p ro p s ......................................... Karan Monkhouse Dudley Shillingsworth Janet Lane 1st asst d ire cto r..........................Mark Turnbull Set construction.........................................Alan Fleming Mixed a t .......................................... D u bbs& C o.

Photography............................ Peter Nearhos, Prod, com pany....................... Full Moon Films 2nd asst director.........................................Keith Heygate Asst e d ito r........................................

Gai Steele Laboratory............................................

Colorfilm Rodney Jong Producers.......................................................LeoBerkeley, 3rd asst d irectors....................................... Judy Rymer, M ixer.......................................................Alastair McFarlane Sound recordist.........................................Kirian KnoxLength............................................... 5 x 5 5 mins Patricia Amad, Lisa Hennessey Still photography......................................

Geoff McGeachin Shooting stock.............................

Eastmancolor E ditors......................................

Steve Rhodes, Michael Koller Continuity.........................................................Jo Weeks Title de s ig n e r..........................................RobertDein Progress............................................ Production Janet Lane D irector...........................................................LeoBerkeley Producer’s assistant................................ Basia Plachecki S tu d io s...................................Mort Bay Studio Scheduled release......... (Pilot) October 1984 Art director...................................................Ruth Berry Scriptwriter.....................................................LeoBerkeley Casting................................ M & L, Liz M ullinar Mixed a t ...................................................... Palm Studios Composer..................................................Kirian KnoxSynopsis: The Unfound Land Is the pilot Photography............................................. Martin McGrath Extras casting Laboratory........................................... Colorfilm episode of a five-part series in which Austra­ Dubbing m ix e r......................................Quentin Black Sound recordist...........................Sean Meltzer co-ordinator................................................. Jo Hardie Lab. liaison............................. Megan Williams lian avant-garde artists working in many Title designer..............................................Ruth Berry E d itor............................................Leo Berkeley Lighting c am eram an.................................Dean Semler Budget................................................... $65,500 different mediums — from film s to perform­ Laboratory.........................................Cinecolor M usic............................................................ Mark McSherry Focus p u lle r.............................................. Steve Dobson Length.............................................................. 30 mins ance art — will be presented to the public, Length.................................................... 15 mins Prod, manager.........................Gabby Brennan C lapper/loader........................................Felicity Surtees G a u g e ....................................................... 16mm with interviews and new commissioned G a uge......................................................

16mm Continuity................................. Fiona Cochrane Key g r ip .............................. Merv McLaughlin Shooting s to c k .......................B&W neg. 7222 works, to enable a better understanding of Shooting stock...........................Eastmancolor Camera assistant..............................Dow Long Asst g rip s ....................................................... PatNash, First released..............................................June 1983 what is happening in creative expression in Progress.............................................In release G affer........................................................... Mark Gilfedder Ric Bartsch Cast: Terence Donovan (Harry Vinson/ this country.

First released.............................April 22, 1983 Boom o pe rator........................ Jim Dunwoodie G a ffe r.......................................................... John Morton Blackie Webb), Sandy Gore (Margo/Clare Synopsis: A secret agent spoof about one Art director......................................Colin Hanna Best b o y ...................................................... Craig Bryant Neale/Lucy), Robert Hughes (Siteve Steele), man’s attempt to save the dwindling flying Neg. m atch ing..................................... Victorian Negative E le ctricia n ............................................... Wayne Simpson Terry Bader (Larry Lomax), Jack Webster BLUE JEANS BABIES fox population of Brisbane — with surprising Cutting Service Genni o p e ra to r...............................Dean Bryan (Sal Shrevnitz), Arthur Dignam (The Voice of results.

Prod, com pany.............. Cox Cornford Prods M ixer...........................................................

David Harrison Boom o pe rator.................................Keir W elch Darkness, Len Lindon (The Eyes of Dark­ Dist. co m p a n y................Cox Cornford Prods S tunts..........................New Generation Stunts Art d irector....................................... Herb Pinter ness).

Producer................................................. Jerem y Cornford Asst art d ire c to r.....................................Stewart MayTitle designer.............................. Joanne Waite Synopsis: Consider Harry Vinson, detective D ire cto r.................................................. Jerem y Cornford Laboratory..............................................Cinevex Costume designer........... Kristian Fredrikson fiction writer. Crime pays for Harry, until one Length.....................................................

25 mins S crip tw riter.............................................Jerem y Cornford M ake-up............................Lesley Vanderwalt long, boozy night when his pulp characters G auge........................................................ 16mm Photography..............................................

David Olney Asst m ake-up..................................................JillPorter burst into reality, with tragic consequences.

Shooting s to c k ...........Eastmancolor Negative Sound re cordist...................................Geoffrey W hite Hairdresser...............................................CherylWilliams Cast: Stephen, Hutchison, Cliff Ellen, ....................................... Tomas Pokorny Asst hairdresser....................................... Penny Morrison THE NIGHTLY VISITANT Malcolm Robertson, Rob Finlayson, Christine Composer.................................. Harold Callum Wardrobe superviser...........................Anthony Jones Exec, p roduce rs............................. Peter Cox, Forsey, Harriet Spalding, Gerard Maguire, Prod, com pany......................................AlkoomiFilm Standby wardrobe.................................... Kathy James P e te r F le tt, D iana G re e n tre e , P e ter Jerem y Cornford P rodu cer................................................Pantelis Roussakis Ward, assistan ts....................................... JenniBolton, Prod, accountants.....................................Peter Williams, Golombex.

Anna French D irector..................................................Pantelis Roussakis Synopsis: An untried bodyguard is caught Ray Osborne S criptw riter............................................Pantelis Roussakis Art dept, m a n a g e r.............Sandra Alexander

DOCUMENTARIES

FEATURES

SHORTS

80 — March-April CINEMA PAPERS

Production Survey

MINISTER OF INTELLIGENCE Progress.............................................. In release G rip s................................................ Tim W ilson, RIVER OF GIANTS Julian Mather Synopsis: A voyage of obsession: the Prod, com p a n y............Bush Christm as Prods Prod, com pany.......................................Kicking Around seventh generation direct descendant of the Special fx p h o to g ra p h y......................... Robert Wyatt Dist. com pany...........................................Barron R im s Prods maligned Captain W illiam Bligh re-enacts the Still photography................... Clare Stapleton Producers...................................................Julian Russell, Dist. com pany.............................. Barron Film s epic sea trip from Tonga to Indonesian Timor A n im a tio n .....................................................Ruth Berry Tony Gailey P roducer.................................... David Rapsey that followed the mutiny on the "B o unty’ ’ in Budget................................................... $35,000 Director.......................................................Haydn Keenan D irector.......................................................... Don McLennan 1789. Nine adventurers endured 40 days in a Length.................................................... 24 mins Photography....................................Tony Gailey Scriptw riter.................................David Rapsey Shooting s to c k ......Eastm ancolor 7247, 7293 replica 23-foot open boat. Each had their own Sound recordist............................................ Max Hensser Based on the original idea In te rv ie w e rs : M ichael M eadows, Paul motivation, but it was one m an’s dream, a E ditor............................................Henry Dangar b y .......................................George Bellanger Crosisca, Ian Henschke, W endy Rogers. dream haunted by the spirit of Bligh.

Exec, producer............................... Paul Barron Photography................................................... IanPugsley Synopsis: A record of W orld Environment Prod, m anager.................Mitou Pajaczkowska Sound re c o rd is t.............................. Kim Lord Day celebrations at Samford, Queensland, Prod, accountant................................. Cyril Ger E d ito rs...............................................Geoff Hall, July 5, 1983. Thousands of people gathered Asst e d ito r..................................................... Pam Barnetta Tang Thien Tai to listen and discuss environmental issues, P u blicity..........................................................Ann Macbeth Com poser.................................................... Greg Schultz DROUGHT and be entertained by such top bands as B udget...................................................$248,000 Exec, produce r............................................ PaulBarron Split Enz, Goanna, Richard Clapton and The Length................................................................48 mins Prod, com pany....................... Golden Dolphin Prod, m a n a g e r.......................................Pamela Borain Party Boys, and Gold Rush.

G a u g e ......................................................... 16mm Prods Prod, secretaries................................... Maggie Hegarty, P rogress................................... Post-production P ro d u ce r.................................... Robert Loader Sue Pemberton ABORIGINAL ARTS IN PERTH HAVE A GO! Scheduled release.................................... March 1984 D ire c to r........................................Tristram Miall Prod, accountant.......................................Marie Brown Cast: Dr L. Machado (as himself).

Prod, com pany......................Film House T.V. E d itor........................................Michael Balson Prod, com pany.........I.F. Prods in association 1st asst director..........................................Peter Friedrich Synopsis: Documentary on Dr Luis Mach­ Producer.........................................

Peter Beilby Prod, m anager....................... Jillian Nicholas with WA Filmworkers 2nd asst director.........................................Theo Mathews ado, Venezuelan State M inister for the D ire c to r....................................................... John Dutton Prod, se cre ta ry.............................................Ann Neale 3rd asst d ire c to r..........................................Blair HoweProducers.............................. Bryan McLellan, Development of Human Intelligence, who in Scriptw riter.............................Peter Hepworth Laboratory.................................................Atlab David Noakes C o n tin u ity ................................................... Chris O ’Connell 1978 set out to raise the intelligence of an Editor............................................................ John Dutton Directors................................. Bryan McLellan, G a u g e ........................................................16mm C a s tin g ....................................... David Rapsey entire nation using unorthodox techniques, Exec, p ro d u c e r........................... Robert Le Tet Progress..................................... Pre-production David Noakes Focus puller................................Rob Sandifort mostly experimental. “ This will be the biggest S yn opsis: A moving docum entary relating to P h otog rap hy.............................David Noakes, Assoc, producer......................................... Trish Foley C lapper/loader...........................................Anne Benzie revolution in history,” he claims.

Australia’s worst drought in living memory.

Alison Fuller Research................................ Heather Forbes Key g r ip ....................................................... KarelAkkerman Sound recordists.........................................Stan Collard, Neg. m atching....................... W arrick Driscoll G a ffe r.............................................................RayThomas Laboratory.............................................Cinevex John Cruthers THE FALSE DOOR AT SAQQARA Boom operator............................. John O ’ Brian OH YOU BEAUTIFUL DOLL Lab. liaison................................................ Bruce Braun Editors.....................................Bryan McLellan, Art director..................................................Philip Monaghan Prod, com pany........................Look Film Prods Prod, com pany.......................Film House T.V. Length..................................................... 48 mins Doris Pilkington Asst art director............................................

Kim Sexton P rodu cer.........................................................W illDavies Producer......................................... Peter Beilby G a u g e ........................................................16mm Prod, m anager.......................................Heather Williams Make-up....................................................... Karla O ’Keefe D ire cto r.................................................Paul Cox D irectors........................................................Sue Cram, Shooting sto c k ..........................................Kodak Prod, assistant............................... Katy Clarke W ardrobe......................................................Stev Riches S crip tw riter......................Michael Le Moignan M arianne Latham Lighting cam eram e n............Malcolm Binder, Scheduled release............................April 1984 Ward, a s s is ta n t...................................... Crispin Rapsey P hotography..................................................YuriSokol S criptw riters......................................Sue Cram, W ayne Bynder S ynopsis: A special which explores the Aus­ Props buyer/ Sound recordist...........................Max Hensser Marianne Latham tralian passion of taking on challenges in a Clapper/loader............................

Sylvia Clarke E d itor............................................................. John Scott standby p ro p s ....................................MichaelTolerton Based on the original idea 2nd unit photography.......... Heather Williams broad range of subjects (e g., sport, science, Lighting s u p p lie r...................................... DarrylBinning Exec, producer........................................ Richard Tanner b y ................................................................ Sue Cram, the arts) from the early days of convict C a rp e n te r.....................................

Kim Jewel 2nd unit sound...............................................Joe Jacobs, Co-producer................................. James Boyle Marianne Latham Chris Lynch settlers to the current day.

Construction m anager........ David Boardman Prod, co-ordinator...................... Bee Reynolds E d itor..........................................Tony Paterson Asst e d ito rs ...............................................Gillian Walker, Dubbing e d ito r....................................... Glenda Hambly Prod, m anager............................................Gerry Letts Exec, p ro d u c e r...........................

Robert Le Tet Tang Thien Tai Dubbing editing asst................................ Serge Zaza J A B IR U — T H E L A S T F R O N T IE R ?

Prod, accountant..................Peter MacDonald Assoc, producer...............................Trish Foley F acilities........................... Film and Television Pyrotechnics and Prod, assistant....................Maryanne Koopler R esearch.......................................................Sue Cram, Prod, c o m p a n y.......................................... Colin Baker Institute (WA) Inc. s e c u rity .....................................................Blair Howe Camera ope rator......................... James Grant Marianne Latham Cinegroup Prods Laboratory.............................................Cinevex Still photography......................................... Skip W atkins Narrator.......................................................Phillip Adams Neg. m atch ing.......................................

W arrick Driscoll P rodu cer..................................................... Colin Baker Budget.................................................... $55,000 W rangler................................................. Stewart O ’Brien Tech, adviser................... Dr Naguib Kanawati Lab ora tory....................................................VFI D irector..................................... John Holbrook Boat h a n d le r...............................................Keith AllanLength.....................................................45 mins P u b licity................................ Christopher Stear Length............................................................... 48 mins S crip tw riter..................................................Colin Baker G a u g e .........................

16mm P u blicity.........................................................Ann Macbeth Laboratory.................................................... Atlab G a u g e ........................................................ 16mm P h otog rap hy......................... Hans J . Heidrich Shooting stock............................. Agfa 682 and Catering....................................................... Chris Bellanger Lab. lia is o n ..................................................Peter Willard Shooting s to ck..........................................Kodak Sound recordist....................Roland McManis Eastman 7293 Mixed a t ......................................................

ABC, Perth B u dget...................................................$397,000 Progress............................................Production E ditor.......................................... Ted Kortekaas Synopsis: Aboriginal artists — traditional Laboratory...................................................Atlab Length................................................................60 mins S ynopsis: One-hour special for television C om posers................................. Chris Soulos, and contem porary musicians, dancers, Lab. lia is o n ................................................. Greg Dogherty G a u g e .........................................................16mm which takes a light-hearted, humorous look Noel Elmowy painters, storytellers and writers — came to B udget................................................. S240.000 Shooting sto c k ................................. 7291,7294 at the way women have been presented in Exec, producer............................ Brian Woods Perth in 1983 from all over Australia to share Length.....................................................46 mins Progress.............................................Production the media during the past 30 years.

Camera assistant........................John Lomax aspects of their culture. This film looks at G a u g e ....................................................... 16mm Synopsis: Macquarie University archaeology N arrator.....................................Peter Gwynne how this culture is presented during the team excavates at the most prestigious site in Shooting stock............................ Eastmancolor Length.....................................................28 mins UNDERSTANDING IS NOT ENOUGH festival and its importance in the area of Cast: June Salter (Narrator), George Bell­ Egypt, Saqqara — the old burial site at e d u c a tio n fo r A b o rig in a l and n o n ­ G a u g e ....................................................... 16mm anger (Himself), Tony Taylor (Pierre), Michell Prod, co m pany.................................. Indiginata Film nic Memphis. An examination of the painstaking Aboriginals.

Synopsis: The story of Jabiru, a modern Marzo (Madame), Peter Hardy (Andre), Sally Dist. com pany__ Uniting Church in Australia detective work that uncovers a 4000-year-old town in the remoteness of the Northern Terri­ Martin (Dorothy Rees), Gail Harrison (Mrs D irector........................................................ Keith Head plot against the king, and possibly the first tory and in the spectacular Kakadu National AUSTRALIA’S WONDROUS Thompson), Shane McNamara (Benson), Bill Photography................................................Keith Head female Prime Minister.

Park, near the site of one of the w orld’s McClusky (Fagin), David O ’Brien (George WATERWAY Sound recordist........................................ Alison Head largest uranium deposits, and of the migrant jun.).

E d ito r............................................................Keith Head Prod, c o m pany...............Roymark Television families who have made their home there.

Synopsis: Drama-documentary based on JERUSALEM — OF HEAVEN AND Exec, p roduce r....................... John Jam ieson P roducer.................................Marcia Hatfield the Bellanger family from France who settled Neg. m atching......................Adam Bahoudian EARTH D ire c to r................................... Peter Benardos J O K — T H E W IL D O N E the rugged Karri forest of south-west Dubbing m ix e r........................................... Peter W atson S crip tw rite r..................................

Kay Kearney Prod, com p a n y..... Nomad Films International Western Australia in 1910. Pierre Bellanger, Prod, com pany...................Albie Thoms Prods N arrators..................................................... John Flaus, Based on the original idea Dist. com pany........Nomad Films International escaping decadent Europe, believed he had Dist. com pany....................Albie Thoms Prods David Innes b y ...........................................Marcia Hatfield D irectors..........................................John Jacob, found a paradise on earth, but his was a P roducer........................................Albie Thoms Lab ora tory.................................................... VFL Photography............................Hans Heidrich Richard Tombleson romantic vision at odds with the harsh reality Director.......................................... Albie Thoms Length............................................................... 33 mins Sound recordist...........................

Ralph Steele Scriptw riter................................................Robert Higson of the isolated forest Pierre’s oldest son, Scriptw riters................................. Albie Thoms, Shooting s to c k ................ECN 7247 and 7293 Prod, consultant.............................. Bob Huber Based on the original idea George, stars in the re-creation of those John Moyle, S ynopsis: W hat is an Aboriginal person?

Prod, co-ordinator................... Dee Molineaux b y ........................Nomad Films International pioneering days.

Glenn A. Baker Have we absorbed a stereotype? This film Prod, m anager..................... Barbara Burleigh P hotography............................... Terry Carlyon, Research......................................................John Moyle, listens to Aboriginals and documents their Camera a ssistant........................John Lomax Martin McGrath Glenn A. Baker self-determination in action. It shows Abori­ Still p h o tograph y............Peter Benardos jun.

THE TOP END SAGA Sound re co rd ists........................................ Sean Meltzer, Sound recordist.........................................Laurie Burke ginal co-operatives, education for leadership Laboratory............................................Videolab Rob C utcher Prod, com pany................................Gittoes and E d itor....................................................... MichaelHagen and cultural identification, and calls for B udget..................................................$113,000 Exec, pro d u ce r........................Douglas Stanley Dalton Prods reconciliation.

C om posers...........................

Johnny O ’Keefe, G a u g e ........................................................16mm Prod, co-ordinator..........................................Lee Beston P rodu cers............................................... George Gittoes, others Shooting s to c k ............................................7247 Prod, accountant.....................Neil Manthorpe Gabrielle Dalton Exec, producer..........................

Warren E. Nutt VOLUNTEER COASTGUARD Cast: Philip Geeves.

Neg. m atching........................................ Cinevex D irectors..................................................George Gittoes, Location unit m anager..........................Bob Hill S y n o p s is : An h is to ric a l d ocu m en tary Mixed a t.................................... Filmsoundtrack Prod, com pany...................... Fox Valley Prods Gabrielle Dalton Location unit director..................................John Moyle retracing Governor Arthur P hillip’s expedi­ Laboratory.............................................. Cinevex P rodu cer.................................................MichaelFitzhardinge Scriptw riters............................................George Gittoes, Post-production supervisor......John Hollands tion along the Hawkesbury River and com ­ L e n g th .............................................. 8 x 24 mins D ire cto r................................................... MichaelFitzhardinge Gabrielle Dalton Camera o p e ra to r................. David Sanderson paring it with the same trip today.

G a u g e ......................................................... 16mm S crip tw rite rs........................... Karin Kreicers, Photography............................................ George Gittoes Telecin e.........................................Michael Gell Shooting stock......................... Fuji 8527, 8528 Janine Cooper, Sound recordist....................................Gabrielle Dalton Camera a s s is ta n t.........................Paul Luxford Progress..............................................................Inrelease Cathie Scott Editor............................................................. Mike Balson M ixer..................................................John Ertler First re le a se d .....................................November 1983M usic...........................................................Martin W esley-Smith DRIVE TO WIN Photography............................................. Glenn Shield, Facilities................................................ Location Video, Synopsis: The thrust and aim of this series is Karin Kreicers Lighting cam eram an..............................George Gittoes Custom Video Prod, com pany.....................Film House T.V. to absorb the viewer in a deeper and more Sound recordists........ Michael Fitzhardinge, Camera assistant.......... Dudley Shillingsworth Co-ordination................................Eileen Bacon Producer......................................... Peter Beilby sympathetic understanding of Jerusalem and Geoffrey Sharp Mixed a t ..........................................Dubbs & Co. Length.....................................................48 mins Director........................................... Trevor Ling her diverse people through a brilliantly visual­ Editor..........................................Karin Kreicers Laboratory.............................................Colorfilm G a u g e ................................................ 2 in. video S crip tw riter.................................... Trevor Ling ized exploration of her past and present in Prod, m an a g e r........................

Janine Cooper Length........................................... 11 x 55 mins P rogress.................................Awaiting release Photography.............................................. David Haskins, human terms. No city in the world has been Camera assistan t............... William. La Ganza G a u g e ........................................................16mm Cast: Glenn A. Baker, Thelm a O ’ Keefe, Alan Barry Malseed more passionately loved — nor more Still photography..........................Cathie Scott Shooting stock............................. Eastmancolor Dale, Col Joye, Bob Rogers, "P e e W ee” Sound re cordist............................................. IanWilson savagely fought over yet there is a greater Coastguard lia is o n .....................................John Cooper Progress.............................................Production Wilson, Valda Marshall, Ken Taylor, Peter E d ito r......................................................Graeme Preston feeling of vitality, history and mysticism here Laboratory.................................................Atlab Scheduled release..............(Pilots) June 1984 Page, Lola Dullow, "C a tfish ” Purser, Barry C om poser...................................................Peter Jones than any other place on earth.

Length.....................................................

1 5 mins Synopsis: This series intends to throw light O’Keefe, Ward Austin, Ron Way, John Exec, p ro d u c e r........................... Robert Le Tet G a u g e ....................................................... 1 6 mm on the rich pioneering history of the Northern Hansen, Vicki O ’ Keefe and the late Johnny Assoc, producer.............................Trish Foley S y n o p s is : A d ocu m en tary about the Territory which, though im portant and O'Keefe.

THE PINTUBI Prod, supervisor......................... Geoff Morrow services of the Australian Volunteer Coast­ colorful, has been neglected as a film subject.

Synopsis: Documentary charting the life of Asst e d ito rs ...........................Brett Southwick, Prod, co m pany....Nomad Films International guard.

Dramatization is being used in conjunction the late Johnny O ’Keefe.

Rob Grant Dist. com pany...... Nomad Films International with investigative documentary footage to Neg. m atch ing.......................................W arrick Driscoll Producer.................................................. Jerem y Hogarth THE WARREN CENTRE create an entertaining portrait of Australia’s Sound e d ito r...............................................Peter BurgessL O N G T IM E N O S E E , R O N N IE Director.....................................................Jerem y Hogarth “ Wild West Up North” .

Prod, co m pany.............. University of Sydney M ixer........................................................... David Harrison Based on the book b y .......... Bruno Scrobogna Prod, com p a n y............Bush Christmas Prods Narrator......................................... Alan Cassell Television Service Dist. com pany.......................................... Barron Films Photography..................................................Alex McPhee THE VOYAGE OF BOUNTY’S CHILD Mixed a t .................Film Soundtrack Australia Producer.........................................................Jim Dale Producer...................................................Wayne Groom Sound recordist.............................................RobCutcher Laboratory.............................................Cinevex D ire c to r...................................................... Barrie Pattison Prod, com pany........................Look Film Prods D irector..............................

Mario Andreacchio E d itors............................................................PaulHoward, Lab. liaison....................................Bruce Braun S crip tw rite r................................................Barrie Pattison P rodu cer.........................................................WillDavies Phil Reid S crip tw riters..................... Mario Andreacchio, P h otog rap hy.................................Tim Segulin Length.....................................................48 mins Director........................................Michael Edols Alan Ramsay C om poser....................................................Frank Strangio G a u g e ........................................................16mm Sound re co rd ist............................................Rob Bell Scriptwriter................................. Cecil Holmes Based on the original idea Exec, p ro d u ce r...................................... Douglas Stanley Shooting sto c k ..........................................Kodak Editor..............................................

Mira M ikulic Photography..............................

Michael Edols by..................................... Mario Andreacchio Prod, co-ordinator...................................Pamela Howard Prod, m anager............................................John W iggins S y n o p s is : Ad o c u m e n ta ry on V e rn Sound re c o rd is t....................................Bronwyn Murphy Photography................................................ RossWurst Prod, m anager........................................... Bruno Scrobogna Operations m anager.................................

Peter Ellis Schuppan’s successful bid to win the 1983 E d itor........................................................Richard Francis-Bruce Sound recordist........................................... Mike Piper Prod, accountant...........................................NeilManthorpe Script co n su lta n t.........................................Tom Gosling Le Mans 24 Hours Endurance race.

Composer.................................................Joseph Hyden Editor...................................Mario Andreacchio Camera assistan t...........................John Ogden Camera a ssista n ts ....................................

Brian Slattery, Exec, producer........................................Richard Tanner Assoc, p ro d u c e r.........................................Kevin Moore G affer.......................................Graeme Sheldon ENVIRONFEST ’83 Doug Chatwin, Assoc, producer.........................Martin Cohen Prod, m anager............................................ Craig Laiff Asst edito r.......................Bernadette Stapleton Sandy Laidlaw Prod, co-ordinator......................Bee Reynolds Prod, accountant................................. Cyril Ger Sound e d ito r................................... Craig Carter Prod, com pany............Brisbane Independent M ix e r...................................................... Stephen Adams Prod, accountant.........................................Tony Bray Video tec h n ic ia n .................Jerem y Saunders M ixe r............................................................ David Harrison Filmakers G raphics.........................................Peter Elliott Editing technician........................................ RossWurst P roducer....................................John Darmody Narrator....................................................MichaelPateProd, assistant.................................... Maryanne Koopler Synopsis: A film /video presentation for the Producer's assistant..................................

Rose Wise Musical d ire c to r.........................................

Steve Matters Mixed a t..................................... Film soundtrack D ire cto r.......................................Debra Beattie Faculty of Engineering at the University of Camera operator........................W ayne Taylor Tech nician............................... Gerry Saunders S c rip tw rite r......................... Michael Meadows Laboratory.............................................. Cinevex Sydney which covers various projects being Publicity..........................................................Ann Macbeth Photography.............................Peter Nearhos, Length..........................................................4 x 2 4 minsExpedition cam eram en.....Rory McGuinness, carried out after 100 years of engineering John Scott B udget.................................................. $222,000 Steven Levitt, G a u g e ......................................................... 16mm education.

Asst e d ito r.....................................Liz Goldfinch Length................................................................48 mins Gary Phillips, Shooting stock.......................... Fuji 8527, 8528 Neg. m atch ing..................................... Colorfilm G auge..........................................................Video Chris Strewe Progress...............................................In release WATER IS LIFE Music performed P rogress................................... Post-production Sound recordists.......................... Kirian Knox, First re le a se d ....................................Septem ber 1983 by..................Laussane Chamber Orchestra Scheduled release....................................March 1984 Cast: George W oturba, Roley M induma, Bruce W allis, Prod, com pany.................................. Scentcore Prods Sound e d ito r........................................... Andrew Steuart Cast: Ronald Biggs (as himself), Jack Slipper Ian Henschke Bulla, Ed Turley, Nick W aters, Andrew Producer...................................................... Tony Surace N arrator...........................................................Leo McKern (as himself), John Underwood (interviewer).

E d ito r................................................ Janet Lane Gilmour, Noel Fullerton, David Yupupu, Director.........................................................Tony Surace Still photography................. Christiane D'H otel Synopsis: These were the words greeting Exec, produce r......................Malcolm Prowse P h otog rap hy............................................... Tony Surace Nosepeg Tjupurrula, George Tjungula.

P u b lic ity................................ C hristopher Stear train robber Ronald Biggs from famous Scot­ Assoc, p roduce r........................... Colin Moore Synopsis: For more than 30,000 years the Sound recordist.......................................... Tony Surace Mixed a t....................................... United Sound land Yard detective Jack Slipper who had Prod, m a n a g e r........................... Brian Cassidy Editor............................................................ Tony Surace Aboriginals wandered the continent of Aus­ Laboratory..................................

Atlab/Colorfilm spent 14 years hunting him.

This docu­ Asst, d ire c to r.............................

PaulC rosisca C o m po ser................................Vance Burrows tralia. The impact W hite Man had on their B udget...................................................$427,000 mentary of the crime and long chase ends in Camera a s s ts ............................... Janet Lane, Prod, supe rvisor........................ David Noakes lives and culture was profound. This dram a­ Length................................................................95 mins a television interview via satellite link-up W endy Rodgers, tized documentary series looks at how one Script assistant.......................................... Lillian Arthur G a u g e .........................................................16mm John Anderson, between Biggs and Slipper in Brazil and group of Aborigines, the Pintubi, came to Additional c a m e ra ........................................ Jeff Hughes Shooting sto c k .............................................7247 Neg. London.

Tonti Connelly Neg. m a tch in g ........................ Tang Thien Tai terms with the invasion of their land.

Neg. m atch ing..........Neg M atching Services, Ron and Marilyn Delaney Sound transfer m ixe r..............Sound On Film Dubbing m ix e r........................ Brett Robinson Laboratory...................................................Atlab Post-production......................... Custom Video P rogress.................................Aw aiting release Cast: Michael W ayne, Jim Backus.

S yn opsis: The history of denim as a fabric and how jeans changed from pants worn by Genoan sailors in the 15th Century to the high fashion, designer-label garm ents of today.

SHORTS

CINEMA PAPERS March-April — 81

Tolley & Gardner!

Insurance Brokers to the Film & Entertainment Industry with Local & World Wide Facilities FEATURE FILMS Cast negatives props equipment cameras liabilities weather aircraft personal accident livestock . ..

STAGE PRODUCTIONS and SPORTING EVENTS Non-appearance cancellation . . .

YOU NEED IT — WE’LL INSURE IT M ELBOURNE VALBAKER LEON LAW RENCE 628 -6 3 0 B o u rk e S tr e e t (03) 67 5112

SY DNEY B A R R Y C A P E L IN 56 B e rry S tr e e t N o rth Sydney (02) 929 4 1 6 6

R. H. Tolley & Gardner Pty Ltd

THINKING OF FILMING IN CENTRAL OR NORTHERN AUSTRALIA? THEN CONTACT US FOR ADVICE O N LOCATIONS, EQUIPMENT, PERMITS, CREW, PRODUCTION SUPERVISION A N D A MILLION OTHER THINGS THAT CAN DRIVE YOU NUTS W HEN FILMING IN REMOTE AREAS. “ CHECK W ITH THE LOCALS," THEY SAY WE'RE LOCALS A N D USED TO FILMING UNDER DIFFICULT CONDITIONS.

PO BOX 3552, DARWIN, NORTHERN TERRITORY. ___________ TELEPHONE: (089) 851093

Production Survey

Music performed b y ................................Vance Burrows, Progress.................................. Post-production G a u g e ........................................................16mm Exec, assistant..................... Mary Gustavsson SOLAR WISE Kevin Jones Synopsis: This program shows three differ­ Shooting s to c k ....... Eastmancolor 7247, 7293 G auge....................................................... 16mm Prod, co m pany............................................ R&RProds Additional e d itin g ..................................... Bryan McLellan ent aspects of the floor-manager’s job: ( 1) Progress............................................. In release Progress....................................Pre-production Dist. com pany.........................Tasmanian Film M ixe r................................................. Eddie Mills floor-managing a studio interview, (2 ) floor­ Synopsis: Technological changes in the S y n o p s is : A film on pub lic housing Corporation N a rrator......................................... Lillian Arthur managing a drama scene and (3) the role of newspaper printing industry, its effects on the philosophy and practice.

Producer.....................

R&R in association with Mixed a t .......................................... ABC, Perth the floor-manager (or first assistant director), quality of service and the changes it brings to Film Victoria Laboratory............................................Colorfilm in an on-going drama series; in this case, the people’s lives who are directly involved in the F A B U L O U S F IF T IE S D irector.......................................................... RonBrown B udget.................................................... $30,000 ABC’s music-drama Sw eet and Sour. process. Filmed in The A g e newspaper Prod, com pany.............. Ukiyo Films Australia Scriptw riters....................................Ron Brown, Length...............................................................23 mins building.

Dist. com pany.................................. Tasmanian Film Don Dennet Gau9e ........................................................ 16mm BRUCE GYNGELL: INSIGHTS INTO Corporation Photography......................................John Lord Shooting s to c k ...............................Ektachrome AUSTRALIAN TELEVISION CHILDREN WITH SPECIAL Producer................................... Don McLennan Sound re co rd ist............................................ RonBrown Synopsis: The film centres on Bunbury and ABILITIES Director......................................Don McLennan Producer..................................... Eric Halliday E d ito r..............................................................RonBrown districts in Western Australia. It shows the Photography.............................Peter Friedrich Director........................................Mark Sanders Exec, p ro d u ce r...................Vincent O ’ Donnell wildlife that lives on the surrounding water­ Prod, com pany...................................Film Unit, Based on an interview Laboratory.................................................... VFL ways and the influence man has on them Materials Production, Curriculum Branch, Sound recordist..........................................Lloyd Carrick E d ito r........................................ Peter Friedrich betw een.................................. Bruce Gyngell G a uge........................................................16mm Education Department of Victoria through changing their natural environment.

Exec, p roduce r...................................... Vincent O ’ Donnell and Julie James Bailey Producer........................................................ IvanGaal Progress............................................................. Inrelease Prod, co-ordinator........................................Sue Chamberlain Sound recordist.............................Deri Hadler Director.......................................................... Ivan Gaal Narrator: Maurie Fields.

WE’RE COMING TO GET YOU Lighting cam eram an.............. Peter Friedrich Videotape e dito r.........................................Peter Simpson Synopsis: The wise use of solar energy in Scriptw riters..................................Joan Dalton, Prod, secretary.....................................Bronwyn W alker planning and building is explored by a Sharon Hurst, Camera o perator..................... Peter Friedrich Prod, com pany.........Sportsmaster Programs Floor m anager....................................... Norman Neeson Ivan Gaal Mixed a t.............................. R.G. Film Services goanna.

Dist. co m p a n y..........Sportsmaster Programs Laboratory.............................................Cinevex Studio camera operators..............Conrad Mill, Photography............................................... Kevin Anderson Producers................................................... Garry Holt, G a u g e ....................................................... 16mm George Petrykowski, THE STATE OF LOVE IN VICTORIA Sound recordist..........................................David Hughes Bill Scholer Progress..............................................In release Youvanna Chantarasy Editor..............................................................Ivan Gaal Scriptw riter...................................................John Little S crip tw riter.................................................Pablo Albers Synopsis: A film which encourages and M ake-up......................................... Suzi Hatton Exec, produce r................. Warren O. Thomas Sound recordist....................................... Roland McManis Exec, pro d u ce r................... Vincent O ’Donnell Studios........................................................AFTS endorses swimming as an appropriate and Prod, m anager.............................................. RobMcCubbin Editor............................................Peter Fletcher Exec, assistant......................Mary Gustavsson rewarding activity for older adults.

Gauge......................................... 1 in. videotape Continuity.................................................... Anne McLeod Composer....................................................Mario Miilo G a u g e ........................................................16mm P rogress..................................

