Cinema Papers No.105 August 1995 by UOW Library

Cosi Therapy Louis Nowra, Miramax and an All-Star Cast

Her Brilliant Career Jacqueline McKenzie on Stage and Screen

Everything Old is New Again P R IN TE D POST APPROVED PP34272/00007

EDITED BY NICHOLAS BEAUMAN ON

Lightw orks THE LATEST AUSTRALIAN FILM TO BE EDITED ON LIGHTWORKS USING OUR TRUE 24FPS SOFTWARE F or m o re in fo rm a tio n o n th is o r a n y o th e r p ro d u c tio n e d ite d o n L ig h tw o rk s , p le a s e call : M E L B O U R N E Q u in to C o m m u n ic a tio n s P ty Ltd U n it 1 1 5 /4 5 G ilb y Rd M t W a v e rle y V ic 3 1 4 9 Tel: 61 3 5 5 8 9 3 7 7 Fax: 61 3 5 5 8 9 2 9 8

S Y D N E Y

Q u in to C o m m u n ic a tio n s P ty Ltd U n it 4, 3 5 8 E a s te rn V a lle y W a y C h a ts w o o d N S W 2 0 6 7 Tel: 61 2 4 1 7 5 1 6 6 Fax: 61 2 4 1 7 5 3 3 7

A U C K L A N D Q u in to C o m m u n ic a tio n s (N Z ) Ltd 8 T h e P ro m e n a d e T a k a p u n a A u c k la n d 9 Tel: 6 4 9 4 8 6 1 2 0 4 Fax: 6 4 9 4 8 6 1 2 1 6

contents

C I N E M A P A P E R S • AUGUST 1995

N U M B E R 10 5

Focus COSI Mark Joffe

M argaret Smith After Grievous Bodily H arm and Spotswood, director Mark Joffe returns with Cosi, a comedy about a drama therapy course in a psychiatric institution. Adapted from the award-winning play by Louis Nowra, the film has one o f the most extraordinary casts ever assembled for an Australian film. by

CANNES 48e Festival International du Film by J an E pstein Every year, Cannes provides the definitive showcase o f what films and directors will be celebrated or damned over the next twelve months. Jan Epstein reports back on high-profile feuds between prize-winning directors, the m ixed reception to the new batch o f Australian films, and the true highlights o f the thousands o f movies on show.

JA C Q U EL IN E M CKENZIE Make-believe and Magic by Daniel Scott At just 27, actress Jacqueline McKenzie is being touted as the fresh, new face o f Australian cinema. H er diverse performances in such varied films as R om per Stomper, This W o n ’t H u rt a Bit!, Traps and Angel Baby have brought her universal acclaim. McKenzie reveals her passions in a revealing interview.

Insights Inbits

Lost and Found

Technicalities

Shorts

History

Retrospective

In review

Legal Ease

Inproduction

Nihil obstat Nine

Lindsay Amos is a Sydney writer with a particular interest in cinematography; Ken Berryman is manager of the Melbourne office of the National Film & Sound Archive; Dominic Case is a motionpicture technical consultant; John Conomos lectures at the College of Fine Arts, University of Sydney; Jan Epstein is the film reviewer for

Miracles of Light Slawomir Idziak photographs Toni Collette in L illian ’s Story. He talks to Lindsay Amos about his life’s work and what being a DOP really means to him. PAGE 2 2 The Melbournian, Freda Freiberg is a Melbourne-based writer on film; Chris Long is a Melbourne film historian; Peter Malone is editor of Compass Theology Review, Geoff Mayer is co-author of New Australian Cinema: Sources and Parallels in American and British Film, Brian McFarlane is an Associate Professor in the English department

at Monash University; Barrie Pattison is a Sydney filmmaker and a passionate believer in the need for a National Film Theatre; Daniel Scott is a screenwriter and playwright; Richard Silverton is a principal in the law firm of Hart & Spira; Margaret Smith is a Sydney writer and filmmaker.

assisted by Research Manager Rose

rently in development at Film Australia. Ron Saunders, the creator of Film

mary Curtis.

cinema

Ingram has varied experience in film,

a u g u s t 199 5 n u m b e r 105

Australia's Johnson & Friends, The Girl

television and media technology devel

from Tomorrow and Escape from Jupiter,

opment. Most recent, she was General

will join Southern Star Entertainment as

116 Argyle Street , F itzroy,

Manager of Metro TV, a membership-

Plead of Southern Star Pacific in mid-

V ictoria, Australia 3065.

based video-production and training

July. Saunders, currently in production

facility based in Sydney. While at Metro,

with Spellbinder, Sun on the Stubble and

Postal

address:

PO B ox 2221,

F itzroy MDC, Victoria 3065. T el: (03) 9416 2644. F ax : (03) 9416 4088. Editor: S cott M urray Technical Editor: D ominic C ase Acting Assistant Editor: Alissa T anskaya Advertising: T erry H aebich

NEWS, V I E WS , AN

PRODUCER BECOMES FIRST RECIPIENT OF FFC SCHEME

has become the first recipient of

ris said Weis w ill receive an advance

Accounts: T ory T aouk

against profits for the feature, Lucky Break.

Legal Adviser: D an Pearce (Holding R edlich, S olicitors)

Since completion, Generation Films has

Patricia Amad , R oss D imsey , D iana G ribble, Natalie M iller Founding Publishers: P eter B eilby, S cott M urray, Philippe M ora

FFC as a reward for commercial suc

T el: (03) 9662 9992

cess, and Lucky Break has achieved

Film: C ondor G roup Distribution: N etwork D istribution . © COPYRIGHT 19 9 5

present and future issues of post-pro

under a new company, but essentially the

duction; in particular, the erosion of

same Board of Directors.

craft skills, the role and training of

to give a sense of hope for people so I put in a happy ending. Swing on ... Three Australian short films were

MTV PUBLISHING LIMITED. S ig n e d a r t ic l es r e p r e se n t t h e v iew s OF t h e a u t h o r s and n o t n e c e ssa r il y t h a t o f t h e e d it o r an d p u b l is h e r .

W h il e e v e r y c a re is t a k en w it h m a n u sc r ip t s an d m a t e r ia l s su pplied t o t h e

MAGAZINE, NEITHER THE EDITOR NOR THE PUBLISHER CAN ACCEPT LIABILITY FOR ANY LOSS OR DAMAGE WHICH MAY ARISE. T his m a g a z in e m ay n o t be r e p r o d u c e d

AFC stated: In making this decision, the Australian Film Commission remains committed

support for publications and other activities. The AFC w ill continue to encour age public dialogue w ith in the

Lessons in the Language of Love (Scott

cultural sector to give rise to strate

Patterson).

gies for the future in the important publications.

Director of the Industry and Cultural Development Branch at the AFC. The

ustralian film m aker Gregor Jor

position has been vacant since Cathy

dan has been awarded the Prix de

Robinson left to become Chief Executive. It was managed in the interim by ICD Project Co-ordinator Julie Regan,

Jury (Jury Prize) for short film s at the Cannes International Film Festival for his 3 minute and 25 second film, Swinger.

SOUTHERN STAR AND FILM AUSTRALIA ALLIANCE

;

Australian Film Commission pro-

( SZpiUr fcAitor, C ongratulations! T ke J

viding post-production finance. Jordan has been a film fan all

video director, script writer, assis

thisis took U s (aAeA, anA

as an actor. S w inger is a story of John

cant or representative part of the character of Australian film , and yet

s V\ol<-Aay

& w 'inÍMní r í&íntiÁ

w itA wAat mi$At easily hcom e *■ m agazin e ] note in fêicAarA V^Aerrett S

rd lectin $ tAe true c o m p t a n t anA art

recollections tAat Ae cites tAe ¡ eatnre,

hua$c o( our {ns'mess.

music, who is on a major losing

d em o n s tr a to r, as Aaving an early influence on

/ [ t (n il speeA witA n siarcA on our

streak. Fie decides to end it all and so ties a noose and jumps. While he

Aim.

-fZoch p a v ilio n project, wAicA cAronccUs

swings, the phone keeps ringing. As

' 60S perioA, anA in tAi lu o( tAe music of¡

through the answering machine, he

tAi time, 1 (was more tAan tAnlUA to reaA

learns th a t all his bad news has

t e n n i s anA T ristra m 's aAventnre uvitA

turned to good. It is too late for him to get down?

tAe very talenteA V \ a* C n llen in

Jordan says:

yioliAay. ¿ ,acA a nniryne concept anA (well

Swinger is, believe it or not, about

WOrtAy o( yonr siü-

depression and howto deal with it.

wAo is tAis W a r w ic k /{rm stron ft

cAaracter tAat you're creAiteA witA it's

tAis country S ( a l l i e s in tAe H JOS anA

he hears the messages coming

AND FILM QUEENSLAND.

The subject genre of horror is not generally considered to be a sign ifi

is sFeAAin$ its d i ^ e y -

i^ r -

tant director, standby props and

Simms, an avid fan of big band

COMMISSION, FILM VICTORIA

from various countries.

Jordan self-funded the pro duction of Sw inger w ith the

trusty otA

FROM THE AUSTRALIAN FILM

bourne, June 28 - August 22), looks at the subject of 'horror' in Australian cin ema, and in imagery on stamps selected

acclaimed themes, subjects and char-

his life and spent the past ten years

CINEMA PAPERS IS PUBLISHED

ittle H orrors", an exhibition L curated by Elizabeth Gertsakis (at the National Philatelic Gallery, Mel

develop and produce drama projects cur

working in the industry as a music

WITH FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE

CINEMATIC STILLS AND ANXIOUS STAMPS

some of our film's most memorable and

PERMISSION OF THE COPYRIGHT OWNERS.

MONTHS BY M T V PUBLISHING LIMITED,

LITTLE HORRORS:

Australia have formed an alliance to

IN WHOLE OR PART WITHOUT THE EXPRESS

116 A r g y l e S t r e e t , F it z r o y , V ic t o r ia , A u stra lia 3065 .

and seconded by Sara Bennett.

he Southern Star Group and Film

C annes ÎSSM is 4 d e a r indicator tAat tAe

C in e m a P apers is p u blish ed ev e r y t w o

The motion was put by John Pleffer

screen culture in Australia through

dent Divorcee (Jonathan Ogilvie) and

ate Ingram has been appointed

technology on work practices.

to encouraging a vigorous and diverse

selected for Cannes: Swinger, Despon

AFC ICD APPOINTMENT

assistants, and the impact of new

In a press statement of 15 June, the

area of specialized screen culture

AUSTRALIAN SHORT FILM W IN S JURY PRIZE AT CANNES

the form ation of a screen editors'

Sometimes when you are feeling

that. pty ltd

1995 at the Plarold Park FHotel in

Sydney called for guild to voice our concerns over the

of what would happen if the phone call came too late. But I also wanted

Morris said,

meeting of 80 editors on 10 May

was restarted by the AFC early in 1995

started toying with the possibilities

the Middle East.

Everyone has their highs and lows.

was thinking about this idea and

France, Germany, Italy, Spain, the UK, Switzerland, Japan, Latin America and

Parkhouse Publishing pty ltd,

Board Meeting on 14 June, it was

Filmnewshadfolded in mid-1993, but

news is only one phone call away. I

sales agent for all other territories, Pan dora, has reported strong early sales to

SCREEN EDITORS' GUILD

t an Australian Film Commission

its last.

bad, it's easy to forget th a t good

Goldwyn Co, w hile the international

The scheme was introduced by the

F rank Daniels

others.

Filmnews. The July 1995 issue w ill be

sold all North American rights to Samuel

Design & Production:

Printing:

Australia on these projects and several

Telecom.

ney-based monthly film newspaper,

Lucky Break was produced by Weis' Generation Films and released in Aus tralian cinemas in October last year.