Post-production G affer............................................................. RobMcCubbin Exec, producer...............................Dick Tanner Progress.....................................Pre-production Synopsis: This program, with Bruce Gyngell H O N O R A R Y P R O B A T IO N Neg. m atching...................Victorian Negative Prod, manager........ • ............ Barbara Burleigh Synopsis: A young tram conductor meets the interviewed by Julie James Bailey, provides Cutting Service O F F IC E R S Prod, secretary ......................... Sandy Holt woman of his dreams fleetingly as she alights some amazing insights into the background Musical director............................ Steve Albon Prod, accountant........................................... Jim Tree from his tram to catch a country bound train.

S criptw riter..............................................Jeremy Press and decision-making processes of the tele­ Music performed b y ..................... Steve Albon Script assistant................................................BillScholer Aided and encouraged by the tram driver he Exec, p roduce r...................................... Vincent O ’Donnell vision organizations in Australia: from those Sound e d ito r.............................................. David Hughes Lighting c am eram a n................................. Hans Heidrich absconds with the tram. They jum p the rails Exec, assistant............................................Mary Gustavsson historic opening-night broadcasts through to Editing assistant............................................RobMcCubbin Camera assistan t........................................John Ogden and set off on a wild tram chase. Setting their G auge........................................................ 16mm the present day.

M ix e r........................................................... David Hughes 2nd unit pho tograph y...................................PhilDority, own course they fly from city streets to Progress..................................... Pre-production Title designer.......................................... Violetta Jasiunas Greg Hunter, country roads of Victoria in search of the girl Synopsis: Recruitment of honorary probation SPLENDID FELLOWS (1934) AND Mixed a t..................................................... Sound Firm Martin McGrath, of his dreams. officers is a continuing problem. The Depart­ AUSTRALIAN HISTORY Laboratory....................................................VFL Lee Pulbrook ment of Community Welfare Services has Length...............................................................

29mins Asst art d ire c to rs ...........................................LynGadsdon, SURVIVING THE SUMMER PERIL Producer.........................................Eric Halliday great difficulty in recruiting people who have G auge....................................................... 16mm Peter Metro a shared economic and cultural outlook to the Director.........................................................Mark Sanders Prod, com pany....................................... Tindale Prods Shooting s to c k .................. Eastmancolor 7247 offenders. The intention of the film is to reach W ardrobe..............................Advance Australia Scriptwriter......................................................Ina Bertrand Producer.......................................................Tony Chenn Progress..............................................In release Asst ed ito rs ..................................................Julia Gelhard, people in the lower socioeconomic group and Based on the original idea Director.........................................................Tony Chenn Synopsis: By means of two case studies, this encourage them to become honorary Amanda Sheldon b y ................................................ Ina Bertrand Exec, pro d u ce r...................................... Vincent O ’ Donnell documentary film is aimed to stimulate dis­ Neg. m atch ing................... Chris Rowell Prods Sound recordist............................................ DeriHadler probation officers.

Exec, assistant............................................ Mary Gustavsson cussion about curriculum strategies for the Music performed b y ............. Little River Band, Editor............................................................ Mark Sanders Progress..................................... Pre-production gifted and talented children in the ordinary J O B C R E A T IO N S C H E M E A N D Glenn Shorrock Prod, d esigner.........................................Dennis Gentle Synopsis: A series of four training films classroom.

Sound e d ito r............................................... Peter Fletcher A R T IS T S Prod, secretary.....................................Bronwyn Walker which broadly parallel the recent publication Editing assistants..........................................LeeSmith, Prod, assistant............................................KayeDineen Prod. C om pany.............Ukiyo Films and OCP S urviving the S um m e r Peril. The themes of MAWSON BASE — FACE TO FACE Amanda Sheldon Floor manager........................................ Jeremy English Producer...................................Don McLennan the four films are: home architecture and M ixers.............................................................PhilHaywood, Technical d ire c to r........................................ RodBower Prod, com pany............................................. Film Unit, design for survival; landscape and garden Director..................................... Don McLennan Phil Tipene Materials Production, Curriculum Branch, Studio cam eras...................................... Conrad Mill, Exec, pro d u ce r...................Vincent O ’Donnell design for survival; facing fire emergencies Narrator...................................................... Glenn Shorrock Education Department of Victoria George Petrykowski Lighting cam eraman..........Zbigniew Friedrich for the community; and survival tactics for the Anim ation........................................................LynGadsdon, Vision sw itch ing...........Youvanna Chantarasy Producer........................................................IvanGaal Camera o pe rator................................ Zbigniew Friedrich fire and emergency services.

Peter Metro Directors........................................... Ian Toohill, M ake-up........................................................ SuziHatton Mixed a t ...................................................... Open Channel O pticals...........................Optical and Graphics Rob McCubbin Video facility............................................... Open ChannelTREES AND WASTE WATER M ix e r.......................................Barry Fernandes Title designer.............................................. Peter Newton Scriptw riter....................................... Ian Toohill Narrator............................................................Ina Bertrand G auge................................................ % in. BVU ( w o r k in g t it le ) Tech, adviser..........................................Howard Rubie Photography..................................... Ian Toohill Studios....................................................... AFTS Progress............................................ Production Publicity........................Wheatley O rganization Sound recordist..........................David Hughes Prod, com pany.............. Street’s Ahead Prods Mixed a t......................................... AFTS Sound Synopsis: Three documentaries, on video­ Mixed at......................................................United Sound E d ito r.........................................Rob McCubbin Post-Production Producer...................................................

Steven Salgo tape, each 20-30 minutes duration, broadly Laboratories...................................... Cine-Film, Composer................................. Neville Stanley Director.........................................Russell Street Laboratory........................................... Colorfilm along the following thematic lines: (1 ) new Atlab, Exec, p roduce r.................. Warren O. Thomas Scriptwriter...................................

Russell Street Length..................................................... 37 mins roles for artists and new ways of working, (2 ) Colorfilm Musical d ire c to r....................... Neville Stanley Photography.................................................Gary Smith Gauge.........................................1 in. videotape community groups and their relations with job Length..................................................... 47 mins Sound e d ito r...............................David Hughes Shooting s to c k ......................... 1 in. videotape Sound recordist...............................................Ian Ryan creation schemes and (3) what participation Narrator....................................... Dr Phillip Law G a u g e ........................................................ 16mm Editor..................................................... Ray Daly Progress............................................................. Inrelease in the job creation scheme has meant to Shooting s tock..’. ............................. 7247, 7293 Exec, pro d u ce r......................................

Vincent O ’ Donnell First relea sed.................................... December 1983Laboratory.................................................... VFL artists.

Synopsis: The dedication, sacrifice and Length............................................................... 30 mins Exec, assistant..................... Mary Gustavsson Synopsis: A program in the AFTS series, G auge........................................................ 16mm financial problems facing the people involved LA W EN FO R C EM EN T A N D THE Mixed a t ................................ Film Soundtrack "Approaches to Australian Film s": Dr Ina Shooting s to c k .......Eastmancolor 7247, 7293 with three of the yachts prepared for the Laboratory..............................................Cinevex Bertrand discusses the historical and social B IC Y C L IS T Am erica's Cup campaign, focusing on P rogress................................. Post-production G a uge........................................................ 16mm context which influenced the making of Producer.......................................Steven Salgo Scheduled relea se............................ May 1984 Challenge 12, Australia 2 and Advance.

Progress.............................................Production Beaumont Sm ith's last film , S p le n d id Scriptw riter.................................Ian McFadgen Synopsis: The film depicts the isolation and Synopsis: The film designed to illustrate the Fellows (1934). its effects on the people who live and work at Exec, pro d u ce r...................Vincent O ’Donnell use of domestic and industrial waste water on G auge........................................................ 16mm Mawson Base, Antarctica. tree plantations and the social and ecological VIDEO EFFECTS Progress..................................... Pre-production advantages of such use.

Producer..................................... Eric Halliday Synopsis: The film, specifically for the Police Director........................................Mark Sanders Force, focuses on the attitude of the police in Scriptw riter............................................ Stephen Jones regard to bicycling traffic offenders. It will Based on the original idea demonstrate a real need to change the well b y ........................................................Stephen Jones established prejudice in favor of cyclists, Sound recordist.............................................DeriHadler and seeks to encourage police to enforce the Videotape editors.......Youvanna Chantarasy, law with care and concern.

CF (CYSTIC FIBROSIS) Neil Maloney Studio cam eram en........ George Petrykowski, Prod, com pany........................... Just Another A L IV IN G M E M O R Y John Agapitos Production Company Scriptwriter.......................... Anamaria Beligan IAN’S CHOICE Technical directors.......................................Bob Foster, Dist. com pany.........................Tasmanian Film Exec, produce r..................Vincent O'Donnell Rod Bower Corporation Prod, com pany................... Television Makers Exec, assistant...................Mary Gustavsson Special e ffe c ts...................................... Stephen Jones, Producer......................................John Hughes P roducer.......................................John Culliton Prod, co-ordinator....................... Steven Salgo Mark Sanders Director........................................ John Hughes Director............................................. John Adey G auge........................................................ 16mm M ix e r................................................Deri Hadler Photography............................... Toni Chaffey, Scriptwriter..................................................

Brian Hannant Progress..................................... Pre-production ALICE IN EFFECTSLAND Mixed a t ............AFTS Sound Post-production Vivien Mehes Sound recordist...........................Laurie Napier Synopsis: A film on the removal of the anoProducer.........................................................Eric Halliday Laboratory............................................Colorfilm Sound recordists.............................Paul Clark, Technical d ire c to r.....................................

David Brogden thropological collection of the Museum of Director.................................................... Cynthia Connop Length..................................................... 28 mins Laurie Robinson Exec, produce r........................... Peter Dimond Victoria to a new home. It uses the removal of Sound recordist........................Graham Tardif Gauge......................................... 1 in. videotape E d itors.................................. Peter Fredericks, Prod, m anager........................................Stewart Binstead the collection as a unifying theme to reflect Editor........................................................Cynthia Connop Shooting stock....... 1 in. videotape and 16mm John Hughes Length..................................................... 13 mins the role of museums within Australian Prod, m anager.......................Nancy W ahlquist Progress...........................................In release Exec, pro d u ce r...................................... Vincent O ’Donnell Gauge.............................. „...-..1 irt. videotape society.

Lighting cam eraman.................... Steve Arnold First relea sed......................... November 1983 Assoc, producer..................Michael Vaughan Cast: David Foster (Ian), Carmen Tanti Camera assistan t....................................... Anna Howard Synopsis: The program identifies several Lighting cam eraman.................. James Grant (Teresa), Phillip Quast (Ted), Jenny Ludlum READ Y OR NO T Gaffer.............................................................. KenCrouch video effects and how they can be achieved 2nd unit op e ra to r........................................ John Cumming (Annie), Cecily Poison (Sophie).

Prod, com pany.............The Production Group Art director................................. Dennis Gentle using the basic facilities available in Camera assistant..........................................RexNicholson Synopsis: A situation is enacted to reveal Dist. com pany..................................Tasmanian Film M ake-up.....................................Sarah Weedon Laboratory.................................................... VFL university, college and art school audio-visual sexist, racist and national prejudices which Corporation P rops..................... :...................... Keiran Usher departments. Stephen Jones, who presents G a u g e .......................................................16mm are current in the work place in public Producers............................ Michael Vaughan, the program, is well known as a designer of Special effects a dviser................................ PaulNichola Progress........................................... In release education. The purpose of the film is to David Campbell Gauge......................................... 1 in. videotape video effects hardware and as an experi­ Synopsis: The film is an optimistic, but stimulate discussion with a view to bringing Director.........................................

Colin Budds Progress.................................. Post-production mental program maker. nevertheless realistic look at cystic fibrosis about changes in attitudes.

Scriptwriters.........................Michael Vaughan, First released............................. February 1984 and its effect on the lives of sufferers and Hardy Stow Cast: Constance Lansberg (Alice), Ken Arlich their families.

MANAGING SYDNEY’S WASTE Script edito rs.........................................Gwenda Marsh, (Mad Hatter), Paul Nichola (Cheshire Cat), CRIKEY, THERE’S A TRACTOR ON Prod, com pany........................Southland Films Colin Budds Peter Luchvitz (Peter Rabbit).

Dist. com pany...................GW Australian Film Sound recordist.............................Geoff White THE FARM Synopsis: Alice rudely discovers how her and Video Marketing E d ito r................................................................JillRice land of wonder is created. The program looks Prod, com pany..................................... Comedia Director......................................... Bruce Hogan Exec, p roduce r...................................... Vincent O ’ Donnell at techniques of creating a num ber of effects Dist. com pany........................Tasmanian Film S criptw riter..........................

Stephen Measday Exec, assistant............................................Mary Gustavsson including streaking, matts, motion control Corporation Prod, manager............................................. Mick MillsPhotography....................................................IanMcDougall systems, horoscope, m iniatures and glass THE AGE OF CHANGE Producer................................Stephen Mepham Sound recordist......................................Michael Gissing Lighting cam eram an......Paul Dallwitz, A.C.S. matting.

D irector..................................................... Robert Grant Prod, com pany.................................... Film Unit, Editor............................................... James Davis Camera a ssistant................. Peter Van Santen Scriptw riter...................................................Mark Little Materials Production, Curriculum Branch, Exec, p roduce r...........................................Peter Dimond G rip ...............................................David Cassar BEING A FLOOR-MANAGER Photography............................. Martin McGrath Education Department of Victoria Mixed a t ...........................................Dubbs & Co. G affer.............................................. John Irving P roducer......................................... Eric Halliday Producer........................................................ Ivan GaalSound recordist........................... Lloyd Carrick Laboratory..............................................Cinefilm Sound e d ito r............................................... Terry Rodman Director......................................................... Mark Sanders Director...........................................................Ivan GaalEditor.............................................................. Guy Miller Length..................................................... 23 mins Sound m ixer................................................Peter Dalanky Exec, pro d u c e r...................Vincent O ’Donnell S criptw riter.......................................Don Bethel Curriculum consultant...................... Helen Kon G a u g e ........................................................ 16mm Laboratory............................................. Cinevex Exec, assistant....................Mary Gustavsson Based on the original idea Photography........................... Kevin Anderson, Shooting stock............................. Eastmancolor G a u g e ........................................................ 16mm Lighting cam eram an............... Martin McGrath b y .................................................. Don Bethel Malcolm Richards Synopsis: The film illustrates the role and the P rogress................................. Awaiting release Camera operator...................... Martin McGrath Photography...........................Gregg Penneket Sound recordist.............................Phil Stirling work of the Metropolitan Waste Disposal Cast: David Bradshaw (Vince Franco), G affer...............................................John Irving Sound recordists.......................... Paul Brincat, Editor.....................................................Ivan Gaal Authority in the management of the disposal Jeannie Drynan (June Franco), Peter HarveyMixed a t ..................Film Soundtrack Australia Leo Pollini, Composer................................................. Neville Stanley of solid wastes in Sydney.

Wright (Peter Davidson), Lisa Dombroski Laboratory............................................. Cinevex John O ’Connell Exec, pro d u c e r..................Warren O. Thomas (Carmel Somers).

G a uge........................................................ 16mm Videotape e d ito r..........................................Mark Sanders Prod, m anager......................... Rob McCubbin MILK AT ITS BEST Synopsis: Ready or Not is fiction, but events Progress...........................................In release Prod, secretary..................................... Bronwyn W alker Prod, assistan t.........................Michelle Morris like those in the film are occurring almost Prod, com pany....................................... MichaelRobertson Cast: Maurie Fields (Dad), Simon Thorpe Floor m anagers............................................. DonBethel, Clapper/loader.............................. Steve Radic daily. A small factory facing closure is taken Film Prods (Dave).

Jerem y English, G affer.........................................Rob McCubbin over by another company to be used as a test Director.....................................................MichaelRobertson Synopsis: Crikey, T h e re ’s a T ra c to r on the Wayne Barry, Neg. m atch ing................... Victorian Negative bed for the introduction of modern com puter­ Scriptw riter.............................................

MichaelRobertson Farm employs the services of two well-loved Norman Neeson Cutting Service ized manufacturing equipment. The workers P hotography............................................... Peter Morley, characters of the Australian bush to examine EFP cam eram an.................... Greg Penneket Music performed by.................................Neville Stanley do not understand the changes happening Richard Cole some major factors in tractor accidents, and Studio cameramen ........George Petrykowski, Sound e d ito r.............................................. David Hughes around them and their suspicion and resent­ Sound recordist............................................ PaulBrincat their prevention.

Conrad Mill M ixer...........................................David Harrison ment of new technology grows and the E d itor............................................................Peter Somerville Technical d ire cto rs.................John Saunders, Title designer.:.................................................IanGray tension spills out into their domestic lives.

CHOICE OF HOUSING Exec, produce r...........................................Peter Dimond Rod Bower Mixed a t ................. Film Soundtrack Australia The film does not detail answers to the Prod, m anage r..................................

Vikki Gates Technical p ro d u ce r...................................... Bob Foster Scriptw riter....................................... David Tiley Laboratory .....................VFL problems of new technology, only the direc­ Gauge.......................... *............. 1 in,, videotape Length.......:.....................................

25 mins Exec, pro d u ce r................... Vincent O ’Donnell tions in which answers might be found.

GOVERNMENT FILM PRODUCTION

FILM VICTORIA

NEW SOUTH WALES FILM CORPORATION

AUSTRALIAN FILM AND TELEVISION SCHOOL

AVRB FILM UNIT

Concluded on p. 108

CINEMA PAPERS March-April — 83

CHERYL NEWTON

RentingGear?

Film postiche • Hand-made wigs, beards and moustaches (All work done on finest film lace) • Latex working

At Lemac Film & Video Equipment Rentals we’ve got Melbourne’s most comprehensive range of 16 & Super 16 mm film equipment

%

PYRMONT HAIRDRESSING 139 HARRIS STREET PYRMONT NSW 2009 Ph: (02) 660 6516

Aaton (Hire @ Sales); Arriflex 16SR BE ST production kits; Video Assist Gear Time Recording; Arri Image Stabilizer; a huge range of zoom and standard lenses, including the new Zeiss KM00T2, the Cooke Super 16 Zoom, & Angenieux 16-44T1Â 3.5 Century to the 300 mm T2.8 Canon - lights, sound & editing gear too.

The Sony Betacam 3 tube Broadcast Camera with the BVU110 Recorder, Wide Angle Fujinon 6.5 - 23 mm Zoom for Sony Cameras @ the .7 x wide angle lens attachment for video zooms with macro.

NEW ZEALAND CONTACT: BRYONY HÜRDEN Business Ph. Auckland 58 4362 Answering Service 541 5488

FILMWORKS POST PRODUCTION PTY L T D _____ -

• • • • • •

Lemac Film ® Video 279 Highett Street, Richmond Victoria, 3l2l Phone (03) 429 2992

a

Comfortable 16mm editing rooms Latest model Steenbecks Double-head projection Transfers Typing service O ut of house rentals

Australian agent for the FLEXFILL reflector system

\ ictorian S Tasmanian representative for Filmwest AATON.

Telephone: (02) 699 1866 28 Pine Street, Chippendale NSW 2008

The end of the clapper..

With the uncompromising AATON LTR with Clear Time Recording (CTR)!

The miracle of Clear Time Recording will save you a lot of time and money and precious film stock, by giving you time marking in clear figures and letters direct onto your film - the day, date, time, scene, take and production numbers permanently printed onto your film, completely eliminating clapper errors.

If you already own an Aaton LTR, it can be fitted with Clear Time Recording giving you access to the latest in film technology without giving up the camera you know best.

Further details available from:

13 FILMWEST Importers and distributors of Aaton equipment throughout Australia.

SYDNEY:

MELBOURNE:

PERTH:

SINGAPORE:

P e r c y Jones M o tio n P icture Services, 1st F lo o r, 2 9 C ollege St: G lad esville. N .S .W . 2111.

T elep h on e: (02) 8 1 6 3371

Joh n B ow ring - L em ac F ilm s (A ust) P ty. Ltd. 2 7 9 H igh ett St. R ichm ond .

V ictoria. 3121.

Tel: (03) 4 2 8 3 3 3 6 /4 2 9 2992

F ilm w est E quipm ent Sales P ty. Ltd. 75 B ennett St. East P erth. W .A . 6000.

T elex: A A 9 4 1 5 0 Tel: (09) 325 1177/325 1423

F ilm w est P te. Ltd. Su ite 157 R affles H otel 1-3 Beach R d. Singapore. 0 7 1 8 T elex: R S 3 6 3 8 9 Tel: 3 3 7 8 0 4 1 /3 3 6 1509

Man of Flowers H e le n G r e e n w o o d

Man of Flowers was the most unusual success of 1983. An art film, shot on a relatively low-budget and deliberately under-promoted, the appeal of the film lies in its ability to appear to raise issues when in fact it merely reflects opinions; to seem to challenge the mind when it actually only tickles a cerebral fancy; and to present a complex veneer of beautiful photo­ graphy, disparate characters and quirky humor that masks a simple intent. Man of Flowers is a charming deception that makes one believe one has seen a highly intellectual and pro­ vocative film when one has merely had one’s senses beautifully and effort­ lessly satiated. This is not to say that the film is facile or trite but that it involves audiences without making any demands on them.

Charles Bremer (Norman Kaye) is an intriguing character: he is initially presented in an almost comic fashion as an unblinking, small man who derives pleasure from watching an artist’s model, Lisa (Alyson Best), do a striptease in his living room then marching into a church across the road to play the organ (visual pun intended, surely). Gradually, however, as the film progresses Charles becomes less and less a harmless figure of fun.

Kaye, in a delicate performance, manages to create a more aware and intellectual version of Peter Sellers’ Chauncey Gardner (in Hal Ashby’s B e in g There, 1 9 8 1 ), with a touch of Pierre Huysman’s Des Esseintes (A g a i n s t N a t u r e , 1 8 8 4 ) . Both Chauncey and Charles come into wealth in the later stages of their lives and move in a world of their own which reduces people to images on a television screen (in the case of Chauncey) or objects (in the case of Charles). Both are incapable of sexual expression, although women do their best to coax it out of them. They exude a mixture of retarded naivety and guileless wisdom which proves a magnet for other people who can then interpret Chauncey and Charles as they wish. And, eventually, both Chauncey and Charles outwit and out­ manoeuvre the people who are attempting to manipulate them. By u n d e r e stim a tin g C h a u n c e y and Charles, those who attempt to use them become victims of their own machinations.

Kaye’s portrayal of tortured sensi­ bility, deliberateness and delicate naivety is a perfect echo of the dram­ atic flashback sequences ■Paul Cox uses to recall Charles’ boyhood.

With quavering, slow-moving images reminiscent of a nightmare, these scenes are a powerful depiction of a misunderstood childhood.

The need for and fascination with sensuality and beauty by the boy Charles is ignored by a stern, authorit­

arian father (Werner Herzog) and catered for by a beautiful, if overpro­ tective, mother (Hilary Kelly). Grad­ ually the boy turns away from his father, retreating psychologically and raising claims of retardation from one of his aunts. The latter (played by Eileen Joyce and Marianne Baillieu), over-blown and fleshy, are the incarnation of the women in a Titian painting and a stark contrast to the lean, ascetic lines of Charles’ mother.

The aunts also seem to be somewhat more than that: their sexually provoca­ tive behaviour and blowsy familiarity, combined with Charles’ father’s penchant for paintings his mother considers pornographic, hint at a rift between his parents and affaires that his father deliberately parades before his more prudish and chaste wife.

The nightmarish evocation explains why Charles grows up with obsessions about naked women, flowers and sculpture. Certainly, the constant presence of water — the bath, the swimming pool, the sea — represents a

security that Charles still craves and his inability to emerge from a child.-i like state. These scenes with their psychological implications and striking filmic techniques render M a n o f F lo w e r s more complex and add to one’s perception of the film as an intel­ lectual statement.

However, this is a red herring because the character Charles is not as much a study of a distorted psyche as it is a representation of an attitude to art.

Charles is a strong advocate of a classical school of thought on art: sculpture must make you want to touch it; real paintings are of land­ scapes and flowers; a painting is some­ thing you can see even when your eyes are shut; and Talking Heads does not compare to Donizetti.

The questioning of artistic (and other) values is presented as a sim­ plistic conflict between the traditional and the avant-garde, the old and the nouveau. The theme however is under­ mined by the fact that David (Chris Haywood), the painter supposed to

.represent the antithesis to the film­ maker’s point of view, begs the ques­ tion.by the weakness and absurdity of the character. t Haywood plays the comic relief well, but the modern painter equipped with flailing rope brush and blow-torch is hardly a credible counter-argument on behalf of the values of modern art.

Similarly, in the exaggeratedly crude relationship between Lisa and David, the latter can hardly be taken seriously as a representation of the chauvinistic, inconsiderate male and thereby weakens the reason for Lisa’s refuge in a lesbian relationship. Given, too, the rather flat portrayal of Jane by Sarah Walker, one could be forgiven for regarding Lisa’s actions as a passing idiosyncracy.

It is for that reason that I cannot agree with Meaghan Morris that M a n o f F l o w e r s “ . . . is a film about values and one that asks . . . that we inter­ rogate our own” .1 While the film is 1.

Financial Review,

S e p t e m b e r 30, 1983.

CINEMA PAPERS March-April — 85

Man o f Flowers

“ a ffirm in g r a th e r t h a n d e s tro y in g th e ric h n e s s o f tra d itio n a l c u ltu ra l v a l u e s ” , it d o e s n o t p r e s e n t a c h a lle n g e t o o n e ’s v a lu e s . I n s t e a d , it lu lls o n e i n to a n u n q u e s tio n in g a c c e p ta n c e o f th e v a lu e s r e p r e s e n t e d b y C h a r le s b e c a u s e t h e r e is n o c o n v in c i n g o r e q u a lly a llu rin g a lte rn a tiv e .

The a ttra c tiv e n e s s of M an of F l o w e r s is d u e , in p a r t , t o t h e m in o r c h a r a c t e r s . C r e a t e d b y C o x a n d f e llo w s c e n a r i s t B o b E llis , t h e y a r e , w ith t h e e x c e p ti o n o f t h e a r t t e a c h e r ( p la y e d b y J u l i a B la k e w h o s e c o n f u s e d G e r m a n a n d I r i s h a c c e n t b e tr a y s a n e q u a lly v a g u e c h a r a c t e r ) , d e li g h t f u l d iv e r s io n s t h a t a ls o s e rv e t o a d d i n te r e s t t o th e c h a r a c t e r o f C h a r le s . T h e g u i l t - r i d d e n , s e l f - p it y i n g p s y c h i a t r i s t ( B o b E llis ) , th e p o s t m a n w ith t h e o r i e s o n t h e m e a n i n g o f lif e w h o n e v e r w r ite s l e t t e r s ( B a r r y D ic k in s ) , th e c o p p e r s m i t h ( P a t r i c k C o o k ) w i t h i n tr i g u i n g id e a s a b o u t s o c i e t y ’s d i s p o s a l o f its d e a d , a n d th e s h y c h u r c h w a r d e n ( T o n y L le w e lly n J o n e s ) a r e a d iv e r s e c o m m u n i t y o f e q u a l l y lo s t s o u ls . It is a ls o a w e lc o m e a b s u r d i t y r a t h e r t h a n p r e te n ti o u s n e s s th a t th e s e c h a ra c te rs a re p la y e d re s p e c ­ tiv e ly b y a w e ll- k n o w n s c r i p t w r i t e r , p la y w r ig h t, c a rto o n is t and th e a s s o c i a t e p r o d u c e r o f t h e f ilm .

T h e f ilm is a ls o e n h a n c e d b y th e s tu n n in g p h o to g r a p h y o f Y u ri S o k o l, a lu s h o p e ra tic s c o re , a n d b e a u tifu l a rt d i r e c t i o n b y A s h e r B ilu , r e p le te w ith a ll u s i o n s to T it i a n p a i n t i n g s , C a r a ­ v a g g io - i n s p i r e d se ts a n d th e M a g r i tt e lik e c h a r a c t e r o f C h a r le s h i m s e l f . T h e a ll u s i o n s t o a r t e x te n d t o th e f in a l s c e n e : t h e s i l h o u e t t e d s o l i tu d e m i r r o r s t h e p i c t u r e p o s t c a r d t h a t C h a r le s d is c o v e r s in a n e a r l ie r s c e n e a s h e s ifts t h r o u g h h is m o t h e r ’s b e lo n g in g s .

T h e b e a u t y o f t h e s e t ti n g a n d th e w a rm th o f th e in d iv id u a ls w ho c o m p r i s e C h a r l e s ’ w o r l d c o n t r a s t w ith t h e c o n s t a n t t h r e a t o f i n v a s io n b y b a d a r t — t h a t is, u g lin e s s — a n d th e d e m o n s o f c h i l d h o o d — t h a t is, i s o l a ­ t i o n a n d i n s e c u r i t y . T h e b a la n c e a n d h a r m o n y t h a t C h a r le s h a s c r e a te d f o r h im s e lf a re th re a te n e d by th e se e x te r n a l a n d i n t e r n a l f o r c e s , a n d t h e p o te n tia l d is ru p tio n to C h a r le s ’ w o rld p r o m p t s h im t o a c t. B y d i s p o s i n g o f D a v id in a n u n l ik e l y b u t h ig h ly c r e a tiv e w a y , C h a r le s e li m in a t e s th e e x te r n a l o f f e n c e to h is s e n s ib ilitie s a n d p e a c e o f m in d . W h e t h e r h e a ls o p u r g e s h i m s e l f o f h is p s y c h o l o g ic a l a n d s e x u a l p r o b l e m s is n o t c le a r .

M a n o f F l o w e r s m a n a g e s to s a tis f y th e s e n s e s , p r o v i d e d i s a r m i n g w it a n d te a s e th e m in d w ith p r o v o c a t iv e i m a g e s , d r a w i n g th e a u d ie n c e in a n d c o n v in c i n g it t h a t t h e film is c h a l ­ le n g in g th e in te l le c t , w h e n , in f a c t , it is m e r e ly te a s i n g a n d d i s a r m i n g th e c o n v e r t e d . B u t w h o c a r e s ? I f o n ly m o r e A u s t r a l i a n f ilm s c o u ld p r o d u c e v is u a l t r e a t s s u c h a s th e s ig h t o f a m o n s tro u s , e x p re s s io n is t p a in tin g w in d in g its w a y u p a g a r d e n p a t h o r a d ig n if ie d C h a r le s B r e m e r t u r n i n g w ith r e d - r i m m e d e y e s to f a c e th e a f t e r n o o n s u n a n d th e c ry o f a b a b y in a p a r k .

Man of Flowers: Directed by: Paul Cox. Producers: Jane Ballantyne, Paul Cox. Associate producer: Tony Llewellyn-Jones.

Screenplay: Bob Ellis, Paul Cox. Director of photography: Yuri Sokol. Editor: Tim Lewis. Production designer: Asher Bilu.

Music: Excerpts from Gaetano Donizetti’s Lucia di Lammermoor. Sound recordist: Lloyd Carrick. Cast: Norman Kaye (Charles Bremer), Alyson Best (Lisa), Chris Haywood (David), Sarah Walker (Jane), Julia Blake (Art teacher), Bob Ellis (psychiatrist), Barry Dickins (postman), 86 — March-April CINEMA PAPERS

Careful, He Might Hear You

Patrick Cook (coppershop man), Victoria Eagger (Angela), Werner Herzog (Father), Hilary Kelly (Mother), James Stratford (young Charles), Eileen Joyce and Marianne Baillieu (Aunts). Production company: Flowers In te rn a tio n a l.

Distributor: Roadshow. 35 mm. 91 mins.

Australia. 1983.

Careful, He Might Hear You J im

Schem bri

C a r l S c h u l tz ’s C a r e f u l , H e M i g h t H e a r Y o u is a n e a s y film t o lik e . I t is th e s to r y o f tw o s is te r s b a t t l i n g f o r th e a f f e c ti o n s a n d le g a l c u s t o d y o f a n e p h e w , a n d is fu ll o f e m o t i o n a l c o n f lic ts . S e t in S y d n e y d u r i n g th e G r e a t D e p r e s s i o n , t h e f i l m ’s m e l o ­ d r a m a ti c s t r u c t u r e a n d n o s t a lg i c p e r ­ s p e c tiv e is c a u t i o u s n o t t o e lic it a n y u n s a v o ry o r u n s y m p a th e tic re s p o n s e s ; it s u c c e e d s in o f f e r i n g th e v ie w e r a n o c c a s io n a lly m o v in g , n o s t a lg i c “ t e a r je rk e r” .

N o n e th e le s s , th e re a re se v e ra l s ig n if ic a n t j a r r i n g n o t e s in t h e f ilm , s o m e o f t h e m s t e m m i n g f r o m th e f i lm ’s e a r n e s t c o n g e n i a l i ty . S e v e ra l s e g m e n ts o f t h e film a r e o v e r w r o u g h t , a n d t h e r e a r e s o m e m is ju d g m e n ts o f c h a ra c te riz a tio n and d ra m a tic e m p h a s is .

G e o r g e ( P e t e r W h i t f o r d ) a n d L ila ( R o b y n N e v in ) a r e t h e a u n t a n d u n c le w ho have ra is e d P .S .

(N ic h o la s G le d h ill) a s t h e i r o w n s o n in t h e i r w o r k in g - c la s s h o m e . P . S . ’s m o t h e r , S in d e n , d ie d g iv in g b i r t h a n d h is fa th e r, L o g a n ( J o h n H a rg re a v e s ), h a s d is a p p e a re d .

T h e r ic h a n d b e a u t i f u l A u n t V a n e s s a (W e n d y H u g h e s ) a rriv e s fro m L o n ­ d o n , a s s u r i n g L il a t h a t , a l t h o u g h s h e w ill ‘b o r r o w ’ h im n o w a n d t h e n , s h e d o e s n ’t “ w a n t t o c h a n g e t h e r h y t h m o f P . S . ’s l i f e ” . B u t h e r p r e s e n c e is c le a r ly d i s c o r d a n t . S h e c h a lle n g e s L i l a ’s c la im t h a t s h e a n d G e o r g e a r e p r a c t ic a ll y m o th e r a n d fa th e r to h im , a n d i n f u r ia t e s G e o r g e w h e n s h e sh u ts- P . S . o u t in th e h a ll w a y , w i t h G e o r g e i n s is tin g , “ W e d o n ’t ever s h u t h im o u t!”

W h e n P .S . a r r iv e s a t V a n e s s a ’s h u g e , r e n te d m a n s io n f o r h is f i r s t s ta y s h e im m e d ia t e l y b e g in s t o m o d if y h is sp e e c h , ta b le m a n n e rs a n d b e h a v io u r to s u it h e r u p p e r - c l a s s , B r itis h a s p i r a ­ t io n s . S h e e v e n r e d u c e s t h e n e a r - s a c r e d s t a tu s o f “ d e a r o n e ’s g a r d e n ” b y b l u n tl y te llin g P . S . t h a t u n d e r th e s to n e s la b lie t h e r o t t i n g r e m a in s o f h is m o th e r .

T h r o u g h h is s h u t t l i n g b e tw e e n th e c o n tr a s t i n g w o r ld s o f V a n e s s a a n d L ila , P .S . s o o n b e c o m e s t h e v ic tim o f th e c o n f li c t i n g v a lu e s a n d w is h e s th e y tr y to in s til in h im . T h is is b o r n e o u t m o s t n o t a b l y w h e n P . S . is m a d e b y each s is te r t o lie t o and keep c o n f id e n c e s f r o m th e o t h e r , s o m e th i n g c le a rly c o n tr a r y t o th e o p e n n e s s L ila

a n d G e o r g e h a d e n g e n d e r e d in h im b e f o r e V a n e s s a ’s a r r i v a l .

H o w e v e r , V a n e s s a ’s i n f l u e n c e o n P . S . is t e n u o u s ; th is is i l l u s t r a t e d w h e n h e m e e ts h is f a t h e r f o r t h e f i r s t tim e .

W h ile L o g a n is t w i tc h y a n d n e r v o u s , P . S . is r e s t r a i n e d a n d m a n n e r e d , s h o w in g n o e m o t i o n a n d a c t i n g l ik e t h e “ little g e n t l e m a n ” V a n e s s a w a n t s h im to be.

A l o n e w ith P . S . , L o g a n b r e a k s d o w n , a n d P .S ., m o m e n ta rily o u t o f V a n e s s a ’s s i g h t , v e n ts h is f e e lin g s , s a y in g t h a t h e w a n t s t o s t a y w i t h L il a a n d G e o r g e . L o g a n s w e a r s h e w ill fix it f o r P . S . , it b e in g t h e “ o n e t h i n g ” h e c a n d o f o r h im , a n d te lls P . S . t o “ b e lly - a c h e a n d m a k e a b ig f u s s ” i f h e is m a d e t o d o a n y t h i n g h e d is lik e s .

W e ll-m e a n in g a n d d e s p e ra te fo r r e d e m p t i o n , th is a s p e c t o f L o g a n ’s c h a r a c t e r , a n d its s u b s e q u e n t n e g a t i o n b y h is d r u n k e n n e s s a n d i r r e s p o n s i ­ b i li t y , is a n a p p e a l f o r v ie w e r s y m ­ p a t h y t h a t w o r k s . A s h e is a b o u t t o le a v e o n a t r a i n , it is r e v e a le d t h a t h is h e a r t - f e l t p r o m is e t o P . S . h a s b e e n b r o k e n , L o g a n h a v in g o n l y s ig n e d p a p e rs th a t k e ep V a n e ssa fro m ta k in g h im t o L o n d o n . L o g a n a p p e a r s n o t a s a v illa in b u t a s a p a t h e t i c , f a il e d p a r e n t , a v ic tim o f h is o w n v ic e s w h o s e o n ly le g a c y a n d s o u r c e o f p r i d e is P . S .

T h e e f f e c t o f th is b r i e f v is it f r o m h is f a t h e r o n P . S . is p r o f o u n d . H e s t a r t s t o r e b e l a g a i n s t V a n e s s a a n d d e c id e s n o t t o r e t u r n t o h e r , te l l in g h e r s o o n t h e p h o n e a n d h i d in g in a c lo s e t w h e n t h e c h a u f f e u r c o m e s t o p i c k h im u p .

A f t e r th e ju d g e (E d w a r d H o w e ll)

P.S. (Nicholas Gledhill) and his working-class aunt, Lila (Robyn Nevin). Carl Schultz’s Careful, He Might Hear You.

Careful, H e M ight Hear You

a w a rd s c u s to d y o f P .S . to V a n e s s a , P . S . a g a i n m a k e s h is l o y a l t ie s c le a r a n d b e g in s r e b e l li n g a g a i n s t h e r , u s i n g s a rc a s m , d e fia n c e a n d o v e rt d is p la y s o f h is d e s i r e t o b e w i t h L i l a a n d G e o rg e .

D u rin g a b ir th d a y p a r ty , a n im ­ p e n d in g s to r m fo rc e s th e c h ild re n in to th e h o u s e , th e e x tra v a g a n t ta b le s o f f o o d w h ic h h a v e b e e n set u p o n th e l a w n b lo w i n g a b o u t in t h e w i n d a s t h e s e r v a n t s v a in l y t r y t o c o r r e c t t h e m . T h i s a p t l y s y m b o l iz e s V a n e s s a ’s a tte m p t to e s ta b lis h a n o rd e r c o n tr a r y to w h a t th e n a tu ra l c o u rse o f c o m m o n se n se w o u ld d ic ta te .

In s id e , V anessa w itn e s s e s w ith h o r r o r a m a c a b re ta u n tin g c e re m o n y w h e r e P . S . h a s a ll t h e c h i l d r e n w a l k in g a b o u t c lu t c h in g c u s h i o n s a n d c h a n t ­ in g , “ H o l d m e L o g a n ” , i n m o c k im ita tio n o f w h a t P .S . h a s se e n V a n e s s a d o . V a n e s s a d e c i d e s t o le t P . S . g o b a c k t o L il a a n d G e o r g e , p a r t i n g w i t h t h e a d v ic e , “ F i n d o u t w h o y o u a re , P .S . so y o u c a n k n o w h o w to lo v e s o m e o n e e l s e . ” A f t e r V a n e s s a ’s a c c i d e n t a l d e a t h in a f e r r y , w h ic h is c r u s h e d b y a r a t h e r u n c o n v i n c i n g m o d e l o f a l in e r , P . S . r e c a ll s h e r m e s s a g e t o “ F i n d o u t w h o y o u a r e ” a n d s u m m o n s f r o m h is e x p e rie n c e s , in p a r tic u la r w ith L o g a n , t h e s e l f - a s s e r t i o n t o h e lp h i m t o d e c i d e t o g r o w u p . H e a s k s L il a w h a t h is r e a l n a m e is, w i t h e n c o u r a g e m e n t a n d a p p r o v a l f r o m G e o r g e , w h o c le a r l y w a n ts to see h im d e v e lo p . H e th e n tr iu m p h a n tly ru n s a b o u t th e g a rd e n s o f t h e m a n s i o n s h o u t i n g , “ I ’m B ill, I ’m B ill” , e c h o i n g t h e c o n s c i o u s s te p c lo s e r h e h a s t a k e n t o m a t u r i t y .

T h e c h a r a c t e r p o r t r a i t o f V a n e s s a is i m p o r t a n t t o t h e f i lm , f o r w h ile it is a d r a m a t i c s t r e n g t h i n i t s e l f , it r e f l e c t s s o m e m a jo r im b a la n c e s .

A l t h o u g h V a n e s s a d i s r u p t s t h e liv e s o f P . S . , G e o r g e a n d L i l a , s h e is n o t d ra w n a s a v i l l a in o u s fig u re of d e l i b e r a t e m a lic e . I n s i g h t s i n t o h e r c h a ra c te r re v eal a to rm e n te d w o m a n o f c o n fu s io n a n d c o n tra d ic tio n , w h o se e x te rn a l w e a lth , m a te ria l s e c u rity a n d b e a u ty m a s k h e r in te r n a l in s ta b ilitie s a n d e m o t i o n a l i s o l a t i o n . H e r p a s t lo v e a f fa ir e w ith L o g a n m o tiv a te s h e r to w a n t P . S . t o fill t h e e m o t i o n a l v o i d h e le ft, y e t h e r d e s ire fo r e m o tio n a l o rd e r is u n d e r m i n e d b y h e r w a v e r i n g t e m ­ p e r a m e n t . A n d h e r a d v ic e t o P . S . t o “ f i n d o u t w h o y o u a r e ” is a n a d m i s ­ s i o n o f f a i l u r e in h e r q u e s t f o r e m o t i o n a l f u l f i l m e n t . P . S . ’s d e s p a i r ­ in g r e a c t i o n t o h e r d e a t h a n d h is v i s i o n o f h e r n e a r t h e f i l m ’s e n d i n d i c a t e t h a t h e r lo s s c a r r i e s c o n s i d e r a b l e e m o t i o n a l i m p a c t f o r h i m a n d t h e v ie w e r s .

B u t w h ile V a n e s s a is t h e m o s t d r a m a t i c a l l y i n v o lv i n g c h a r a c t e r in t h e f i lm n e x t t o P . S . , L i l a a n d G e o r g e , in c o n t r a s t , a r e n o t g iv e n a c o m p a r a b l e a m o u n t o f d r a m a t i z a t i o n . T h e s c e n e in w h i c h t h e y v a in l y t r y t o s t o p L o g a n l e a v i n g o n a t r a i n is a s t r o n g s t a t e m e n t o f t h e i r c o m m i t m e n t t o a n d lo v e f o r P . S . T h e r e is a ls o a n e a t , t h o u g h a ll to o b r ie f , e v o c a tio n o f G e o rg e (th a n k s t o a n e x c e ll e n t p e r f o r m a n c e b y W h it f o r d ) as a h a rd -w o rk in g , h o n e s t m a n .

H o w e v e r , t h e i r c h a r a c t e r s , e s p e c ia lly t h a t o f G e o r g e , a r e g iv e n t o o l ittle b e a r i n g in t h e f i lm , a n d t h e i r b o n d w i t h P . S . is n o t s h o w n t o b e s u f f e r in g g r e a t l y f r o m t h e s t r a i n o f V a n e s s a ’s g ro w in g a c c e ss to a n d in flu e n c e o v e r h im .

T h is i n a d e q u a c y is b e s t e x e m p l if i e d b y L i l a ’s f l e e t i n g m e n t i o n t h a t V a n e s s a n o w h a s P . S . f o r f iv e d a y s a w e e k “ b ecau se we c o u l d n ’t f i g h t h e r a n y m o r e a n d c a n ’t a f f o r d a p r i v a t e s c h o o l” . T h e re lu c ta n c e t h a t w o u ld

Phar Lap

Phar Lap (Towering Inferno) wins his first race at the 1929 Derby at Randwick. Simon Wincer’s Phar Lap. a c c o m p a n y s u c h a d e c i s i o n , a n d th e im p e n d in g c h a n g e th a t th e p re d o m in ­ a n t l y B r i ti s h v a lu e s o f t h e p r i v a t e s c h o o l w o u l d b r i n g t o t h e i r liv e s , is n o t r e g is te r e d in a n y w a y o t h e r t h a n th is .

S i m il a r ly , G e o r g e ’s p o l it i c a l in v o lv e ­ m e n t s a n d L i l a ’s a s t h m a a r e a s p e c ts o f th e ir c h a ra c te rs th a t are n o t s u f f i c i e n t l y d e v e l o p e d . E a r l y o n , L ila w h e e z e s b rie fly b u t d o e s n o t a p p e a r to s u f f e r f r o m h e r c h r o n ic a s t h m a t ic c o n d i t i o n u n t i l m u c h l a t e r in t h e film , in t h e d r a m a t i c c o u r t r o o m s c e n e .

L ik e w i s e , G e o r g e ’s p o l it i c a l w o r k , a p art fro m re c e iv in g one s lig h t m e n tio n w h e n th a n k in g V a n essa fo r a n e w s u i t ( “ I ’ll r e a l ly b e f l a s h e d o u t a t T r a d e s H a l l in t h i s ” ), d o e s n o t f e a t u r e u n t i l t h e c o u r t s c e n e . H is s u b s e q u e n t o u t b u r s t u p o n d i s c o v e r i n g t h a t h is “ p r e c i o u s b o o k ” is r u i n e d is a n i n d i c a t i o n o f t h e s tr e s s h e is u n d e r , b u t l a c k s t h e p o w e r t h a t a b u i l d - u p w o u ld h a v e g iv e n it.

V a n e s s a ’s p r o m i n e n c e in t h e film a ls o r e f l e c t s a s o m e w h a t i r r i t a t i n g s o c i o - c u l t u r a l i m b a l a n c e b e tw e e n t h e p o r t r a i t o f t h e L o n d o n s o c ie ty , f r o m w h i c h s h e h a il s , a n d t h e w o r k in g - c la s s e n v ir o n m e n t o f L ila a n d G e o rg e , w h i c h s h e d i s r u p t s . V is u a lly , t h e p o i n t is m a d e b y c o n t r a s t i n g t h e s p a c io u s , e c h o in g c h am b ers o f V a n e s s a ’s m a n s io n w ith th e c la u s tro p h o b ic s u b u r b a n h o m e o f G e o r g e a n d L ila .

T o o m u c h o f t h e f ilm is s e t a m i d s t V a n e s s a ’s o p u l e n t l if e s ty le a n d , w h ile t h e v ie w e r g e ts a g o o d i m p r e s s io n o f t h e v a lu e s a n d lif e s t y l e o f t h e B r itis h a r i s t o c r a c y , t h e r e is n o s u s t a i n e d l o o k a t h o w L i l a a n d G e o r g e liv e a n d m a n a g e t o c o p e . S u c h a c r itic is m m a y c o n f l i c t w i t h t h e n o t i o n o f n o s t a lg i a , b u t a n o t a b l e i m b a l a n c e e x is ts w h e n t h e e f f e c t s o f t h e D e p r e s s i o n a r e o n ly m e n tio n e d in c id e n ta lly r a th e r th a n b e in g s h o w n in a c o n v in c i n g m a n n e r .

A p a rtic u la rly a d m ira b le a sp e c t o f t h e f ilm is t h e h a n d l i n g o f P . S . ’s c h a r a c t e r . T h e m o v in g p e r f o r m a n c e o f G l e d h il l a n d th e th e m a tic u n d e r ­ p i n n i n g s o f h is e x p e r i e n c e , g r o w t h a n d d e v e l o p m e n t o f r e s o u r c e f u l n e s s is a w e lc o m e c o n tr a s t to th e re c e n t s p a te o f f i lm s w h ic h f e a t u r e p r e c o c i o u s , w o r ld w is e u n d e r - 1 0 - y e a r - o l d s .

T h o u g h C a r e f u l, H e M ig h t H e a r Y o u h a s b e e n so m e w h a t o v e rra te d , a n d c o u l d h a v e b e n e f i t e d f r o m s e v e ra l b e tt e r - d e v e lo p e d a n d - s u s t a i n e d i n d i ­ g e n o u s p e r i o d f e a t u r e s , it is a p le a s in g and s p o ra d ic a lly m o v in g , i f u n ­ d e m a n d i n g , m e l o d r a m a . I ts lu s h p r o ­ d u c t i o n m a k e s it a t t r a c t i v e a n d th e s t r o n g p e r f o r m a n c e s in t h e c e n t r a l r o l e s , e s p e c ia lly t h a t o f H u g h e s as V a n e s s a , e lic it s y m p a t h y f r o m th e v ie w e r. T h e r e a r e s e v e r a l m is ju d g m e n t s , b u t t h e f ilm h i ts t h e r i g h t s p o ts m o r e t im e s t h a n i t m is s e s a n d t h a t , a f t e r a ll, is w h a t c o u n t s .

Directed by: Carl Schultz. Producer: Jill Robb.

Screenplay: Michael Jenkins. Director of photography: John Seale. Editor: Richard Francis-Bruce. Production designer: John Stoddart. Music: Ray Cook. Sound recordist: Syd Butterworth. Cast: Wendy Hughes (Vanessa), Robyn Nevin (Lila), Nicholas Gledhill (PS), John Hargreaves (Logan), Geraldine Turner (Vere), Isabelle Anderson (Agnes), Peter Whitford (George), Colleen Clifford (Ettie).

Production company: Syme International.

Distributor: Hoyts. 35 mm. 110 mins.

Australia. 1983.

Careful, He M ight H ear You:

Phar Lap Keith Connolly

B e c a u s e o f its o r i g in s , a n d b y - n o w f a m i l ia r E d g le y b u i l d - u p , I m u st c o n fe ss to a p p r o a c h in g P h a r L ap w ith s o m e r e s e r v a t i o n . T h e f i r s t v ie w in g (c o u rte s y o f th e A u s tra lia n F ilm A w a rd s ) w as so p le a s a n t a s u rp ris e th a t I a tte n d e d a la te r sc re e n in g , a n d a f u r t h e r p r e s s p r e v ie w , t o c h e c k m y a lm o s t-w h o lly fa v o ra b le re a c tio n .

T h e r e w a s n o d o u b t a b o u t it: d i r e c t o r S im o n W in c e r h a d t u r n e d o u t a l a r g e ly a u th e n tic , e m o tio n a lly re s tra in e d a n d th o ro u g h ly c o n v in c i n g m a in s tre a m film w ith in th e p a r a m e t e r s o f p o p u l a r

le g e n d - m o n g e r i n g .

B y c o m p a ris o n , T h e M a n F r o m S n o w y R iv e r is s im p ly a re fu g e e fro m M a r lb o r o c o u n try .

O f c o u r s e , P h a r L a p is a p a n t i n g l y r e a d y p r o j e c t f o r t h e “ c ’m o n - A u s s i e ” sc h o o l o f in s ta n t p a trio tis m (c an B radm an, Ja ck a , D arcy a n d re m a k es o f S m ith y a n d N e d K e lly b e f a r b e h in d ? ) . B u t W in c e r a n d s c r i p t w r i t e r D a v id W il l ia m s o n m u s t h a v e b e e n a c u te ly a w a r e o f t h e d a n g e r s i n h e r e n t in th is v e r y r ip e n e s s : to o m uch r e v e r e n c e w o u l d c h o k e it j u s t a s s u r e ly a s w o u l d a c a v a li e r a t t i t u d e t o b a s ic h i s t o r ic a l f a c t .

In th e m a i n , t h e y s t r i k e a n ic e ly a c c e p t a b le b a la n c e . T h e m o v ie P h a r L a p is s o m e w h a t l a r g e r t h a n l if e . . . a n d s o w a s t h e r e a l - li f e r a c e h o r s e . T h e p e r io d does t a k e o n a f a i n t l y r o s e a t e g lo w , y e t t h o s e b l e a k D e p r e s s i o n t im e s w e re in t r u t h e n li v e n e d f o r m a n y A u s ­ t r a l i a n s b y th is e x t r a o r d i n a r y a n i m a l .

I t is p o p s t u f f , b u t a c c e p t a b l e , n e v e rth e le s s , th a n k s to a s k ilfu l c o u n t e r p o i n t i n g o f P h a r L a p ’s f a m o u s v ic to rie s w ith th e s h o rtc o m in g s , s t r e n g th s a n d f a il u r e s o f t h e m e r e h u m a n s a r o u n d h i m . T h e r e is lit t le r e a l a tte m p t, b e y o n d th e a c c u ra c y o f A n n a S e n i o r ’s c o s t u m e s and a g e n e ra l a u t h e n t i c i t y o f lo c a l e , t o c a p t u r e t h e s t r a in e d a t m o s p h e r e o f t h o s e p e n n y p i n c h e d t im e s .

H o w e v e r , it s h o u l d b e n o t e d t h a t W in c e r a n d W i l l i a m s o n c a n t e r d e f t l y a lo n g a c o u r s e s t r e w n w i t h h y p e r b o l i c te m p ta tio n , m a k in g th e m o s t, b u t n o t to o m u c h , o f a n in c id e n t-s tu d d e d f o u r y e a r s . C e r t a i n l y W il l ia m s o n h a d t o i n v e n t v e r y l it t le . H i s a r t i s t i c i m a g i n a ­ tio n a n d su p e rb g ra sp o f A u s tra lia n id io m (e v en th o u g h c e n s o rs h ip -c la s s i­ f i c a t i o n o b j e c t iv e s p r e s u m a b l y d e n ie d h im t h e s a l ty s p e e c h o f t h e s t a b le s ) su p p ly th e n e c e s s a ry u n d o c u m e n te d m o m e n ts a n d a d d h u m a n in te rlu d e s o f p rim a ry c o m ic a n d e m o tio n a l c o n ­ tra s t.

T h e s e s c e n e s , a s w e l l- w r i t t e n a s a n y t h i n g W il l ia m s o n h a s d o n e f o r t h e s c r e e n , a llo w W in c e r t o e s t a b l i s h a c o n v in c i n g r e l a t i o n s h i p b e tw e e n h o r s e a n d h u m a n s , n o ta b ly s tra p p e r T o m m y W o o d c o c k (T o m B u rlin s o n ), tr a in e r H a r r y T e lf o r d ( M a rtin V a u g h a n ) a n d

CINEMA PAPERS March-April — 87

Phar Lap

o w n e r D a v e D a v is ( R o n L e i b m a n ) .

T h e c h a r a c t e r s a r e s o m e th i n g less t h a n c o m p l e x in o u t l o o k a n d b e h a v i o u r , b u t t h e n t h e w o r l d o f r a c i n g is n o t o r i o u s l y a s s h o r t o n s u b t l e t y a s it is lo n g o n s t r a te g y .

T h e r e c o r d is t r e a t e d r e s p e c t f u ll y .

P h a r L a p ’s r e la ti v e ly b r i e f c a r e e r is te l e s c o p e d a l it t le , b u t b y n o m e a n s f a ls if i e d , f r o m t h e t im e t h e t h e n u n g a in l y y e a r l in g r e a c h e d S y d n e y f r o m N e w Z e a l a n d in 1928 t o h is s tillu n e x p l a i n e d d e a t h in C a l i f o r n i a o n ly fo u r y e a rs la te r.

T h e ra c in g s e q u e n c e s a re im a g in a ­ tiv e a n d a u t h e n t i c . T u r f m e n I k n o w f i n d l it t le f a u l t w ith t h e m ( t h e r e a r e , a p p a r e n tly , so m e m in o r a n a c h r o n ­ is m s ) and p ra is e th e o v e ra ll v e r is im i li t u d e . A n d t h e r e is e n o u g h “ a c t i o n ” , m o s t o f it f a c t u a l , t o s a t is f y t h e m o s t f i d g e t y f i lm g o e r — f r o m t h e C u p - e v e s h o o t i n g a t t e m p t t o t h a t la s t f a i r y - t a l e w in in M e x ic o a n d b i z a r r e d e m is e ( r e c o u n t e d in a p r o l o g u e t h a t e s ta b lis h e s th e f i l m ’s h i s t o r i c a l p e r s p e c t iv e ) .

T h e c a u s e s o f th e s tra n g e d e a th o f P h a r L a p , a t a C a lifo rn ia n s tu d fa rm n o t l o n g b e f o r e h e w a s a b o u t t o ta c k l e th e U .S . ra c in g c i r c u it , is s o f t ­ p e d a l l e d . F o r w h a t e v e r r e a s o n ( th e m o s t lik e ly b e in g a r e lu c ta n c e t o o ffen d th e p o te n tia l A m e ric a n m a r k e t) , th e c o n v e n tio n a l w is d o m o f m y b o y h o o d , th a t th e Y a n k s h a d p o is o n e d P h a r L a p a s a s s u re d ly a s th e y h a d k ille d L e s D a r c y , is v i r tu a l ly ig n o re d .

T h e o n l y p e o p le r e a lly p illo r ie d a re th e 1930s V ic to ria R a c in g C lu b c o m m i t t e e , p a r t i c u l a r l y its c e le b r a t e d c h a i r m a n L .K . S . M c K i n n o n (p la y e d w i t h r e d o u b t a b l y B r i ti s h - A u s t r a l i a n s ta rc h by V in c e n t B a ll).

B a l l ’s c h a ra c te riz a tio n o f th e e s ta b lis h m e n t a u to c r a t w h o p r o m p ts th e h a n d ic a p p e r t o g iv e P h a r L a p f a r t o o m u c h w e ig h t is, l ik e t h o s e o f o t h e r m a le p r i n c i p a l s , a c o n v e n ie n t b le n d o f s te re o ty p e a n d s u b s t a n c e . M a r t i n V a u g h a n d o e s h is b lo o d y -o ld -c u rm u d g e o n act w ith c u s t o m a r y v e h e m e n c e , B u r l in s o n is th e n ic e y o u n g i n n o c e n t I a m p r e p a r e d to b e lie v e T o m m y W o o d c o c k t r u ly w a s , a n d H o lly w o o d im p o rt R o n L e ib m a n is s u i t a b l y d i s t r a c t e d a s t h e p a r v e n u b u s i n e s s m a n - o w n e r w h o c a n ’t q u ite b e lie v e h is l u c k . ( T h e i m p o r t a t i o n o f L e i b m a n is j u s t i f i e d b y th e f a c t t h a t D a v e D a v is w a s a U .S c itiz e n o f E u r o p e a n - J e w i s h o r i g in w h o liv e d in A u s t r a l i a in t h e 1920s a n d e a r ly ’3 0 s.)

T h e c o m p e t e n t l y - p e r f o r m e d fe m a le r o l e s a r e p o s s ib l y r e a l is t ic , t o o , in th e ir s u p p o r t i v e d e f e r e n c e to th e m a s c u lin e h e g e m o n y o f th e s o c ia ily - c o n s e r v a tiv e t u r f m il i e u , t h e n a n d n o w . W illia m s o n n o d o u b t f e lt f r e e to e n la r g e u p o n J u d y M o r r i s ’ M r s D a v is w ith o n e o r tw o n a rra tiv e - f u lf illin g in te rv e n tio n s , a n d i f t h e M r s T e l f o r d o f C e lia d e B u rg h o c c a s i o n a l l y d e v e lo p s a B e llb ir d is h t i n k l e , t h a t is n o t n e c e s s a r ily o u t o f c h a r a c t e r , e it h e r .

A n d o n e m u s t n o t o v e r lo o k t h a t b e a u tifu l b e a s t T o w e rin g In fe rn o , w h o a p p a r e n tly d iffe rs fro m th e c h a m p io n h e i m p e r s o n a t e s o n l y in t h a t h e d o e s n ’t m o v e h is h o o f s a s q u i c k l y . B u t n e ith e r d o m o s t h o r s e s f o a le d b e f o r e o r sin c e .

T e c h n i c a l l y , th e p r o d u c t i o n is a m a t c h i n g c r o s s b e tw e e n f u ls o m e a n d a r t f u l , n o t a b l e c o n t r i b u t i o n s b e in g R u s s e ll B o y d ’s e l o q u e n t p h o t o g r a p h y , B r u c e R o w l a n d ’s r o u s i n g , b u t n o t o b tru s iv e , m u s ic ana th e com ­ p r e h e n s iv e ly c r is p e d it i n g o f T o n y P a te rs o n .

It g o e s w i t h o u t s a y i n g t h a t t h is is S i m o n W i n c e r ’s b e s t film . H e h a s e n j o y e d t o o m u c h s u c c e s s in r e c e n t

88 — March-April CINEMA PAPERS

Bush Christmas and M olly

t im e s , b o t h a s p r o d u c e r a n d d i r e c to r , to b o th e r to o m u c h a b o u t w h a t a n y o n e t h o u g h t o f th e b e s t - f o r g o t t e n S n a p s h o t a n d H a r le q u in . B u t o n e g e ts th e i m p r e s s io n f r o m P h a r L a p t h a t , a s w ell as h o n i n g h is d i r e c t o r i a l t a l e n t s , h e h a s a d d e d e x p r e s s i o n s lik e “ n o t b lo o d y l i k e l y ” t o h is w o r k i n g v o c a b u l a r y .

Phar Lap: Directed by: Simon Wincer.

Producer: John Sexton. Screenplay: David Williamson. Director of photography: Russell Boyd. Editor: Tony Paterson.

Production designer: Larry Eastwood.

Music: Bruce Rowland. Sound recordist: Gary Wilkin. Cast: Tom Burlinson (Tommy Woodcock), Martin Vaughan (Harry Telford), Judy Morris (Bea Davis), Ron Leibman (Dave Davis), Celia de Burgh (Vi Telford), Richard Morgan (“ Cashy” Martin), Vincent Ball (Lachlan McKinnon), James Steele (Jim Pike), Georgia Carr (Emma Woodcock). Production company: John Sexton Prods-Michael Edgley Inter­ national. Distributor: Hoyts. 35 mm. 118 mins. Australia. 1983.

Bush Christmas and Molly G e o ff M ayer

F ilm s m a d e s p e c if ic a lly f o r y o u n g c h il d r e n a r e o f t e n d i f f i c u l t to r e v ie w as m a n y o f th e e le m e n ts o n e lo o k s f o r in o t h e r f ilm s , s u c h a s g e n e r ic c o m ­ p le x ity , a r a n g e o f c h a r a c t e r t r a i t s , a m b i v a le n t e n d in g s and te m p o ra l c h a n g e s , a r e n o t p o s s ib le b e c a u s e o f th e c o n c e p tu a l d i f f ic u l ti e s t h e y p o s e .

T h e re a re , o n th e o th e r h a n d , c e rta in b a s ic e le m e n ts w h ic h in c r e a s e th e c h a n c e s o f h o l d in g a y o u n g a u d i e n c e ’s a t t e n t i o n . T h e p r o d u c t i o n te a m s f o r B u sh C h r istm a s a n d M o lly a r e g e n e r ­ a lly a w a r e o f th e s e e le m e n ts .

P a r a m o u n t a m o n g s t th e s e is th e s u b j e c t m a t t e r a n d , i f n o t h i n g e ls e , th e h i s t o r y o f c h i l d r e n ’s l i t e r a t u r e a n d th e c in e m a h a s r e p e a te d l y d e m o n s t r a t e d t h e u n iv e r s a l a p p e a l o f h o r s e s (B u sh C h r istm a s ) a n d d o g s (M o lly ) . T h is , in tu rn , o fte n e v o k es a d e g re e o f se n ti­ m e n t a li t y w h e n c h il d r e n a r e g e n e r a lly d e p r iv e d o f th e s e p e ts f o r m o s t o f e a c h film .

A ls o s i g n i f ic a n t in b o t h f ilm s is t h e f o c u s o n t h e c h il d r e n a s t h e c e n t r a l c h a r a c t e r s , t h e lin e a r n a r r a t i v e , t h e e m p lo y m e n t o f p ro v e n m e lo d ra m a tic d e v ic e s o f s u s p e n s e , e x te r n a l te n s io n a n d s im p le c h a r a c t e r s . T h a t is, t h e r e is a c le a r d iv is io n b e tw e e n g o o d a n d e v il, and th e s o u r c e o f th e n a rra tiv e ‘p r o b l e m ’ is i m p o s e d b y t h e v illa in s (in b o t h f ilm s t h e t h e f t o f t h e a n im a ls ) o n th e s y m p a th e tic c h a ra c te rs .

M an­ d a t o r y , o f c o u r s e , is t h e r e s o l u t i o n o f a ll p r o b l e m s a n d t h e h a p p y e n d in g .

It is i n t e r e s t in g t o c o m p a r e B u s h C h r istm a s w ith M o lly a s b o t h film s sh a re a n u m b e r o f s tru c tu ra l a n d th e m a tic s im ila ritie s .

B ut h a v in g w a tc h e d th e f ilm s o n t h e s a m e d a y o n e is s t r u c k b y t h e s m o o t h n a r r a t i v e c o n ­ f id e n c e a n d h u m o r o f B u sh C h r istm a s , w h ic h is a c r e d i t t o its c r e a ti v e t e a m , p a rtic u la rly s c rip tw rite r T e d R o b e rts , w h o m u s t s u r e ly b e o n e o f A u s t r a l i a ’s m o st a c c o m p lis h e d w rite rs , as a n y o n e w h o s a w t h e la s t s e rie s o f P a tr o l B o a t w ill t e s tif y .

B u s h C h r i s t m a s is s e t in t h e A u s ­ t r a l i a n o u t b a c k d u r i n g t h e e a r l y 1950s a n d t h e s im p le s t o r y c o n s i s t s o f tw o s t r a n d s . T h e f i r s t , a n d s u b s id i a r y

stra n d , c o n ce rn s B en and K a te T h o m p s o n ’s ( P e t e r Sum ner and V e n e t t a O ’M a lle y ) m o r t g a g e d e b t , a d e b t w h ic h m u s t b e p a i d b y t h e f i r s t d a y o f J a n u a r y o r t h e T h o m p s o n s w ill lo s e t h e i r h o m e s t e a d t o t h e l o c a l s to c k a n d s ta tio n a g e n t. T h e se c o n d s tr a n d , w h ic h o c c u p ie s t h e b u l k o f t h e f ilm a n d d o v e ta ils w ith t h e f i r s t , f o llo w s th e a c tiv itie s o f B ill ( J o h n E w a r t ) a n d S ly ( J o h n H o w a r d ) , t h e m a n a g e r a n d le a d s in g e r o f a s t r u g g l in g b u s h b a n d .

S tra n d e d and b ro k e a fte r th e C h r i s t m a s d a n c e in T u l l a g e a l , t h e tw o r o g u e s d e c id e t o ‘b o r r o w ’ t h e T h o m p ­ s o n s ’ p r iz e r a c e - h o r s e a n d e n t e r it in c o u n t r y - r a c e c ir c u it s in a n e f f o r t t o re c o u p th e ir fo rtu n e s . H o w e v e r, th e t w o T h o m p s o n c h il d r e n , H e l e n ( N ic o le K id m a n ) a n d y o u n g John (M a rk S p a i n ) , t o g e t h e r w i t h t h e i r B r itis h c o u s i n , M i c h a e l ( J a m e s W in g r o v e ) a n d A b o r i g i n a l h a n d , M a n a l p u y ( p la y e d b y M a n a lp u y ) , d e c id e t o f o l lo w th e th ie v e s w h ile B e n T h o m p s o n is a w a y a t t e m p t i n g t o se ll t h e i r c a t t le t o r a is e t h e m o r tg a g e .

T h e b u l k o f t h e f ilm c u ts b a c k a n d fo rth b e tw e e n th e la r g e ly c o m ic a t t e m p t s o f S ly a n d B ill t o c r o s s t h e r a n g e s w ith t h e h o r s e s a n d t h e d e s ­ p e ra te a tte m p ts o f th e f o u r y o u th s to f o llo w t h e m . T h e i r t r e k c lim a x e s w h e n M a n a l p u y , M i c h a e l a n d H e l e n f a ll i n t o a d e s e r t e d m in e s h a f t w h ic h s o o n b e c o m e s f lo o d e d . T h e la s t s e c tio n o f

th e f i lm , a f t e r t h e r e c a p t u r e o f th e h o rse s, d e a ls w ith th e la s t-d itc h a t t e m p t b y th e T h o m p s o n s t o r a is e m o n e y b y r a c i n g t h e i r h o r s e in t h e N e w Y e a r ’s D a y c r o s s - c o u n t r y r a c e .

It m ig h t b e e x p e c te d t h a t th is d r a m a t i c f r a m e w o r k , w h ic h f o llo w s t h e o r i g in a l v e r s i o n f i lm e d b y t h e R a n k O r g a n i z a t i o n in 1 9 4 6 -4 7 , w o u l d o f f e r little r o o m f o r s u r p r i s e o r f r e s h n e s s . In f a c t , t h e w o r s t is f e a r e d w h e n B e n T h o m p s o n b e g in s t h e f ilm w i t h , “ O n e m o re b a d C h ristm a s a n d w e are f i n is h e d h e r e . ” I t w o u l d a p p e a r t h a t R o b e r ts h a s it in f o r S u m n e r a s h e is f o r c e d t o u t t e r a s u c c e s s io n o f s i m il a r g e m s i n c l u d i n g , “ S o r r y k i d s , I d o n ’t th in k P rin c e [th e ir h o rse ] has g o t a c h a n c e ” b e fo re th e ra c e , o r a f t e r t h e r a c e , “ W e ’v e s a v e d t h e o ld p la c e .”

W it h i n t h e e s s e n t ia l ly 1 9 th C e n t u r y m e lo d ra m a tic c o n v e n tio n s o f th e s to ry , R o b e rts h a s in je c te d a c o n s is te n t s t r e a m o f h u m o r , l a r g e ly f o c u s i n g o n t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p b e tw e e n S ly a n d t h a t h a b i t u a l s c e n e - s t e a l e r , B ill. S ly , in p a r ­ tic u la r, h a s a n u m b e r o f v e ry f u n n y lin e s w ith o n e o f t h e b e s t b e in g h is h o r r i f i e d r e a c t i o n t h a t B ill’s k illin g o f a b u s h r a b b i t w ill a n t a g o n i z e t h e A b o r ­ ig in a ls w a tc h in g th e ir p ro g re ss ( “ Y o u ’v e . s h o t o n e o f t h e i r p e t s ” ).