C hris Stewart (C hairman),

television tria l in collaboration w ith

decided not to continue funding the Syd

the FFC's Producer Revenue Entitlement

M ina C arattoli

MTV Board of Directors:

continue as Executive Producer for Film

ell-known producer Bob Weis

Scheme. FFC Chief Executive John Mor

Office Cat: O ddspot

a fourth series of Johnson & Friends, will

and overseeing the operation of a cable-

F1LMNEWS FOLDS

Subscriptions & Office Assistance:

Proofreading: Arthur Saltón

Ingram was instrumental in establishing

conception1? p in y relation to ¿tfUÜanF ¿ u r e l y your jrnest for ‘contemporary is not ¿faut to reAnce tAe g ú íty -y H o r a -W l* rr a y ‘{Piírle! reputation.

fëeyçarAs, W a r w i c k Tf-reeman

The 44th Melbourne International Film Festival The City of Melbourne Awards for Short F ilm Grand P rix: The C ity of M elbourne Award fo r B est Film ($5,000)

The C ity of M elbourne Award fo r B est Experim ental Film ($2,000)

T wilights (T en g ai A m an o, J a p a n )

The Smell of B urning A nts

The C ity of M elbourne Award for B est Short Fiction ($2,000)

( J a y R osen blatt, U .S .)

The Salesman and O ther A dventures (H a n n a h W e y e r, U .S .)

The C ity o f M elbourne Award fo r B est Anim ation ($2,000)

The B ig S tory (T im W a tts,

D avid S toten, U K )

The C ity o f M elbourne Award fo r Beat Documentary ($2,000)

HELLO P hoto

(N in a D aven p ort, U .S .)

In addition to these official jury awards, the following specialist citations were presented within the Festival

The International Ecumenical Organization, 0. C.I. C, Special Citation fo r Outstanding Australian Short Film Prom oting Human Values

The Film Victoria Erwin Rado Award fo r Bedt A ustralian Film ($2,000) ,,

W riter ’s B lock (L e o n

Small Treasures (S a ra h W a tt)

Cm ielew ski) If

The ANZAAS-Scienceworks Award fo r M ost Outstanding Film dealing with a Science-related subject ($1,500)

The Kino Cinemad Award fo r Creative Excellence ) in an A ustralian Short Film ($2,500)

N oah ’s A r k

Teenage P ortraits (G re ta M o rto n )

(V ivianne H o w a rd , U K )

Director: Special M ention

M elbourne International Film F estival Citation fo r B est Student Production

The SECRET (C lare K ilner, R oyal College o f A rt,

Great M oments in S cience : Falling Cats (A n d rew H o rn e, A u stralia)

L on don , U K )

The 42nd Sydney Film Festival Dendy Awards for Australian Short Films Docum entary Category ($2,500, sponsored by The Dendy) E T E R N I T Y (L a w re n ce Jo h n s to n )

General Category ($2,500, sponsored by The Dendy)

F ood ( for) Thought: (T hree) I ngredients from the Mass Consumer D iet (D an iel C roo k s)

Fiction Category ( more than 2 5 minuted; $2,500, sponsored by The Dendy) AUDACIOUS (S am an th a L an g )

Ethnic A ffairs Commission o f N S W Award ($2,500, sponsored by The Ethnic A ffairs Commission ’of N S W )

Fiction Category (less than 2 5 minutes; $2,500 sponsored by The Dendy)

(N ed Land er with Carol R uff and Ja m e s B radley)

A M odest P roposal

50 Years of S ilence

Rouben M am oulian Award ($2,500, sponsored by N S W Film and Television Office)

(L aw so n B ayly)

Yoram Gross Anim ation Award ($2,500, sponsored by Yoram Gross Film Studios)

S omething to S ing A bout .

R ED B A C K (N ed L an d er)

ematic fiction with global and national philatelic anxieties about AIDS, disease, war, terrorism, religious memories of martyrdom, murderous Shakespearian fatal flaws, cultural fables and ghost sto ries that recognize the fears deep within their cultural origins, and the human fear of nature which is often at the heart of the horror genre's preoccupation with transformation and metamorphosis. The horror genre belongs to a special realm of storytelling fiction, a scary form acters, here and internationally, have His Natural Life (1927), to Picnic at of entertainment that also has a cau dread as their source. Hanging Hock [ 1975), The Last Wave tionary effect in terms of the real world From early films such as The Story of (1977) , The Chant o f Jimmie Blacksmith and our place in it as vulnerable human the Kelly Gang[1906) and The Term of (1978) and the Mad Max movies (1979, beings. The horror film's capacity to play 1981,1985), to Hazorback (1984), The on individual anxiety in a sense is Howling (1984) and Celia counter weighted by the stamp's refer (1989), and up to the The Editor replies: ence to mass global and national recent Body M elt (1994), Warwick Freeman’s enthusialmlor t E r " concerns. In looking across from the Australian film history — new..format hasJ)£en.mirrored .by many__ signs, symbols and emblems of horror in unfolds an array of readers, who have written, faxed and film, stamp designs share from the same mechanical colonial antag f phoned in. pool of representations, a vocabulary of onists and post-nuclear F^WOftanlrthemr-------visual archetypes that endure and are human monsters that are recycled. moral primitives or canni — As_rQ,j:he.wrong£ulattribution0£surname bals or executioners, "Little Horrors" includes such intrigu A T ijH ,4 irect° r ° f Demonstrator, that was avenging assassins, deviant ing horror memorabilia as the coffin _ a gaffe made during the e d itin g f^ T m b y ” ARTafticl'e’s au children or maidens pre made from car parts from Chamber Made occupied with death. Opera's production of Peter Weir's The -gtzes to-Ereeman and assures him-that-the. .. In the exhibition, still Cars That Ate Paris, and Yahoo Serious' JP if lL of scholarship which has attempted images from film are Reckless Kelly costume. to inform every issue continues^rthTTCiT" matched with stamps, in a greater resotve.~ r ----------— — ------ Sculptor Loretta Quinn, well known partnership that blends cinfor her macabre figures, was commis-

(M a rtin D a le y )

sioned to create several objects for the exhibition.

CINEMA PAPERS STAFF erry Haebich has replaced Barry Telfer as Cinema Papers' Advertis ing Representative. Haebich has worked with Cinema Papers in the past, and both he and the magazine look forward to the renewed association. Alissa Tanskaya, who kindly stepped in at very short notice as Acting Assistant Edi tor, is leaving to pursue

Sandy Taylor (Murray Bartlett) and Kate (Essie Davis). George W haley’s

Dad and Dave On Our Selection.

her own projects, including a book whose deadline is rapidly approaching. Cinema Papers thanks her for her great contribution, especially her valued input into the restyling of the magazine.

CORRIGENDUM n Raymond Younis' review of Before Sunrise (Cinema Papers, No. 104, June 1995, p. 49), Eric Rohmer is incorrectly

referred to as the director of Jacques Rivette's Céline et Julie Vont en Bateau.

I B

iT < L " 1 L n

fiJlIW r a m r a irainlKf ISrji

■ 1 1 8 1 1 11 M U

mliinT 4

| I a «T aW T | |

MH fmiT

C I N E M A P A P E R S • AUGUST 1995

p|yyis (Ben Mendel^

EflpacJĂ‰iW eav^and Roy (Barry Otto). Mark Joffe's

els), is a jaundiced nurse who hates the trendy idea. To make matters worse; emands that Lewis direct the patients in his favourite opera, CosiFdnjufte j C I N E M A P A P E R S â€˘ AUGUST 1995

ince directing G riev o u s B o d ily H a rm (1988) and S potsw ood (1992), Mark Joffe has read literally hundreds of scripts. He is very careful about what he chooses to direct, so it wasn’t until he saw Louis N ow ra’s loosely-autobiographical play, Cosi, that he felt he’d found the right project. (Nowra directed Gilbert & Sullivan’s Trial by Jury in a psychiatric institution in the 1970s.) Joffe joined forces with Nowra in finalizing the screenplay. The film updates the play to the pre sent, and has an incredible cast, which also includes Toni Collette, Paul Chubb, Kerry W alker, Jacki Weaver and Aden Young. How did you come to direct Cosi? I was approached by [producer] Richard Bren nan. W e both saw the play two or three years ago, and thought it could make a very inter esting film. I’m always on the look-out for anything half decent in terms of storyline. You get so many scripts that are either formula-driven or cliched. Anything in an original form, or with an origi nal slant, attracts me. N othing really happened for quite a few m onths, though, because I was w orking on other things. Then Richard and I talked to Louis [N ow ra]. Louis and I got on very w ell, and seemed to have the same ideas of where the film script would go. How different is the film script from the play? Reasonably different, though the essence hasn’t changed. The major difference is that the film is now set in the 1990s, whereas the play was set in the late 1960s and early ’70s, with the Viet nam war as the backdrop. Louis and I decided that m odernizing it would give it greater poignancy, and more relevance to contemporary life. It also took away any novelty or cuteness attached to that particular era, especially given a lot of films set then were coming out. At the same time, we lost the positive effect of having something significant like the V iet nam war as a backdrop. We tried to utilize other things. There are many other problems going on now involving psychiatric treatment and hos pitals, and people generally growing up. There were enough issues to deal with. Presumably, you felt the way patients are left in psychiatric institutions today is not all that different from the 1970s. It has improved quite a lot. We filmed at a cou ple of hospitals, and most of the patients were being transferred to more modern facilities. Their actual surroundings and treatment seem to be a lot more modern, and are probably more beneficial than 20 years ago. Were the patients present at any of the mental institutions you shot in? Yes, at Gladesville Hospital. W e also saw quite a few patients while we did our research. The

hospital staff and the administrators were very co-operative. It wasn’t easy filming on actual locations. You had to be very sensitive about how you approached it, and quite truthful with the patients and staff. They can see if you’re not being honest. It was a great bonus for the film to have the legitimate physical characteristics of an actual psychiatric hospital to work with. We cheated quite a bit, too, but hopefully no one will notice. In Spotswood, you comment on the way mod ern industry devalues people. In Cosi, you are telling a hopefully-enthralling story which also has an edge of social comment. There is some slight similarity, but I don’t think there’s any profound analysis of business prac tices in S potsw ood. I don’t think it’s superficial, but we certainly didn’t get into the ins and outs of economics. In C osi, we don’t really get into the issues. You won’t leave the cinema and say, “Ah, that’s what is wrong with psychiatric hospitals.” It

doesn’t really touch on that. All we do is try to take a human perspective when dealing with these patients. W ithout being too profound, we treat them with some respect and dignity. W e found a lot of the patients have a won d erful sense o f hu m ou r. T h ey are ju st like normal people. They just have a slight problem, either chem ically-induced or hereditary. We tried n ot to deal w ith them fo r the sake of laughs. I hope the script portrays them in a very realistic but very humorous way, and that the poignancy comes out of that. But it does attempt to increase one's understanding of these people's lives? It should ... it should. W e definitely don’t por tray them in an absurd way, although so many of the things they do are quite absurd. Do the so-called 'normal' people in your film also behave in absurd ways? Yes, because that happens all the time. Once you interrelate with these folk, you start to behave

C I N E M A P A P E R S • AUGUST 1995

Far Left: Ruth (Pamela Rabe), Roy, Julie (Toni Collette), Cherry and Henry (Paul Chubb). Left (above): Doug (David Wenh<am). Y Left (below): Julie.