T h e r e a r e a ls o s o m e n ic e t h r o w a w a y lin e s , s u c h a s H o w a r d m u t t e r i n g “ T a x i ! ” a s h e s tu m b le s th r o u g h th e

Molly, the ‘singing’ dog, and young friend, Maxie (Claudia Karvan). Ned Lander’s Molly.

Bush Christmas and M olly

Allies

ÂElies Keith Connolly

d e n s e b u s h . E v e n t h e c h i l d r e n s h a r e in th e c o m e d y , p a rtic u la rly th a t p o te n tia l s c e n e -s te a le r M a rk S p a in (a v e te ra n o f A u s t r a l i a n m e d i a a t 11 y e a r s o f a g e ) d o w n i n g a w i t c h e t t y g r u b w i t h r e li s h a s h is c o n s e r v a t iv e B r i ti s h c o u s i n is h e a r d r e tc h in g o f f - s c r e e n .

M y f o u r - y e a r - o l d c o ll e a g u e a t t h e s c re e n in g b e g a n ta p p in g h e r fe e t rig h t f r o m th e s ta r t, w h e n th e m u s ic o f th e B u sh w a c k e rs a c c o m p a n ie s a sp e c ­ ta c u la r rid e b y M a n a lp u y o n P rin c e d o w n a r i d g e , a n d s h e w a s s till e n g ro sse d a t th e e n d ; c re d it m u st s u re ly g o to d ir e c to r H e n ri S a f r a n , a n d d ire c to r o f p h o to g r a p h y M a lc o lm R ic h ­ a r d s . T h e i r e x p e r t is e is p a r t i c u l a r l y e v id e n t in t h e c li m a t i c c r o s s - c o u n t r y r a c e w i t h is c a p t u r e d l a r g e ly in l o n g ­ s h o t d u rin g th e firs t h a lf , re s e rv in g th e c lo s e - u p s o f j o c k e y M a n a l p u y a n d P rin c e to g e n e ra te e x c ite m e n t a n d t e n s i o n d u r i n g t h e c lo s in g s e c ti o n s o f t h e r a c e . S i m il a r ly , t h is e x p e r t is e is o b v i o u s w h e n t h e c h i l d r e n s t u m b le u p o n a su p p o s e d ly d e se rte d s h a c k a n d f i n d a c o u p le o f u n w e l c o m e v i s i to r s , a n d a g a i n w h e n t h e y a r e t r a p p e d in t h e m in e s h a f t . I n f a c t , it p e r m e a t e s t h e e n t i r e f ilm .

T h e n a r r a t i v e s k ill d e m o n s t r a t e d b y B u s h C h r is tm a s h i g h li g h t s t h e c e n t r a l w e a k n e s s o f M o lly . M o lly , h o w e v e r , h a s a lo t g o in g fo r it, n o ta b ly a p h o t o ­ g e n ic d o g w h o ‘s i n g s ’ a n d a v i r t u a l l y f o o l p r o o f p l o t s i t u a t i o n in v o lv i n g a l it t le g i r l ’s a t t e m p t t o r e c o v e r t h e d o g a f t e r it h a s b e e n s t o l e n . B u t t h e f ilm a ls o d e m o n s t r a t e s a r e c u r r e n t w e a k ­ n e s s in m a n y A u s t r a l i a n f ilm s : a r e a s o n a b l e b a s is f o r a f i lm b u t i n s u f ­ fic ie n t d e ta ile d s c rip t p r e p a r a tio n r e s u l t i n g in a r e p e t i t i v e m id d l e s e c ti o n a f t e r a s t r o n g o p e n i n g . T h e f ilm is a t its b e s t a t t h e s t a r t w h e n O l d D a n (R e g L y e) ta k e s M o lly in to a c o u n tr y p u b a n d c o n s t h e l o c a ls w i t h h is s i n g in g d o g . T h e w h o le s e q u e n c e c o m e s o f f p a r t i c u l a r l y w e ll — a c t i n g , a t m o s p h e r e a n d t e n s i o n — a n d L y e is m o s t a u th o r ita tiv e in th e s e s u r r o u n d in g s , e s p e c ia lly w h e n h e o r d e r s a t r i p l e w h is k y w ith a b e e r c h a s e r.

O ld D a n t r a v e ls t o S y d n e y w ith h is d o g a n d h e b e f r i e n d s y o u n g M a x ie ( C l a u d i a K a r v a n ) , w h o is m o v in g t o C o o g e e t o liv e w ith h e r a u n t a f t e r t h e d e a th o f h e r m o th e r. D a n s u ffe rs a h e a r t a tta c k a n d e n tru s ts M o lly to M a x i e ’s p r o t e c t i o n . T h e b u l k o f t h e f ilm c o n c e r n s t h e r e p e a t e d a t t e m p t s o f J o n e s ( G a r r y M c D o n a l d ) t o s te a l t h e d o g t o g e t h e r w ith M a x i e ’s a t t e m p t s t o f i n d a h o m e f o r t h e a n im a l.

W h e r e a s B u s h C h r is tm a s r e v it a l i z e s its f a m i l i a r c o n v e n t i o n s w ith h u m o r , M o lly o p t s f o r r a t h e r s i n i s t e r o v e r ­ t o n e s . I f o n e w a l k e d in l a t e o n e c o u ld b e e x c u s e d fo r th in k in g o n e w a s w a t c h i n g , o n o c c a s i o n s , th e b u i l d - u p f o r a “ s p l a t t e r ” m o v ie . T h e v i l l a i n ’s o b s e s s io n w ith b e c o m i n g a p e r f o r m e r d i c t a t e s h is s i n g l e - m i n d e d e f f o r t s to s te a l M o l l y , a r e a s o n a b l e p l o t d e v ic e t o g e n e ra te so m e te n s io n . B u t d ire c to r N e d L a n d e r a n d d ire c to r o f p h o to ­ g ra p h y V in c e M o n to n re p e a te d ly e m p h a s i z e t h e p s y c h o t ic d i s t u r b a n c e o f t h e v illa in : s h o t s o f h is b o a r d i n g - h o u s e r o o m w ith its s h o w b u s i n e s s f e ti s h ; a p r o t r a c t e d s e q u e n c e o f J o n e s a p p ly i n g c lo w n m a k e - u p t o h is f a c e , o r s h a v in g h is h e a d w ith a b a r b e r ’s c u t - t h r o a t r a z o r ( a n d in o n e g r u e s o m e s c e n e h e a c c id e n t a l l y s te p s o n t h e b l a d e ) . O n e b e g in s t o w o n d e r i f t h is is in f a c t M c D o n a l d ’s s c r e e n t e s t f o r N o r m a n B a te s in P s y c h o III: h is c h a r a c t e r is d e v o id o f h u m o r e x c e p t f o r a b l a c k j o k e w h e n h e d r o p s a r a t i n t o t h e s te w a s h e le a v e s h is j o b a s a s h o r t - o r d e r cook.

T h e o n ly e x p la n a tio n I c a n o f f e r fo r t h e r a t h e r r a d i c a l s h i f t in t o n e b e tw e e n th e g irl a n d h e r d o g in s u n n y C o o g e e a n d t h e d e m e n t e d v illa in is t h e d e s ir e to a p p ro x im a te th e th re a te n in g q u a li t ie s o f t h e f a ir y - t a l e s g a t h e r e d b y t h e B r o t h e r s G r i m m ; p u b l i c i t y .fo r t h e f ilm d e s c r i b e s M o lly a s a “ m o d e r n f a ir y - t a l e a b o u t a d o g w i t h a r a r e g i f t ” .

C e r t a i n l y f e a r is a k e y i n g r e d i e n t a s t h e v i ll a in p r o w l s t h e a lle y s o f C o o g e e a t n i g h t w ith h is c a n e r a ttlin g th e c o r r u g a t e d i r o n f e n c e s n e a r M a x i e ’s b e d , o r h is s i n i s t e r o b s e r v a t i o n o f a

lo n e ly , l ittle g ir l w a l k in g t h e d a r k s t r e e t s i ll u m in a t e d b y a s in g le s t r e e t lig h t. L a t e in t h e f i lm , in a b i z a r r e s e q u e n c e , h e te rro riz e s y o u n g M a x in e d r e s s e d in a n u n ’s o u t f i t .

G r a e m e I s s a c s ’ m u s ic a n d t h e F ly in g F r u i t F ly C i r c u s r e p r e s e n t a n a p p e a l i n g c o u n t e r p o i n t t o M c D o n a l d ’s v illa in a n d it is u n f o r t u n a t e t h a t a l it t le m o r e t h o u g h t w a s n o t g iv e n t o t h e s c r i p t a s t h e r e is m u c h in t h e f ilm t o a p p e a l t o y o u n g c h il d r e n . B u s h C h r is tm a s , o n th e o th e r h a n d , p e rh a p s w ith th e a d v a n ta g e o f w o rk in g fro m a p o p u la r s t o r y , r e t a i n s i n te r e s t t h r o u g h o u t w ith a d e ft b le n d o f h u m o r, a c tio n a n d a ttra c tiv e c h a ra c te riz a tio n s .

Christm as: Directed by: Henri Safran. Producers: Gilda Baracchi, Paul Barron. Screenplay: Ted Roberts. Director of photography: Malcolm Richards.

Editor: Ron Williams. Production designer: Darrell Lass. Sound recordist: Don Connolly. Cast: John Howard (Sly), John Ewart (Bill), Manalpuy (Aboriginal boy M analpuy), James Wingrove (Michael), Mark Spain (John), Nicole Kidman (Helen), Vanetta O’Malley (Kate), Peter Sumner (Ben), Bushwackers Band (Band). Production company: Bush Christmas Prods. Distributor: Hoyts.

Super 16. 96 mins. Australia. 1983.

Bush

Directed by: Ned Lander. Producer: Hilary Linstead. Associate producers: Phillip Roope, Mark Thomas. Screenplay: Phillip Roope, Mark Thomas, Ned Lander.

Director of photography: Vincent Monton.

Editor: Stewart Young. Music: Graeme Issac. Sound recordist: Lloyd Carrick.

Cast: Claudia Karvan (Maxie), Garry McDonald (Jones), Molly (as herself), Ruth Cracknell (Mrs Reach), Reg Lye (Old Dan), Mellissa Jaffer (Jenny), Slim de Grey (Tommy), Leslie Dayman (Bill Ireland), Robin Laurie (Stella) and members of the Plying Lruit Fly Circus. Production company: Troplisa. Distributor: GUO. 35 mm. 88 mins. Australia. 1983.

M olly:

A t a tim e o f in c r e a s in g l y n o v e l a tte m p ts to d i v e r s if y film -fu n d in g s o u r c e s , A S I O a p p e a r s t o h a v e g iv e n th e p r o d u c e r s o f A llie s f u ll m a r k s f o r i n itia tiv e . A c lo s e d s e s s io n o f t h e H o p e R o y a l C o m m i s s io n w a s t o l d la s t y e a r t h a t th e film h a d b e e n “ a s s e s s e d ” a s a p o s s ib le v e h ic le f o r K G B d i s i n f o r m a ­ tio n . (A fte r so m e p r o m p tin g , th e fe d e ra l A tto rn e y -G e n e ra l, S e n a to r E v a n s , re b u tte d th e s u g g e s tio n . M r J u s tic e H o p e ’s r e p o r t ig n o re s it a l t o g e t h e r .)

G iv e n th is p e c u l i a r e s s a y in d i s s e m b ­ lin g , r a t h e r t h a n d i s i n f o r m i n g , s o m e p e o p le m ig h t h a v e e x p e c te d A llie s t o c o n ta i n e q u a l l y s p e c t a c u l a r r e v e l a ­ t io n s . T h e y w o u ld h a v e b e e n d i s ­ a p p o in te d , ev en th o u g h th e d o c u ­ m e n t a r y , d i r e c te d b y S y d n e y j o u r n a l i s t M a r i a n W i l k i n s o n , is fu ll o f s t a r t l i n g a n d d is tu rb in g m a te ria l. A n d o n e tru s ts th a t th e a n o n y m o u s A S IO a s s e s s o r n o t e d h o w e v e n - h a n d e d it is.

F o r e v e r y w itn e s s , A u s t r a l i a n or A m e r ic a n , w h o t a l k s d a r k l y a b o u t C I A a c tiv ity in t h is c o u n t r y , t h e r e is a n o t h e r e x to llin g t h e a m i t y a n d m u t u a l r e s p e c t o f th e U . S . a n d A u s t r a l i a .

T h e f i l m m a k e r s ’ s t a t e d p r e m i s e is to r e - e x a m in e t h e 4 0 y e a r s in w h i c h , in th e ir w o rd s , m o st A u s tra lia n s h a v e lo o k e d o n th is c o u n t r y ’s a ll i a n c e w i t h t h e U n i t e d S t a te s a s a n a r ti c l e o f f a i t h , b e y o n d q u e s t io n a n d o f t e n b e y o n d c r itic is m .

A llie s d o e s n ’t e x p l i c i t l y c ritic iz e , a l t h o u g h its q u e s t i o n i n g a p p r o a c h is o b v i o u s ly less t h a n e c s ta ti c a b o u t w h a t th e a llia n c e h a s m e a n t in p r a c t ic e .

C le a r ly , t h e m a i n t h r u s t is t o l o o k i n t o C IA o p e ra tio n s th a t h a v e a ffe c te d A u s tra lia n s , a t h o m e a n d a b r o a d . N o t a g r e a t d e a l is r e v e a le d a b o u t w h a t w e n t o n within A u s t r a l i a , b u t t h e r e is a g o o d d e a l o f te s tim o n y a b o u t h a p p e n ­ in g s in th e S o u t h - E a s t A s i a r e g io n .

A n d , as fo rm e r A m e ric a n A ir F o rc e c o lo n e l F l e tc h e r P r o u t y , w h o f o r 10 y e ars o rg a n iz e d th e P e n t a g o n ’s lo g is tic a l s u p p o r t f o r t h e C I A , r e m i n d s o n e , “ A u s tr a lia w a s d e e p ly in v o lv e d ” in w h a t h e c a lls “ t h e w h o le p l a n f o r S o u th -E a s t A s ia ” .

T h is , h o w e v er, is q u ite so m e d i s t a n c e f r o m t h e t h r u s t o f t h a t c e le ­ b ra te d d o c u m e n ta ry a b o u t th e C IA , O n C o m p a n y B u s in e s s ( 1 9 7 9 ), d i r e c te d

by A lla n F ra n c o v ic h , c o - p ro d u c e r o f A llie s .

W h a t A llie s d o e s , h o w e v e r , is t o p r e s e n t s o b e r ly a n d c o m p e t e n t l y a v a s t a m o u n t o f m a t e r i a l a b o u t t h e a c tiv itie s o f th e C I A in S o u t h - E a s t A s ia f o r m o re th a n 30 y e a rs , w ith so m e in tr i g u i n g , i f less t h a n a p o c a l y p t i c , in s ig h ts i n to A u s t r a l i a ’s c o n t r i b u t i o n a n d r e a c ti o n t h e r e t o .

A m o n g th e p r o b a b ly in e s c a p a b le c ro w d o f ta lk in g h e a d s a re m a jo r e s ta b lis h m e n t fig u re s s u c h as f o rm e r p r im e m in i s t e r s S ir J o h n G o r t o n a n d S ir W illia m M c M a h o n , a m b a s s a d o r s S ir K e ith S h a n n a n d A l a n R e n o u f , a n d f o r m e r A m e r ic a n a m b a s s a d o r s t o A u s ­ tra lia , M a rs h a ll G re e n a n d E d C la rk .

T h e r e is a ls o a f a s c i n a t i n g a r r a y o f o n e - tim e C I A o p e r a t i v e s , b e g in n i n g w ith f o r m e r c h i e f W il l ia m C o l b y a n d e x te n d in g t o j a i l e d s p y C h r i s t o p h e r B oyce (w h o w o rk e d fo r th e a g e n c y ).

The le g e n d a ry c o u n te r-in s u rg e n c y e x p e rt, E d L a n s d a le , d e s c rib e s h o w h e “ o rg a n iz e d ” s u p p o r t f o r th e S o u th V i e tn a m e s e g o v e r n m e n t o f N g o D i n h

CINEMA PAPERS March-April — 89

A llie s

D ie m ( b u t n o t h o w t h e a g e n c y h e lp e d b r in g D ie m d o w n ) . P r o u t y te lls o f t h e a g e n c y te a m “ th a t h a d o v e rth ro w n T h e P h i l ip p i n e s g o v e r n m e n t ” b e in g s e n t o n a s i m il a r m is s io n t o I n d o n e s i a in 1958. ( H e a ls o c la im s t h a t A u s t r a ­ lia n b a c k - u p t e a m s w e re s t a n d i n g b y t o s u p p o r t th e in s u r g e n ts .

V e te ra n C IA o p e r a tiv e R a lp h M c G e h e e s a y s h e w a s th e “ c u s t o d i a n ” o f a n i n f lu e n t ia l b o o k f u n d e d b y th e a g e n c y t o c o v e r its t r a c k s in t h e I n d o ­ n e s ia n c o u p o f 1 9 6 5 . M c G e h e e a n d o t h e r h ig h ly p l a c e d a g e n c y m e n , V ic to r M a r c h e t t i a n d F r a n k S n e p p , d is c u s s t h e a g e n c y ’s r o l e in V i e tn a m f r o m t h e tim e t h e U .S . b e g a n t o s p o n s o r D ie m in 1954.

M c G e h e e s a y s t h a t b e f o r e th is d e c is io n w a s t a k e n t h e A m e r i c a n p e o p le , a n d a llie s s u c h a s A u s t r a l i a , w e re s o ld a p i c t u r e o f t h e s i t u a t i o n in V ie tn a m t h a t w a s “ s h e e r i l l u s i o n ” .

M a r c h e t ti — a u t h o r o f a c o n v in c in g a n d u n s e n s a t io n a l a c c o u n t o f C I A w o r k in g s a n d b l u n d e r s , The CIA and the Cult o f Intelligence — a n d S n e p p , t h e C I A ’s c h ie f s t r a te g y a n a l y s t in S a ig o n in 1 9 7 5 , s a y m a n y i n te r e s t in g , a n d a fe w s t a r t l i n g , t h in g s a b o u t A m e r ic a n d e a lin g s w ith C a n b e r r a .

T h e m o s t s t a r t l i n g is M a r c h e t t i ’s g u a rd e d re fe re n c e to “ c la n d e s tin e ” (h is w o r d ) C I A a c tiv ity in A u s t r a l i a d u r i n g t h e t im e o f t h e W h it l a m G o v e rn m e n t.

He d e s c rib e s how a n o t h e r C I A m a n c o m p l a in e d t o h im t h a t a “ l e g i t im a te ” ( a g a i n , M a r c h e t t i ’s w o r d ) i n te llig e n c e o p e r a t i o n a t P i n e G a p w a s b e in g e n d a n g e r e d b y a n o t h e r c la n d e s tin e a c tiv ity “ o f a n i n t e r n a l n a t u r e in A u s t r a l i a ” g o in g o n u n d e r

Frank Snepp, senior CIA officer, Saigon, 1969-1975. Marian Wilkinson’s Allies.

t h e a u s p ic e s o f t h e C I A s t a t i o n c h i e f in C a n b erra .

S n e p p , d a r k l y - h a n d s o m e a n d s till y o u t h f u l - l o o k i n g , d e s c r ib e s h o w h e d e li b e r a t e l y m is le d th e A u s tra lia n g o v e r n m e n t ( t h r o u g h its a m b a s s a d o r in S a ig o n ) a b o u t t h e s iz e a n d n a t u r e o f th e N o r t h V ie tn a m e s e i n c u r s i o n i n t o S o u t h V i e tn a m . L a t e r , h e s a y s , h e w a s in s tru c te d to r e g a rd th e W h itla m G o v e r n m e n t a s “ N o r t h V i e tn a m e s e c o l l a b o r a t o r s ” a f t e r it d e m u r r e d a b o u t A m e r ic a n s a t u r a t i o n b o m b i n g o f t h e N o rth !

A lm o s t w ith o u t e x c e p tio n , th e A m e r ic a n s w h o a p p e a r in A llie s a r e m o re fo rth c o m in g a n d a rtic u la te th a n t h e A u s t r a l i a n s . O n l y C ly d e C a m e r o n , w i t h h is c h a r g e t h a t A u s t r a l i a n i n te l li ­ g e n c e m e n h e lp e d t h e C I A in C h ile d u rin g th e A lle n d e G o v e rn m e n t, m a k e s a n y n o ta b le c o n trib u tio n .

C a m e r o n a lle g e s t h a t , a s M i n i s t e r f o r I m m ig ra tio n in t h e W h i t l a m G o v e rn m e n t, h e w as “ sta g g e re d ” to d i s c o v e r t h a t t h e r e w e r e “ 21 t o 2 4 A S IO a g e n ts a r o u n d th e w o rld p o s in g as im m ig ra tio n o ffic ia ls ” : W h e n I d is c o v e re d th e ro le A u s tr a ­ lia n I n te l l ig e n c e h a d p l a y e d in t h e o v e rth ro w o f th e A lle n d e G o v e rn ­ m e n t i n C h ile in 1 9 7 3 , 1 w a s a p p a l l e d th a t my ow n d e p a rtm e n t w as in v o lv e d in t h i s s o r t o f w o r k .

O u r in te llig e n c e a g e n t s in C h i le w e re a c t i n g a s a ‘h y p h e n ’ b e tw e e n t h e C I A , w h o [sic] w e r e n ’t a b le t o o p e r a t e in C h i le a t t h a t tim e , a n d t h e P i n o c h e t j u n t a w h ic h e v e n t u a l l y m u r d e r e d t h e d e m o c r a t i c a l ly - e le c te d p re s id e n t. Im a g in e m y a m a z e m e n t

SPA C E m

BO O KS

THE CINEMA & SCIENCE FICTION BOOKSHOP A wide range of popular and critical Cinema books always in stock, including:

T H E U N IV E R S A L S T O R Y

by Clive H irsc h h o rn $29.95

SALLY MEIKLEaOHN, CHRISTINE MAC&RILl. P.9. 8 0 X 2 9 8 8 . AUCKLAND. K.Z. TIL: 779-033.793*138.

THE FILM CCJLVCNATICN CENTRE

Inc. in N.S.W.

305/307 Swanston St., Melbourne, 3000

m P O L K A W m COSTUM ES W

SCRATCH REMOVAL and CLEANING of 35mm and 16mm NEGATIVE, POSITIVE AND REVERSAL FILM by the latest process available from the U.S.A. ★ No messy coating remains on the film after treatment -k Film can be subsequently wet printed, ultrasonically cleaned, spliced, projected or handled in the usual manner ★ Ideal for negative or positive film that will be transferred to videotape ★ 4b per foot — 35mm prints 3b per foot — 16mm prints Price list available

D

REPAIR SERVICE ALSO AVAILABLE

O

T

9 Q u e e n S tre e t, M e lb o u rn e , 3 0 0 0

Call LEONIE DONOVAN for further information (02) 427 2585 or a.h. 653 2494 UNIT 1, 1 LINCOLN STREET, LANE COVE WEST, N.S.W. 2066

Phone: •

(0 3 ) 6 2 1089

D e s i g n e r s a n d m a n u f a c t u r e r s o f q u a li t y c o s t u m e s f o r film t e l e v is io n a n d t h e a t r e

J 90 — March-April CINEMA PAPERS

Current lists sent on request.

Open seven days a week. Phone 663-1777

Allies

For Love or M oney

w h e n I r e c e iv e d a l e t t e r f r o m t h e P r im e M in is te r s a y in g th a t I w a s to t a k e n o f u r t h e r a c t i o n in t h e m a t t e r . . . th a t I w a s n o t to w ith d ra w A S IO a g e n ts e v e n fro m S a n tia g o a n d th a t n o th in g w as to b e d o n e a b o u t it a t a ll.

O t h e r A u s t r a l i a n w i t n e s s e s in c l u d e D a v id C o m b e (w h o se p h o n e - ta p p e d m e n t i o n o f t h e f i lm le d t o t h a t e x t r a ­ o r d in a r y R o y a l C o m m is s io n re fe re n c e ) ta lk in g a b o u t th e A u s tra lia n L a b o r P a r t y h a v in g “ h e ll f r i g h t e n e d o u t o f it” b y a lle g a tio n s b y C h r is to p h e r B o y c e o f i n v o l v e m e n t b y t h e C I A in A u s tr a lia n p o litic s , a n d a c a d e m ic D r D e s m o n d B a ll o n t h e i m p o r t a n c e t o th e U .S . — a n d p o te n tia l d a n g e r to A u s tra lia — o f th e P in e G a p , N o r th ­ W e st C a p e a n d N a rru n g a in s ta lla tio n s .

T h e U . S . is b y n o w q u i t e e x p e r i ­ e n c e d a t t h e k i n d o f b e n ig n p a c i f i c a ­ tio n p ra c tis e d b y M a rs h a ll G re e n , th e tro u b le - s h o o tin g A m e ric a n A m b a s s a ­ d o r d u r in g th e W h itla m y e a rs , w h o s t a r e s le v e lly i n to t h e c a m e r a a n d d e c la re s : I th o u g h t t h a t if w e ju s t m in d o u r m a n n e r s a n d d e a l w ith th e n ew g o v e r n m e n t p e r f e c t l y s t r a i g h t , w e ’ll a ll b e a ll r i g h t . A n d s o it t u r n e d o u t .

N o w t h a t ’s q u i t e a b i t d i f f e r e n t f r o m th e te s tim o n y o f S n e p p .

W hen W illia m C o lb y d e c la re s r o u n d l y “ w e h a v e n e v e r i n t e r f e r e d in A u s t r a l i a n p o l i t i c s ” , j u d i c i o u s e d it i n g g e n tl y c o n t r a d i c t s h i m a l i t t le l a t e r o n , w h e n V i c to r M a r c h e t t i d e c l a r e s t h e C I A h a s b e e n i n v o lv e d in p o l i t i ­ cal a c tio n p r o g r a m s w ith frie n d ly g o v e r n m e n t s a ll o v e r t h e w o r l d . . . w h y w o u l d n ’t w e d o it in A u s t r a l i a if n e ce ssa ry ?

W h a t , t h e n , d o e s A llie s a c h ie v e ?

O b v i o u s l y , a n y o n e w h o e x p e c ts it t o r e v e a l a c o n s i s t e n t lin e o f A m e r i c a n i n t e r v e n t i o n a n d m a n i p u l a t i o n in A u s ­ t r a l i a n a f f a i r s i s n ’t t h i n k i n g c le a r l y .

A f t e r a ll , A u s t r a l i a n s h a v e h a d n o o n e lik e Jacobo A rb e n z or S a lv a d o r A l l e n d e , m u c h le s s F i d e l C a s t r o , t o c o n c e rn th e U .S . A n d th e n , as th e f i l m ’s t it l e a n d c o n t e n t c o n s t a n t l y r e m i n d s A u s t r a l i a n s , t h e y a r e allies.

T h e f i l m ’s t e c h n i q u e is f o r m a l , re s tra in e d a n d a g o o d d e al m o re e x p o s ito ry th a n o u tw a r d a p p e a ra n c e s — t h e t o t a l la c k o f c o m m e n t a r y , a n d t h e e v e n - h a n d e d m ix o f p a r t i c i p a n t s a n d w itn e s se s — m ig h t su g g e s t.

I t is a ls o f a i r l y d e m a n d i n g . T h o s e w ith o u t a m o re -th a n -p a s s in g k n o w ­ le d g e o f w o r l d h i s t o r y s in c e 1 9 4 5 , a n d p a r t i c u l a r l y w h a t w e n t o n in t h e S o u t h ­ E a s t A s i a n a n d P a c i f i c r e g io n s , m a y th in k th a t a g o o d m a n y o f th e w it­ n e s s e s ’ r e m a r k s a re e ith e r o p a q u e o r

irre le v a n t. A ll, h o w e v e r, h a v e a t le a s t s o m e s i g n i f ic a n c e , e v e n i f , in a fe w c a s e s , it lie s in w h a t is not s a i d .

In th e e n d , o n e c a n n o t b u t c o n c lu d e t h a t A u s t r a l i a ’s b ig b r o t h e r in t h e U .S . (in t h e w o r d s o f a d i t t y b y t h e d o g g e r e l v e r s i f ie r o f b y g o n e y e a r s , “ D ry b lo w e r” M u rp h y ) h a s in d e e d b e e n w a t c h i n g o v e r A u s t r a l i a — in its fa s h io n .

mmmef. ÛmcmmÉm

Directed by: Marian Wilkinson.

Producer: Sylvie Le Clezio. Co-producer: Allan Francovich. Executive producers: David Roe and Cinema Enterprises.

Research: Marian Wilkinson, William Pin­ will and Denis Freney. Director of photo­ graphy: Philip Bull. Editor: Sara Bennett.

Music: John Stuart and Greg Maclain. Pro­ duction company: Grand Bay. Distributor: Cinema Enterprises. 16mm. 96 mins. Aus­ tralia. 1983.

A llies:

For Love Or Money R o d B is h o p

R e c e n tly , G e r m a i n e G r e e r m a d e s o m e p e r t c o m m e n ts a b o u t t h e w o m e n ’s m o v e m e n t, b e lie v in g it to b e “ e x ­ p l o it e d b y le s b ia n s a n d f e m i n i s t s ” a n d r i d d le d b y a “ silly r e li g i o u s o b s e r ­ v a n c e ” t o i d e o l o g y . H e r m o s t s u c c in c t t a r g e t w a s t h e w o m e n ’s e n c a m p m e n t at G re e n h a m C om m on w hose f a n a t ic i s m G r e e r c r it i c i z e d a s f u r t h e r e v id e n c e o f a “ c o u n t e r - p r o d u c t i v e a n d is o la te d ” f e m i n i s m r a p i d l y l a p s in g i n t o a f o r m o f p o l i t i c a l e x ile .

I f G re e r a p p e a rs p ro g re s s iv e ly a t o d d s w ith a m o v e m e n t s h e p e r c e iv e s a s s e c ta r ia n a n d p o w e r l e s s , t h e f e m i n i s t p e r s p e c t iv e o f t h e c o m p i l a t i o n d o c u ­ m e n t a r y F o r L o v e O r M o n e y is i n t e n t o n u n a p o lo g e tic a lly lin k in g th e h is to ry o f A u s t r a l i a n w o m e n a n d t h e i r w o r k to t h e p o l it i c s o f w a r , r a c e a n d c la s s .

I n d e v e l o p i n g t h is w i d e r p o l it i c a l f r a m e w o r k , t h e f ilm o p p o s e s th e n o tio n o f an is o la te d fe m in is m , a r g u in g t h a t p o l i t i c a l is s u e s , w h ile s o m e ti m e s a p p e a r i n g a s l o s t c a u s e s , in f a c t r e la te t o a m o r e s u b s t a n t i a l u n d e r ­ t a k i n g : t h e q u e s t f o r e q u a l p o w e r w ith m e n t o d e t e r m i n e n o t o n l y t h e liv e s o f w o m e n b u t a ls o t h e liv e s o f o t h e r s w h o h av e, th ro u g h o u t h isto ry , b een k e p t p o w e r le s s .

I f th e g re a te s t s tre n g th o f F o r L o v e O r M o n e y d e r iv e s f r o m t h is p o l i t i c a l p e r s p e c t iv e , t h e f i l m ’s m a j o r v i r t u e is th e f ir e a n d s p i r i t w i t h w h ic h it t a c k l e s

M i s s

c L M , P o D

O

v a a

Wanted & Positions Vacant For quality 35 mm sci-fi/adventure/war/car action/feature films — to be shot in Australia and other countries (replies from USA, Europe, Asia, etc. welcome, include your phone number). ? .■ We are perfectionists and award winners, prepared to go to great lengths to search out (hence this ad) and where necessary develop products and people that are “just right”. We value character (we like quiet, knowledgeable, patient, etc., people) more than experience. Write to us if yon see yourself as: assistant, acting talent, line producer, artist, designer, machinist, technician, etc. or consultant/supplier of props, wardrobe, weapons, Techniscope, Kodachrome, warfare, cars and heavy vehicles, computer graphics, electronics, servo motors, locations, etc.

If you think you have anything to contribute, or if you know o f anyone who has, please send fullest information, in your own longhand, to Executive Producer, P.O. Box 333, Bondi Beach, N.S.W. 2026, Australia.

We would prefer not to have to return anything; enclose s.a.s.e. if you want anything returned. Angol Holdings Pty Ltd. T el. (02) 309 2221 ‘ÆmhiiËmmk

Top: a champion typist of 1907. Above: mother and children in a Melbourne kitchen o f 1951. Megan McMurchy, Margot Nash, Margot Oliver and Jeni Thornley’s For Love Or Money.

CINEMA PAPERS March-April — 91

For Love or Money

t h e is s u e o f t h e A b o r i g i n a l a n d th e f e a r s o f th e n u c l e a r a g e a s b e in g i n t r i n ­ s ic a lly l in k e d w ith th e h i s t o r y o f A u s ­ t r a l i a n w o m e n . C o m p r e h e n s i v e a s it is, th e film c a n o n l y b e g in t o c h a r t , a n d t h e r e b y r e w r it e , th e e v id e n c e u n ­ c o v e r e d b y its h i s t o r ic a l r e s e a r c h .

C o m p r e s s i n g 195 y e a r s i n t o 109 m in u t e s o f s c r e e n t im e r e q u ir e s a n o c c a sio n a l ‘s h o t g u n ’ a p p r o a c h to h is t o r y a n d , t o b e s u r e , s o m e p e r io d s o f th e film a r e b e t t e r d o c u m e n t e d t h a n o th e rs .

B ut v is u a l h is to rie s a re n o t o r i o u s f o r c o n s t r i c t i n g f i lm m a k e r s b y a s im p le u n a v a i l a b i l i t y o f m a t e r i a l .

T h e im a g e s in F o r L o v e O r M o n e y a r e d ra w n fro m m o re th a n 200 fe a tu re film s , h o m e m o v ie s , n e w s r e e l d o c u ­ m e n t a r i e s a n d in te r v ie w s m a d e in A u s ­ t r a l i a b e tw e e n 1906 a n d 198 3 , a n d w o v e n t o g e t h e r w ith a n a r r a t i o n c u lle d fro m ra d io sh o w s, n e w sp a p ers, d i a r ie s , p o p u l a r s o n g s , l e t t e r s a n d a c a d e m i c h is t o r ie s .

It r e a c h e s b a c k t o 1 7 8 8 , c a r e f u ll y p a t c h w o r k i n g th e p e n a l a n d c o lo n i a l h is to r ie s o f w h ite a n d A b o r i g i n a l w o m e n d u r i n g a p e r io d o f i n c a r c e r a ­ tio n in p r i s o n s , b r o t h e l s a n d w o r k ­ h o u se s, a n d tra c e s th e d e v e lo p m e n t o f th e r u r a l a r i s t o c r a c y a n d th e g r o w in g s o p h i s t i c a t i o n s o f th e V i c t o r i a n A g e . It is p a r t i c u l a r l y s t r o n g o n th e th r e e d e c a d e s b e f o r e W o r ld W a r 1, w h e n r a p id i n d u s t r i a l i z a t i o n c r e a t e d t h e n e e d f o r c h e a p w o r k f o r c e s , so d e f in i n g w o m e n ’s w o r k a n d g iv in g ris e to a w o m e n ’s p e r s p e c t iv e o n l a b o r , e q u a l p a y a n d th e v o te .

A l t h o u g h th e m a t e r i a l f r o m b e tw e e n th e w a r s is s lig h t, F o r L o v e O r M o n e y p o w e r f u ll y d o c u m e n t s th e h i s t o r y o f w o m e n in w a r t im e : t h e i r o r g a n i z a t i o n s f o r p e a c e , t h e i r i n f lu x i n to j o b s t r a d ­ iti o n a ll y a s s o c i a t e d w ith m e n , t h e ir c o n ti n u i n g t r a d e u n i o n s tr u g g l e f o r e q u a l p a y , th e ir e v e n tu a l d e m o b iliz a ­ t io n a n d t h e i r i n e v i t a b l e t a r g e t i n g b y p a t r i a r c h a l c a m p a i g n s to r e t u r n t o t h e ir h o m e s . It t o o k t h e e c o n o m i c e x p a n s io n o f th e 1 9 50s a n d ’6 0 s , a n d a r e n e w e d n e e d f o r l a b o r , to e n a b l e w o m e n t o c o m e b a c k i n to t h e w o r k ­ f o r c e w h e r e th e y j o i n e d a n e w g r o u p o f w o r k in g w o m e n : t h e m i g r a n t s , w h o r e t u r n e d e a c h C o l d W a r n i g h t t o th e i n iq u i t o u s h o s te ls .

S u r p r i s i n g l y , F o r L o v e O r M o n e y is le a s t c o n v in c i n g w h e n d e a l i n g w ith th e p e r io d o f th e l a te 1 9 6 0 s a n d t h e ’7 0s w h e n th e s ty le o f th e film b e g in s to w a v e r b e tw e e n a f o r m a l i s t i c c h r o n ­ o lo g y a n d a p o t t e d , im p r e s s io n i s t i c h i s t o r y . It h a s n e it h e r t h e t im e n o r t h e m a t e r i a l t o a c h ie v e e i t h e r e f f e c tiv e ly .

T h e f i n a l v i c t o r y , in 1 9 7 2 , a f t e r a 9 0 - y e a r f i g h t f o r w a g e e q u a l i t y , is w ell c o v e re d — th e re a re im a g e s o f H a w k e , W h it l a m a n d w o m e n in p o litic s — b u t t h e a n t i - V i e t n a m a n d w o m e n ’s l i b e r a ­ tio n m a rc h e s ru s h b y , a n d th e “ d a u g h ­ t e r ’s r e v o l t ’ ’ a n d t h e r e j e c t i o n o f t h e m o t h e r ’s r o le a r e g iv e n c u r s o r y t r e a t ­ m e n t w h e r e o n e m ig h t h a v e e x p e c te d a s o lid a n a ly s is d r a w n f r o m th e p e r s o n a l e x p e r ie n c e s o f t h e m a k e r s o f th is d o c u ­ m e n ta ry .

T h e c o ll a p s e o f t r a d i t i o n a l r o le s f o r w o m e n d u r i n g t h e s e y e a r s is o n ly a ll u d e d t o , a s a r e t h e i m p o r t a n t s o c i o ­ lo g ic a l and p s y c h o lo g ic a l con­ s e q u e n c e s w h ic h f lo w e d f r o m th is s u s ­ t a i n e d a c t i v it y a n d w h ic h , d u r i n g th e 1 9 7 0 s, d e v e l o p e d in to a p lu ra lis t f e m i n i s m w ith b r o a d p o l it i c a l i m p l i c a ­ t io n s . T h e c o m p l e x a n d , o c c a s i o n a l l y , c o n t e n t i o u s c h a n g e s t o f e m in is m t h a t h a v e s u b s e q u e n tly d is tu r b e d le a d in g f ig u r e s o f th e m o v e m e n t , s u c h a s G r e e r , a r e g iv e n s c a n t a t t e n t i o n .

A s a n a c c e s s ib le d o c u m e n t a r y o n th e s t a t u s o f w o m e n in A u s t r a l i a n h i s t o r y ,

92 — March-April CINEMA PAPERS

The Clinic

Dr Eric Linden (Chris Haywood) listens to a patient’s (Doug Tremlett) dilemma. The Clinic. t h e r e is n o t h i n g r e m o t e l y in t h e c la s s o f F o r L o v e O r M o n e y . T h e film is m o s t e f fe c tiv e w hen d o c u m e n tin g th e p a tria rc h a l c o -o p tio n o f w o m e n fo r w o r k , a n d th e p e r io d i c d e c is io n s m a d e b y m e n t o a llo w w o m e n i n to th e w o r k ­ f o r c e o n ly w h e n it s u its t h e i r p e r s o n a l , p o l it i c a l o r e c o n o m i c a m b i t i o n s .

F o r L o v e O r M o n e y s tr iv e s t o i n te g ­ r a t e t h e is s u e s o f w a r , r a c e a n d s o c ia l c la s s w ith its t h e m e o f w o m e n a n d w o r k . It s i m u l t a n e o u s l y h e lp s p r o b e t h e f a il u r e o f p a t r i a r c h a l s o c ie tie s to see th e s e is s u e s a s n o t o n ly s p e c if ic a lly r e la te d t o m e n , b u t a s a ls o r e f l e c t i n g t h e s e x u a l in e q u a l it i e s p e r p e t r a t e d o n w om en.

In a c o n t e m p o r a r y p e r io d o f e r o d in g e c o n o m i c c o n d i t i o n s a n d its i n h e r e n t t h r e a t t o t h e g a in s m a d e b y w o m e n a n d th e ir w o rk , th e c o n f ro n tin g p ro file o f f e m i n i s m f a c e s th e p r o s p e c t o f q u a l ­ i f ie d e q u a l i ti e s : c o m p r o m i s e s b o r n o f realpolitik w h ic h s u g g e s t a f o r m o f e q u a l i ty b u t w h ic h d o n o t n e c e s s a r ily c a r r y e it h e r th e e n ti t le m e n t s t o p o w e r o r t h e a p p a r a t u s f o r its u s e .

For Love Or Money: Directed by: Megan McMurchy, Jeni Thornley. Producers: Megan McMurchy, Margot Nash, Margot Oliver, Jeni Thornley. Screenplay, research and production by: Megan McMurchy, Margot Oliver, Jeni Thornley. Editor: Margot Nash. Narrated by: Noni Hazlehurst. Music: Elizabeth Drake. Distributor: Sydney Filmmakers Co-op. 16 mm. Black and white, and color. 109 mins. Australia.

1983.

The Clinic D eb i E nk er

G iv e n th e s l a n t o f t h e p u b l ic i ty c a m ­ p a ig n a n d a n a w a r e n e s s o f th e w a y A u s t r a l i a n c o m e d ie s h a v e d e a l t w ith s e x u a lity in t h e p a s t , o n e c o u ld b e f o r ­ g iv e n f o r e x p e c tin g T h e C lin ic t o b e a n u n g a in ly c r o s s b e tw e e n C a rry O n C a r e fu lly a n d A lv in S tr ik e s O u t.

H o w e v e r , D a v id S t e v e n s ’ e c o n o m i ­ c a l d i r e c ti o n a n d G r e g M i l li n ’s w itty s c r ip t h a v e p r o d u c e d a f a r m o r e i n t e r ­ e s tin g s y n th e s is : a f u n n y film d e a lin g c o m p a s s io n a t e l y w ith a r i s q u e s u b j e c t , w i t h o u t r e s o r t in g to t h e ty p e o f e x p lo i t a t i o n w h ic h s e e k s t o t i t i l l a t e its a u d ie n c e w ith a n i n g lo r i o u s p a r a d e o f tits a n d b u m s . T h e i r p r e s e n t a t i o n o f a h y p o t h e t i c a l d a y in t h e life o f a c lin ic t r e a ti n g s e x u a lly t r a n s m i t t e d d is e a s e s a b o u n d s w ith i r r e v e r e n t h u m o r a n d s a tir e . T h e C lin ic a ls o c r e a te s a m ic r o c o s m o f A u s t r a l i a n s o c ie ty ; it r e p r e s e n t s a d iv e r s ity o f c h a r a c t e r s , v a lu e s a n d r e l a t i o n s h i p s , a n d s u b j e c t s th e m t o in c is iv e s c r u t in y .

A s s e m b lin g se v e ra l d is p a ra te c h a r a c t e r s 'u n d e r t h e o n e r o o f h a s b e e n a c o m m o n p r a c t ic e , p a r t i c u l a r l y o n te le v is io n . T h e d e v ic e o f t h e s h a r e d liv in g - p la c e (N u m b e r 9 6 , S ta r tin g O u t) o r w o r k - p l a c e (T h e B o x , T h e Y o u n g D o c t o r s , A r c a d e , D iv is io n 4 , e tc .) e n a b le s t h e r a n g e o f s i t u a t i o n s to b e i n c o r p o r a t e d w ith a m i n i m u m of e x p e n d i t u r e o n s e ts , l o c a t io n s o r c o s tly e x te r io r s . U s in g t h is f o r m u l a , T h e

C lin ic h a s i n te r w o v e n a s e r ie s o f v ig n e tte s w h ic h e x a m i n e r e l a t i o n s h i p s , a n d th e ir o c c a s io n a lly re la te d a f flic ­ tio n s .

O n a n o t h e r le v e l, h o w e v e r , t h e film h ig h lig h ts t h e p r o b l e m s o f a s o c ie ty w h ic h o b s tru c ts c o n s tru c tiv e d is ­ c u s s io n o f is s u e s r e l a t e d t o se x : th e g e n e r a l la c k o f in fo rm a tio n , th e s t i g m a t iz a t i o n o f th e c l i n i c ’s p a t i e n t s , th e la n g u a g e p ro b le m s fa ce d by m ig r a n t s a n d t h e p r e j u d i c e s t h a t c a n m a g n i f y a n i n f e c t i o n f r o m a n illn e s s t o a v ic e .

T h e in tro d u c tio n o f th e c h a ra c te r o f a m e d ic a l s t u d e n t e a r l y in t h e film s ig n if ie s th e s t a r t o f a n e d u c a t i o n p r o ­ c ess w h e r e b y t h e n e w c o m e r , a n d im p lic itly t h e a u d ie n c e , is i n s t r u c t e d in th e w o r k i n g s o f t h e e s t a b l i s h m e n t .

P a u l A rm s tro n g (S im o n B u rk e ) s ta u n c h ly e m b o d ie s a ra n g e o f c o n ­ s e r v a tiv e a t t i t u d e s , d i r e c tl y c o n t r a s t e d w ith t h o s e o f t h e s t a f f a n d s e v e ra l p a t i e n t s . H e is h o s t i le t o h o m o s e x u a l s , c o n te m p tu o u s y et c u rio u s about p r o s t i t u t e s , d i s h o n e s t a b o u t h is i n h i b i ­ t io n s a n d a r r o g a n t a b o u t h is p r o f e s ­ s i o n a l s t a t u s . H e a ls o e x h ib i t s tw o t r a i t s v ie w e d a s p a r t i c u l a r l y r e p r e ­ h e n s ib le : a la c k o f h u m o r a n d a P u r i t a n i s m m a n i f e s t e d in p o m p o s i t y .

H e n o t o n l y fe e ls a c u t e l y u n c o m f o r t ­ a b le in h is n e w s u r r o u n d i n g s b u t a ls o is e s s e n tia lly d e m e a n e d b y t h e m . I t is a k e y f a c t o r in t h e f i l m ’s s t r a t e g y t h a t t h is c h a r a c t e r , w ith a ll its c u r io s it y a n d p a r o d i e d p r e j u d i c e s , is th e f ig u r e t o w h ic h t h e f ilm a lig n s its a u d ie n c e .

P a u l is a s s ig n e d to s p e n d t h e m o r n ­ in g w ith E r ic L in d e n ( C h r i s H a y w o o d ) ,

The C lin ic

a d o c t o r w h o m a n a g e s o n h is f i r s t p a tie n t s u ffe rin g fro m h e rp e s, are a p p e a r a n c e in t h e f i lm t o c o n t r a v e n e a ttrib u te d to ig n o ra n c e a b o u t th e m o s t o f t h e p r o p r i e t i e s a s s o c i a t e d w ith n a t u r e o f t h e d is e a s e s . T h e m o r e t h e m e d i c a l p r o f e s s i o n . D r e s s e d in h u m o r o u s s k e t c h e s d e p ic t a g e n e r a l ta tte re d je a n s a n d a h a p h a z a rd ly n a iv e t e a b o u t b o d i ly f u n c t i o n s a n d th e b u t t o n e d f l o r a l s h i r t , E r ic d e m o n ­ t r a n s m i s s i o n o f i n f e c t i o n s . In t h i s w a y s tra te s a n in f o r m a lity w ith p a tie n ts t h e f ilm s e e m s c o n s c io u s ly d e s i g n e d a s a n d a b e n e v o le n t to le ra n c e o f th e m a s o u r c e o f i n f o r m a t i o n f o r its a u d i ­ th a t P a u l fin d s in c o m p re h e n s ib le . e n c e , s y s te m a t i c a ll y c h r o n i c l i n g t h e i n ­ W h e n t h e d o c t o r is r e v e a le d a s a n u n ­ a d e q u a c i e s o f t h e p ill, th e t r e a t m e n t s r e p e n t a n t h o m o s e x u a l , t h e c o n t r a s t is f o r v e n e r e a l d is e a s e a n d th e in c id e n c e c o m p l e t e . P a u l ’s e x p o s u r e t o E r ic o f n o n -s p e c ific u r e th r itis , a n in fe c tio n fo rm s a c e n tra l c o m p o n e n t o f th e t h a t e x h ib i t s s o m e o f t h e s y m p t o m s o f n a r r a t i v e , d e l i n e a t i n g its a s s e r t i o n t h a t g o n o rrh o ea . e d u c a tio n c a n tr a n s f o r m a n in to le r a n t, T h e film a ls o a t t r i b u t e s a p a r t o f a n d o fte n ig n o r a n t, a ttitu d e in to a P a u l ’s e v e n t u a l c o n v e r s i o n in a t t i t u d e m o re p ro d u c tiv e a w a re n e ss. t o h is r e s p i te a t t h e b e a c h . W h e n h e is A l t h o u g h a l a r g e p a r t o f P a u l ’s ' in t h e c lin ic h e is u n a b l e t o i d e n t i f y i n s t r u c t i o n is r e l i a n t o n E r i c ’s t u i t i o n , w ith a n y o f th e p a tie n ts o r p la c e th e m th e v i e w e r ’s t u t e l a g e is e x te n d e d in a b r o a d e r c o n t e x t w h ic h a c c e p ts b e y o n d t h e r e a l m o f h is c o n s c io u s n e s s . s e x u a l d is e a s e s a s a b y - p r o d u c t o f T h e r e is a c o n t i n u a l e m p h a s i s o n t h e o f t e n h e a l t h y o r f u l f il l in g r e l a t i o n ­ n e e d f o r i n f o r m a t i o n a b o u t se x e d u c a ­ s h ip s . H o w e v e r , a s h e w a t c h e s a c o u p le t i o n a n d s e x u a ll y t r a n s m i t t e d d i s e a s e s . a t t h e b e a c h , h e is f o r c e d t o a c k n o w ­ T h e in a p p ro p ria te o v e r-re a c tio n o f an le d g e t h e e x is te n c e o f a n i n t i m a c y a n d e m p lo y e r to a n e m p lo y e e w h o h a s c o n ­ te n d e rn e s s th a t h e h a d a u to m a tic a lly t r a c t e d s y p h i l is , a n d t h e t r a u m a o f a d isa sso c ia te d fro m th e p a tie n ts .

■ H

H a v i n g a c c e p t e d t h e c lin ic a s a n e c e s ­ sa ry , ev en d e s ira b le , e s ta b lis h m e n t, he is a b le t o r e t u r n a n d s e e h is w o r k t h e r e in a d i f f e r e n t c o n t e x t . H e is e v e n a b le t o c o n f i d e h is p r i v a t e f e a r s t o E r ic in a s c e n e w h ic h i r o n ic a l l y c o n c l u d e s w ith t h e t w o m e n s h a r i n g a l a u g h in a t o il e t c u b ic le . I t is i n d ic a ti v e o f t h e e s s e n tia l g e n e ro s ity o f th e s c rip t th a t ev en th e m o st p o m p o u s a n d u n p le a s a n t c h a ra c ­ t e r is g r a n t e d h is m o m e n t o f i n te g r i ty .

I f T h e C lin ic h a s a h e r o , it is E r ic L in d e n , w h o s e c a s u a l y e t p r a c t i c a l a p p r o a c h t o h is w o r k is s e e n t o e m a n a te fro m a h u m o r a n d h u m a n ity o f r e a l b e n e f i t t o h is p a t i e n t s . H a y ­ w a r d ’s p e r f o r m a n c e is n o t s im p ly e n j o y a b l e , b u t a l m o s t r e m a r k a b l e : in a m e d i u m f r o m w h ic h s u c h r e p r e s e n t a ­ t io n s a r e n o t a b l y a b s e n t , h e s u c c e e d s in p o r t r a y i n g a n o p e n a n d i n te l li g e n t h o m o se x u a l as a c h a ra c te r w o rth y o f re s p e c t.

L i n d e n ’s p r o f e s s i o n a l a t t r i b u t e s a r e s h a r e d b y th e o t h e r m e m b e r s o f t h e s ta f f . U n ite d b y a s p irit o f c o m m u n ity , t h e y o p e r a t e e f f i c ie n t ly a n d w i t h c o m ­

p a s s io n a n d w ry h u m o r th r o u g h th e s e r ie s o f c o n s u l t a t i o n s . A s a g r o u p , t h e i r t o l e r a n t r e c e p ti v i ty b e c o m e s a n a n t i d o t e t o t h e p s y c h o l o g ic a l d i s o r d e r s o f a r e p r e s s iv e c u l t u r e . T h e i r i n t e r ­ a c t i o n w ith t h e v a r ie ty o f p a t i e n t s s p illin g o u t f r o m t h e b u s t l in g w a i ti n g r o o m p r o v i d e s m u c h o f t h e b a s is f o r t h e f i l m ’s s o c ia l o b s e r v a t i o n s .

H o w e v e r , e v e n t h e s t a f f is s u b j e c t t o c r it i c i s m . In a s e m in a l s c e n e w h ic h t a k e s a w e ll- a im e d s w ip e a t a n y f e e lin g s o f s m u g n e s s o r p a t r o n i z a t i o n e m a n a t i n g f r o m th e s a f e t y o f t h e s t a ll s , W il m a ( B e tty B o b b i tt ) is i n t r o d u c e d .

S h e a p p e a r s t o b e a p a r o d y f r o m th e m o m e n t s h e e n te r s D r Y o u n g ’s ( R o n a M c L e o d ) o f f i c e . S h e is a c u t e l y e m b a r ­ r a s s e d a b o u t a t t e n d i n g t h e c lin ic , t o t h e e x te n t o f a d o p t i n g a d is g u i s e a n d a p s e u d o n y m , t h e n h i d in g in th e t o ile ts r a t h e r t h a n b e s e e n in t h e w a itin g r o o m . H e r u n f a s h i o n a b l e m o d e s ty a b o u t sex h a s e s c a l a t e d t o f e a r f u l p r o ­ p o r t i o n s w h e n c o m b i n e d w ith h e r o v e r - z e a l o u s s t a n d a r d s o f h y g ie n e . S h e f e e ls , h o w e v e r , c o m p e l le d t o u n d e r g o

m I S

B

I H

I I i l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l B

I I I I I I l l l l l l l l I I I I H

I l l i l l l l B

l I R

R

B

B

H

R

I I I B

I I I

CINEMA PAPERS March-April — 93

The Clinic

an examination because, for the first time since her husband’s departure (three years ago), she has slept with a man and was horrified when he failed to get out of bed and wash himself afterwards. Convinced that such neglect, in addition to his stained underwear, indicated that he was somehow unclean, she swallowed a tranquilliser and headed for the clinic.

Upon the disclosure of her com­ plaint, even the normally sympathetic doctor and nurse (Jane Clifton) find it impossible to suppress their mirth.

Wilma appears prudish and absurd; a bundle of inhibitions and neuroses comforted by valium, she could almost be a sister to Edna Everage. The viewer is encouraged to share the amused dis­ belief of the staff.

But the tone of the scene changes abruptly, in a style indicative of the fluidity with which the film can alternate between comedy and drama.

Sensing that she is being ridiculed, Wilma rightly demands that she be treated with respect; she acknowledges that she may seem ridiculous but asserts that to her this is an embarrass­ ing and degrading situation. The immediate effect of her protest is to silence the giggles of the staff and elicit an apology which once again stresses the need for compassion rather than gratuitous judgement. Her succinct speech produces an effect similar to that of Sandy’s belated outburst in T o o t s ie . In both cases an ostensibly eccentric and neurotic woman con­ fronts her detractors and explains her confusions, demanding that she be viewed more respectfully.

As both a comedy of manners and an examination of social mores, T h e C lin ic is often poignant and consist­ ently funny. But, occasionally, a heavy-handed attempt to draw atten­ tion to the serious side of the subject detracts from the fluidity of the film.

A refusal to ignore the graver aspects of its subjects so as to sustain the laughs is admirable. However, the fate of the syphilis patient, Warwick (Ned Lander), overstates issues already adequately covered by the script and underestimates the impact of Lander’s sensitive performance.

It is established clearly that Warwick is suffering from syphilis and that his honesty to the nurse at his place of employment has resulted in an unethical betrayal of his confidence and his retrenchment. Despite efforts by the helpful and maternal counsellor (Pat Evison), it is also clear that War­ wick will remain a victim, not only of his disease but also of the lack of understanding demonstrated by his employer and family. In the light of this information, it becomes necessary to emphasize his plight by conveying news of his off-camera suicide. As one of the few occasions when the film relies on an overt statement of conse­ quences rather than on employing a more subtle disclosure of information leading to the same conclusions, it creates an awkward and laboured tension.

T h e f i l m ’s h a p p y b u t h a s ty e n d in g i n d ic a te s a d e s ir e t o t h r e a d t h e lo o s e e n d s t o g e t h e r . T h e a n ti c s o f a r e lig io u s fa n a tic , b e n t o n th ro w in g w h a t he r e g a r d s as a v e r it a b l e S o d o m i n to c h a o s b y d e p o s i ti n g a n o m i n o u s s h o e b o x in th e l a v a t o r i e s , a c t a s th e d e v ic e f o r th e f i l m ’s c o n c l u s i o n : in t h e i n t e r ­ v a l b e tw e e n th e b u i l d i n g ’s e v a c u a t i o n a n d th e r e t u r n t o b u s i n e s s , E r ic a n d P a u l r e s o lv e t h e i r d i f f e r e n c e s ; D r Y o u n g r e c o n c ile s w ith h e r h u s b a n d ; a s a t is f ie d p a tie n t r e tu rn s w ith h is

94 — March-April CINEMA PAPERS

we're behind the award winners PRiVOST World renowned editing tables from 2-plate to 10-plate in 35mm and 16mm capabilities. Dual gauge (16/35) tables have 'flip­ over' picture units for quick change. • Precision alignment.

• Overhead and rear projection.

• 8 w att solid state amplifiers to soundheads. • Film capacities to 1500 feet.

ROSCO The established 'name' when it comes to lighting gels, filtration media, special effects, theatre accessories and stage design aids.

LOWEL Sophisticated lights that are smooth, dazzling bright and versatile.

Your choice: • very soft • semi­ soft • h^rd-shadow • high intensity • super long 'th ro w s'... simply by adding accessories. Unique designs • durable • lightweight • compact.

P

IC

S

Australasia Limited

r.NSW

I¡ncowaíed

LTM HMI lighting with a quality equivalent to arc light.

The low power consumption is a feature of the five models (to 6000 watts) available through PICS.

MICROH Used by leading sound technicians all over the world.

Extremely selective, Micron radio microphones are the established standard system for use with recording, television and stage productions, as they are less susceptible to interference.

i

i

Sydney 8 Dungate Lane Sydney 2000 Ph 254 1981 Melbourne 77 City Road South Melbourne 3205 Ph 62 1133 Brisbane 116 Brunswick Street Fortitude Valley 4006 Ph 52 8816 Adelaide 239 Anzac Highway Plympton 5038 Ph 293 2692 Perth 110 Jersey Street Jolimont 6014 Ph 387 4492 Auckland 5 Pollen Street Grey Lynn Auckland Ph 78 9094

f ia n c e e in to w ; a n d tw o o t h e r p a t i e n t s d is c o v e r t h e i r m u tu a l a t t r a c t i o n in th e s t r e e t . G iv e n th e f i l m ’s i n t e n t i o n to c r e a te th e im p r e s s io n o f a p o s s ib le d a y a t t h e c lin ic , t h e i n tr u s io n o f a b o m b s c a re s e e m s a little im p l a u s i b le . It is a n u n n e c e s s a r y c a t a l y s t a im e d a t c r e a ti n g a q u ic k r e s o l u ti o n o f u n c e r t a i n s i t u a ­ t io n s w h e n th e s t r u c t u r e o f t h e film s u g g e s te d th e y m ig h t b e b e t t e r le f t o p e n -e n d e d .

H o w e v e r , in s p ite o f th e s e r e s e r v a ­ t io n s , T h e C lin ic is a n a d m i r a b l e s a t ir e on c o n te m p o ra ry v a lu e s and an

in c is iv e a t t e m p t to h i g h li g h t th e p r o b l e m s o f in d iv i d u a ls f a c i n g a p a r t i c u l a r f o r m o f p r i v a t e s tr e s s . F o r its c o m ic s k e t c h e s , it p r e s e n t s a h o s t o f ta le n te d c o m e d ia n s , in c lu d in g M a rk L ittle , E v e ly n K ra p e and A la n P e n t l a n d , a n d t h e t r a n s i t i o n s b e tw e e n c o m e d y a n d d r a m a a r e g e n e r a ll y s u b t l e a n d f l u id . B u t t h e f i l m ’s r e a l s t r e n g t h is its a b il i ty t o d e p ic t s i t u a t i o n s t h a t o fte n p ro d u c e e m b a rra s s m e n t, d is­ c o m f o r t a n d e v e n b i t t e r n e s s in a c o n te x t w h ic h r e i n f o r c e s t h e n e e d f o r t o le r a n c e a n d c o m p a s s i o n .

The Clinic: D irected by: D av id Stevens.

P ro d u cers: R o b e rt Le T et, B ob -W eis.

S creenplay: G reg M illin . D ire cto r o f p h o to g rap h y : Ian B ak er. E d ito r: E d w a rd M cQ u een -M aso n . S o u n d re co rd ist: Jo h n R ow ley. C a st: C h ris H a y w o o d (E ric L inden), Sim on B u rk e (P a u l A rm stro n g ), G erd a N icolson (L in d a ), R o n a M cL eo d ( C a r o l) , S u z a n n e R o y la n c e ( P a t t y ) .

P ro d u c tio n c o m p an y : T he F ilm H o u seG en eratio n Film s. 35 m m . 90 m ins.

A u stra lia . 1983. +

SETSI SCENERY PROPSl MODELS for film, television, theatre, commercials, exhib Our National Service includes design, construction, painting, transport, erection, dismantling, hire and storage.

Contact COLIN BURCHALL CLIVE LEE PORCHER RICHARD GODDEN

Studio Set Constructions

Richmond, Victoria 3121 Telephone 4291647

Silver City A love story set against the epic background o f post-W orld War 2 migration to Australia.

Silver City is directed by Sophia Turkiewicz, from a screen­ play by Turkiewicz and Thomas Keneally, fo r producer Joan Long. Director o f photography is John Seale.

Opposite page, clockwise from top left: Nina and Julian give a party in their temporary home — a fibro garage; Silver City; the Minister for Immigration, Mr Calwell (Ron Blanchard), presents a koala to “the 100,000th displaced person” (Cheryl Walton); Nina and Julian; Nina comes to the rescue of a fellow immigrant.

Right: Polish immigrants Nina (Gosia Dobrowolska) and Julian (Ivar Kants). Below: immigrants get their first glimpse of Australia.

T h e F il m Y e a r B o o k ■ ■ ■ ■

1984 EDITION

T h e indispensable guide to a complete year of cinema

$ 1 4 .9 5 Available now at all good bookshops and newsagents

^

tills , credits and

r r p

‘ pecial section on A ustra lia by leading film a u th o rity Tom Ryan studies the re­ em e rge nce of A ustralian Films.

5

V J review s of all film s released between Ju ly 1982 and June 1983. n-depth features by the w o rld 's leading film critics on the m ovies they th o u g h t best, w o rst and m ost likely to succeed.

/ C u r r e y O ’N e il

•

L 2 ep orts fro m around /

I the w o rld . Quotes o f th e year. A w ards, lists, b o x-office charts, reference section.

•

9

1

8

S p e c ia l A u s t r a l ia n S e c t io n B y T o m R y a n 1983 CREDITS

m

o

v

i E

C

A

m

Latest Complete Camera System

“THE SILENT ONE” (NZ) “ FINDING KATIE” (NZ)

Competitive Hire Rates

“ MOLLY”

Location Back-up

“THE WILD DUCK”

Production Incentives

“ FAST TALKING”

Technical Production Consultancy

“ CONSTANCE’ (NZ)

Worlds largest Moviecam Rental House

“ MAN OF FLOWERS’

Australian Company “ONE NIGHT STAND” “ANNIE’S C O M IN G OUT’

cinem atic services pty ltd 8 C la re n d o n Street, ARTARMON NSW 2064 Phone: (02) 439 6144

Call Don Balfour or Oscar Scherl to improve your "Below The Line" costs

1984

CLUES ACROSS Welcome to Xanadu: How To Play T h is is a c r y p ti c c r o s s w o r d ; t h e “ c r y p t i c ” i n v o lv e s c lu e s . I t is s i m il a r to th o s e f o u n d in w e e k e n d n e w s ­ p a p e r s : t h e c lu e s m u s t b e d e c i p h e r e d in v a rio u s w a y s to g e t a t th e ir m e a n in g a n d th e p r o p e r re fe re n t to th e w o rd w a n te d , p la y in g a r o u n d w ith th e p o s s i­ b ilitie s a n d a n a c h r o n i s m s o f l a n g u a g e , a s s o c ia tio n a n d m e a n in g . T h e g rid w o rk s ju s t as a n o rm a l c ro ssw o rd d o e s . I n p a r e n t h e s e s a f t e r e a c h c lu e is t h e n u m b e r o f l e t t e r s in t h e w o r d o n e is s e e k in g . I f it is m o r e t h a n o n e w o r d , t h e r e w ill b e a n u m b e r f o r e a c h w o r d : e . g . , L a s t Y e a r a t M a r ie n b a d w ill b e ( 4 ,4 , 2 ,8 ) .

P a r t i c u l a r l y , t h is is a c r o s s w o r d a b o u t f ilm a n d t e l e v is io n . T h e c lu e s a n d a n s w e rs h a v e to d o w ith p r o p e r n a m e s o f p e o p l e in f i lm s o r te l e v is io n o r b o t h , t it l e s o f f ilm s o r s h o w s o r b o th , te c h n ic a l m a tte r s , g e n re s , a s s o c i­ a t e d f i g u r e s , f i lm t h e o r y , e tc . O v e r t h e y e a rs, o n e h a s a c c u m u la te d u n to ld ( a n d u n s y s t e m a t i z e d ) i n f o r m a t i o n in th is a r e a ; t h e p u z z l e is a g a m e b u t a ls o a w e ir d s y s te m f o r r e a c h i n g i n t o t h a t te e m in g g u m b o a n d p l u c k i n g o u t j u s t t h e r i g h t b i ts (g iv e s t h e m v a lu e , d o e s n ’t i t? ) .

T ip s : I n i t i a l a r ti c l e s ( t h e , a n ) m a y o r m a y n o t b e p a r t o f a n s w e rs w h ic h a re tit l e s . S o m e a n s w e r s a r e a b b r e v i a t i o n s .

I n c lu e s , c a p i t a l l e t t e r s m a y n o t b e p r o ­ v id e d ; p u n c t u a t i o n m a y b e m is s in g o r m is le a d in g ; t h e c lu e m a y c o n t a i n m o r e t h a n o n e s o r t o f m in i - c lu e o r r e f e r ­ e n c e ; a p p a r e n t e r r o r s o r m is s p e ll i n g s m a y b e in te n tio n a l a n d p a r t o f th e a n sw e r; p la y m a y b e m a d e o n w o rd s w ith m u l t i p l e m e a n i n g s ; t h e a n s w e r o n e is l o o k i n g f o r m a y b e in its o r i g i n a l l a n g u a g e , w i t h r e a s o n a b l e l im i ts ; p u n s m a y s t r i k e ; t h e p r e s e n c e o f a f i lm t i t l e in t h e c lu e m a y n o t a lw a y s r e f e r

d ir e c tl y t o t h o s e a s s o c i a t e d w i t h t h a t f ilm ; p r e p o s i t i o n s s h o u l d b e c a r e f u l l y s t u d i e d ; t h e c lu e m a y b e a lis t p o i n t i n g t o t h e a n s w e r — a c o m m o n e le m e n t ; a n d c lu e s m a y c o n t a i n a n a n a g r a m o f t h e a n s w e r , o r le a d i n g t o t h e a n s w e r , w h ic h w h e n u n s c r a m b l e d r e v e a ls a ll.

M uch p la y w ill be m ade of s y n o n y m s a n d o f h o m o n y m s , i n w h ic h case co d e p h ra se s su c h as “ w e h e a r ” o r “ s o u n d s l i k e ” m a y g iv e a s i g n a l; th e re m a y b e titu la r o r o th e r re fe re n c e s t o a m is s in g p a r t ( C lu e : M e e t J o h n .

A n sw e r: D o e ). O n e m a y h a v e to a s s e m b le t h e a n s w e r b i t b y b i t ( C lu e : G a m b le a m it e , f i n is h w i t h d r y w h i t e a n d c a s s is . A n s w e r b y s u b s t i t u t i o n : G a m b le = b e t; m it e = t ic k ; d r y w h i t e a n d c a s s is = k i r ; B e t + tic k + k i r s o u n d s lik e B o e tt i c h e r ) .

Examples C lu e : H u n t e r a n d D i l l o n d i d it w i t h o u t R i t t e r (3 ). S o l u t i o n b y n a m e a s s o c i a ­ tio n : T im H u n te r d ire c te d M a tt D i l l o n ’s f i r s t f e a t u r e , T e x ( t h e a n s w e r ) ; T ex R itte r, d e c e a s e d , h a d n o th in g to d o w ith it.

C lu e : A t t h e s t a r t , h o m e o f E a s t e r n U .S . f ilm a r c h i v e s . “ A t t h e s t a r t ” s ig n a ls t h a t t h e a n s w e r w ill b e i n it i a l s o r a n a c ro n y m ; fro m th e r e , w ith a b it o f k n o w l e d g e , o n e is le d t o M u s e u m o f M o d e r n A r t , w h ic h s t a r t e d o n e o f t h e f i r s t U .S . a r c h i v e s a n d is l o c a t e d in t h e E a s t , c o m m o n l y r e f e r r e d t o in p r i n t a s M O M A (th e a n s w e r).

S o m e ti m e s t h e a n s w e r is p r e s e n t in t h e c lu e . C lu e : M o s tl y p u r i t a n i c a l A m e r ic a n a g e n c y . A n s w e r : M P A A , t h e U .S . r a t i n g b o a r d , f o u n d b y n o t i n g t h e f i r s t l e t t e r o f e a c h w o r d o f t h e c lu e .

O n e m ay e n c o u n te r h o m o n y m a l v a r i a t i o n s in s p e l li n g b e tw e e n c lu e a n d an sw e r.

B o n a p p e tit.