Like Jacki Weaver as Cherry, for example. Yes, Jacki hasn’t done a film for a long time and this is something completely different for her. Uniformly, I think the cast is really good. I’m very happy with the perform ances. They teamed very quickly and all got on famously, which was a great bonus for me. Were you surprised that you were able to gather together such an excellent cast? It has many of the best actors in the country. W ell, I’m very happy it does. T h e play has a very good reputation and I ’m sure the script would have attracted them as well. The feeling is that the film will be of some quality. I’m hoping that it is, so that their faith is rewarded. It must have been difficult to afford so many name actors on a $3.5m film. Oh, I stay out of budgetary matters! I

think it’s like a domino theory: when actors

hear that other actors of a certain quality have been cast, they realize what levels you are aim ing for. T h e actors were very generous in giving their time. It is truly a big ensemble cast, and we couldn’t afford to pay them what they would normally get, or what they normally deserve. Ben Mendelsohn plays Lewis, the semi-autobiographical character. This is one of his first adult roles. W ell, he is an adult. H e’s not that young any more. After S p otsw ood, I told him he should be focusing on more adult roles. Ben was very excited and enthusiastic about differently. It was a great eye-opening exercise for me, and no doubt for anyone who has had to deal with it. O f course, this is all based on Louis’ experi ences when he was a younger man. Louis had two grandmothers who were in institutions and he also went through a similar process when he did some drama therapy with psychiatric patients. W e had something solid to work from and we tried to modernize it and make it more rel evant. It is entertaining, as anyone who saw the play would know, but fashioned for the cinema. How many drafts did Nowra do? T h ere w ere fo u r or five m ajor rew rites, but we constantly kept w orking on the script, as most people do. Louis is very good in terms of analyzing where our discussions were leading and quickly getting the ideas down on paper, despite being a very busy man. Did Nowra visit the set? He came once, I think. He was quite expedient

C I N E M A P A P E R S • AUGUST 1995

in that if the film doesn’t work, though it will, he can just say, “It w asn’t my fault! I w asn’t there!” [Laughs.] Louis did so much good work beforehand, and I was more than happy to take it to the next step myself. The play had some great stage and screen actors, such as Barry Otto and Ben Mendelsohn. You cast some of them in the film. W e w en t th ro u g h a very e x ten siv e castin g process. I’m a great believer in screen tests. W e didn’t screen-test Barry, however. I thought he was just absolutely perfect for the role [of Roy] and there was no need. W e did extensive testing for nearly every other character, because you have to give actors a chance to show what they can do, even for those few minutes it takes to do a test. W e happened to choose a few people who had been in the play, as well as a lot of differ ent people who weren’t. Your first reaction may be one of surprise at who plays certain parts.

his part. He is in nearly every scene of the film, so he was under quite an immense pressure. I think he comes through it very well, and looks very good in the picture. The part of Nick [Aden Young] has been w rit ten up from the stage play. You've made him more important. Y es, I th in k he is m ore relevan t. T h e social worker aspect of the character wasn’t something that we wanted to pursue in the picture. So, we gave Nick more of a personal relationship with Lewis and with Lucy [Rachel Griffiths], Lewis’ girlfriend. There is a bit of a triangle going on. W hat we tried to do was w rite a parallel between the story o f the opera and what was happening out there. Hopefully, it is subtle and not too heavy-handed. It’s the old art imitates life - or, life imitates art, actually. Did you cast Toni Collette and Rachel Griffiths after having seen Muriel's Wedding? No. Toni’s first part was in Spotsw ood, years ago.

Alison B arrett, who is a m arvellous casting person, and I looked at a lo t o f people for

T his p ro ject came about quite quickly, in a

own and being recognized. He had to w ait

on three or four others, one of which was very

a long time.

close to being ready to go. I was also being

two-year period. Before then, I was working

Barry is an excep tion ally fine a cto r, and a

offered quite a lot. Only one I regret not push

wonderful guy.

ing forw ard . All the others I said “N o ” to

In Australia, we are influenced so much by the material we do, and there isn’t a lot of

didn’t turn out that well, which is good. You are always going to get that. I

don’t know where the last three or four

great material out there. You sometimes have S p otsw ood . T h at’s how we found Toni. I saw T on i before we started this picture to do things you normally wouldn’t. In the past few years, I’ve tried to avoid and she was very determined to be in it. She

years went, but certainly I was very busy with

doing that, which means not doing anything

working overseas on different things in devel

was one of the first we screen-tested and she is just fantastic [as Julie] . As for Rachel, she was simply the best per son for her rôle. M u riel’s W ed d in g ’s success

a variety of things, including travelling and

for a while and concentrating on projects that

opment. You have to give yourself a base of

I really like. For a working actor, it must be

things you really like to do. If you are em o

really difficult.

tionally and financially secure, you can choose

Barry returns to the stage between films,

to do the things you want. T here is nothing

Actors have been meeting lately and talking

w hich m ust be a great b en efit fo r him and

better than doing a film that you really enjoy,

about too much stereotypical casting. That

his psyche. But in the film sense, after Bliss

rather than having to do it for the money ...

type of casting is something you appear to

[Ray Law rence, 1 9 8 5 ], he did a few things

and making excuses later! But maybe th at’s

have avoided in Cosi.

th a t d id n’t get recognized or released. I t’s

what I’ll have to do after C osi. [Laughs.] You

just the nature o f filmmaking.

just have to be realistic about your place in the

didn’t play a part in it.

A bsolutely. T o n i C o llette plays a junkie in the film . Now , after M u riel’s W eddin g, you wouldn’t think she would be the girl you’d look to first for the part. W e have a w o n d erfu l cro ss-se ctio n of Australian actors and people who have seen

In a recent interview, Barry Otto said that he felt he was only now coming into his

N ow there seems to be a few interesting projects going around and he is up there being

process. How much workshopping did you do?

cast in a great variety of roles. He did a w on

I w orkshop every p ro je ct. O n this, we did

derful job on our film, and I’m sure he’s doing

two weeks. It was of great b enefit, because

equally well on other films.

th e re w ere so m any o th e r fa ce ts I had to

the film think the actors look very com fort

W as taking a fe w years off very hard for

concentrate on. It wasn’t so much the perfor

ab le in th e ir rô le s . In o th e r w o rd s, y ou believe who they are quite easily, and forget

you financially and emotionally? It must

m ances, but ju st getting a th rou gh -lin e on

be difficult for a director to sustain energy

each o f the ch aracters. H aving the

that they are these actors up there, which is

and enthusiasm for a project over a long

whole cast there, and discussing things

very im portant.

period.

quite freely, was a huge advantage.

P®®

C I N E M A P A P E R S • AUGUST 1995

w ish to subscriba fo r S issu e s a t 10% o ff! $37^50 (normativ $41.70} 12 is su e s "at 15% off! $70.00 (.normally $83:40). iA -•>'* ,'&g»ksB. 18 issues a t -20% o ffi $100.00 {n;prmally$125.10) ‘ j% ,\*sR enew al? , ■a— /Suf""MeWmm B ack issues: $6.00 ea'ch % j? ?|fc, Total no. ofissu.es:

Total Cost $

oo 1 Q3 ■m 1 CD ’

N am e.............................................. ..............................................

T itle ................................................................................................

XD t, <—

Company.......................................................................................

Address .........................................................................................

’«CD ,• C C ountry............................................Post C ode.......................... ■ a> Telephone (H ).................................(W )...................................... Enclosed is my cheque for $ ..................................................... m a m or please debit my D Bankcard G M astercard H Visacard Card No..........................................................................................

;=*

,.c £ r '§ m

CD \

Expiry D a te ..............................................................................

Cheques should be made payable to MTV Publishing Limited and mailed to P0 Box 2221 Fitzroy MDC Australia 3065. All overseas orders should be accompanied by Bank Drafts in Australian Dollars Only. Please allow 4-6 weeks for processing.

up!

S ignature......................................................................................

.< e* lt3 S 0

—

< CD

J />

CD CD GO

(/} 3 3 </>

OJ 3

CNJ

CD CD GO

<D 3

CL O

O) 3 00

CD CD GO

CL O

f /i

CD CL CD

o (O CO

“O CD

22 CD

CD CD GO

All overseas orders should be accompanied by Bank Drafts in Australian Dollars only.

Please lis lfp u e Nod required:

cintsure

Level 10, 1 Elizabeth Plaza, North Sydney 2060 (off M ount Street) • PO Box 1155 North Sydney 2059

Telephone (02) 954 1477 Facsim ile (02) 954 1585

A u s tra lia ’s lead in g Film and T V In s u ra n c e U n d e rw ritin g A g en cy We ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■

S p e c i a l i s e in I n s u r a n c e f o r : Film Producers Indem nity (Cast) N egatives and V ideotapes Errors and O m issions A dditional Expenses Props, C am eras, Lighting, Sound Equipm ent Public Liability M oney ouR TEAM

J o h n H e n n in g s G ra h a m B u tt M e g a n O ’R ile y ACN: 007 698 062

F ilm V ic to ria

Recognising the

cultural significance of film by supporting

organisations, projects

and events which foster the appreciation of film and television and develop an audience and infrastructure for Australian production. Film Victoria, 4th floor, 49 Spring Street, Melbourne; C I N E M A P A P E R S • AUGUST 1995

• AUSTRALIAN FILM INSTITUTE • AUSTRALIAN „ CHILDREN'S TELEVISION FOUNDATION • MELBOURNE INTERNATIONAL FILM FESTIVAL • MODERN IMAGE MAKERS^ ASSOCIATION X • OPEN / J :; ë ' W ^ L Î A ? ^ ^

JMm • CINEMA • METRO MAGAZINE AWARDS

Tel 03 9651 4089 Fax 03 9651 9

48 e Festival

hen Emir Kusturica’s Under ground won the Palme d’Or at the Cannes Film Festival this year, those members of the in ternation al press watching the awards in an adjacent auditorium, courtesy of Canal+ , erupted in jubilation and applause. Just previously, Theo Angelopoulos had been awarded the Grand Prix (effectively the “runner-up” prize) for To Vlemma Tou Odyssea (Ulysses’ Gaze), a trophy he accepted with bad grace. He had clearly expected to win the top prize, and his refusal to say anything because he felt snubbed (“I’m not going to speak because this is all you have given me”) stunned the Cannes Ju ry, particularly Présidente Jeanne Moreau and novelist Nadine Gordimer, who both looked shocked, then glanced at each other wryly. At the press conference later, Angelopoulos made a playful attempt at reconciliation by biffing Kusturica on the head with his rolled certificate. But his dis appointment is understandable. Cannes is a fiercely competitive festival and the Yugoslav Kusturica, with his wild hair and gravelly voice, is a Cannes favourite.