1 P o s s ib le A u s tra lia n v e rs io n of c e n t a u r , h a r p y , m e r m a i d , e tc .; c o u ld m e a n r a c e p r o b l e m s (8) 5 F e a tu re s lo s t b rie fs , n o w se e n n a k e d a n d a l o n e (6) 7 F re d , w h o se o u tb u rs t m a rk e d a f i r s t f o r t o t i n d u s t r y (3) 9 A t th e s ta r t, h o m e o f E a s te rn ( U .S .) f ilm a r c h i v e s (4 ) 10 S h e ’s in a a r d v a r k , b u t lo v e s lio n s (5) 11 P a c e r p r a n c i n g t h r o u g h t h e p l o t (5 ) 14 O n e o n e t h r e e e ig h t (3) 15 O l d lig h t w e i g h t f o r f ie ld p ix (5 ) 16 I t t a k e s a ll k i n d s o f m o n e y t o m a k e t h e i r p i c t u r e s (8) 18 S o u n d s b e t t e r s in c e (5) 2 0 S m a s h i n g s u c c e s s a s k in g in N e w Y o r k (4) 23 S ile n t m is s ile (3 ) 2 4 T o B illy J o e (3) 25 S o u n d s lik e p r o d u c e r c o n v in c e s R a y (8) 28 F i r s t in d o u b t , b r o u g h t f ilm c lo s e r t o p e o p le (2) 2 9 W ie n e s e c lo s e t f o r c ig a r , A li (8 ) 3 0 H o r n s in , c h a t s w i t h h i g h s o c ie ty (5 ) 31 B r ie f ly , P a r a m o u n t ’s f a v o r i t e p i c ­ t u r e (2) 33 “ N o d e a r t h o f d e a t h n e a r m e ! ” , h e r a v e d (5 ) 3 4 N e r o n i n e t y n o r t h (7) 36 D ig — g e t s a n d y (3 ) 38 a n d 21 D o w n : W is e m a n ’s O r i e n t a l h e a l e r (2 , 2 ) 39 Variety’s r u r a l s a m p le r e je c t e d t h e s e f ilm s — k e t t l e b o i l e r s , th e y w e r e (4) 41 U c c e la c c i f r o m I n d i a n a (5) 43 S e n s e n o t u s u a l l y a d d r e s s e d b y m o v ie s (4) 4 4 T o g e t t h is c o n s o r t e r w i t h d e t e c ­ tiv e s , m u s t s o r t o u t T h e T h ir d M a n (4) 4 6 R e b e l g e r m - h u t c o n t a i n s B ig M a c in t in p o t , w e h e a r ? (6 , 6) 4 7 N o t a s s u t u r e d a s m o s t , b u t tie s u p t h e s t o r y w e ll (4)

CLUES DOWN 1 N o t j u s t a n o t h e r p r e t t y le g , h e r c o m p a n y s i m p ly p u r r s (3 ) 2 C i ty s o t o s p e a k , t h r o u g h t h e l o o k in g g la s s (1 , 4 , 4 , 5) 3 M ix e d u p b e f o r e b r e a k f a s t ( m a d e h u n d r e d s o f f ilm s a f t e r ) (4 ) 4 F ro m a n o ld p re s id e n t, a re s e a rc h t o o l f o r e x - e d i to r ; t h e l a d i e s ’ m a n , t o o . P l u r a l (6) 5 B e tw e e n six a n d e ig h t , B e r g m a n t o o k o n e — z o o s g o t a l o t m o r e (4 ) 6 F irst sa w g h o s ts , th e n c a rrie d H o p p y (6) 8 M a i d M a r i a n ? S e e m s l ik e ly f o r t h is w r o n g - w a y P e t e r L o r r e (5 ) 11 F u d d ’s “ L o o k y ! ” (9 ) 12 M o s t a r m y s e r ie s h u m o r i s n ’t s o f l a t (4 ) 13 E s s e n t ia l f o r W e s te r n s — t r y it in a m i r r o r (4) 17 C o m e s h a r d a n d s o f t (4) 19 V e ry u n u s u a l m a l e s e x u a l d i f f i c u l t y

(9) 21 se e 38 A c r o s s (2 , 2) 2 2 H a l f a n o t ic (8 ) 24 H a lf o f o d d p a ir h a s a f f in ity f o r g a r b a g e (5 ) 2 6 C o w c a llz b a c k w a r d f o r q u i c k w a y t o c o n n e c t n e a r a n d f a r (4 ) 2 7 P o s s e s s iv e t o w a r d I n d i a n ? S i, m i g e n e r a l — a t o u g h b u n c h (7) 3 2 B y t h e s o u n d o f i t , w o u l d n ’t y o u j o i n a b u g in a t h e o r y t h a t c o u l d b u r n w ith a n h ? (7 ) 35 O f t e n a t m i d n i g h t t h is h e a d b l a n k s o u t (6 ) 3 6 F o r w e e d y e a g le s , F o r d ’s F o r d (5 ) 37 F i r s t f o r p e r c u s s i v e t h e s p , w e h e a r .

R e f: M E , W B /7 7 , Q M /F B I 4 0 S o u n d s lik e d u ll ‘A ’ a c t o r r e g r e s s e d in f u t u r e (4 ) 4 2 N e c e s s ity f o r R i c h a r d a n d a ll o t h e r w r i t e r s (4) 45 B r i e f f o r f ilia l o u t f i t : q u i c k t o s p e a k u p f o r p r o f i t s (2 )

(Solution on p. 9)

+

CINEMA PAPERS M a rc h -A p ril — 99

The Industry Comments

The Industry Comments Continued from p. 61 fingers have been burned in the local film industry. One firm, Roach, Tilley and Grice, first became involved in feature films with Winter of our Dreams in 1981 and its success on a budget of less than $400,000 encouraged the firm to continue in the field.

But despite this, and other numerous and excellent examples, there has been an unreal­ istic reluctance in this country to attempt to tailor budgets to population size. Libido, The Adventures of Barry McKenzie, Alvin Purple, Petersen, Stone and Sunday Too Far Away cost less than $300,000. Picnic at Hanging Rock, Caddie, Don’s Party, Storm Boy, Winter of our Dreams and Mad Max cost less than $600,000. The Man from Hong Kong, Breaker Morant, My Brilliant Career, Newsfront and Puberty Blues cost less than $1 million. Beyond that level, Gallipoli, Mad Max 2 and The Man from Snowy River have presumably recouped their budgets and others will. It seems to me to be madness to propose producing films whose budgets exceed the returns on The Man from Snowy River.

Nevertheless, one doesn’t need a licence to be a film producer: it is still a matter of sticking one’s name on a door with “ producer” written underneath it. There is no regulating body controlling the industry nor will there be. But the market forces are placing an inevitable emphasis on low-budget and innovative films, which I, for one, welcome.

Many filmmakers in Australia behave like pampered children demanding a status equivalent to that of doctors while doing considerably less to alleviate human misery.

Those with the skills to produce a Mad Max, a Gallipoli or a Snowy River are few and far between. There is no logical course of develop­ ment from bargain-basement filmmaking to high-budget production, except that of the Peter Principle.

I hope that no one doubts that the bipartisan government support offered to the film industry is motivated by the English-speaking press’ infatuation with Australian films. This honeymoon has lasted since 1975, far longer than the vogues for Japanese, Swedish, French and Canadian cinemas.

Australians are continuing to pursue the elusive “ international” market, of course, but this year they are doing so with fewer overseas “ has-been” actors and “ hand-me-down” American scripts. I hope to defer as long as possible the day when I am sitting around the campfire telling the other disbelieving dead­ beats that I used to be a producer. The day will come, of course, but I hope later rather than sooner.

Andrew Martin Director, Cinevest

The Rules o f the Only Game in Town It is a mercifully resistable temptation to draw on some of the grimmer observations of Damon Runyon when discussing Film Invest­ ment Tax incentives. As the seedier operatives emerge from the slime at the bottom of the harbor and contemplate a “ Windeyer” 100 — March-April CINEMA PAPERS

Tenth Anniversary Supplement

waiting, those of us who bother remember a time when talk of tax deductibility for film investment was courting the contempt of the self-righteous. Now to talk otherwise is to deprecate what has become in conventional parlance the life-blood of the industry. The game has become respectable. All of this, it would seem, will end, and perhaps sooner than even the most pessimistic suspect.

One is sobered by an examination of the future of tax deductibility in the Australian film industry. Without drawing on the services of a crystal ball or spilt chook’s entrails, it is possible to detect trends in the direction of thinking of those directly responsible for the implementation of the house rules. Interpreta­ tion of the rules is, however, a matter of personal taste.

From the point of view of this observer, there are three significant aspects of the present administration of Division 10BA that offer hints as to the future. The first involves a near­ heretical legal viewpoint that the tax deduction does not exist. Before anyone reaches for his lobbying phone, there is no apparent intention on the part of the Tax Commissioner or his officers to apply this weakness in the drafting to harass the overtaxed investor. On the contrary, to do so would be tantamount to an admission that the Public Service had allowed Parliament to enact meaningless legislation.

The argument goes this way: 1. To obtain a deduction, an investor has to satisfy the Commissioner that at the time he invested there was in force a declaration from a Producer.

2. The legislation provides what is to be said in the declaration, including a statement that investors’ funds have been invested.

3. It also states that a declaration is in force only after the date that it is provided to the Commissioner.

4. Obviously, therefore, the declaration could not have been in force at the time the investor made his investment.

The second straw in the wind is a hint provided when the state of deduction was reduced: August 1983. It was explained that by cutting back the deduction from 150 per cent to 133 per cent the Treasury would “ save” $5 million. The conclusion one would expect to draw from this is that the government felt it was over­ subsidizing films to the tune of $5 million in indirect subsidies. But the conclusion is fantastic: this over-subsidy has been replaced by a $5 million direct subsidy. This appears to me as puzzling a piece of political decision­ making as one is likely to see in a long time. The non-existent logic defies explanation on its own terms, and the very calculation of the $5 million sum is worthy of comparison with Senator McCarthy’s estimates of the number of com­ munists in American government employ (“ I have here the names and phone numbers of the investors who will not invest $5 million if this tax incentive is reduced . . .” ).

Thirdly, the reduction from 150 per cent to 133 per cent can be demonstrated mathematic­ ally to be a means of discouraging the 46 per cent tax bracket investor (i.e., the corporate sector). The true motive for the 17 per cent reduction has nothing to do with the announce­ ments creating a $5 million fund.

The third and last indicator is the intro­ duction of new sets of what I refer to as “ non­ rules” governing the availability of the deduc­ tions . Most obvious of these is the so-called “ 15 day rule” . This states that money that is not needed has to be paid back to the Trust Fund after 15 days. If not paid back, it is assumed the money is not used for direct production pur­ poses. This quantum leap of logic has been used as a basis for the enforcement of an extra­

ordinary rule that by its very implementation means the figures extracted by the Department of Home Affairs can never reflect the level of film investment, only the turnover of that investment. The important thing to note, however, is that this rule does not exist at law.

It is not a regulatory or legislative rule and, in fact, until recently existed solely as a statement of the opinion of the Department of Home Affairs as to what that Department thought the opinion of the Commissioner of Taxation might be.

The industry has much to fear in the rela­ tively near future if tax incentives are to be seen as the basis of its continuing productivity. To a certain extent, the incentives were always justifiable on the basis of the positive dis­ crimination that applied against film invest­ ment in Australia by comparison with foreign competitors and with other art forms. That dis­ crimination is reflected both in international Double Tax treaties which steadfastly distinguish film from “ cultural activities” and in long-standing, only recently recognized, errors in legislation that handed control of Aus­ tralia’s distributors to foreign conglomerates.

The arguments are now wearing thin. Austra­ lians are culturally conditioned against specula­ tive investment, but the gradual implementa­ tion of the recommendations of the Campbell Report, even in modified form, are aimed at long-term reversal of that attitude. Rex Connor was going to buy back the farm with money provided by Tirath Khemlani. Bob Hawke seems keen to acquire it on a lease-back from international banks on condition they come here and stir Westpac and the ANZ out of their complacency. The tendency is to throw all investment industries into the lion’s den of the marketplace.

The three indicators lead me to a few tenta­ tive conclusions. The drafting of the legislation implementing the 150 per cent and the 133 per cent deductions has been carried out in arduous fashion. Most men knowledgeable in the law could have drafted legislation to the same effect without destroying half a dozen rain forests.

That, coupled with an attitude that first of all rejected, and later embraced, the concept of a Trust Fund, seems to indicate that the “ Cater­ pillar Principle” is in force. For those not familiar with its workings, the Caterpillar Prin­ ciple is a doctrine that states if a government department is in existence it must exist for a purpose; if the personnel of that Department are under-employed, there must be something for them to do.

It is a corollary of the Caterpillar Principle that the last one to touch it is responsible. The Department of Home Affairs was the last one to touch the film industry so it is responsible for providing the answer to the unanswerable ques­ tion that politicians ask: “ How much is all this going to cost?” An answer has to be found even if the basis of the answer is spurious. The Trust Fund provides that basis. Now, if a politician wants to reduce the level of deductibility he can state with impunity that the reduction is justifi­ able because it is based on “ government figures” . Here is the mechanism by which an astute politician can be seen at the same time to be clamping down on tax dodgers while simul­ taneously assisting filmmaking at a level “ appropriate to the state of the economy” .

In other words, the Public Service, or those responsible in this particular area, want legis­ lation to reflect their control over the industry as far as possible. Government control is an explanation for the incomprehensible nature of the legislation. Government control is an explanation for the existence of the extra­ ordinary Trust Fund. Government control explains the $5 million fund to the AFC, and

Tenth Anniversary Supplement

The Industry Comments

government control explains the enforcement of non-rules. If someone wants to antagonize the Commissioner, there are plenty of stumbling blocks available to be placed in the path of the unwary.

More than one senior member of the Treasury is reported to favor greater control by Treasury over the activities of other govern­ ment departments. The implementation of this legislation reflects this style of governing. The film industry will gradually find itself in a position where back-benchers, no longer titillated by articles in Time and Newsweek about the “ brave little industry” down under, bow to the economic wisdom of the Treasury.

The winds of change will blow cold around the doors of those who claim “ most favored” status. In an economic climate that encourages free flow of investment cash to all sectors, the film industry could find itself the enemy of those who claim a slice of the same cake. The first writing appeared on the wall when the “ sunrise industries” lobby called for similar incentive to aid its growth. Unless the film industry can in the future claim to represent the source of con­ siderable export earnings, the concession will, over a period of time, be reduced from 133, to 125, and then to 110 or 100 per cent.

W o m e n in A u s tr a lia n F ilm

'' -

Vicki Molloy Director, Creative Development Branch, AFC

In December 1983, the Women’s Film Fund in conjunction with the Australian Film and Tele­ vision School released a report entitled, Women in Australian Film Production. Analyzing the male-to-female breakdowns of Cinema Papers' crew lists since 1974, and the responses of 400 women film workers about their employment and training experiences and needs, the report painted a less than rosy picture of women’s representation in the mainstream of the Aus­ tralian film industry, putting paid to the mis­ conception that “ women run the industry” .

One does not need research to know that only one female director between 1974 and 1982 had directed a 35mm feature film (Gillian Arm­ strong), although a few others have made lowbudget, 16mm features. But it was alarming to find that no woman had received credits as director of photography or sound recordist on feature films, and that only 4.5 per cent of feature editors have been women.

The overall proportion of women employed in feature production did increase from 13 per cent to 28 per cent between 1974 and 1982, but this figure is still 10 per cent lower than the pro­ portion of women in the workforce at large.

The majority of women, furthermore, were still clustered in “ traditional” female roles: e.g., make-up, hairdressing, production secretary and continuity. Interestingly, only 13 per cent of all producer positions on features in this period of the study had been held by women.

The outstanding success of Pat Lovell, Joan Long, Margaret Fink, Jill Robb and several others would have one assume a much higher proportion of producers was female.

The success of several feature films focusing on female characters in the Australian film renaissance — e.g., Caddie (1976), Picnic at Hanging Rock (1975), The Getting of Wisdom (1977), Puberty Blues (1981) and My Brilliant Career (1979) — may have led one to believe that women are well represented on the screen,

at least. This has certainly not been the case, as such as Maidens (1978), and My Survival as an actresses such as Noni Hazlehurst have been Aboriginal (1978). These films are widely circu­ quick to point out. The actual number of films lated non-theatrically, usually through the about women has been few. Actors Equity has Australian Film Institute or the Sydney Film­ been looking at a way of evaluating the propor­ makers Co-operative, which has for many years tion of significant female roles in Australian paid special attention to the promotion of cinema, a study which would doubtless produce women’s films, and employs a women’s film depressing results. worker.

In the independent filmmaking scene, Given the number of outstanding short films however, women have been much more directed (and crewed) by women, one wonders prominent during the past 10 years. At the 1983 why there have not been more women engaged Sydney Film Festival’s Greater Union Awards as directors, or in other key creative and for short films, winning films in all four technical roles, in the commercial sense. The sections had women directors. Jackie 1983 survey found that the majority of women McKimmie directed the marvellous short drama working in independent films wanted to work Stations; Robin Anderson co-directed the docu­ on features (and, incidentally, the reverse was mentary First Contact; and Helen Grace wrote the case for women working in features). But and directed the best film in the general section the obstacles are many and varied: oldand the Rouben Mamoulian award winner, fashioned prejudices create caution amongst Serious Undertaking. investors and producers mitigating against The resurgence of Australian filmmaking choosing female directors; for women it is activity in the early 1970s coincided, of course, harder to get a first job in an area that is not with the second wave of feminism. At that traditionally female; many traditional female time, many women were attracted to film as a jobs don’t lead on to key creative or technical means of disseminating feminist ideas and positions; and existing social circumstances exploring women’s place in society. Feminism make it difficult for women to persevere in an has continued to be an influential element industry with such long hours and irregular within independent and alternative film culture work. with regard to film practice, theory and distri­ The findings of the survey referred to earlier bution, as well as films produced. that 83 per cent of women working in features It was in the early 1970s that the Sydney or independent films did not have children in Women’s Film Group made several short their care (compared with 1981 Census figures “ feminist” films, such as Jeni Thornley and in which 75 per cent of Australian women more Martha Ansara’s Film for Discussion (1974), than 15 years-old have borne children) must and, in 1974, the group organized the first of also provide a clue to a major problem. Better several women’s film workshops. From it childcare services and more equitable sharing emerged 10 films, including What’s the Matter of childcare in relationships are necessary.

Sally (1974) and The Moonage Daydreams of After viewing en bloc the 20 feature films Charlene Stardust (1974). A women’s film that made up last year’s total output, and group was also active in Melbourne about the seeing the awful array of filmic, female stereo­ same time and, in Adelaide in 1975, Penny types that were wheeled out in many of those Chapman produced four short films directed by films, one feels some urgency to ensure that women in a package entitled 1:1, as the women’s experience and viewpoint is more South Australian Film Corporation’s contribu­ adequately represented in our popular cinema, tion to International Women’s Year. as well as in independent films. Mainstream The International Women’s Year Secretariat films are an influential reflector and moulder of financed several women’s films during 1975, as our culture. The commitment, the flair, the well as a memorable, international Women’s passion, the anger, and the rigorourness of Film Festival. An enduring legacy of Inter­ analysis and representation that have been the national Women’s Year was the Women’s Film strength of independent women’s film work in Fund (WFF). A sum of $100,000 had been allo­ this past decade could also have been a strength cated to, but not taken up by, Germaine Greer, within mainstream Australian cinema, creating for a series on human reproduction. After a genre akin to the social realist films produced agitation by Sydney women, the $100,000 was by the “ angry young men” in Britain in the set aside as a permanent source of finance for 1950s. future women’s film work. The WFF now Women must be given a greater voice in operates under the auspices of the Australian Australian cinema in the 1980s. ★ Film Commission and has supported many fine films over the years, such as Pins and Needles (1980), Consolation Prize (1979), Greetings from Wollongong (1982) and Age Before Beauty (1980).

The WFF has also been responsible for initiatives in relation to distribution of women’s films, research, training and employment. It was instrumental in the organization of Women in Film and Television associations in several cities, and has recently established a women’s film unit at Film Australia, under a Commonwealth Employment Program grant.

Throughout the years women have produced a body of excellent short, low-budget films.

Although few have followed the feminist film theorist’s urge to develop a new and distinct “ female” film language to counter dominant cinema modes, there have been many clear and 35nwi & J6nmi Negative Cutting forceful issue-orientated documentaries such as The Selling of the Female Image (1979), or Red Heart Pictures’ Size 10 (1978), and Behind Closed Doors (1980); short narratives such as 24 Carlotta St The Singer and the Dancer (1977), A Most Artarmon N.S.W. 2064 (02) 439 3522 Attractive Man (1981), and Last Breakfast in Paradise (1982); personal and political films /

CHRISROWELLPRODUCTIONS

CINEMA PAPERS M a r c h -A p r il — 101

Sim on W incer

Simon Wincer Continued from p. 31

E d g le y I n te r n a tio n a l H o w d id y o u b e c o m e in v o lv e d w ith M ic h a e l E d g le y In ter ­ n a tio n a l?

Michael and I go back about 20 years. I had done some television work but was interested in learning more about drama. So I decided to go into theatre for a while and ended up as stage manager in one of the Edgley Russian shows. I was about 22 then, as was Michael, who was just starting the com­ pany, and we struck up a friend­ ship.

Over the years, we always said we should get back together and do a film or television project.

Eventually, we agreed to do some­ thing about it three and a half years ago. I had finished H a r l e ­ q u i n and started to look for some­ thing suitable with which to launch the Edgley film operation. T h e M an fr o m Snow y R i v e r came along at about that time.

Geoff Burrowes [producer], George Miller [director] and myself had worked at Crawfords.

Geoff raised the possibility of the project with me. I thought it had all the elements to make an entertaining film with broad appeal. It was important for us to do something that could be successful, not only here but over­ seas. And, whatever people think about it, there is no doubt that film left its mark.

S o t h e E d g l e y o r g a n i z a t i o n is i n t e r ­ e s t e d in t a k i n g o n p r o j e c t s a t v a r io u s s ta g e s o f d e v e lo p m e n t a s w e ll a s o r ig in a tin g o th e r s t h e m ­ s e lv e s ?

Yes. The highest risk on any project is the development stage.

That is when the producer makes the most critical decisions: the choice of material, the concept, the story. If you ain’t got it then, it’s never going to get any better.

Consequently, we try to become involved in a project as early as possible. But it varies. What we are finding now, particularly with the Hoyts-Edgley venture, is that people come to us with projects that are already at a first- or second-draft stage and often it is a matter of deciding what to go with.

That was the case with John Duigan’s O n e N i g h t S t a n d . Since then, I had a bit of input with John on the script, which I enjoyed immensely. But basically the development of the project was left to Dick Mason [producer] and John.

The Edgley o rg an izatio n ’s expertise is in the marketing side and raising the money. I guess I am 102 — March-April CINEMA PAPERS

A scene from John Duigan’s One Night Stand. Wincer is executive producer.

Dick Mason and John Duigan, who brought the film to us initially, to get on with their next projects while Terry Jackman and Michael start doing the foreign W h a t fo r m h a s th e H o y ts -E d g le y marketing. That is the attraction v e n tu r e ta k e n ? of our whole set-up: producers can come to us knowing that we can be The relationship has been pretty a help in raising money and in get­ informal in terms of legal struc­ ting the film marketed properly. ture. It is virtually run by Terry Without such a set-up, the Austra­ Jackman and Jonathon Chissick lian producer has to be not only a from the Hoyts side, and Michael creative genius, but a business and myself from Edgley. It is genius as well. No one is qualified ad m in istered by a general to handle all the complex sides of manager, John Daniel, who was filmmaking, these days. previously at the Australian Film I am very fond of O n e N i g h t Commission.

S t a n d . It is an extraordinary little Once we found this structure film with an enormous impact. It is was starting to work well, the big a very clever concept and looks problem became finding projects. at the most important issues in That is where all the effort went. the world in a relevant and enter­ Now, all of a sudden, we seem to taining way. It certainly has a chill­ have a lot of them, so we are going ing effect. We have really high to have to expand just a little. But hopes for it. we don’t want to get too big. We The amount of money that it don’t want to become a bank in­ cost, $1.4 million, is very little stead of a company that is helping these days. But the production to produce and market films. The values are extraordinary. There are aim is for a producer or a writer to scenes shot in Paris and New York, come to us and we will provide with demonstration scenes in back-up and expertise, particularly Sydney involving 20,000 people. in the marketing area, but also in John Duigan is a highly talented production. filmmaker and a brilliant writer. It The biggest fault with Austra­ has been an utter joy working with lian films still seems to be that him because his approach to film­ people don’t spend enough time making is very different to mine, developing scripts to the stage and that has been a real learning where they are ready to be filmed. process for me.

People think as soon as they have a John is very adventurous, par­ reasonable draft, and investors are ticularly in the post-production prepared to put the money into it, where this film really grew. It was they should go into production. quite extraordinary because every time we looked at a new cut it was P r o d u c e r s d o n ’t a p p e a r t o p u t in entirely different. John and John s u ffic ie n t e f fo r t a t th e m a r k e tin g Scott, the editor, played around e n d , e ith e r . . . for a couple of months finalizing the thing. It is constructed in an What happens then is the pro­ unusual way: it is quite surreal in ducer starts working on another places, yet it all ties together in the project, and tends to forget that end. the next most important part after the script and the production is W h a t h a s b e e n y o u r i n v o l v e m e n t marketing. in “ T h e C o o l a n g a t t a G o l d ” ?

O n e N i g h t S t a n d is just entering that phase now, of being marketed I have only been involved in the outside Australia. That allows background on C o o l a n g a t t a . It is more the creative person, and I have an input on the script and production — those kinds of deci­ sions.

physically impossible for me to allocate time to each production.

John Daniel is really the man on that film, though it is a project which is very dear to Michael’s and Terry’s hearts. I have been much more involved in P h a r Lap, and a little on O n e N i g h t S t a n d . How­ ever, I will be involved in the post­ production of T h e C o o l a n g a t t a G o l d , to some extent.

Everyone has high hopes for C o o l a n g a t t a and, from what I have seen, it looks absolutely fabu­ lous: stunning country, beautiful cast and a great contemporary story that should have been made a long time ago. No one could come up with the right script, until Peter Schreck did. Hopefully T h e C o o l a n g a t t a G o l d will capture that audience we were talking about, those 14 to 22-year-olds that P h a r L a p didn’t get.

A r e y o u p la n n in g t o d ir e c t a n y o f th e n e x t E d g le y -H o y ts p r o je cts?

Oh, certainly. It is just a matter of finding the right story.

S o m e c r itic s s e e m t o h a v e a h ig h e r o p i n io n o f y o u r d ir e c tin g a b ilitie s t o d a y th a n th e y d id a t th e tim e o f “ S n a p sh o t” or “ H a r le q u in ” .

H o w d o y o u fe e l a b o u t y o u r p ro ­ g r e s s a s a d ir e c to r ?

I don’t think I am all that much better; it is the project that makes you look good, and P h a r L a p was a great project. If you get a good script you are half way there. It is pretty hard to muck-up a good script, but it is impossible to make a bad script good.

Those other films were lowbudget and aimed at a particular market. I never pretended that they were the world’s greatest scripts, but I had to make a living as a director and I am not ashamed of either.

As a director, I know what I am good at and I knew at the time I was doing P h a r L a p that it was the sort of film I was very good at, with lots of emotion and action.

But when you are given something as interesting as P h a r L a p , it is pretty hard to fail.

Did you read that interview with Dr George Miller in Australian Film Review. He said something along the lines that you can train anyone to be a director if he is in­ telligent.3 I don’t quite agree, but the point he is making is that if you understand the mechanics of film­ making, the art is in the script. I tend to agree. ★ 3. Australian Film Review, Issue 24, Jan. 19-Feb, 1, 1984. Miller said: Directing films is one thing but that’s not filmmaking only. Sure there are skills, but they’re skills that are readily achieved by anybody who is intelligent enough . . . there are more mysterious things about film. It’s the other end of how a film is conceived and how it is written and how it inter­ acts out there with society. The early part of the film, including the writing, is much more important than the shooting of it.

MALCOLM SMITH

PENNY CHAPMAN

Malcolm Smith, Penny Chapman and Errol Sullivan have recently joined the Australian Film Commission to provide an even greater service to the Australian film and television industry With their enthusiasm and experience they will assist all members of the industry through streamlining assistance schemes and stimulating creative project development For further information about our financial assistance and counselling services please contact the Commission:

Chief Executive General Manager, Film Development Director of Creative Development (Acting) Director of Marketing Director of Projects Special Production Fund Consultant

ERROL SULLIVAN

Joseph Skrzynski Malcolm Smith Murray Brown David Field Penny Chapman Errol Sullivan

Interstate callers are advised that the Australian Film Commission has installed a toll free line: (008) 22 6815= Australian Film Commission, 8 West Street, North Sydney NSW 2060. Telephone: (02) 922 6855 Telex: 25157 FiCOM

Street K id s

Street Kids Continued from p. 25

encounter that the police had that evening, whether it was a domestic fight or something more dramatic.

The immediacy and the power of those tapes is overwhelming. It is the true guts of documentary film­ making.

We have used that technique on occasions in S t r e e t K i d s , and it has come over very strongly. But apart from that, I don’t think that any­ thing in particular influenced us at all, except a belief that it had to be filmed directly and spontaneously.

Tilson: For me there was an element of New Journalism in the filmmaking process. So often the events, the unexpected, took over, just as in New Journalism the reporter is dominated by what is subjectively happening to him. It is also not dissimilar in style to the work of American documentary filmmakers such as Fredrick Wise­ man, D. A. Pennebaker and films such as G i m m e S h e l t e r , and the cinema verite films.

Chadwick: As filmmakers, you have to decide on what general approach you are going to take in terms of making it as realistic as possible, not trying to pull the wool over the eyes of the audience, and then just follow it instinc­ tively.

Scott: That’s not to say that there is no element of performance in it, because there is. The kids turned on incredibly powerful per­ formances, some of which were too powerful to remain in the film, either because of language or because the kids decided to modify what they had said. For example, one kid whose father had been sexually assaulting her was extremely angry and vented her rage openly. But later on she decided to modify her stance because she didn’t want to break completely with the family. She wanted to leave some avenue open for reconciliation. We had to take all these sorts of things into account.

Tilson: We were also aware of the sort of audience for which we were making the film. There were some even more devastating, extreme things that happened, but we all were aware that our purpose was to make a film for a general audience on what it feels like to be homeless. I think that a positive aspect of the film is the restraint we used to get these things across and reach out to an uninitiated audience.

H ow

e f fe c t iv e

do

you

th in k

th e

f i l m c a n b e in a c t u a l l y c h a n g i n g a t t it u d e s o r in c h a n g in g th e s e k i d s ’ p r e d ic a m e n t?

Chadwick: I have gone beyond the point now where I think that films or books can automatically solve these problems. It would be 104 — March-April CINEMA PAPERS

very naive to think that. There is no way any of us think that S t r e e t K i d s is going to solve the problems society has in the 1980s. And, in the long run, it is not necessarily going to help any of the kids who were in it. But certainly it is at least going to make a large section of society aware that the problem exists.

It may also help a lot of kids who may go down that path, because there is nothing very nice at all about what you see. In the drug sequences, in the prostitution sequences, in all the sequences, those kids are basically saying, “ Help, I don’t really want to be in this situation.’’ So, while it will not solve the problem, it will make some contribution to general awareness.

O n e d ir e c t c o n t r ib u t io n th a t th e f ilm h a s m a d e h a s b e e n th e f o r m a ­ t io n o f th e D e lt a S q u a d [in V ic ­ to r ia ] to tr e a t k id s in a m o r e s y m ­ p a th e tic w a y . . .

Scott: The reaction we observed at preliminary screenings was the deep personal impact of the film. People would go quiet for a while until someone broke the ice and started talking about it.

This personal response has been very encouraging and has always led to a discussion of the issues the film raises. Some of these reactions have been extremely positive, and some have been negative.

Chadwick: For the police, which included eight high-ranking officers in the Victorian Police Department, from the deputy com­ missioner down, it was in a sense a revelation. Not that various indivi­ dual members of the police force weren’t aware of specific aspects of the problem, but it was the first time that they had seen it encapsu­ lated in a coherent way. The severity of the situation came through for the first time. As a result of the film, the Special Delta Squad was formed.

Scott: What they saw was that these kids were normal, with normal emotions, but caught up in a situation outside the normal bounds of society. They could see that they were not freaks or idiots.

And because they were being treated to a discussion by the kids, via the film, they could see the need for a greater sensitivity in treating the kids through the system.

Chadwick: The Police Depart­ ment reacted very positively, but, as for the Community Welfare Department, the reactions from officialdom were minimal. The only assumption we could make from this comparative silence was that nobody in the department was prepared to make a statement, one way or the other, presumably because of the official implications of doing so.

On the other hand, when we showed the film to a number of independent social workers and

organizations, they were enor­ mously impressed.

It s e e m s th a t, to o n e g r o u p a t le a s t, th e film is p e r c e iv e d as a th r e a t . . .

Chadwick: Yes. But it was a selfconceived threat. In my view, the film doesn’t offer a threat to the Department of Community Wel­ fare Services.

Scott: It raised the issue of responsibility, and the way that responsibility was being translated into action. And I guess because there is no strong presence in the film by Community Welfare Department officers — and this is simply because we did not come across them in our journeys — they felt vulnerable. We didn’t set out to slag them. We certainly could have made quite an indict­ ment of that department by using some of the material we had shot, but that wasn’t our aim.

The kids did make some pointed remarks about official welfare workers, and in general it is a whole new area to look at. But we are not setting ourselves up to be experts in the field and hopefully, as a result of the film being made, other more qualified people will be able to do something about the problem.

T h e s o c ia l w o r k e r s h o w n in th e film s e e m s to b e a v e r y p o s itiv e fo r c e , e v e n th o u g h s o c ia l w o r k e r s h a v e b e e n c r itic iz e d f o r th e ir w o r k in s u c h s i t u a t i o n s . . .

Chadwick: But she is outside the bureaucratic system. The problem is that most social workers are hamstrung by the bureaucratic system that employs them. Alex McDonald made one very incisive remark about social workers right at the beginning. He said that it is no good running a service opera­ tion from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. while the client is asleep. Those kids need support and back-up after the normal 9 to 5 government depart­ ment working day. And it is people like Alex and Linda — who, in a way, is an independent social worker — who can really give them support. If you are not there when the kids have the problems, then you are of no use to them whatsoever.

I f y o u are lo o k in g fo r s o lu tio n s , y o u r e a liz e th e r e a r e s o m a n y c lo s e d d o o r s : rea l e s ta te a g e n ts w h o d o n ’t p r o v i d e a c c o m m o d a ­ t io n , e m p lo y e r s w h o a re r e lu c ta n t to o f f e r j o b s , fa m ilie s w h o s e d o o r s r e m a in c lo s e d . . .

Tilson: That is the hardest thing of all. The kids would often say that they feel on the outside of society, forced into this situation through circumstances. “ Now, how do I get in? How do I find somewhere to sleep? How do I find a key to any of the doors, just to get started?’’ And there are many things that stop them, which

means that most stay out there.

The real tragedy is this constant rejection by society.

Scott: That is why they say, “ Why not get into hitting smack for the rush of it and for the way it soothes the pain?” In no time that becomes a normal activity along with eating, sleeping and getting money. If the door remains unopened, what is the point of knocking anymore.

Chadwick: You can see this in the film when several of the kids . express the wish to die. When one of them is asked, “ When do you think you’re going to die?” , he says, “ Well, I think I’m going to die in my twenties.” So you ask him, “ Why’s that?” And by this stage he has a stare on his face. It is a sort of check-mate question: he is looking ahead, but he can’t see anything.