He won the Palme d’Or first in 1 985 for Otac Na Sluzbenom Putu (When Father was Away on Business) and won the Prix de la Mise en Scène (Best Director) for Dom Za Vesanje (Time o f the Gypsies) in 1989. Angelopoulos is also an acknowledged master. He has ten impressive films to his credit, and has won the Cannes International Critics’ Prize three times: for O Thiassos (The Travelling Players) in 1975, Taxidi sta Kithiri (Voyage to Cythera) in 1 9 8 4 , and for Ulysses’ Gaze. However, as significant as this prize is, it is not the Palme d’Or, and it must have rubbed insult to injury that he shared the Critics’ Prize this year with Ken Loach’s Land and Freedom. What sharpened competition between Kusturica and Angelopoulos for the Palme d’Or was the fact that both films deal with the ongoing war in the Balkans. Both directors have universalized the con flict to make profound commentaries on the human condition. But that is where the similarity between the two films ends. Ulysses’ Gaze is magisterial and bleak. Harvey Keitel plays a Greek-American filmmaker (called “A” in the credits) who returns to his homeland, osten sibly to attend a screening of his own controversial

films, but really to search for three missing reels of undeveloped film shot at the beginning of the cen tury by the legendary Manakia brothers. This odyssey leads him on an epic journey across the Balkans, from Athens to Sarajevo. Ulysses’ Gaze impresses through the majesty of its images. Spectacularly photographed by Yorgos Arvanitis, the most enigmatic and haunting scene is the loading of a barge on the Danube with a giant statue of Lenin which has been dismantled for the voyage, and reassembled in a grotesque parody of itself. The most moving sequences, shot on location in the shrouded mists of Sarajevo, involve Erland Josephson as Ivo Levi, the film archivist who repre sents both the beginning and the end of A’s quest. But the film has difficulties. For the first hour of Angelopoulos’ three-hour epic, Keitel seems hope lessly miscast. The film’s pace is slow and deliberate, and Keitel has been directed to adjust his speech and make every word count. This cuts across his natural speech patterns, with the result that much of his early dialogue sounds laboured and unnatural. Only as the film progresses, and A pursues the missing reels, does Keitel settle into his role, and C I N E M A P A P E R S • AUGUST 1995

A giant statue of Lenin floats down the Danube in Theo Angelopoulos' To Vlemma Tou Odyssea[Ulysses'Gaze).

by Jan Epstein the wider meaning of the quest asserts itself. Underground is very different from Ulysses’ Gaze. Untidy and passionate, Kusturica’s epic covers more than 50 years of Yugoslav history, beginning with the bombing in 1941 of the Belgrade zoo by the Germans (a heart-rending opening), and ending in the present. The story follows several partisan families hidden in underground tunnels beneath the ruined city, who are tricked into making ammunition for the Resis tance 20 years after the war is over. Kusturica’s savage attack on the forces tearing his country apart is both surreally funny and tragic. By focusing on three very different brothers - the treacherous M ark o, the p atrio tic Blacky and the sad zoo-keeper Ivan - he locates the cause of the conflict in the intractability of human nature. Yet the film is marked by boisterousness and optimism, and it has a marvellous score sourced in Gypsy music which affirms life and refuses to admit defeat. The film’s first cut was six hours in length. Kusturica trimmed it to three hours for its Compétition screening, but agreed the film could benefit from fur ther pruning. “I listen to my critics”, he said. Of all the national groupings at Cannes, British C I N E M A P A P E R S • AUGUST 1995

films made the strongest impact. The six films selected for official screening were all quality features, excit ing talk about the revival of the British film industry. After years of neglect, and in the wake of such world wide successes as The Crying Game (Neil Jordan, 1992) and Four Weddings and a Funeral (Mike Newell, 1994), it seems to have penetrated government circles that there is an international market for non-formulaic, well-written films with interesting stories. Christopher Hampton’s Carrington was panned in a Cannes edition of Variety, which did more dam age to the critic who penned the piece [Derek Elley] than it did for the film itself. Set in England during World War I, this lyrical film about the strange pas sion of Dora Carrington (Emma Thompson) for biographer Lytton Strachey (Jonathan Pryce) won the Prix Interprétation Masculine (Best Actor) for Pryce, as well as the Prix Spécial du Jury. Hampton wrote Carrington 20 years ago, and has been trying ever since to get it made. He was fascinated with the story in the 1960s and spent a year writing it, courtesy of Warner Bros., which was interested ini tially in producing it. Out of desperation, Hampton decided to direct it himself. “It’s difficult raising money

for a story about a girl who falls in love with a faggot and kills herself”, he said at his press conference. All the film’s characters are subtly and convinc ingly played by a strong cast. Pryce’s characterization of the eccentric biographer is particularly complex and moving: this is no stereotypical gay portrait. The script is genuinely funny, and the whole is rhythmi cally linked via six episodes, named for the characters and events in the couple’s life. Carrington avoids the staginess of literary set pieces such as Mrs. Parker and the Vicious Circle (Alan Rudolph, 19 9 4) and Tom and Viv (Brian Gilbert, 1 9 9 3 ), and characters move in their environment (which has been lovingly recreated) with great natu ralness. Michael Nyman’s score runs through the film like a stream. “I felt I was making portraits of the characters”, he said. “It was very different to [Peter] Greenaway, where you make music for the trees.” Nicholas Hytner’s tragi-comedy, The Madness o f King George, shines in all departments. The script has been admirably adapted to the screen by Alan Ben nett from his play, and Hytner, a theatre director who makes his feature film début after directing the stage production, is in full command of his new medium.

■ammuffì

Emir Kusturica's Underground.

Arthur (Maury Chaykin), Steven Lidz (Nathan Watt), Danny (Michael Richards;) and Sid (John Turturro) in Diane Keaton's Unstrung Heroes.

Steven Lidz and his mother, Selma (Andie MacDowell). Unstrung Heroes.

f f l l 'i

Tang (Li Bëotjan) in Zhang Yimou's Shanghai triad.

Xiao Jinbao (Gong Li). Shanghai Triad.

£>yMAM//?■<■

Deputy Honey (Rhea Perlman) and Bud D. Boomer (John Candy). Michael Moore's Canadian Bacon.

Reprising the rôle that he made famous on the stage, Nigel Hawthorne gives a virtuoso performance as the mad king. He shows himself to be an actor of great em otional power and depth, and those who only know him as Sir Humphrey in Yes, M inister will be very surprised. Hawthorne was miffed at being pipped at the post by Jonathan Pryce for Best Actor. Accepting on Helen M irren’s behalf her award for Prix Interprétation Féminin (Best Actress), he chided the Jury for only giving the film a single award, and, assuming his screen persona, quipped that he would ask “Mrs Q ueen” to place her prize on the mantelpiece for all the family to see. Ken Loach’s L an d and F reed om , about an unem ployed youth who leaves Liverpool in 1936 to fight the Fascists in Spain, won widespread critic acclaim, and was touted early as a contender for the Palme d’Or. A moving love story, as well as a tough politi cal drama which engages in discussion about Stalin and the Communist Party betrayal of the people’s rev olu tion , the film has the feel of a docum entary. This is Loach’s most ambitious film to date, and he tackles the much broader canvas without any loss of

intimacy. As well as sharing the International Critics’ prize, Loach won the Ecum enical Jury Prize “for keeping the memory of the past alive in a society los ing its values and forgetting its roots”. Terence Davies’ T he N eon B ib le was similarly ambitious but less successful. His adaptation of John Kennedy T oole’s novel about a young boy growing up in a small 1940s Bible Belt town in America’s Deep South is finely crafted. The film is luminously lit and there are some breathtaking sequences. Gena Row lands is superb as Aunt Mae, who brings glamour to the small backwater town, and newcomer Jacob Tier ney gives a haunting performance as the boy. But the material is slight, and stretched too thinly. This dilutes the emotional impact and the whole seems mannered. Christopher Monger’s The Englishman Who Went Up a H ill but Cam e Dow n a M ountain, a modest film about Welsh villagers who challenged the measurement made by two English cartographers which finds that their local mountain is really a hill, was one of the few surprises of the Festival and a genuine delight. Starring Hugh Grant and Colm Meaney, it is a nostalgic throw back to the good-natured, inoffensive films which became Britain’s trademark in the late 1940s and ’50s.

The President of the United States (Alan Alda). Canadian Bacon.,

Mike Newell’s Aw Awfully Big A dventure, which screened in La Quinzaine des Réalisateurs (Directors’ Fortnight), is about a 16-year-old girl in Liverpool in the ’40s who escapes from family life into the theatre, only to fall prey to the repertory company’s two dom inating presences, played by Hugh Grant and Alan Rickm an. The story, obliquely told, is downbeat but polished and accomplished. s usual, the American presence at Cannes made itself felt. Of the six screened in the official selec tion, the best was E d W ood, Tim B u rton ’s whimsical but warm tribute to Edwood D. Wood Jr., described as the worst director of all time. Filmed in black and white in gentle parody of W ood’s filmmaking style, the film boasts inspired performances from Johnny Depp as Ed W ood, and Martin Landau in his Oscar-winning rôle as Bela Lugosi. Depp also starred in Jim Jarm usch’s D ead Man. This strange film has an unfathomable plot, which is no doubt deeply allegorical. W illiam Blake (Depp) loses his innocence in American W ild W est in the

C I N E M A P A P E R S • AUGUST 1995

¡PaC£7Í!m^ms...STOfl947T

The statue of Lenin in Ulysses'Gaze.

U Ang Ko (U Ang Ko) and Laura Bowman (Patricia Arquette) in John Boorman's Beyond Rangoon.

U Ang Ko and Laura Bowman. Beyond Rangoon.

1890s. The film is peppered with Tarantinoesque killers who spout incongruous dialogue, and there are cam eos from such acto rs as Jo h n H urt, R ob ert Mitchum and Gabriel Byrne. Shot in black and white, the film is w orth seeing for its striking visuals, although response to the film is best summed up by the man at the film’s premiere who leaned over the balcony and called: “Pourquoi, Jim ?” Most disappointing were two big-budget Amer ican film s. Jam es Iv o ry ’s J e ffe r s o n in P aris was launched with much fanfare, but the film sank like a lead balloon. Scripted by Ruth Prawer Jhabvala, and starring Nick N olte and Greta Scacchi, it depicts Thomas Jefferson as fathering a child by his negro slave (Thandie N ew ton), while he was American Ambassador to France during the early days of the French Revolution. The film was savagely attacked in the U.S. press for playing with historical facts. It fared little better with the Cannes critics who accused it of being dry and stuffy. John Boorm an’s B ey o n d R angoon was received more gently. A political thriller about the atrocities committed by the ruling military Junta against those C I N E M A P A P E R S • AUGUST 1995

Dagney (Gabrielie Anwar) and Jimmy the Saint (Andy Garcia) in Gary Felder's Things to Do in Denver when You're Dead.

Jimmy the Saint and Critical Bill Dooley (Treat Williams). Things to Do in Denver when You're Dead.

Colm Meaney and Kenneth Griffith in Cristopher Monger's The Englishman Who .Went Up a Hill but Came Down a Mountain.

Tara Fitzgerald and Hugh Grant in The Englishman Who Went Up a Hill but Came Down a Mountain.

who supported Burma’s democracy movement, it focuses on a young American woman, Laura Bowman (Patricia Arquette), who comes to terms with a tragedy in her own life by becoming involved with dissidents. The film is a passionate call for the world to pay attention to what is happening in Burma and few will see the film and not be moved, or feel they have learned something. But glaring plot contrivances, some shaky performances and a tendency to simplify complex issues prevents B eyond Rangoon from being much more than a message movie. The Festival’s most controversial film was Kids, a powerful first film by photographer Larry Clark which follows 24 hours in the lives of a group of hip young people addicted to sex, drugs and booze - any thing that gives a buzz. The film was scripted by Harmony Korin, who was a 19-year-old high-school drop-out when he wrote it to Clark’s specifications. Clark wanted to show the other face of teenagehood - the side that adults don’t want to know about, and should. The story centres on Telly (Leo Fitz p a trick ), w hose speciality is d eflow ering barely-pubescent virgins, and Jenny (Yakira Peguero), one of his victims who discovers she is HIV positive

after only one encounter with him. The spectre of AIDS hangs like a time bomb over the kids who, as they hip-hop like fleas from one to the other, are appallingly ignorant that they are dicing with death. Kids is a supremely-confident, fearsomely-accomplished film with a cinéma vérité feel that gets beneath the skin of its audience. Most of the actors were kids recruited from the park. Some scenes are so natu ralistic you’d swear it was all improvised. Clark has been criticized heavily for showing things as they are, without moral commentary. Several of the young actors who play virgins look under-age, which Clark claims wasn’t the case. But the facts speak for them selves - 4 8 % of American teenagers have had sex by the time they are 14 - and the film deserves to be widely seen. The most impressive French film at the Festival was Mathieu Kassovitz’s La H aine (Hate), which won Best Director. Written and directed by Kassovitz, and shot in black and white, this is a hard-hitting, sensi tive, angry film about three friends - an Arab, a Jew and a Moroccan - who are unable to extricate them selves from a vicious cycle of hate when a policeman beats one of their friends to death during a riot at a

Edward D. Wood Jr. (Johnny Depp). Tim Burton's Ed Wood.

Tor Johnson (George "The Animal Steele) and Vampira (Lisa Marie). Ed Wood.

The Kid (Leonardo DiCaprio). Sam Raimi's The Quick and the Dead.

Ellen (Sharon Stone). The Quick and the Dead.