Tilson: In some ways, dying is not such a bad option. There are many things that have happened to kids that are as tragic as dying.

And there are other situations when there is no way out. In fact, eight kids who were in some way associated with the film have died since it was started.

Scott: It should be added that the film is not a dirge of the dying.

There is a lot of positive perception in the film, even though some of it tends towards the cynical. You do see that these kids are as bright and spontaneous as any of the kids leading a normal life.

G iv e n th e lo n g tim e m a k in g th e f ilm , it m u s t h a v e b e e n fr u s tr a tin g t o h a v e t o w a i t s o l o n g t o h a v e it s h o w n p u b lic ly . . .

Chadwick: The experience of making S t r e e t Kids has, for all of us, called into question just how much can be said and filmed about very sensitive issues which are indicative of the time in which we live; just how far you can go with or without the support of the people about whom the film is about; and to what extent film­ makers in the 1980s are com­ promised and prevented from put­ ting on film a reality that society doesn’t want to see.

Scott: You can go to Afghani­ stan, or away from your immedi­ ate environment, and shoot some­ thing that shows blood and guts and people dying in the streets.

However, as soon as you show something which is as horrific but which is in your own environment, you face a lot of reactions that have to do with the position of the people who are seeing it. This is the difference in making a film on issues that are too close to home.

Chadwick: It should be said that right through the controversy and the pressures that have been brought to bear on us, as film­ makers, and the kids, we have all stood firm in not compromising the film in any way. And we don’t intend to allow it to be com­ promised. ★

1983 AF1 Award

Top Rating ^ ^ Y t f f t h e Record. ■■

31st SYDNEY FILM FESTIVAL 8-24 June 1984 ■: in the magnificent State Theatre W im

(03)48171433 REAR 62 YORK ST. NORTH FITZROY 3068

PO Box 25, Glebe, NSW 2037, Australia Telephone: 660 3844, telex AA75111 Ticket enquiries only: 660 3964

F IL M T R O N IC S

F R A N C IS L O R D

Supporting the Film and Television Industry as Sole Agents, with the supply of

Supporting the Film and Television Industry with

CHRISTIE Battery Packs and Chargers ANGENIEUX Lenses RDS Studio Lighting, Portable Location Kits, Effects Projectors, Globes DOEL Edge Numbering Machines SCHMID Editing Machines, Recorders MARUSHO Splicers and Tape NIETHAMMER Follow Spots NEILSON HORDELL Animation Stands FREZZOLINI Battery Packs and Chargers MEOPTA 16mm Projectors Other supplies include SMPTE test film, Filmlab split spools, Easton editing equipment, Maier Hancock hot splicers.

Service of all equipment sold by the Group. Work carried out by factory trained engineers.

Special Service for Cine, T.V. and ENG Zoom Lenses.

Sole authorised Angenieux Service Centre.

Service to all types of lens systems (since 1945) including high vacuum coating, ultrasonic cleaning, lens polishing and cementing.

Front surface mirrors, beam splitters made to order

33 HIGGINBOTHAM ROAD, GLADESVILLE 2111 PHONE: 807 1444 TELEX: 25629 (MEOPT)

D a v id Stevens

David Stevens Edmund Hillary; I could never climb Mt Everest. But I would love to feel that one day I would make a film that would open up visions of a world as much as the conquest of Mt Everest did. Well, anything is possible. Man is capable of anything. And man is not a chauv­ inist term. [Laughs.]

night before. For the people in the audience who do understand what she’s talking about, it is a ravishing moment because that is probably the first time they have ever heard something they may feel guilty about being cheerfully discussed in public. It’s like Francois Truffaut’s approach in Day For Night. There are jokes that only people who have worked on a film crew would laugh at.

“ Undercover” seems a very nationalistic film: the Great White Train, the push for local industry, the arguments with importers.

Why?

That concern with the exploration of Australian heroes and the past is recurrent in your work: “ Breaker Morant” , “ The Sullivans” , “ A Town Like Alice” . . .

Well, it is a very tongue-in-cheek form of nationalism. There is still a huge cultural cringe in Australia: we still insist that our heroes have to be recognized overseas before we recognize them here. What Fred Burley was trying to do was simply say, “ Bugger it. We can do it here, and we needn’t be ashamed of ourselves.” I believe the same thing.

Equally, I believe that an excess of nationalism can lead to the excesses of Nazi Germany. So the patriotism, the jingoism, in Under­ cover is very tongue-in-cheek. It says be proud of who you are and proud of Australia, but don’t take it too seriously.

I suppose I take a revisionist view of history. There are people in society who try to make others conform to their standard of behaviour, and I will fight that, all the way down the line. If you believe the standard interpreta­ tions of history, then there was a time at some distant point in the past when everybody behaved according to the same fashion. But they never did. People have always been people, questioning and dis­ obeying their elders. So you have to take the revisionist view.

If Nevil Shute were alive and could see the film of A Town Like Alice, I think what he would be most cross about is the fact that we allowed Jean and Joe (Bryan Brown) to fornicate before they were married, because it says speci­ fically in the book that they did not.

If you want to present a total characterization of anyone you must show all aspects of the char­ acter. One of the things I believe modern audiences needed to know was that Jean and Joe could get it on together, that that part of their relationship was good as well. But if I hadn’t shown it at that point, we would have had to have a scene later on, after they were married.

But there wasn’t room for such a scene then because the drama was concerned with other things.

I don’t expect everybody to like my films but I hope that some people will. I have been lucky over the past few years and it seems that quite a lot of people have liked them. I would anticipate quite soon I will make a film very few people will like. Who wants to be caught on the treadmill of success?

An essential thing for any artist is having the right to fail. The nasti­ ness of having success is that people demand that you go on being a success. One of the problems for Charles Kingsford­ Smith was that he flew around Australia for the first time, he flew across the Pacific for the first time, and he became the first man to completely circumnavigate the world by flying. What more could he possibly do? But the mob dem anded m ore, and th a t, together with the bureaucracy, eventually destroyed him. ★

Continued from p. 15

am using the form of the love story to attempt to get across a potent message.2 With “ The Clinic” you manage to move fluidly between comedy and drama. The subject is controver­ sial, yet the film is accessible, edu­ cative and funny. What do you see as the differences between directing comedy and drama?

I am concerned about the Aus­ tralian obsession with historical documentary or documentary fact, but I am also deeply concerned with this obsession of dividing things into comedy and drama.

Sell them their dreams? Why What is the difference? not. It is better than selling them reality, isn’t it?

Laughing?

It seems somewhat ironic that the success of the House of Berlei is based on the selling of fan­ tasies . . .

There is something dubious about it . . .

morally

Well, let’s try and work it out.

We have just come from an age where women were trapped in whalebone. Society moves slowly, so one can’t jump straight from being trapped in whalebone to burning one’s bra. So, when one goes down to the elastic rather than the whalebone, it has to be made to look glamorous. One has to sell women their dreams. Surely that is a step forward.

I agree that the selling of artificial dreams is wrong. The selling of a totally romanticized view of the world in which no kind of reality intrudes is deeply, awfully wrong.

The next film I am due to write is called Africa, which I will direct.

It is an attempt to try and examine Australia’s relationship with the Third World in general, and speci­ fically the Black Third World in famine-ridden Africa. One could do a horrendous documentary about this, which 10 people would see, but I intend to do it as a love story. So in that sense I am selling people their fantasies, but fan­ tasies with a hard core of reality. I 106 — March-April CINEMA PAPERS

You cry and you also laugh with A Town Like Alice. Life isn’t one thing; nobody’s life is tragic or comic. The greatest comics are those who make you cry when they slip on a banana skin and yet you’re laughing at the same time.

The greatest tragedians are those who make you laugh with the char­ acter first because you recognize the humanity of the character.

If you take Laurence Olivier’s Richard III, you actually think that Richard is a jolly, cheerful and funny chap, then he starts doing those terrible things. You are forced as an audience to make a moral evaluation of the char­ acter; and that is the only thing that is interesting to me in drama. I hate the single close-up. I believe an audience should be given a choice on a screen of deciding whom they want to look at. I lead and guide.

My favorite scene in Undercover is probably when the country boy, Frank (Nicholas Eadie), pro­ poses to Libby. Within that one shot you have everything that I believe about the cinema. You 2. Stevens is presen tly in E ast A frica on a four-w eek trip to do research fo r this film p ro jec t.

have two characters on screen at the same time, and you have a range from broad comedy to drama when she turns away from him and he understands that she is saying no. Your heart bleeds for him.

There is also a very acute sense of that in “ The Clinic” . You resist the temptation of making a char­ acter look stupid in order to get a laugh, particularly with Wilma (Betty Bobbitt). Initially one wants to laugh at her or to patronize her, but then one is made to feel callous and guilty. Frank in “ Under­ cover” is the same sort of char­ acter: he could be a country bumpkin, he could look stupid and naive and clumsy, but he isn’t . . .

It comes back to what I believe about drama. The Wilma char­ acter in The Clinic is a case of almost taking that too far. In the first double-head screening of The Clinic the audience stopped laughing when Wilma told them off, and didn’t laugh again for the rest of the film. We were shitscared. But hers was the classic case: “ I may be making a fool of myself, but I don’t believe I deserve to be laughed at.” That’s the cry of every individual in the world.

A director doesn’t have to do very much when he has a script and a cast like we had for The Clinic.

One of the things that I love about the film is that there are scenes in which only people who are into a particular sexual behaviour will understand. For example, Helga (Evelyn Krape) talks happily about rectal sex. Ninety per cent of the audience doesn’t understand what she’s talking about, but there will be a few hysterical laughs from women in the audience who know exactly what she is talking about. The rest of the audience may be bored by that scene, or puzzled, as they try and work out what the hell she’s been up to the

: !

î; ••

;• • • • • : *. *

•

S o u n d tra c k A lb u m s

: • •

N ew Sound Tracks and Cast Recordings GORKY PARK (HORNER) $13.99; LAST EMBRACE (ROZSA) $12.99; HERCULES (DONAGGIA) $12.99; HEAT AND DUST (ROBBINS) $12.99; UMBRELLAS OF CHERBOURG — COMPLETE TWO DISC SET (LEGRAND) $25.00; LES DEMOISELLES DE ROCHEFORT — TWO DISCS (LEGRAND) $25.00; BLUE THUNDER (RUBINSTEIN) $13.99; PSYCHO — ORIGINAL (HERRMANN) $13.99; PSYCHO II

I

(GOLDSMITH) $12.99.

Mail orders welcome; add $1.50 post/packing

--------- R E A D IN G S R E C O R D S & B O O K S — ----153 Toorak Road, SOUTH YARRA. Telephone (03) 267 1865 We are open 7 days a week

• CINEMA BOOKS & PAPERBACKS • GREETING CARDS & POSTCARDS • MOVIE POSTERS • PERSONALITY PHOTOGRAPHS • MOVIE STAR BADGES • LOBBY CARDS & STILLS « VIDEO MOVIES FOR SALE OR RENT • QUALITY BLANK VIDEO TAPES « OPEN 7 DAYS UNTIL 7 PM • MAJOR CREDIT CARDS WELCOME • CAR PARKING NEARBY

HOLLYWOOD AND VINE MOVIE SHOP 19 TOORAK ROAD SOUTH YARRA VIC 3141 PH: (03) 267 4541

W A N TE D A m e r ic a n V o ic e C o a c h Australian actor needs to learn authentic Californian accent and terminology from the mid-60s.

Please call (03) 428 1651

M e e t in g n e e d w it h n e w t e c h n o l o g y in a f a m ily o f i n t e g r a t e d v i d e o / f i l m e d itin g ta b le s Right now Steenbeck are offering a complete list of products providing practical solutions to # frame exact interlock ® sound transfer ® dubbing and mixing • video interlock and transfer

For exam p le, th e n ew ST941V (pictured) v id eo -so u n d editing table Picture: Video-cassette recorder in 3/4" U-format (VHS on request) Sound: ST 941V ST6401V ST9601V ST6601V

— — — —

2 2 3 3

magnetic magnetic magnetic magnetic

sound sound sound sound

films films films films

16 16 16 16

mm or 17.5/35 mm mm or 17.5/35 mm

And that’s not all. Ring Roger Dornan and ask for the latest information on just what’s possible with Steenbeck and you.

RANK ELECTRONICS PTY. LTD. 16 SUAKIN STREET, PYMBLE. PH: (02) 449 5666

Production Survey

Location manager.................... Ron Stigwood Location nurse........................................ JulieRourke Prod, secretary...................................DebbieColeEditors..................... Richard Francis-Bruce, Prod, accountant.................................... JohnBurke Catering..................................... Kate Roach David Stiven 1st asst director......................Peter Baroutis Accountant trainee.............................BrendaSharrad ” (Katering Co.) 2nd asst director................................ DorothyFaine Prod, designer..................... Owen Williams 1st asst directors..............Philip Hearnshaw, Tutor..............................

Deborah Waterman Continuity.................................................LeeHeming Composer............................................. ChrisNeal Brian Giddens Mixed a t.................................................Atlab Producer's assistant.................................LeeHeming Prod, manager.................... Antonia Barnard 2nd asst director.......... Christopher Williams Laboratory..............................................Atlab Casting...................................................GregApps Location manager..................................TonyWinley 3rd asst director................................... MasonCurtis Post-production.......................Custom Video Lighting directors..............Peter Slmondsen, Unit manager.....................................GeorgeMannix 2nd unit director....................................DavidEggby Length........................................13 x 46 mins Peter Lewis Prod, secretary................................ElizabethWright Continuity................................................ AnnWalton Mixed a t................................... Palm Studios Gauge.................................................. 16mm Technical producer.............. Steve Pickering Prod, accountant..................................LyndaCollings Producers assistant............................. ChrisHoward Shooting stock....................................... 7247 Laboratory......................................... Cinefilm Costume designer.................................. Julie Skate 1st asst director.................................... SteveAndrews Casting.....................................Audine Leith Cast: Liz Burch (Kate Wallace), Louise Clark Length.................................. 13 mins 30 secs Synopsis: The events surrounding a pair of 2nd asst director.........................Chris Webb Lighting cameraman................Ernest Clark (Maggie Scott), Rod Mullinar (Jack Taylor), Gauge.................................................. 16mm down-at-heel private eyes.

3rd asst director................................ RichardHobbs Camera operator................... David Foreman Jay Kerr (Con Madigan), Gus Mercurio (Ben Shooting stock.......................... Eastmancolor 2nd unit 1st assistant...........Tony Wellington Clapper/loader.................

David Wolfe-Barry Jones), Michael Caton (Paddy Malone), Synopsis: Advances in technology have ONE SU M M ER AGAIN Continuity............................... Pamela Willis Camera assistant................................. MartinTurner Martin Lewis (Sam), Priscilla Weems brought about a major change in the 2nd unit continuity...................................... JoWeeks (THE HEIDELBERG SC HO O L) Key grip....................................

Rob Morgan (Hannah Scott), Peter Carroll (Mr Withers), approach to the production and distribution of Casting................... Forcast (Michael Lynch) Prod, company.......................................ABC Asst grip....................................Jon Goldney Tony Blackett (Backer Bowman). milk. Automated systems are operating in Lighting cameraman............................. DeanSemler Producer................................................Keith Wilkes Gaffer..................................................

TrevorToune Synopsis: Television series made for Disney most dairies, and factories employ the latest Camera operator....................................DeanSemler Director....................................... Mark Callan Generator operator............................ WernerGerlach Channel. The story of two women, one Aus­ methods in hygiene control to ensure fresh Focus puller.................... Richard Merryman Scriptwriter...................................

Bill Garner Boom operators................Chris Goldsmith, tralian, one American, who run a stage stop milk is delivered to consumers.

Clapper/loader................................... FelicitySurtees Based on the original idea Eric Briggs station at Five Mile Creek for the Australian 2nd unit camera assistant......................ColinDean b y .............................................. HumphreyMcQueen Asst art director........................Vicki Niehus Express. Five Mile Creek dramatizes the PLANNING FOR SYDNEY Key g rip .............................Merv McLaughlin Senior cameraman....................................IanWarburton Costume designer.................... Anna Senior lives and experiences of these frontier Asst grip....................................................Pat Nash Prod, company..................... Capricorn Prods Sound recordist...................... John Boswell Make-up................................................. KarlaO’Keefe people in the 1860s.

2nd unit photography........................ AndrewLesnie Producers..................... Dinah Van Dugteren, Editor.........................................................BillMurphy Hairdresser...................................... ChristineEhlert Gaffer.................................................... JohnMorton Joan Masterman Prod, designers..................................GunarsJurjans, Costume supervisor..........................GrahamPurcell THE FLYING DOC TOR S Electrician............................................ JasonRogers Directors....................... Dinah Van Dugteren, Max Nicolson Wardrobe mistress........... Louise Wakefield Boom operator......................................DavidLee Prod, company............................... CrawfordProds Joan Masterman Exec, producer...................................... KeithWilkes Props buyers...............

Christopher Webster, Art director..............................................BillyAllenProducers............................... Bud Tingwell, Photography............................... T ony Wilson Prod, manager.......................................GeoffCooke Marta Statescu Costume designer............................... RobynRichards Graham Moore Editor................................. Ronda McGregor Unit manager....................... Peter Trofimovs Standby props..........................

John Daniell Make-up.................................................... LizFardon Director...................................................PinoAmenta Exec, producer........................Peter Dimond Prod, secretary...................................DebbieCole2nd unit make-up......................................VivMepham Art department co-ordinator........Janet Hay Photography.........................................DavidConnell Mixed a t..................................... Dubbs & Co. 1st asst director.........................................BillSmithett Special effects.............................

Brian Cox, Hairdresser..........................................CherylWilliams Sound recordist..................Andrew Ramage Laboratory........................................ Colorfilm 2nd asst director...................................... AnnBartlett Chris Murray Wardrobe..................................

Jenni Bolton Exec, producers................ Hector Crawford, Length................................................ 20 mins Continuity.............................................. KerryBevan Set dresser............................. Barry Kennedy Ward, assistant....................Julie Frankham Ian Crawford, Gauge...................................................16mm Producer’s assistant.............................KerryBevan Asst set dresser...................................... NickiRoberts Machinist..............................Sheryl Piikinton Terry Stapleton Shooting stock......................... Eastmancolor Casting.................................................. GregApps Scenic artist................................. Ian Richter 2nd unit wardrobe............. Leslie McLennan Assoc, producer..................................... MikeLake Synopsis: The film outlines the principles of Lighting cameraman.................................IanWarburton Carpenter.................................. John Moore Props buyer........................................... LissaCoote Prod, co-ordinator............................... JanineKerley urban consolidation. It illustrates ways in Camera operator....................................JohnHawley Set construction Standby props..................... Nick McCallum Prod, manager......................................HelenWatts which land can be utilized to achieve greater Focus puller............................. Trevor Moore supervisor......................................... DerekMills 2nd unit standby props...........Peter Terakas Unit location manager................... Grant Hill housing density, yet avoid the problems of Key g rip ............................Tony Woolveridge Set construction Set decorator..........................Blossom Flint Asst location manager........................MurrayBoyd over-crowding through planned open-space Electrician.............................................. MickSandy Scenic artist............................................Billy Malcolm Prod, accountant.................................. VinceSmits manager......................... Keith McAloney areas and imaginative design concepts.

Boom operator........................................GaryLundCarpenters............................................ ChrisNorman, 1st asst director..................................... JohnWildAsst editors........................ Denise Haratzis, Costume designer..................Alwyn Harbott Karen Hayes Frank Phipps 2nd asst director.,............. Michael McIntyre TAFE COU NTRY Make-up...............................................JurjenZielinski, Musical director................... Garry Hardman Set construction.......................................BillyHowe 3rd asst director...................... Jack Zalkalns Linda Washbourne Sound editors........................

Peter Burgess, Prod, company................................. GadonyaProds Asst editors.......................................... ClaireO’Brien, Continuity............................................... JulieBates Wardrobe.......................................... RhondaShallcross Frank Lipson, Producer..................................................JohnMcNally Louise Innes Focus puller........................................... GregRyan Props buyer.......................................... HelenWilliams Craig Carter, Director...................................................JohnMcNally Still photography.....................Jim Sheldon Clapper/loader.........................Bruce Phillips Special effects.........................................RodClack Rob Grant Photography............................. Peter Morley Tech, adviser.......................... Peter Philpott Sound assistant................... Scott Rawlings Scenic artists............................. Otto Boron, Mixer...................................................

JamesCurrie Sound recordist......................... Paul Brincat Best boy....................................Craig Bryant Key grip................................... Ian Benallack John Tribilco Stunts co-ordinator.............................DennisHunt Editor........................................................ JasShennan Runner............................... Melissa Blanche Asst grip.................................. Craig Dusting Asst editors........................................ StevenRobinson, Still photography.................................... BlissSwift Exec, producer...................................... PeterDimond Catering................................................Feast Gaffer.................................................... DavidParkinson Nick Lee Storyboard artist................Scott Hartshorne Mixed a t.................................... Dubbs & Co. Studios.............................The Metro Theatre 3rd electrician/ Sound editor...............................Bill Murphy Laboratory......................................... Cinefilm Art dept runner.................... Daniel Morphett Laboratory.......................................Colorfilm genni operator................................... SteveBickerton Editing assistants...............................

GeorgeMoore Horsemaster............................Ray Winslade Length................................................ 15 mins Lab. liaison.................................. Bill Gooley Art director................................................

Tel Stolfo Title designer......................................... JudyLeech Asst horsemaster.................. Bill Willoughby Gauge...................................................16mm Length....................................... 10 x 60 mins Asst art director....................Bernie Wynack Publicity...............ABC Publicity Department Carnages.................................

Clem Wilson Shooting stock.......................... Eastmancolor Gauge................................................. 16mm Make-up...........................................LeeanneWhite Catering....................... Bande Aide Caterers Armourer.................................. Rob Mousley Synopsis: The film provides an introduction Shooting stock..................................... Kodak Asst make-up hairdresser........... Pam Wright Length.......................................

3 x 5 0 mins Best boy..............................

Graeme Shelton to TAFE — Technical and Further Education.

Cast: Gary Sweet (Bradman), Hugo Weaving Wardrobe supervisor............................ ClareGriffin Cast: Chris Hallam (Tom Roberts), Michele Runners............................................. LindsaySmith, There is special emphasis on the importance (Jardine), Jim Holt (Larwood), Rhys McCon- Wardrobe standby................................... PhilEagles Fawdon (Jane Sutherland), Huw Williams David Field of TAPE'S role in the country, showing the nochie (Warner), Julie Nihill (Jessie), John Ward, assistant.................... Amanda Smith (Arthur Streeton), William Zappa (Billy Publicity..................... Suzie Howie Publicity courses and facilities that are designed to Walton (Woodfull), Max Cullen (Cooper), Props buyer.......................... Bernie Wynack Maloney), Phil Sumner (Fred McCubbin).

Catering................................

Jem’s Catering meet the needs of people in rural areas and John Gregg (Fender), Arthur Dignam Standby props.............................. Barry Hall Synopsis: A radical look at the first Austra­ Studios.....................SAFC Hendon Studios how TAFE is an integral part of the (Jardine Snr), Frank Thring (Lord Harris), Set dressers....................................... HarveyMawson, lian art movement.

Mixed a t....................SAFC Hendon Studios community.

Heather Mitchell (Edith).

Murray Kelly Laboratory....................................... Colorfilm Synopsis: The Bodyline series dramatizes, Construction manager..........................PeterMcNee W HITE M A N ’S LEGEND in 10 one hour-long episodes, the story of the Still photography..................................SterioStillsLab. liaison..................................Bill Gooley, Richard Piorkowski cricket battles between England and Prod, company.......................................ABC (David and Lorel Simmonds) Budget.....................................................$7.3million Australia in 1932.

Producer.............................. Michael Carson Best boy................................... DickTummel Length........................

3 x 120 mins (series), Director............................Geoffrey Nottage Runner...................................................PeterNathan 165 mins (feature) Scriptwriter...................................Wal Cherry FIVE MILE CREEK Unit publicist..................................Chris Day Gauge..................................................

35mm Photography......................................... PeterHendry Catering...................... Early Morning Risers Series 2 Cast: Sam Neill (Captain Starlight), Steven Sound recordist.......................................RonMoore (Tony Lippold) Vidler (Dick), Christopher Cummins (Jim), Prod, company...................................Vaistar Editor....................................Neil Thumpson Length.......................................... 6 x 60 mins ‘ Liz Newman (Gracey), Deborah Coulls Prod, designer...................................QuentinHoleProducers.......................... Henry Crawford, Gauge................................................. 16mm (Kate), Susan Lindeman (Jeannie), Tommy Doug Netter Synopsis: A story of adventure and romance Prod, manager..................... Michael Collins Lewis (Warrigal), Ed Devereaux (Ben), Jane Directors.................................Gary Conway, Unit manager............................................ValWindon based on the contemporary Royal Flying Menelaus (Aileen), Andy Anderson (George).

Kevin Dobson, Prod, secretary.................Maureen Charlton Doctor Service.

A NZACS Synopsis: Based on Rolf Boldrewood's Brendan Maher 1st asst director....................... Wayne Barry famous novel about two bushranging (further directors to be advised) 2nd asst director.....................

Scott Feeney Prod, company........................................ TheBurrowes THE M A E S TR O ’S C O M P A NY brothers and their legendary leader, Captain Scriptwriters.........................................SarahCrawford, Continuity........................................... AntheaDean Dixon Company Prod, company...............Independent Prods Starlight.

Graham Foreman, Casting..............................................Jennifer Allen Producer.............................. Geoff Burrowes Producer.................................... Jim George David Boutland, Camera operator..................... Roger Lanser Directors................................................ JohnDixon, Director.................................. Bill Fitzwater Keith Thompson, R UN A W A Y ISLAN D Focus puller......................... Sally Eccleston George Miller Series editor............................Hugh Stuckey Denise Morgan, Clapper/loader.................................... RobertFoster Scriptwriters........................................... JohnDixon, Prod, company............Grundy Organization Scriptwriters...........................Hugh Stuckey, David Stevens, Key g rip ...........................

John Huntingford John Clarke, Producer.................................Roger Mirams Rick Maier, Gwenda Marsh Asst g rip ...............................Paul McCarthy James Mitchell Director.................................. David Stevens Marcus Cooney, Script editor..............................Tom Hegarty Gaffer....................................................... TimJones Photography..........................................KeithWagstaff Scriptwriter.......................... Paul Wheelahan Marcia Hatfield, Photography................................Kevan Lind Electricians......................Robert Wickham, Sound supervisor.................................. TerryRodman Length......................1 x 96 mins, 8 x 72 mins Sheila Sibley, Ken Pettigrew Sound recordist........................................SydButterworth Editor............................................ Philip Reid Cast: Miles Buchanan, Simone Buchanan, Sue Wolfe Art director........................................ QuentinHoleEditor................................................... StuartArmstrong Prod, designer.....................................LesleyBinns Julie Tyler, Julian Gilespie, Rodney Bell.

Based on the original idea Composer.............................Bruce Smeaton Asst art director..................................AndrewHarris Composer.............................................BruceRowland Synopsis: Set in Sydney in the 1830s, two by.................................................... MarciaHatfield Prod, supervisors....................... David Lee, Make-up....................................................ValSmith Assoc, producer.................................. DennisWright children are on the run from corrupt govern­ Photography................... Robert McDonnell Jan Bladier Wardrobe......................... Carolyn Matthews Prod, supervisor........................................ BillRegan ment officials.

Sound recordist.......................... Noel Quinn Prod, co-ordinator...................... Dale Arthur Props buyer............................ Mervyn Asher Unit manager........................................... RayPatterson Prod, manager.......................... Brenda Pam Location manager.................................. BrettPopplewell Special effects........................Brian McClure Story consultant...............Patsy Adam Smith S W EET AND SOUR Prod, accountant........ Moneypenny Services Prod, secretary.........................Julia Ritchie Opticals........................................... Colorfilm Casting............................ Mitch Consultancy Prod, accountant...................Margaret Keefe 1st asst directors.................................

Adrian Pickersgill, Publicity................................

Lesley Jackson Prod, company.......................................ABC Costume designer..................... Jane Hyland 1 st asst director.....................Stephen Jones Keith Heygate Studios....................... ABC, French’s Forest Producer................................Jan Chapman Publicity..................... Suzle Howie Publicity Director's assistant................................ SianHughes 2nd asst director...................... Geoff Barter Mixed at...................... ABC, French's Forest Directors................................Geoff Nottage, Budget.....................................................$6.5million Casting............................Mitch Consultancy 3rd asst director........................G. J. Carroll Laboratory....................................... Colorfilm Helena Harris, Length........................................ 5 x 120 mins Camera operators................ John Thornton, Length........................................................ 90minsContinuity.............................Jackie Sullivan Ric Pellizzeri, Gauge..................................................16mm Ian Marden Casting............................... Vicki Popplewell Gauge................................................. ,16mm Posie Jacobs, Synopsis: A dramatization of Australia’s Vision switcher.................. Jeanette Abinieri Focus puller............................. Tracy Kubler Cast: Bill Kerr (Mac), Dorothy St Heaps Graham Thorburn participation in World War 1 Art director........................Chris Breckwoldt Clapper/loader............................ Chris Cole (Sarah), Deryck Barnes (Tunny), Michael Scriptwriters........................... Tim Gooding, Costume designer................................FionaSpence Key grip................................. Brett McDowell Watson (Lance), Don Reid (Priest), Robert COW RA Johanna Pigott, Set designer.......................................WendyDickson G rip................................................. “ Nobby” Szafranek Noble (Mike), Frank Taylor (Benbow), Reg Michael Cove, (working title) Puppet designer/ Gaffer................................................GrahamRutherford Gillam (Griggs).

Paul Leadon, Prod, company...................... Kennedy Miller builder...........Beverley Campbell Jackson Boom operator................Graham McKinney Synopsis: Though retired, Mac fears giving David Poltorak, Dist. company.......................... Network Ten Runner.............................................. RichardJasek Art director..................................... Lisa Elvy in to old age. He and Tunny buy a fishing Forrest Redlich, Producer................................ Kennedy Miller Post-production.................................

Custom Video Costume designer................... Jenny Arnott boat, take on an Aboriginal deckhand, Bert Deling, Directors...................................................PhilNoyce, Length........................................13 x 24 mins Make-up................................... Viv Mepham Lance, and Mac re-discovers a purpose in Debra Oswald Chris Noonan Shooting stock...................... 1 in. videotape Hairdresser.................................Joan Petch life. Disaster strikes: the boat and Mac's Based on the original idea Scriptwriters...........................Margaret Kelly.

Synopsis: A humorous and informative look Standby wardrobe.......................Viv Wilson, life are irretrievably grounded. Only Lance by......................................... Tim Gooding, Chris Noonan, at the world of opera, featuring famous Judy-Ann Fitzgerald knows that, for Mac, time is running out.

Johanna Pigott Russell Braddon, voices from the major opera houses, seen Ward, assistant...................Blair Broadhurst Script editors..................................... MichaelAitkens Sally Gibson through the eyes of two 12-year-old children.

Props buyers.......................Brian Edmonds, Sound.....................................................Noel Cantrill, Length....................................... 10 x 60 mins Each episode looks at a specific opera and Michael Tolerton John Segal follows a puppet community of aspiring Gauge................................................. 16mm Standby props...................................GeorgeZammit, Prod, designer.................................... MurrayPicknett Synopsis: The story of the Cowra POW Nick Reynolds operatic talents.

Technical producers......... Dave Wightman, breakout.

Set dressers........................Brian Edmonds, Merv Manthey, ROBBERY UNDER ARM S Michael Tolerton Brian Mahoney, GUM SHOES Scenic artist............................................. RayPedler Prod, company..........................SAFC Prods Ezio Belli, BO D YLIN E (working title) Construction manager............ Denis Donelly Dist. company.................. ITC Entertainment Peter Knevitt (working title) Asst editor........................

Danielle Weissner Producer........................................Jock Blair Prod, manager.......................................Carol Chirlian Prod, company.................................... ABC Neg. matching............................... Delaneys Prod, company..................... Kennedy Miller Directors.............................Donald Crombie, Prod, secretary................. Regina Lauricella Producer................................................. NoelPrice Music editor..........................Garry Hardman Ken Hannam Dist. company..........................Network Ten 1st asst directors.....................Wayne Barry, Directors..................................................NoelPrice, (Australian Screen Music) Scriptwriters..........................Tony Morphett, Producer................................Kennedy Miller Brian Shannon, Lindsay Dresden, Sound editor......................................... HughWaddell Graeme Koetsveld Directors..................................................CarlSchultz, David Young, Richard Sarell Asst sound editor.................................... MikeJones George Ogilvie, Based on the novel by........Rolf Boldrewood Graham Millar Scriptwriters......................... Andrew Knight, Mixer................................ Julian Ellingworth Lex Marinos, Photography.............................. Ernest Clark 2nd asst directors................... Kate Woods, John Clarke Stunts co-ordinator..................................GuyNorris Denny Lawrence Sound recordist........................Lloyd Carrick David McClelland, Based on the original idea Still photography.......................................JimTownley Editors.................. Andrew Prowse (feature), Scriptwriters.........................Robert Caswell, Dorian Newstead by........................................... John Clarke, Head wrangler.....................................DannyBaldwin Lex Marinos, Cliff Hayes (series) Producer’s assistants....... Rhonda McAvoy, Andrew Knight Wranglers............................................

Laurie Norris, Denny Lawrence, Prod, designer.......................George Liddle Danuta Blachowitz, Prod, designers....................Robert Walters, Gary Amos, Terry Hayes Exec, producer.............................. Jock Blair _ Anthea Dean, Frank Earley, Brian Rourke Assoc, producers..........Pamela H. Vanneck, Photography.............................Dean Semler Elizabeth Lindley, Dale Mark Best bo y ...................................................KenMoffat Bruce Moir Sound recordist........................Peter Barker Larraine Quinnell Exec, producer....................................... NoelPrice Runner................................

Brett Popplewell Prod, co-ordinator....................

Barbara Ring Casting....................................

2nd unit sound recordist......... David Glasser Jennifer Allen Prod, manager................ Lorraine Alexander

Production Survey

Continued from p. 83

TELEVISION

PRE-PRODUCTION

PRODUCTION

108 — March-April CINEMA PAPERS

... ...............................................................................■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ............................... ....................................

:

WANTED

:

Western Electric Tubes, Amps, Networks, Mixers, Consoles, Tweeters, Drivers, Horns, Speakers, others.

Westrex (London) Amps, Drivers, Speakers, etc.

■ J

David Yo PO Box 832 Monterey Pk, Ca. 91754 USA Tel: (213) 576 2642

■ ■ J

■ > > ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ! ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ I

■ Studio 75' x 46' with 14' to lighting grid.

■ Large three sided paintable fixed eye.

■ Good access to studio for cars and trucks.

■ Design and set construction service available.

■ Dressing rooms, wardrobe, and make-up facilities.

FOR STUDIO BOOKINGS, PHONE: Alex Simpson,

(03)568 0058, (03) 568 2948

E V E R Y T H IN G T H A T W E C A N . ... IS O U R B E ST m sm a;

— —

C IN E V E X FILM LABORATORIES T elephone: 5 2 8 6 1 8 8 . T e le x: 3 8 3 6 6

’

3185'

Production Survey

Lighting directors.......................Barry Quick, Special effects........................Peter Leggett Justine Saunders (Iris), Frank McNamara Catering...................................Gem Catering Based on the novel b y .............................MaxFatchen David Pike, Asst editor............................. Karen Stimson Photography........................................ ErnestClarkStudios.............................. HSV 7 Melbourne (Priest), Bill Conn (John), Lorrie Cruickshank Jeff Brown, Sound editor......................... Michael Honey (Ruth), Brian Anderson (Mayor).

Mixed a t................................................. Atlab Additional Roy Jeffery, Editing assistants................. Karen Stimson photography................... Ross Berryman Synopsis: Kev, the builder from Badigeri, Laboratory.............................................. Atlab Sam Chung Mixer.......................................Stephen Hope imports a Philippine bride, Ampy. Despite a Sound recordist........................................DonConnolly Lab. liaison............................ Andrew Mason Cameras Budget......................................... $2.5 million Still photography.................. Martin Webbey few early problems the marriage has Editor..........................................Bob Cogger (outside broadcast).............Ross Milligan, Length..............................................192 mins Publicity................................ Leslie Jackson potential. But Badigerl’s populace is both Prod, designer......................................... KenJames Peter Robson Catering................................ Fillum Catering racist and sexist and Ampy, struggling to find Composer.......................................... RichardMillsGauge...................................................16mm Cameras (studio).............................. RichardBond, Mixed a t................................ ABN Channel 2 Shooting stock............................Kodak 7247 her place in the town and the marriage, finds Exec, producer................... Brendon Lunney Murray Tonkin, Laboratory......................................Colorfilm Cast: Bryan Brown (Peter Lalor), Bill Hunter difficulty dealing with conflicting pressures.

Prod, co-ordinator................... Sue Courtney Tony Connolly, Lab. liaison............................. Alan Gambier (Timothy Hayes), Carol Burns (Anastasia Prod, manager..............................Jan Tyrrell Denis Forkin, Hayes), Amy Madigan (Sarah Jamieson), Length............................................... 75 mins MAN OF LETTERS Location manager........................Dixie Betts Glen Traynor Brett Cullen (Charles Ross), Penelope Gauge................................................. 16mm 1st asst director...................................... JohnWarran Prod, company.......................................ABC Costume designer...............Janet Patterson Stewart (Alicia Dunne), Tom Burlinson Shooting stock..... Eastmancolor 7293, 7247 2nd asst director.............................Phil Rich Producer...............................Chris Thomson Make-up................................................. VickiBlaess, (Father Smythe), Cast: Mark Davis (Steve), Toni Allaylis (Elly), 3rd asst director......................Mike Faranda Director.................................Chris Thomson Sandie Bushell Synopsis: Based on the 1854 incident which Rod Zuanic (Petey), Paul Smith (Roily), Chris Continuity................................................Sian Hughes Scriptwriter........................... Alma de Groen Wardrobe...............................................ElsieEvans, Trusswell (Titch), Arna Hunter (Debbie), became known as the Eureka Stockade Script editor.................................. Philip Pike Based on the novel by.......... Glen Tomasetti Ron Dutton when the citizens of Ballarat took up arms John Goddon (Al), John Gregg (Laurie Casting...........................Mitch Consultancy Photography......................................... PeterHendry Props.....................................................TerryBayliss Fletcher), John Hamblin (Ian Henderson), against a tyrannical and corrupt colonial Focus puller............................ Martin Turner Sound recordist.......................... Ron Moore Props buyers......................................... ColinBailey, John Jarratt (Terry). administration.

Clapper/loader........................Brian Breheny Editor..................................................... TonyKavanagh Tony Cronin Synopsis: Steve is “ leader” of a group of Key grip...................................Lester Bishop Prod, designer..................................GeoffreyWedlock FIVE M ILE CREEK Standby props......................................Justin Sears teenagers who have too much idle time and Asst grip..........................................Geoff Fill Composer.............................. John Charles Special effects..................... Brian McClure, few prospects. He meets Elly, who offers him Series 1 Gaffer........................................ Roger Wood Exec, producer.....................Michael Carson Peter Gronow love and hope. She proposes a possible Boom operator....................Andrew Duncan Prod, manager....................................... JudyMurphy Prod, company................................... Valstar Choreography................................. AdrienneNock future — escape. But the death of a friend Costume designer.................. Fiona Spence Unit manager...............................Val Windon Producers...........................Henry Crawford, Videotape editors............................... TrevorMiller, forces Steve andElly to confront their Make-up....................................................VivMepham Prod, secretary................ Maureen Charlton Doug Netter John Randel, oppressors, with devastating consequences.

Standby wardrobe...................................RitaCrouch 1st asst director.......................Ken Ambrose Directors.................................

George Miller, Geoff Chew Props buyer........................ Derrick Chetwyn 2nd asst director.....................Scott Feeney Frank Arnold, Musical director.................... Martin Armiger EVERY M OVE SHE MAKES Standby props........................... Igor Lazareff Continuity...............................

Sharon Goldie Di Drew, Associate musical Special effects..................................... MontyFieguth Casting....................................Jennifer Allen Prod, company.......................................ABC Chris Thomson, director.......................... Graham Bidstrup Special fx assistants............................. PeterBrake, Producer................................................Erina Rayner Casting assistant..............................Jennifer Couston Michael Jenkins, Asst musical director...... Stephen O’Rourke Colin Best Director.......................................... CatherineMillar Lighting cameraman...............Peter Hendry Kevin Dobson, Songs found by..................... Carolyn James Construction manager........... Danny Burnett Camera operator.....................Roger Lanser Scriptwriter..................................... CatherineMillar Brendan Maher, and Graham Thorburn, Carpenter...............................................

RoryForrest Photography.......................... Ian Warburton Focus puller..........................Sally Eccleston David Stevens, and written by 25 of Australia’s Asst editor........................................ MichelleCattle Clapper/loader........................Robert Foster Sound recordist..................................... JohnBoswell Gary Conway, leading band songwriters Neg. matching...................................... Atlab Editor.........................................................BillMurphy Key grip.................................................. LongJohn Brian Trenchard Smith Music performed b y .............The Takeaways Music editor........................Garry Hardman Asst g rip ................................Paul McCarthy Prod, designer...............

Christopher Forbes Scriptwriters............................Peter Klnloch, Music and effects..................... Robyn Judd, Stunts co-ordinator...................Peter West Gaffer.......................................... Tim Jones Prod, manager......................... Frank Brown Gwenda Marsh, Alan Andrewartha, Horses/animal control................Heath Harris Prod, secretary.........................Debbie Cole Electricians.......................

Robert Wickham, Sarah Crawford, Katie Noakes Still photography....................................MarkBurgin 1st asst director.....................Peter Baroutis Ken Pettigrew Denise Morgan, Still photography.................. Martin Webbey Dialogue coach....................... Pam Western Boom operator......................David Pearson 2nd asst director.....................................MarkGibson Michael Joshua, Title designer...........................Lynne Barrett Wrangler.........................Allen Fitzsimmons Continuity.............................. Christine Lipari Make-up........................................... JohanneSantry Bob Caswell, Publicity............................... Lesley Jackson Best b oy............................ Philip Golomblck Casting.................................................. GregApps Wardrobe............................ Caroline Suffield Greg Millin Studios................................ ABC Channel 2 Catering...... D.J. and C.J. Location Catering Lighting cameraman............Ian Warburton Props buyer.............................................MaxBartlett Script editor.......................Graham Foreman Length.......................................20 x 30 mins Nurses..................... Tracey Calvert (ex Old), Standby props.......................................

Clint White, Camera operator..................Don Whitehurst Photography.........................................Kevan Lind Gauge................................... 2 in. videotape Ruth Howie (ex Sydney) Garry Geercke Focus puller........................................... HansJansen Sound recordist........................................SydButterworth Scheduled release................................ 1984 Laboratory............................................. Atlab Key g rip ............................Tony Wooiveridge Asst editor.......................

Matthew Rochford Editors....................................

Tim Wellburn, Cast: Tracy Mann (Carol), Ric Herbert Length................... 5 x 24 mins (mini series), Neg. matching...................... Pamela Toose Asst grips.....................................Tony Halls, Stuart Armstrong (Darrell), David Reyne (Martin), Arky Michael 108 mins (tele-movie) Philip Oyston Sound editor......................Tony Kavanagh Prod, designer...................................GeorgeLiddle (George), Sandra Lillingston (Christine), Shooting stock........................1 in. videotape Underwater photography....... Ivan Johnston Mixer..................................................... PeterBarber Composer.............................Bruce Smeaton George Spartels (Nick), Martin Vaughan First released...........................January 1984 Still photography.................. Gary Johnston Electricians................................ Mike Sandy, Prod, supervisors................................. DavidLee, (Shrug), Robin Copp (Johnny).

Cast: Ron Blanchard (Mert), Brett Climo Malcolm McLean, Publicity.................................Leslie Jackson Jan Bladier Synopsis: A 20-part series about the early (Ray), Lyn Collingwood (Mrs Y), Roger Cox Les Frazier Catering................................ A & B Catering Prod, co-ordinator...................... Dale Arthur life of an inner city band. A comic look at the (Bill Ky), Alan Dargln (Bindaree), Steve Dodd Boom operator....................................... GaryLundStudios.......................ABC, French’s Forest Location manager...................... Paul Grant world of the 99 per cent of bands that don't (Narli), John Jarratt (Clurry), Nicole Kidman Art director.............................................. DaleMarkMixed at......................ABC, French’s Forest Prod, accountant....... Moneypenny Services become the next big thing.

(Petra), Scott McGregor (Yorkie), Justine Laboratory...................................... Colorfilm Costume designer..................David Whalley 1st asst directors................................. AdrianPickersgill, Saunders (Mary), Paul Sonkkila (Darby), Jeff Make-up...........................Rachel Cartwright Length...................................

75 mins Bob Donaldson Truman (Eric).

Wardrobe.................................. Anne Brown Gauge................................................. 16mm 2nd asst director....................................ChrisWilliams Synopsis: An adventure-thriller set in a Shooting stock.......................................7247,7293 Props buyer........................ Brent McDonald 3rd asst director............;.............G. J. Carroll small, remote Australian town where the Cast: Warren Mitchell (Sir Dorton Serry), Standby props........................... Ross Allsop Continuity............................................ JackieSullivan townsfolk are held hostage by three bank­ Dinah Shearing (Beth Serry), Carol Raye Special effects...................................... TerryBarrow Casting................................................... VickiPopplewell robbers.

(Ursula Penhindle), Arna Maria Winchester Neg. matching.....................Susanne Tyzack Focus puller.......................................... TracyKubler (Doona Douglas), Susan Leith (Drusinda Music performed Clapper/loader................................... ConradSlack Hlghwire),Genevieve Mooy (Con), Pat by...........Melbourne Symphony Orchestra Key grip..................................Brett McDowell EUREKA STO CK A DE Bishop (Ann Turtle), Judi Conelli (Marion Sound editor..................................... GeòrgieMoore G rip................................................. “ Nobby” Szafranek CHILD REN OF TW O C O U N TR IES Custom), Simon Burvill-Holmes (George Editing assistant........................Nicolas Lee Prod, company................................... EurekaStockade Gaffer................................................GrahamRutherford Prod, company.................................KingcroftProds Highwire), John Clayton (Bill the Chairman).

Mixer..................................................... JohnBoswell Film Partnership Boom operator..................................GrahamMcKinney (Australia) Synopsis: Sir Dorton Serry is a Man of Stunts.................................................... ChrisAnderson, Producer.............................................. HenryCrawford Art director............................................... LisaElvy Producer......................................Philip Bond Letters. An esteemed philosopher and lover Glen Ruehland Director........................................ Rod Hardy Costume designer....................Jenny Arnott Director....................................Terry Ohlsson of all women, he controls his world Title designer............................. Judy Leech Scriptwriter..............................Tom Hegarty Make-up..................................... Jose Perez Scriptwriter............................. Terry Ohlsson absolutely. So how does he react when the Mixed a t..................................................ABC Photography..........................................KeithWagstaff Hairdresser................................ Joan Petch Photography...........................Michael Kings women in his life step out of their allotted Laboratory........................................ Cinevex Sound recordist........................................ PhilStirling Standby wardrobe...................... Viv Wilson, Editors......................................... Bill Stacey, Length........................................................ 78minsroles and challenge his prejudices and life Editor.....................................................DavidPulbrook Judy-Ann Fitzgerald Liz Irwin philosophies?

Gauge................................................. 16mm Prod, designer......................................LeslieBinns Ward, assistant................................... JamesWatson Exec, producer..........................Neil Ohlsson Shooting stock................ Kodak 7247, 7293 Composer............................................. BruceSmeaton Props buyers................... Ian Allen, Prod, manager...................................... TerrySlack Cast: Julie Nihill(Alison), Doug Bowles THE YO U N G W IFE Exec, producer............Carnegie Fieldhouse Brian Edmonds Unit manager.........................................TerrySlack (Matthew), Pepe Trevor (Jackie), James Prod, supervisor...........................David Lee Standby props...................................... PhilipEagles, Prod, company.......................................ABC Prod, secretary.................................... MarinaSeeto Laurie (Andrew).

Prod, co-ordinator................... Janine Kerley Nick Reynolds Producer..............................................Oscar Whitbread Lighting cameraman............... Michael Kings Synopsis: A man fall obsessively in love with Prod, manager......................................... JanBladier Set dressers.....................Ian Allen, Director................................................OscarWhitbread Camera operator.................... Michael Kings a female fellow worker. He begins to pursue Location manager................ Phil McCarthy Brian Edmonds Scriptwriter.............................Linda Aronson Focus puller.........................................MartynGoundry her innocently and she responds in a Prod, accountant......................Carolyn Fyfe Scenic artist................................ Ray Pedler Based on the novel by............... David Martin Clapper/loader.................................... MartynGoundry courteous, but unenthusiastic way. The Accounts assistant...............Jennie Crowley Construction manager............ Denis Donelly Senior cameraman....................................Ian Warburton Key grip........................................ Peter Doig situation however quickly changes from one 1st asst director................................... StuartFreeman Asst editors........................... Vicki Ambrose, Sound recordist.........................................BillDoyle Asst g rip ................................Kerry Besgrove of a casual problem to one of menace.

2nd asst directors.............................. MichaelFaranda, Danielle Weissner Editor....................................................... TedLowe Studios........................Kingcroft (Melbourne) Ian Kenny Neg. matching................. Delaneys Prod, designers...................................... PaulCleveland, Post Prod..........................................Kingcroft(Sydney) 3rd asst director............... Murray Robertson Music editor..........................

Garry Hardman M A IL-O RDER BRIDE Des White Mixed at.................................Sound On Film Continuity.............................. Jenny Quigley (Australian Screen Music) Exec, producer.................................... OscarWhitbread Laboratory........................................Colorfilm Prod, company....................................... ABC Producer’s assistant..........Vicki Popplewell Sound editors.......................................Stuart Armstrong, Prod, manager..................................

Lorraine Alexander Producer............................. Michael Carson Length......................................... 2 x 60 mins Casting............................... Vicki Popplewell, Hugh Waddell Unit manager......................... Peter Baroutis Gauge...................................................16mm Director............................................ StephenWallace M & L Casting Asst sound editor........................

Mike Jones Prod, secretary..........................Debbie Cole Shooting stock......................... Eastmancolor Scriptwriter.......................................... RobynDavidson Casting consultants........... Loretta Crawford Mixer.....................................................JulianEllingworth 1st asst director......................... Jim Oastler Photography.........................................JulianPenney Synopsis: Two television specials about an — Los Angeles, Stunts co-ordinator................... Heath Harris 2nd asst director........................ Ann Bartlett exchange visit between children from China Sound recordist............................ Ben Osmo Sheila McIntosh — London Horsemaster............................. Heath Harris Continuity.................................. Kerry Bevan and Australia.

Editor............................................ Bill Russo Camera operator................................... BarryWilson Still photography....................... Jim Townley Producer’s assistant................. Kerry Bevan Prod, designer..................................... NeaveCatchpool Focus puller................................. Rob Murray Head wranglers...................... Ray Winslade, Casting.................................................. GregApps Composer............................................. RalphSchneider Clapper/loader...................... Rex Nicholson Danny Baldwin Lighting cameraman............Ian Warburton Prod, manager.................... Michael Collins Key grip............................................ Ian Park CRIME OF TH E CENTUR Y Wranglers................................Laurie Norris, Camera operator.................. Gus Whitehurst Unit manager.................Katrina Francsali Asst grips................................Jamie Leckie, Gary Amos, (w orking title) Camera assistant...................................Hans Jansen Prod, secretary.................... Chrisula Fillios Peter Kershaw Brian Rourke Key g rip ............................Tony Wooiveridge 1st asst director..................... Brian Giddens Prod, company....................................... ABC Gaffer.....................................Tony Holtham Best bo y ......................................Ken Moffat Electrician.................................................LesFrasier 2nd asst director..................Michael Ailwood Producer........................................... MichaelCarson Runner........................................Paul Grant Boom operator........................................GaryLundElectricians............................ Guy Hancock, Continuity........................................... AntheaDean Director................................... Ken Cameron Jim Hunt Location nurse.......................

Deidre Eagles Costume designer..................................Paul Cleveland Casting..............................................JenniferAllen Scriptwriter..............................Michael Cove Boom operator......................... Ray Phillips Catering...................................... Ray Fowler Make-up................................................ LindaHamilton, Lighting cameraman..............Julian Penney Based on the original idea Asst art director........................Peter Kendall (Fillum Catering) Ian Laughnan b y ...................................................MichaelCoveCamera operator.................... Julian Penney Costume designer..................................AnneFraser Tutor............................. Deborah Waterman Wardrobe................................................. EvaUnger, Focus puller............................Russell Bacon Photography......................... Julian Penney Make-up.................................................Terry Worth, Mixed a t.................................................

Atlab Norma Londregan Clapper/loader.......................................BrettJoyce Sound recordist.............................Ben Osmo Patricia Payne Laboratory..............................................Atlab Props buyer........................... Helen Williams Key g rip .................................................. AlanTrevena Editor.................................................MichaelHoney Hairdresser...............................

Terry Worth, Post-production......................

Custom Video Sound editor...................................... AndrewBarry 2nd unit photography............................ GarryJohnson Prod, designer........................................BrettMoore Patricia Payne Length................................................. 13x46 mins Editing assistant..................................... NolaStewart Gaffer................................................... MartinPerrott Exec, producer..................................MichaelCarson Make-up and hair Gauge.................................................. 16mm Stunts co-ordinator................................ ChrisAnderson Electrician.............................................PierreDrion Prod, co-ordinator..................Cathie Garland assistant............................... Leanne White Shooting stock....................................... 7247 Stunts.....................................................Glen Reuhland Boom operator.............................. Geoff Krix Prod, manager........................ John Moroney Wardrobe..............................................JennyArnott Cast: As for Series 2.

Dialogue coach..................................... HelenNoonan Art director........................ Neave Catchpool Unit manager...................................... DorianNewstead Ward assistants........................................ VivWilson, Synopsis: As for Series 2.

Tech, adviser........................................

Harry Shiamaris Asst art director....................Sibella Mannix Prod, secretary...............................GeraldineCollins James Watson, Publicity...............ABC Publicity Department Make-up............................................. RobertWasson 1st asst director....................James Freeman Judy Ann Fitzgerald, Catering........................Bande Aide Caterers HIGH C O U NTRY Wardrobe......................................... BeverleyPowers 2nd asst director................................ KatrinaFrancsali Lea Haig Cast: Nick Lathouris (Yannis), Peter Ward, assistant......................................DeanPearce Continuity......................................... LarraineQuinnell Prod, company........................................ PBLProds Props buyer...........................................DavidO’Grady Katsaitis (Criton), Christine Totos (Anna), Props.............................................Don Page Producer's assistant.......... Larraine Quinnell Producer................................................ PeterHerbert Standby props........................................BarryKennedy Olivia Hamnett (Patricia Barwing), Simon Props buyer...................................Bill Booth Casting............................................. JenniferBruty Director...................................................... BillHughes Special effects....................................... BrianPearce Chilvers (Peter Barwing).

Standby props......................Richard Walsh, Lighting cameraman.............. Julian Penney Scriptwriter................................................Ian Bradley Set decorator........................................

David O’Grady Synopsis: A young Greek Cypriot woman Bruce Bowman Camera operator..................... Julian Penney Based on the original idea Carpenter............................................... JohnMoore comes to Melbourne in the 1950s for her Special effects..................... Brian McClure, Focus puller.............................Russell Bacon Set construction....................................Bruce Michell by...........................................................

Ian Bradley arranged marriage and is caught in a web of Peter Leggett Clapper/loader............................Brett Joyce Photography............................Ray Henman Asst editor......................................... AnnetteBinger tragedy.

Asst editor...............................................NickMeyers Key grip................................................... AlanTrevina Sound recordist.....................................GeoffWhite Sound editors...................Stuart Armstrong, Sound editor...................................Bill Russo Asst g rip ................................ Paul Lawrence Editor...................................... Clifford Hayes Penn Robinson Editing assistant..................................... NickMeyers Electricians........................... Martin Perrott, Prod, designer.................................... RobbiePerkins Editing assistants................................ PhillipDixon, Mixer..................................Anne Cocksedge Pierre Drion Composer............................................. DavidSkinner Hugh Waddell Boom operator..................................GeoffreyKrix Publicity................................Lesley Jackson Mixer.................................Julian Ellingworth Exec, producer.......................................... IanBradley Catering................................Fillum Catering Art director..............................................BrettMoore Stunts co-ordinator....................................BillStacey Assoc, producer..................................... MikeMidlam Studios.................................................... ABC Asst art director............Gregory Stephenson Stunts........................................................ BillStacey, Prod, supervisor...................................... JanMarnell Mixed a t.................................................. ABC Costume designer...................................BrettMoore Prod, co-ordinator.................. Janine Kerley Lou Trifunovic Laboratory....................................... Colorfilm Make-up................................................ BrittaKingsbury Still photography................................... DavidParker Location manager..........................Grant Hill Length........................................................

85mins CHASE TH R O U G H TH E N IG H T Wardrobe............................................... BarryLumley Dialogue coach.........................................JimNorton Prod, secretary..................................MelanieHall Gauge.................................................. 16mm Prod, company............... Independent Prods Ward, assistant...................................... DeanPearce Wrangler.......................................John Baird Prod, accountant.................... Jim Hajicosta Scheduled release........................ June 1984 Producer.....................................Jim George Props........................................................RoyEggleton 1st asst director................ Philip Hearnshaw Best boy................................... Bruce Towers Cast: Ray Meagher (Kevin), Charito Ortez Director................................. Howard Rubie Props buyer......................................... AdrianCannon Runners.................................................PeterCulpan, 2nd asst director.................................... JohnTitley (Ampy), Paul Sonkkila (Tommo), Sheila Scriptwriters...........................Rob George, Standby props.......................................DavidWhite, Continuity............................ Judy Whitehead G. J. Carroll Kennelly (Dorothy), Robert Noble (Donnie), Peter Moroney John Emery Publicity.....................Rea Francis Company Script editor....................................... GraemeFarmer

POST-PRODUCTION

AWAITING RELEASE

110 — March-April CINEMA PAPERS

Production Survey

Casting...................

Focus puller............

Clapper/loader........

Key g rip ...................

Asst grip..................

Gaffer......................

Boom operator........

Asst art director......

Make-up..................

Hairdresser............

Wardrobe................

Standby wardrobe...

Ward, assistant......

Props b uyer............

Standby props........

Special effects........

Set decorator.........

Set construction....

Musical director.....

Music performed by Mixer.......................

Asst m ixer..............

Stunts co-ordinator.

Still photography....

Title designer.........

Tech, adviser..........

Wrangler..................

Best b o y .................

Runners..................

.............. Maura Fay ...Malcolm Burrows ........... John Lomax ..........Peter Mardell ........Phillip Shapiro ............ Pav Govind ............ Ray Phillips ................Scott Bird .......Leeanne White .......Leeanne White ...Heather McLaren ...... Julie Constable ....... Frankie Hogan ........Mark Polonsky ..........David Oldrey ............. Clive Jones ......Harvey Mawson ....Studio Set Studio .........David Skinner .........David Skinner ........Roger Savage ........... Ian Maycock ....Graham Mathrick ...Vladimir Osherov .The Arts Producers ..... Graeme Stoney ........ Charlie Lovick ....Grahame Mulder .... Michael Stribley, John Hogah, Nick Alimede ............. Lyn Quayle ............... Take One .......................GTV9 ............. Matt Burns ...Patsy Hearnshaw ...............Soundflrm ..........................VFL ...................93 mins ......................16mm ...Kodak 7247, 7294

Publicity..........

Catering.........

Studios...........

Safety officer...

Location nurse Mixed a t .........

Laboratory.....

Length.............

Gauge............

Shooting stock

Progress..........................................In release Cast: John Waters (Ben Lomax), Tom Oliver (Frank Stacey), Terry Serio (Dave Baxter), Tim Hughes (Sid Nelson), Simone Buchanan (Debbie Lomax), Maureen Edwards (Ellen Corbett), Robin Bowering (Lachlan Corbett), Brett Climo (Alex Corbett), Kerry Mack (Kathleen O’Keefe), Rod Williams (Ander­ son).

Synopsis: A contemporary drama dealing with the lives of mountain cattlemen whose family traditions can be traced back 140 years. The central character is a mountain squatter who has been away from home for three years. He returns to steal back his own horse to prevent it being injured in a race.

TH E K EEPERS Prod, company........ ...............................ABC Producer................. .....................Noel Price Directors...................

Kevin Dobson, Mark Callan, Keith Wilkes, Richard Sarell Scriptwriters............ ............... John Reeves, Shane Brennan, Ian McFadyen, Catherine Millar Based on the original Idea developed by........ ................ John Reeves Sound recordists.... ....................Peter Mills, David Redcliffe Sound effects........... ............... Peter Bradley Videotape editor....... ......................Ken Tyler Prod, designers....... ............Gunars Jurjans, Frank Earley, Robert Walters Composer................ .............. Greg Sneddon

Exec, producer...

Prod, manager. ..

Prod, secretary..

1st asst directors 2nd asst directors Continuity

Producer’s assistants

Casting...................

Lighting directors ....

Technical producers Senior cameramen ..

Key g rip ...................

Electrician...............

Boom operator.........

Costume designer ...

Make-up..................

Wardrobe..................

Props buyer...............

Special effects...........

Music composed and performed b y .........

............... Noel Price ............ Geoff Cooke ............ Debbie Cole ............Bill Smithett, Chris Weymouth, Peter Murphy ............... Don Ryan, John Slattery, Graeme Cornish ........... Lee Heming, Kay Hennessy, Sue Overton, Jo McLennan, Kerry Bevan, Trish Canavan ...........Lee Heming, Kay Hennessy, Sue Overton, Jo McLennan, Kerry Bevan, Trish Canavan .............. Greg Apps ............Ron Cromb, Noel Quirk ..... Steve Pickering, John Bennett ............. John Tuttle, Roger McAlpine ...........Max Gaffney ............. Joe Mitzsal ...........Ernie Everett .............. Julie Skate .Robert Kretschmer, Linda Washbourne, Paul Pattison .......Beverly Jasper, Norma Londregan ....... Helen Williams ................Rod Clack ........Greg Sneddon

Mixer.............................................. Peter Mills Stunts co-ordinator...............Chris Anderson Stunts...................................Glen Reuhland Still photography........ABC Stills Department Animation................................Mike Hollands Title designer.......................... Mike Hollands Tech, adviser.......................... Jim Davidson Publicity............... ABC Publicity Department Catering........................ Bande Aide Catering Length........................................ 9 x 50 mins Scheduled release......................March 1984 Cast: Bill Hunter (Jack Wolfe), David Cameron (Rick Zammit), Catherine Wilkin (Aggie French), Nina Landis (Miriam Woods), Vikki Blanche (Kim French), Terry Gill (Keith Eberle), with various guests artists each episode.

Synopsis: Stories based on the work and lives of Fisheries and Wildlife officers.

W ATERFRONT Prod, company.... ........................ Waterfront Producer.............. ..........................Bob Weis Director................ .................Chris Thomson Photography....... .....................Dan Burstall Sound recordist.... .....................John Phillips Editor.................... .Edward McQueen Mason Prod, designer.... ........................Tracy Watt Assoc, producer... .................. Mac Gudgeon Prod, supervisor... ............ Margot McDonald Unit manager...... .................. Jake Atkinson Asst unit manager .........Michael McGennan Prod, secretary.... ..............Elizabeth Symes Prod, accountant.. ..................... Carolyn Fyfe Prod, assistant..... ...............Milanka Comfort Trainee prod, assistant.. .................. Kattina Bowell 1st asst director. .. .................... David Clarke

2nd asst d irector...........................John Titley 3rd asst director....................... Stephen Saks Continuity............................................AndreaJordon Focus pulle r.............................Natalie Green Clapper/loader..................... Brendon Lavelle Key g rip ................................ Paul Ammitzboll Asst grip.................................................. PeterKershaw Gaffer..... ...................................Brian Adams Sound assistants.............. Bruce Lamshed, Ray Phillips Asst art director..................................... BryceRenzow Make-up...............................................KirstenVeysey Hairdresser..................................Joan Petch Wardrobe................................................RoseChong, Karen Merke Standby wardrobe...................... Gail Mayes Props buyer/ set decorator..................................... PaddyReardon Asst buyer/decorator.................. Chris James Standby props.............................. Phil Eagles Art dept, trainee........................... Tara Ferrier Construction manager........................... ColinBurchall Editing assistant............................... WarwickCrane Still photography...............Vladimir Osherov Best b o y .................................................. JohnLeaver Funner.....................................................ColinTudhope Publicity.....................Rea Francis Company Catering.................................................HelenWright, Beeb Fleetwood Laboratory.........................................Cinevex Cast: Jack Thompson (Maxey), Greta Scacchi (Anna). Frank Gallacher (Paddy), Tony Rickards (Snowy), Mark Little (Allan), Jay Mannering (Davo), Ray Barrett (Sam), Chris Haywood (Ernie), Warren Mitchell (Les), Noni Hazlehurst (Maggie).

Synopsis: An impossible love story set against a background of political and social violence. A story full of bitterness and of the racism that formed the early days of migration in Australia.

TO P TEN MANAGEMENT For Actors ( I n c o r p o r a t i n g A. & j. C a s t i n g )

678

W arrigal Road, O akleigh South 3067

T e le p h o n e ( 0 3 ) 579 055 7 Anthony J. Weymouth Manager

C in e S e r v i c e III _ c o m p a c t v id e o _ SUPER 8MM & 16MM FILM DUPLICATING & SUPER 8MM REDUCTION PRINTING • SOUND RECORDING • STANDARD 8MM, SUPER 8MM, 9.5MM, 16MM & 35MM TO EITHER W , BETA, OR VHS TAPE • VIDEO TAPE TO FILM TRANSFERS • VICTORIAN AGENTS TUSCAN REELS & CANS 235 moray st. sth. melbourne 3205 p.o. box 328 phone (0 3 ) 699 6999

CINEMA PAPERS M arch-April — 111

/MELBOURNE FILM/MAKERS RESOURCE BOOK

LATEST EDITION N O W AVAILABLE. A N YO N E EVEN REMOTELY CO NTEM PLATIN G FILM P R O D U C T IO N IN MELBOURNE SHOULD HAVE THIS USEFUL REFERENCE. 6 4 PAGES OF FACTS, FIGURES, A N D ADDRESSES. WHERETO G O AND HOW M UCH IT COSTS. N O W C O N T A IN S LISTING OF V ID E O EDITING FACILITIES. SEND $ 3 .5 0 TO PO BOX 27 CA RLTO N 3 0 5 3 (INCLUDES POSTAGE) FOR YOUR O W N RUSH CO PY.

1984

OPTICAL & GRAPHIC (1982] Pty. Ltd

All titling services fo r M otion Picture, Video, Audio Visual and Documentary including:- Titles, roli-ups, sub-titles, graphics . ' and special effects

KEHOE AUSTRALIA 18 Cahill Street, Camperdoiun 2050.

Teh (02) 519 4407.

Suppliers of professional Film,Tele vision and Special Effects M ake-U p for the Industry. — R.C.M .A.(U.s.a.)

VISIORA (France) KRYOLAN(Germany)

Shooting in all fo rm a ts:Academy, W ide-Screen, T V. and Anamorphic Contact Amanda or P eter Newton

[02] 922-3144

Parking and entrance at rear of 1 1 0 - 1 1 2 W e s t S t., Crows N e st, N .S .W . 2 0 6 5

WITH A KEM K800 SYSTEM EVERYTHING IS POSSIBLE With this incredible system you can interlock 2 K800 tables with 16mm Twin picture modules and have 4 pictures and 2 sound tracks or you can transfer film to video or lay film sound tracks to video or you can change all the modules to 35mm.

It offers so many different combinations.

FROM

FILMWEST 13

SOLE AGENTS FOR KEM THROUGHOUT AUSTRALIA AND ASIA

For more details and prices on the K800 System contact: — Maureen Keast

Alan Lake

Peter Grbavac

Filmwest Equipment Sales Pty. Ltd.

Film Production Services

Photographie & General Instruments

Filmwest Pte. Ltd.

75 Bennett Street, East Perth, W .A . 6000.

Phone: [09] 325 I 177, 325 1423.

Telex: AA94I50.

102 Chandos Street, Crows Nest, N.S.W. 2065.

Phone:[02] 439 7102.

203 Rocky Point Road, Ramsgate. N.S.W. 2217.

Phone: [02] 525 6314

Suite 157, Raffles Hotel, I - 3 Beach Road, Singapore. 0718 Phone: 337 8041, 336 1509.

Telex: RS36389 FLMWST.

[on Noble

DT/FW/783

FUJICOLOR

Th e co m p lete range of M otion Picture Film fo r a li occasions

O fficial Film o f the Los Angeles 1984 Olympics

FUJICOLOR HIGH SPEED NEGATIVE FILM

FUJICOLOR

FUJICOLOR raS NEGATIVE FILM

FUJICOLOR HIGH SPEED NEGATIVE FILM, Store Delow 10 COO T)

FUJICOLOR REVERSAL FILM

Openooryin tota! darkness

R T 125^™ “ ■JfimmxsoSmttOOIEI

ON CORE

FUJICOLOR REVERSAL FILM

FUJICOLOR REVERSAL FILM R T 1 2 5

a

Imm X 122m (400) ONCORE j Openonlyintotal daritness KERN j Nut Inabsolute* Dunkelheit otlnen SURNOYAUi Nouvrir guedans»obscuritétotale

Natural color reproduction is yours with Fujicolor. Tones come alive. Luxuriate in the rich skin tones and exquisite subleties of the grays.

In situations which call for veiy fine grain pictures, Fujicolor A allows you to shoot at a lower exposure index (e.g. El. 50) and then fine-grain process to obtain outstanding results.

Fujicolor AX has an exposure index rating of 320 in tungsten light and 2 0 0 in daylight When shooting under adverse lighting conditions the E.I. rating of Fujicolor AX can be doubled by force processing which virtually results in no change in color balance.

Distributed in Australia by

m

HANIMEX

•

SYDNEY

•

M ELBOURNE

•

B R IS B A N E

•

A D E L A ID E

•

PERTH

•

HOBART

PERFECT RELEASE COPIES BEGIN WITH THIS 4000M REEL

AMERICAN ACADEMY AWARD 1983

COLOUR BY RANK FILM LABORATORIES (U.K.) North Orbital Road,Denham,Uxbridge, I (U.S.A.) Technical S ervices, 1015 NorthCahuenga, M iddlesex UB9 5HQ, Tel.0895 832323,T elex934704. | Hollywood.C.A.90038 Telex 691600, Tel.213 469 9094,