Lytton Strachey (Johnathan Pryce) in Cristopher Hampton's Carrington.

Lytton Strachey and Carrington (Emma Thompson). Carrington.

Larry (Matt Dillon), Russell (Casey Affleck) and Jimmy (Joaquin Phoenix). Gus Van Sant's To Die For.

Suzanne Stone (Nicole Kidman). To Die For.

Thomas Jefferson (Nick Nolte) and Sally Hemmings (Thandie Newton). James Ivory's Jefferson in Paris.

Pattsy Jefferson (Gwyneth Paltrow). Jefferson in Pans.

French housing project. Kassovitz’s previous film was C a fé O lé, a hard-edged com edy about a Jew and M oroccan in love with a pregnant woman who is not sure which of her lovers is the father of her baby. The most intriguing French film was L a C ité des E n fan ts Perdus (T he City o f L o st C h ild ren ), by the directors of Delicatessen, Jean-Pierre Jeunet and Marc Caro. This is a surreal fairytale about a freakish ogre, Krank (Daniel Em ilfork), who kidnaps children in order to steal their dreams. M ore fantastic in conception than D elicatessen, with costumes designed by Jean-Paul Gaultier and spe cial effects w hich are quite phantasm agoric, the outlandish cast of characters includes One (Ron Perl man), a fairground strongman, six clone brothers (all played by the rubbery-faced strongman Dominique Pinon), a brain floating in a tank which speaks through the bell of a gramophone (with the voice of Jean-Louis Trintignant), and a pair of wicked Siamese sisters. The plot, which involves One’s saving the stolen children, is perhaps too elaborate at times, but, in the course of asserting the right of children to a childhood, Jeunet and Caro provide many affecting moments. Smaller films which drew attention to themselves

were Diane Keaton’s debut feature, Unstrung H eroes, a warm, off-beat story about a young boy coping with the imminent death of his mother; L e C on fession al [The C o n fessio n a l), by Canadian Robert LePage, a stylish cross-genre mystery-thriller which plays on H itch cock ’s I C o n fess; Todd Haynes’ S afe, a film about the fragility of identity; and Heavy, a slow-mov ing, a ffectin g film by first-tim e d irecto r Jam es Mangold (U.S.), about a repressed, over-weight pizza chef who emerges slowly from his cocoon when his domineering mother (Shelley Winters) becomes ill. Also impressive was the New Zealand documen tary, W ar S tories, by Gaylene Preston (B rea d a n d R oses), in which seven elderly women tell stories about what they did in the war with unforgettable candour and humour. The silliest film as the Festival was M anoel de Oliviera’s O C onvento (The Convent), a pseudo-mys tical mish-mash starring Catherine Deneuve and John M alkovich, which is precisely the type of film that gives Cannes’ Official Selection a bad name. Judge ment was swift and cruel, with thousands of critics from all over the world spontaneously booing and hissing like geese.

n the home front, there was no Strictly Ballroom (Baz Luhrmann, 1 9 9 2 ) or T h e A d v en tu re s o f P r is c illa , Q u e en o f th e D e ser t (Stephan Elliott, 1994). Richard Wherrett’s bright but slight offer ing, B illy ’s H o lid a y , tried to fill the b reach , but couldn’t engender the same buzz, although news of its sale to Miramax was a welcome shot in the arm. M ost successful critically was All M en Are Liars, by first-time director Gerard Lee (who co-wrote Sw eetie with Jane Campion), and Gregor Jordan’s short film, Swinger, which won the Prix du Jury. The Caméra d’Or was won by Iranian director Jafar Panahi for L e Ballon Blanc (The White B alloon), a gentle film about a seven-year-old girl who, on the first day of spring, dreams of buying herself a goldfish. In the year many are celebrating the century of cin ema, special thanks is due to the Cannes Festival committee for commissioning 30 wonderful “Préludes”. These four-minute entrées to screenings in the Official Selection, com posed of them atically-linked clips from known and less well-known classic films, were a delight, and deserve to be shown again and again. ©

C I N E M A P A P E R S • AUGUST 1995

WALK OUT OF ILAA WITH A SHOWREEL D i re c ti o n , cin e m a to g ra p h y, 1st A . D . , S ou n d R eco rdi ng , S c r e e n w r i t i n g , C a m e ra O p e ra t io n , Still Pho to gr ap h y, Co n tinu ity, Editing, V i d e o P ro d u ctio n and V i d e o Editing. A n y or all o f th e s e can be on y o u r sh o w r e e l w ithin the D ipl om a o f S cre e n A r t s p r o g r a m m e at ILAA. Typically ou r s t u d e n t s d i r e c t at least one film ( 1 6 m m Sy nc h) and c r e w on f o u r or five o t h e r key roles.

LECTURERS p r a c t i s i n g p r o f e s s i o n a l s A F T R S q u a l i f i e d

IN S T IT U T E OF LENS A R T PO BOX 177 K A L O R A M A V I C 3 7 6 6

T H E V IA B L E A L T E R N A T IV E TELEPHONE 728 1150

STATE FILM THEATRE After a temporary closure the

STATE FILM THEATRE is now available for hire.

As the premier exhibition centre for independent and non-comm ercial cinema in Victoria, the

STATE FILM THEATRE offers full film and video projection facilities, with a seating capacity for 239.

The STATE FILM THEATRE is an ideal venue for a variety of events including film festivals, seminars, product launches and com m unity activities.

For information regarding hire rates and availability contact the Cinema Co-ordinator on (03)

C I N E M A P A P E R S â€¢ AUGUST 1995

651

1515

or (03) 651

1611

The W orld o f Jacqueline M cK enzie At just 27, actress Jacqueline McKenzie is being touted as the fresh, new face of Australian cinema. While the films in which she has appeared to date - R om per Stom per (Geoffrey Wright, 1992), This W o n t Hurt a Bit! (Chris Kennedy, 1993) and Traps (Pauline Chan, 1994) - have not all met with universal acclaim, her very diverse performances have. From the abused, epileptic Gabe, ricocheting between two skinheads in R om per Stom per, through the lisping southern English beauty queen who falls for a dentist in This W o n t Hurt a Bit!, to the coquettish child-woman caught on the edge of a couple’s sexual confusion and the Franco-Viet Minh war in Traps, McKenzie has shown a marked disdain for cinematic type-casting. M eanw hile , her career has burgeoned on two other fronts. On television, she has had starring rôles in Ben Elton’s Stark (Nadia Tass, mini-series, 1993) and The Battlers (George Ogilvie, mini-series, 1994), opposite Gary Sweet, and will soon aptly appear as a woman with a multiple personality disorder in an episode of H alifax f.p. In the theatre, a string of powerful performances have also earned her awards, rare plaudits (her per formance as Ophelia in the Belvoir Street H am let was described by one arts journalist as being “so exquis itely pitched it could have cut glass”) and the plum title rôle in Saint Jo a n in the Sydney Theatre Com pany’s production directed by Gale Edwards. Soon, M cKenzie is about to hit the big screen again in T a lk (Susan L am bert) and A n g el B a b y (Michael Rymer), in which she gives a disturbingly impressive performance as the schizophrenic Kate.

ROMPER STOMPER (G eoffrey W rig h t, 1992) M id d le -c la s s Gabe (M cK enzie) jo in s a Nazi skinhead gang and becom es the lover of its leader, Hando (Russell C row e). W h e n Hando dum ps Gabe, she se d u ce s his loyal lie u te n a n t, D avey (D aniel P ollock), w h ic h catalyzes the film 's dénouem ent.

I also lived at home during the whole time and met with my old school friends, so I had a good balance. Sure I went out and socialized with peo ple from NIDA, but I had another life outside of it. That keeps you fresh and helps maintain a sense of humour about yourself. At NIDA, you work and push so bloody hard. Because of that, time is completely maximized. I’ve no doubt that people don’t need to go to an acting school to learn things, but it takes ten times as long if you d o n ’t. A cting school is so c o n densed. Plus, you meet the most amazing bunch of people. [Miranda Otto, Jeremy Sims, Andrew Blackman and Colin Moody are some of M cKen zie’s contemporaries.] I couldn’t wait to do Saint Jo a n because there’s

THIS W O N T HURT A BIT! (Chris K enndy, 1993) V anessa P re s co tt (M cK enzie) becom es th e w ife of Gordon F a irw e a th e r (Greig P ickhaver), a m entallyunstable ru n a w a y from an o rphanage, w h o bluffs his w a y into b ecom ing a fu lly -u n q u a lifie d dentist. He p ro m p tly em barks on a trip to England w h e re he plans to w re a k revenge on th e English population fo r past in ju stice s, both h is to ric a l and personal.

a guy in the play who taught me at NIDA: Tony Taylor. In our second year, he came in and saved

Beginnings

us.

How did the interest in acting begin?

sense of humour, because they’re really feeling

I was very into rôle-playing as a kid, and I always wanted to sing. The singers that I used to try to sing like were into performance, not so much just sounding good. If you listen to Barbra Streisand’s earlier stuff, there’s a journey to each song. I used to do that sort of character singing. W hen I was at school, I debated and did the odd play. But I wanted to be all sorts of things: a vet, a doctor, a la w y er, a zoologist. Did you go straight from school to the National Institute of Dramatic Art [NIDA]? N o, I had two years off. I w ent to N ew South W ales University to do drama, which I hated. I really wanted to act; I didn’t want to talk about it. All research and no action isn’t that much fun. So, I threw in the towel and did some ads, sang in a band and prepared for NIDA the next year. Looking back, I would love to do that drama course, because I now love all the research. W hat was good about NIDA? I just had the most wonderful time. I often hear people complaining about NIDA, but that’s typ ical of any institution you go to. There are always elements that can grate.

Second-years are renowned for losing their the pressure - any minute someone can be thrown out. Tony put the perspective back. He reminded us that it’s a fun thing to do, that it’s make-believe and magic, and that it shouldn’t be a chore. You have to keep a certain lightness.

Romper Stomper

TRAPS (P auline Chan, 1994) V iola R enouard (M cK enzie) is th e d a u g h te r o f Daniel dl§km i Frey), a Frenchm an w h o m anages a rubber p la n ta tio n s In d ochina in th e 1950s. T h e ir lives are set in tu rm o illyvith the a rriva l of a young English w o m an, Louise D uffle Id (Saskia Reeves), and her husband, M ic h a e l (R obert R eynolds), an A u s tra lia n jo u rn a lis t.

Did you get the part in Romper Stomper straight from NIDA? I did about four plays back-to-back. And when you’re doing plays, you rehearse from 9 till 5. If there are any film roles coming along, you’re just not available to audition for them. It’s really the luck of the draw. Miraculously, I had a director who was kind enough to let me out of rehearsals to go and try out for R o m p er Stom per. I was doing R ebecca at the time, and they sent the film’s producer up to see the play. R o m p er S to m p er had been on the drawing board for a long, long time, and it had been cast and recast ten zillion times. Apparently, I wasn’t the first choice; I was about the fourth.

ANGEL BABY (M ic h a e l Rymer, 1995) Kate (M cK enzie) and H arry (John Lynch), w h o s u ffe r from m ental illness, m eet at a d a y -c a re c lin ic and fa ll in love. They s e t up house to g e th e r, engaging each o th e r in th e ir living fan ta sie s. H arry hears v o ice s th a t to rm e n t him; Kate has a guardian angel th a t sends her m essages th ro u g h W h e e l o f Fortune.

C I N E M A P A P E R S • AUGUST 1995

Was the violence in the film something you were very aware of in the filming process? N o, not completely. I was aware when we were

This W on't Hurt a Bit! seems to be aiming at a particular type of comedy that doesn't come off. I thought it was funny.

sequences, how ever, I certainly was aware of it because they were done in one hand-held shot. There was one particular shot where we were all bloody running down this alleyway. [DOP]

the person w ho’s picking you up, “She might be a little bit nervous today, so go easy around those

going through the rushes, but less so when we were actually doing it on the day. In some of the

If you have a really difficult scene to do that morning, then you want the 1st A.D. to have told

Traps As for Traps, it doesn't go successfully into the heart of the place; it just uses Vietnam in the 1950s as a backdrop.

corners. D on’t drive at a 1 5 0 .” It’s all about com munication. Kirsten Veysey [the make-up artist on Stark and A n g el B a b y ] is p ro b ab ly one o f the m o st important people on a film set for me. She’s not only read the script, she’s read it ten times. She

pulling focus at the same time. I just rem em ber

It is essentially about the [D uffields’] marriage, not so much about Vietnam.

knows exactly what scene I’m doing and can tell

w atch in g H and o [R ussell C row e] and D avey [Daniel Pollock] lay into some poor victim, and I

Perhaps because the book on which it is nominally based is set in Tuscany.

by the look o f me w hether or n o t I ’m shitting m yself. S h e ’s a m ag n ificen t com rad e to have

R on Hagen was chasing us with the camera and

thought, “Oh my God, that looks really painful.” And then when they called “Cut”, Russell picked the victim up and patted him on the back, asking “You all right there, mate? Everything all right?” It was so needed. The Vietnamese gang tried to work together as actors and get some sort of gang feeling going, because they only had a short amount of rehearsal time. The Australian gang did the same. And at the end of some of these bash scenes, they’d get together and just put everything back into per spective.

This W on't Hurt a Bit! Your next tw o features. This W on't Hurt a Bit! and Traps, didn't really succeed. W hat made you choose to do them? I loved the characters. W hat turns an actor on is good characters and a good yarn. I thought they were great characters and great yarns. As to whether or not they succeeded, it’s all relative to what you think success is and what the film is aiming for.

around on the set. The book is entirely different. M y character is an amalgam of two from the book - the brother and Angel Baby sister. I find it hard to judge. I just go in there and How did you research for the part in Angel Baby? do the character and hope for the best. But the I just sat in the medico section of the library and experien ce o f film ing in V ietnam was magic pulled out books. good magic and bad; the full gamut. W ith schizophrenia, there are a million con I find that happens with film: every produc flicting explanations. In the 1960s, there was even tion you do is like entering a new world. a school of thought that it was because of m oth ers not breast-feeding - as if there isn’t enough

Directors

guilt associated with bringing up children.

You have worked with a diverse range of direc tors. W hat is your definition of a dream director?

It’s onset can be quite late. You could have a norm al, healthy, socially-adjusted child - sm il

Someone who has done the work and who is not floundering. And, if they are, they are seeking help from everybody else, because there are so many bloody intelligent people on the set. If you are having any trouble, even as an actor, ask. Som eone will help you out; som eone will have an idea. It’s not just the heads of department, for me it’s the first people you meet in the m orn ing: make-up and hair; the people who pick you up in the car.

ing, happy, bright - w h o’s getting A grades one day and then starts slowly deteriorating. W ithin a year, they could com pletely socially outcast to rtu re d b ecau se th e y ’re h earin g v o ice s and demands. T h e re ’s a great responsibility you must feel if you are playing a character like Kate, especially in a tale that purports to show how schizophren ics really suffer. Y ou d o n ’t w ant to do people suffering from the disease any m ore disservice than has already been done them. Kate doesn’t think she’s mad. She has her own logic that appears illogical to other people. But she knows what she’s talking about; she knows how she feels. There’s no confusion there. I hope that one thing that we do through A ngel B ab y is give the sense that these are real people. W hen I first went to meet some people who had sch iz o p h re n ia at the C lu b h ou se in M e l bourne, I’d done a hell o f a lot o f research and everything I’d learnt told me not to be afraid of these people. But the day I w ent, I was really scared. The fact they were so nice and w elcom ing made it a wonderful experience. It just goes to show you can’t do it all from the books. Have you ever known anyone personally who was schizophrenic? Yes, but I didn’t know until I studied this. He was an incredibly-gorgeous-looking bloke, incredibly funny. Slightly loopy, but shit so am I. And he’s a very loving sort o f person. H e is very human and that’s what we were determ ined to achieve with A n gel B ab y . It is a love story betw een two people who just happen to suffer from schizo phrenia. It was never meant to be a treatise on the disease; it couldn’t be. W ith Kate, I kept going back to her courage. I mean, she met some guy no, n ot just som e guy, the m ost beautiful man alive! - and she accepted his love and this reality. T o be able to do that anyway, let alone if you’re

Som e teachers are o f a school o f tho u g h t th a t if you haven't been raped yourself, then you can't play som eone w h o has. I just don't agree w ith th a t at all. 18

both suffering from schizophrenia, is just so w on derful. It’s something to look up to. I hope it can happen to me. Kate uses Wheel of Fortune as a kind of guidance. She gets messages through the W h eel o f F ortu n e from her guardian angel, Astral.

ETsf5 p54

C I N E M A P A P E R S • AUGUST 1995

lost and found

A Co-Respondent’s Course Ken Berryman argues his case in ((Legions o f the Lost, Forgotten and Underrated Australian Cinema39. 1C o - R e s p o n d e n t ’ s poor definition. To make matters C ou rse was the first worse, the 16mm prints are often production of M e l derived from clumsily cut-down bourne’s Efftee Studios, British release prints which were lit the first Australian nar tle more than fodder for Empire rative film to be quota support, bearing little resem com pleted with an blance to the longer and better-paced optical soundtrack, and part Australian of the first release versions.3 all-Australian full-length unit programme For his ultimately unsuccessful attempt to be screened in this country.1 For aall to establish permanent film studio facil that, its place as part of our film his tory is pretty tenuous. My first exposure to the film was as recent as 1987, when it was selected by film researcher and his torian Chris Long as part of a programme on “Early Sound Sys tems in Australian Cinem a”, that year’s contribution by the National Film & Sound Archive to the M el bourne C inem atheque’s annual calendar of screenings. My viewing of Efftee material prior to then had been confined to the usual canon of features - H is R o y a l H ig h n ess (1 9 3 2 ), H arm on y R ow (1 9 3 3 ), A T icket in Tatts (1934), C lara G ibbings (1934), etc. - and some of the vaudeville and educational shorts. W hile the shorts had obvious merit as pictorial record, it was hard to get too enthused about the features - all directed by Efftee founder, F. W. Thring - or to disagree with the stan dard view of Efftee fare as summarized by Chris Long in his reap praisal of the early talkie shorts, follow ing their initial release on video.2 Long claimed that whenever Efftee retrospective screenings were conducted, the “worst of the bunch” were inevitably chosen:

Indeed, The Haunted Bam ([E. A. D ietrich -D errick and Gregan McMahon, short feature,] 1931), Diggers (1 9 3 1 ), H arm on y R ow (1933) and Clara Gibbings (1934) typify all of the worst aspects of low -budget film m aking in the early sound era. The camerawork is generally static, with tedious dia logue delivered in a series of lengthy ‘takes’. The direction and editing are loose and undisciplined. The scripts are inadequately adapted from the conventions of ‘live’ theatre. And all of these shortcomings are fur ther emphasised by the poor quality of most of the 16mm viewing prints currently in circulation. These prints have very poor sound, severe crop ping of the image, and frequently C I N E M A P A P E R S • AUGUST 1995

differentiate between the demands of per formance on stage and performance on film seriously compromised the films he chose to direct himself. I have often wondered about this inherent contradiction. Why would this entrepreneurial dynamo - responsible for building the Australia-wide chain of Regent theatres for Hoyts in the 1920s with his first-rate knowledge of the film

C o n ^ ^ ^ ^ t ie poster's claim, the film's title begins with the indefinite (not definite) article

ity in Melbourne with production conti nuity, T h rin g ’s vision, tenacity and managerial acumen have often been acknowledged. The output of his studio over a three-year period - the equivalent of twelve features and more than eighty shorts, produced between March 1931 and April 1934 - was equally amazing, and probably unequalled in this country’s stop/start film history. But his inability to

business, not have confined himself to running Efftee Film Productions and del egated the day-to-day business of making films to others? It can’t have been a ques tion of finance, not initially at least. With the money gained from the sale of his controlling interest in Hoyts to Fox in 1930, Thring was willing to stake all in his determination to set up local film pro duction on a solid basis.

This included the im portation of state-of-the-art equipm ent: M itchell 35mm cameras and RCA Photophone sound gear. More important, Thring had the good sense to gather around him a wealth of talent to put the equipment to best use. Efftee staff at different times included such famous names as N or man Lindsay, C. J. D ennis, Arthur Higgins, Raymond Longford, and Tom Holt (father of Harold). Before com mencing production in 1931, Thring sent Holt (his general manager), Hig gins (his cameraman) and his sound engineer, Alan M ill, to the U.S. to familiarize themselves with the latest studio practices and to bring back with them someone conversant with the RCA recording technology. Having committed himself to this extent, it seems odd that Thring would then baulk at the additional expense of hir ing one or two people with talkie directorial credentials on the basis of excessive salary demands, as Shirley and Adams suggest.4 In the event, Thring did engage a young European director, E. A. D ietrich -D errick, to make A C oRespondent’s Course, the first film on the Efftee production slate. DietrichD errick was assisted by American RCA sound expert Dan Bloomberg, and had Australia’s most experienced cinematographer, Arthur Higgins, behind the camera. The result, as Shirley and Adams also point out, was the “least typical of all the Eff tee output”. To what exten t the com paratively jaunty pacing and confident use of Melbourne bayside locales was due to directorial input, or to the absence of the proprietor’s heavy hand, is difficult to gauge. Dietrich-Derrick’s screen credit is not differentiated in any way from the remainder of the crew, and his name is noticeably absent from the film ’s Press Sheet. The fam iliar leaden visual treatment is also evi dent in Dietrich-Derrick’s only other film for Efftee, the comedy melo drama, The H aunted Bam . There are elements of staginess, the odd plot creak and the obvious limita tions imposed by the early sound recording requirements in A Co-Respon d en t’s Course, but the film has a degree of sophistication, an insouciance, not to be found in the later Efftee work. It is not as if the film has no admir ers. Shirley and Adams find merit in the

lost and found

of jealousy, the green-eyed god which can cause undue stress, worry and mis understanding. On the other, we are assured that after seeing A C o-R espon den t’s Course, M ost wives will be unwilling to snatch that extra few minute’s sleep in the morning. They will want to obviate a hurried breakfast and do away with the chance of burning hubby’s toast. Otherwise they may set in motion a sequence of events sim ilar to those in this comedy drama.6

clever use of post-production dubbing over the various location shots, some thing of a rarity in the context of local production in the early sound era. Chris Long, too, praises the association of sound with visual narrative: Nothing even vaguely approaching this had been attem pted in M e l bourne before, but few Efftee productions ever came up to the standard of this initial experiment.5 Pre-publicity for A C o -R esp o n d e n t’s C ou rse emphasized its trendiness: a “modern society comedy drama”; a gen tle marital farce on “modern divorce”. The original story was written by M on tague (Monty) Grover, his first effort to write directly for the screen. Grover, a former editor of The Sun (Melbourne) and T he Sydney Sunday Sun, had also written plays and short stories before turning his hand to this screenplay. The plot revolves around the jeal ously of two men for the women they love, the com ic elem ent supposedly deriving from the numerous errors made by three private detectives hired to gain evidence for one of the men who sus pects his wife of adultery. Thring obviously hoped to attract live theatre audiences to the cinema by casting several J. C. Williamson regulars - including Jo h n D ’Arcv, Donalda W arne, Pop Cory and Adele Inman in the principal roles, despite their lack of screen experience. Much was made of the two leads: John D’Arcy (father of the former HSV7 personality) as James Lord, and Donalda Warne, still only 19 when A C o-R espon den t’s C ourse premiered. Warne, who plays Lord’s society sweet

heart, Nellie O ’Neill, is described vari ously as a “charm ing b lon d e” who “typifies the real Australian girl we all know and love”. She is depicted indulging in the “fast seaside sport” of aquaplaning, and featuring the latest in bathing attire which also serves, ulti mately, as her wedding outfit. To stoke the then controversy among fashion authorities about the respective virtues of blondes and brunettes, arising from the publication of Anita Loos’ Gentlemen Prefer Blondes, W arne is also cast alongside Patricia Minchin, a “decided brunette”. Featured together on the cover of Table Talk (23 April 1931) after being chosen for the leading feminine rôles in A Co-Respon den t’s Course, Warne and Minchin are described as being given the opportuni ties “to become the Greta Garbo and Norma Shearer of Australia”. From what we see in this Efftee com edy drama, Garbo’s status was in no real danger but, apart from W arne’s lesser rôles in The Haunted Bam and His Royal Highness, it is puzzling why Thring opted not to use Warne in his later films, after the major studio attempt to turn her into one of our first talkie stars. She certainly has most of the better lines in A CoR espondent’s Course. When one of the hapless private detectives mistakenly hands Lord a set of divorce papers, he recoils. “We don’t want them, do we?”, he says to O ’Neill. “Not just yet any how” is her quick retort. Lord is hard pressed to keep pace with such a ‘mod ern flapper”, at one point calling her an “incarnation of a psychoanalysis”! Much of the film’s intended comedy

derives from a variation of the ‘Three M en and a Baby Austin’ theme. One slightly (for the time) risqué scene has the second corpulent detective peering into the suspected w ife’s bathroom , although the subsequent dialogue exchange seems to have been entirely erased from the soundtrack - the result of an equally-clumsy 1931 censorship decision, perhaps? But the continuing pleasures of A Co-Respondent’s Course, particularly for a Melburnian, lie else where: its fascinating attempts to evoke bayside locations, its considerable period charm, its throwaway humour (as, for example, when one of the jealous hus bands abandons counting sheep in a vain attempt to get to sleep because they are “moving too fast”). In keeping firmly within the ‘mod ern society comedy/drama’ formula, locales are confined to those which might have been expected to appear in social pages at the time: South Yarra, Chelsea, Frankston, sections of Beach Road, and Portsea, “the playground of the society of Victoria”. A trip from Melbourne to Portsea circa-1931 is, in film journey terms, something akin to Priscilla’s more recent pilgrimage to the desert. We also learn from the film’s publicity that “wellknown Melbourne society girl”, Miss Noel Clapp, daughter of the then Vic torian Railways Commissioner, has a small rôle in the film - as D ’Arcy’s sec retary: “her titian hair and expressive features ideally fit her for screen work”. The film ’s moral inclinations are indicative of the times as well. On the one hand, married men need to beware

The film’s studio sets, designed by W. R. Coleman, for the most part complement the location work. Thring had taken over the burnt-out shell of His Majesty’s The atre - still in disrepair after a disastrous fire in 1929 - in Exhibition Street, in the absence of other suitable studio premises in Melbourne, and constructed several elaborate soundproof stages to facilitate his continuous production plans. Shot between April and June 1 9 3 1 , A C oR esp o n d en t’s C ourse was held up for release until Thring’s desire to present a full-length unit programme could be real ized. The trade paper E veryon es duly announced the completion of the first Efftee package on 9 September 1931. The Gala W orld Prem iere was scheduled for 6 November 1931 at Mel b ou rne’s Plaza T h eatre, below the Regent in Collins Street. A C o-R espon dent’s Course was billed with the six-reel wartime comedy feature, Diggers, star ring Pat Hanna and George Moon, and four shorts: Selections from the Desert Song, p resen ted by W ill C ade a n d the Regent Theatre Orchestra-, Jack O ’Hagan: Vocalist Composer-, C ecil Parkes Strad Trio present Selections from their Reper toire-, and the travelogue, M elbou rn e Today. Thring also had filmed, in June 1931, an introductory speech for the first E fftee program m es, citing them as “merely the forerunners of a succession of productions of increasing quality, which from now on will be produced here in Australia”. In addition, a Fox Movietone News crew was on hand to record the excitement of this first really professional Australian sound film pre miere. Happily, given the attrition rate of films from this period, all of this mate rial survives. At the time, the prognosis for Efftee Films appeared favourable. A distribu tion-exhibition deal with Fox and Hoyts had been honoured. The first unit pro gramme fared ordinarily on initial release, but did better business on its city re-run and the country circuit. U lti mately, though, the brave experiment for various reasons proved unsustainable, and most of the Efftee output gradually disappeared from view - save for the odd revival of the George Wallace features and a screening of Thring’s sound ver sion of The Sentim ental B lo k e (1932). C I N E M A P A P E R S • AUGUS T 1 995

James lo rd (John D'Arcy), Nellie O'NeflMDonalda Warne) and Clergyman (Royce Milton^É^A. Dietrich-Derriç^s A Co-Responi

A Co-Respondent’s Course, Efftee’s first modest venture into narrative filmmak ing, is now possibly the least-remembered and most-rarely-screened of all the stu dio’s drama productions. Why should this be so, given its legit imate place in our film history? Is it because its subject of matrimonial mer riness and mayhem is so slight, or that its avowedly Melbourne setting is too parochial, or that it boasts no enduring film marquee stars, or name director? More likely, its original billing as a sup port feature (to Diggers, which doesn’t stand up nearly as well) and its awkward length (3800ft) have not helped its cause. By today’s standards, it would fill a com m ercial television hour. F or cinem a release in Australia, or more particularly since the demise of the B picture, a film of this length has always been awkwardly situated - neither “sh o rt” nor “fulllength”. As a post-1930 short feature, it also failed to qualify for separate entry listing in Pike and Cooper’s feature ‘bible’, Aus tralian Film 1 9 0 0 - 1 9 7 7 : A Guide to Feature Film Production (though it’s C I N E M A P A P E R S • AUGUS T 1995

1 E fftee’s plans to exhibit the first local

A C o-R espondent's Course [...] is n o w po ssib ly th e least-re m e m b ered and m o st rarely-screened of all [Efftee] stu dio's dram a p ro d u c tio n s .

talkie unit program me were slightly thwarted by the single screening of Isle o f Intrigue and Spur o f the M om ent at M el bourne’s Palace Theatre on 26 September 1931. These were presented along with a filmed introductory speech by the direc tor of both films, A. R. (Dick) Harwood. 2 E fftee Entertainers and E fftee’s Australia ,

mentioned in the Diggers entry)7. Apart from the writings of Chris Long, and Ina Bertrand8, very little critical attention has been paid to the film, or to the Efftee work in general, for reasons probably apparent already. The films of Hall at Cinesound, and Chauvel, produced in the same era, by com parison have remained firmly in view and under dis cussion. W ith the full restoration of Melbourne’s Regent Theatre now under way and re-opening planned for 1996, a revival screening of some of the gems from the Efftee collection, with provision for a new 35mm print of A Co-Respon d en t’s Course, would not be an inappropriate way of getting this period charmer back in the spotlight it enjoyed so briefly more than 60 years ago.

A C o-R espondents Course Directed by E. A. Dietrich-Derrick. Pro ducer: F. W . Thring. Scriptw riter: Montague Grover. Director of photog raphy: Arthur Higgins. Sound: D. J. Bloomberg. Settings: W. R. Coleman. Cast: John D’Arcy (James Lord), Donalda W arne (Nellie O ’N eill), Patricia M inchin (May Barry), Pop Cory (Andrew Rouse), Norman Lee (Arnold Dane), Suzette Lander (Mrs Dane), Noel Clapp (M rs W illis), M onte M oles (Farmer), Beatrice Egerton (Mrs Hope), Leal Douglas (Mrs O’Neill), Royce Milton (Clergyman), Reginald Wykeham (Sleath), Ed W arrington (Detective), George M oon (Detective), Oliver Pea cock (D etective). An E fftee Film Production. 35mm. 44 mins. 1931.

released as a set by the National Film & Sound Archive in 1989. 3 Chris Long, “Efftee: the production (and reproduction) of Australia’s early talkies”, Film news, February 1990, p. 8. 4 Graham Shirley and Brian Adams, Aus tralian C in em a: the First E ighty Y ears , Angus and Robertson-Currency Press, Sydney, 1983, p. 113. 5 Chris Long, programme notes for NFSAM elbourne Cinem atheque Screening, 1987. 6 A C o-R espondent’s Course: press sheet. 7 Andrew Pike and Ross Cooper, Australian Film 1900-1977: A Guide to Feature Film P rod u ction , Oxford University Press in association with The Australian Film Insti tute, Melbourne, 1980, p. 205. 8 Ina Bertrand, Efftee Productions, Media Cen tre Paper No.7, LaTrobe University, 1978. ®

B fc l ap*-

and argues fòri

S law om ïr Idziak fi litis Lilian's Slawomir (Slawek) Idziak is one of a select group of Polish cinematographers who have become major figures in international cinema over the past few years. This group includes Janusz Kaminsky {Schindler’s List and H ow to M ake an American Quilt), Andrzej Sekula {Reservoir Dogs and Pulp Fiction) and recent Academy-Award nominee Piotr Subocinski {Trois Couleurs: Rouge).1 nearly thirty years, has becom e widely known through three films for Krzysztof Kieslowski: Krôtki Film o Zabijaniu (A Short Film About Killing, 1988), Le Double Vie de Véronique {The D ouble Life o f V éronique, 1 9 9 1 ) and Trois Couleurs: Bleu {Three Colours: Blue, 1993). But his earlier work includes fourteen films for Krzysztof Zanussi including Bilans Kwartalny {Balance, 1975) and Rok Spokojnego Slonca {The Year o f the Quiet Sun, 1 9 8 4 ), Andrzej Wajda’s Dyrygent {The C on ductor, 1 9 7 9 ), Kieslowski’s first television film, Przejscie Podziemne {Pedestrian Subway, 1 9 73), as well as films in Germany, France, Italy, Finland and Iceland. Last year, he photographed John Duigan’s The Journey o f August King in North Carolina. Idziak ,

Idziak was in Australia recently to shoot Jerzy endary Sydney identity Bee M iles, with Ruth Cracknell and Toni Collette sharing the title rôle. During breaks in the shooting, Idziak offered his often controversial views on films and filmmaking. Although you are in Sydney to shoot Lilian's Story, you are working with a fellow country man as director. What attracted you to work on what seems at first glance to be a very Australian story? I knew Jerzy, who finished film school in-Lodz at the same time as I did. We didn’t work together in Poland, but we were in the same production group.2 Later on, Jerzy left Poland and is now a resi dent of Australia. Simply being a Pole and getting a chance to do L ilian’s Story, he asked m e if I; would do it. I read the script and it seemed to me to be about an incredibly interesting character. It’s a kind of challenge for a cinematographer to do such a movie. Did it seem very foreign or even exotic to you?

get the same result on the screen. O f course, you are always dependent on the human talent, but in terms of production values - meaning the money invested being visible on the screen - you’d probably get the same having much less people around. W hat is the director-cinematographer

whose career spans

Domaradzki’s Lilian’s Story, based on the life of leg

personnel. But what is important is that we would

Interview by Lindsay Amos

relationship as it exists in Poland? Our country was for so many years in seclusion we somehow developed a different system. It was

You decided this from an initial reading of the script? From the script, talking with the director, and from the book. F o r example, the original script had as the opening Lilian leaving the psychiatric hospital. My suggestion was that we have one scene before it - a night scene - which seems to me to be a kind of announcement, an invitation to a journey. It is a better presentation of the protagonist, especially the first close-up of Lilian [Ruth Cracknell], who is standing in front of a window with her eyes covered by a bar. W e see only her mouth, which seems to me to be a clear indication to the audi ence wheré we are into. Part of the film is apparently set in the 1950s. Yes. W e use flashbac&ywhicbTis a very common technique. In our fase, we hàvela slight colour 'dif feren ce. G enerally, the flasnllack slire% io*e yellowish and the contemporary period is warm. I know you don't w ant to say too much about a film which is still in progress, but are there any major differences for you making a film in Australia compared with Europe or the U.S.? There is a general problem in that films are being made in different ways all over the world. The systems used to organize the crew, the ways a film is done^àre completely different. W hat puzzles me is that we very easily adapt to a bad system. I call it “Americanization”. There are two approaches to production. One is to have a high budget with an enormous num ber of personnel and vehicles arou n d, and a compacted period of shooting. The other method, which in my opinion should be taken under con sider Aion, is a small crew and a little bif more roomljpr shooting. That way, the timepressure is not So enormous.

In a way I’m used to doing things which seem to be e x o tic . F o r exam p le, T h e D o u b le L ife o f Véronique we shot in Paris and I don’t even speak French. I have nothing to do with France. Lilian’s Story has universal appeal. It’s not a local story. It’s the story of a torm ented soul, somebody who, because of her life, because of her troubles, tries to tell us something about a uni versal truth using Shakespeare’s lines. For me, the most interesting part was to try and find a way to transform her feeling, her inner

m atogr»her is completely different from the west. In Cjfermany and Scandinavia, for example,

life, to the screen.

Lilian’s %ory would have been made with half the

Wershould try to analyze the different experi ences in different countries, because there are a lot of positive examples, not only in Poland, where the relationship jfFtyyeBn the director and çine-

first of all grounded in the film schools, which had only two departments: the director depart

ment and the cinematographer department. In Poland, the cinem atographer is number tw o, and starts work on the project very early. Kieslowski, for example, gives the cinematogra pher the first treatment - the first three pages. In nearly 8 0 per cen t of cases, the cin em atogra pher is co-author of the shooting script. Directors e x p e ct cin em atograp hers to bring th eir own world, their own vision. So, it was something very unusual when I all of a sudden realized that here in the west it was the director who was telling the cinematographer, “Put the cam era h e re .” F o r m e, they are two different professions. I really don’t believe, with some exceptions of course, that it’s possible to have total control of the actors and the flow of the sto ry , and also decide ab ou t each single take. Directors shouldn’t be too close, because very quickly they lose the sense of the wholeness. I really believe in creative group work, and som ehow ou r exam ple in the Polish cinem a, where we are really creative partners of the direc tor, is a very good example. It works. T o be a future cinem atographer, you have to change your attitude, because the technique is simpler and simpler. It’s not enough to be sim ply a technician; you have to be a partner; you have to understand the construction of the story; you have to bring your own vision.

1 I

Probably the most controversial film in The Decalogue series, and one which brought both you and Kieslowski international attention, is A Short Film About Killing. There has been a lot of discussion about your use of filters - some say 600, others 200. Did the filmstock help w ith the garish effect you were trying to achieve? It was Orwocolor* wasn't it? N o, it was Agfa, and they were my filters! Agfa is a very good negative and it was me who destroyed its qualities. Decalogue is very interesting because in a way I didn’t want to do A Short Film A bout Killing. Kieslow ski ap p ro ach ed me and gave me the choice of all ten films. The problem was it was C I N E M A P A P E R S • AUGUST 1995

C I N E M A P A P E R S â€¢ AUGUST 1995

-A planned as a 16m m television series. For a Polish cinem atographer, doing 16m m is a nightmare because the quality of our laboratories is very low. I decided to do number 9 , a very simple story about love and jealousy. Then Kieslowski told me, “I know your trick: the m om ent I’m ready to do number 9 , you ’ll be abroad and have no time to do it. And now when I’m ready to do A Short Film About Killing [number 5], you won’t do it!” I said to Kieslowski, “Listen, why do I have to do such a story? After an hour one person gets killed; after another half an hour another person gets hanged in .prison Jfr.’s terrible! Why do 1 have to do

for|jhp,ave^^^spegator they are more or less the same, It’s a pity we

dqn’t have richer possibilities in

terms of the material, but there is in the future the possibility to change colours with computers. It will be a completely new age in cinematograV phy, and I’m really looking forward to it. TheBouble Life o f Véronique, in contrast to your OecMogue episode, has a striking, warm , roman tic lo p k.lt is an audacious tw ist on the theme of tw in personalities: you are telling tw o different storjes in one film. "'"4-like v^ery much The Double Life o f Véronique

because it w ^ ^ filrrl' on^yhich we were sort of But Kieslowski’s a very stubborn pepon. So I innocent people. It was KiéSfewski’s first foreign told him, “Okay, I will do the filqj^$$0re c.ondifilm. It had a great atmospherêllb location, which tion that I do it green and using^ lM W m tersT”'' for me is one.of^he^most imp.prrfnt things. It was Kieslowski replied, “I don’t wahf ! the film on w h i^ T ^ ^ d to work all my I’m doing a TV series. I can’t havG^ffi^rsudden "life r : one green !” So I said, “It’s I The filrff1h,a ^ ^ ^ » ra c le atmosphere because do it green, or I don’t do it.” ■all.the elements oh^Sduction worked. One mir The next day, Kieslowski dan^^pBrBnd said, acle was^tEe wavavrTOund Irène Jacob, who was “I’m doing ten films, okay. If’o n f ^ ^ ^ B e green, a com pletely^m ^M vn actress. Kieslowski had let it be shit green. It’s your decision^ ^ it^reen»&ii ~~ iHtttiragdadie mrovfjfcth a different actress, but he And, you know, it’s the first tiif t e ^ my life that c o u ld n T § ë t^ ^ p p u s ~ e of financial problems. it happened: a director ¡g ^ ^ M o n p n th b efafiThe production started, we things. Normally, you carry this burden of respon a dMn’Éhaÿe^am actress. sibility. Normally, you are afraid to do something W hat wpre the major problems which you were new. You have to calculate very precisely how far cinematographer? you can go to risk som ething. which is very unusual in my professinM H&teffiffiigC ^ ^ » f c ^ ^ b l e m was to make the unbelievable find a key to make the story, which us something about our s u b c o n s c ib ^ K S i^ ^ S under pressure which is somehow dercas&ifingf^ "ffi^hhdd^li^v.-^erv. literal, work on the screen. A So, this movie was in a way a k i n ^ ^ g u ^ R 3^ ^ S ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ w a s Zbigniew Priesner’s incredible for me. You have to find a method so tharjj^!dra| —müsulr not a prisoner of this incredible responsibility. ^ T h e most important problem was to solve the And when you started to see the results? I was scared, because it was so unusual. The first screening was really disappointing. With the sec ond screen in g, with tw o or th ree scenes cut together, we realized there was something there. Kieslowski is open to any kind of risk. He really gives room to the cinematographer, because he strongly believes that the look is more impor tant than anything else. The stories are always the sam e, only how we tell them is different. He understands to what extent the style affects the story, how the style is the story itself. Changing the style changes the story. W hat I really like is not so much the shoot ing, which is challenging and interesting of course, but to work with directors before we start shoot ing. All im portant decisions should be taken in pre-production. The cinematographer should be an im portant collaborator in the scriptwriting process. Were the filmstocks you used on the earlier films you did with, say, Zanussi and Wajda primarily East German? N o t necessarily. The leading directors usually m anaged to get a certain am ount of Eastm an Kodak. But, in many cases, if we didn’t have enough, we shot the daytime scenes in colour and the night scenes on black and white. The main problem was that our shooting ratio was five-toone maximum, and the average ratio here in the west would be twelve-to-one. I shot a lot of scenes on Orwo. You may say it is bad, but it has a completely different look. There is not much difference between Kodak, Fuji and Agfa in terms of the colours, because the techn ology is very m uch the sam e. Professionals may see the difference in various filmstocks, but

knot between the end of the first act and the beginning of the second: the death of the Polish W eronika and the introduction of the French Véronique. It was something that we knew from the very beginning had to be very strong visu ally to persuade the audience to sw allow something which is completely, totally, unbeliev able! W e were also conscious that the first phase of the Polish Weronika was easy to achieve because it was part of our lives, but somehow France is the exotic land for us. So, the second challenge was to bring these two worlds together. Instead of differences, we tried to find similarities. W e decided that it’s much more im portant to con centrate on her inner landscape, because this very specific, sensible character is so concentrated on her own subconscious, forgettin g the reality around her. This puts a considerable responsibility on the cinematographer, not merely to visualize this inner landscape, but to put it on screen. Kieslowski is a director who has the ability to change a lot during the shooting. H e doesn’t mechanically follow the script. H e’s the one who understood that the film had its own, indepen dent life. Each day after shooting, we used to discuss it and we changed a lot. The second part and the end of the film are very different from the original script. When you came to do the Three Colours trilogy, once again with Kieslowski, you chose Blue, though Kieslowski claims you could have shot Red and Piotr Subocinski Blue. Kieslowski was always very nice to me, because I shot his first TV films, his first feature [Blizna (The Scar, 1976)], the first film shot in the Decalogue

series and his first foreign film. H e asked me to decide which of the Three Colours I wanted to do, and I decided to do the first one, Blue. Red was another option for me. But Three Colours seem ed to me a very, very p erson al project, and I was afraid that my vision and his vision may grow too far apart. Later on, I realized that the risk of Blue was that it was a little bit too close to Véronique. Again, the function of the music was important. All these elements were a bit of a problem for us, because we are always afraid we are going to repeat ourselves. But, I decided to do Blue and I’m happy because it was the first in the series. I like Red as well. I very much like the work of my younger colleague, Subocinski. It’s com pletely different. I would never have photographed the film in such a way. It’s an example of what I was saying before about the way Kieslowski works with the cinematographer: he’s open to various different visions. The Three Colours and Deca logue series are very good examples. Re-viewing Blue, I was surprised how few overt blue references there are. There is a lot of warm light. Well, I decided to use the colour blue as a kind of d ram aturgical co lo u r - a co lo u r w hich has a meaning. W e tried to use music and light as a C I N E M A P A P E R S • AUGUST 1995

guide to the inner life of Julie [Juliette Binoche]. It is a cinematic representation of an inner mono logue. The strong blue scenes are the scenes of her loneliness in the swimming pool, reflections on her face, the glass-bead lampshade. But we tried to use blue in a very economical way. W e kept the film with a warm atmosphere and gave it a quite stro n g , very aggressive blue at im p o rta n t moments. T h e blue we used is a rtific ia l. I to o k the strongest gel and did a lot o f tests trying to find the most theatrical blue, which has nothing to do with the natural blue that already exists. There is a lot of concentration on details: an eye, a mouth, the musical notes, a teaspoon, a coffee cup. In the case of B lue, it was clear for me that Ju lie’s world is as much inside as outside, so I tried on purpose to narrow her anger. For this reason, I came up with the suggestion of macro-photogra

tion, following the notes. It gives the audience the impression of being able to read music. Music seems to inspire you in your work, too. You know, for most movies, it would be much better to have music before the shooting! But the system is that you do the movie and add the music later. If you have music on the location, it has enormous impact on your work - on the atmos phere, on how the scene is blocked. Hearing the music, you know where you are into. Sure, it’s easier for the com poser to see the film and write the music, but perhaps it would be interesting to give the com poser the script the same way you would the cinem atographer. It may open several doors th a t w eren ’t open before.

In the beginning, I was a little bit insecure, but it was evident that with each new project I was part of his team. M aybe it gave me for the first time a sense of security, a sense of development. I learnt a lot, because I realized that it’s not only a problem of one movie, it’s the kind of personal re la tio n sh ip w h ich we som eh o w d ev elop ed through the years with all the advantages and dis advantages. The director and cinem atographer are like in a marriage; they survive all the ups and downs.

where you show Julie in the process of composi

preparation, or a special operator.

C I N E M A P A P E R S • AUGUST 1995

That’s true. Zanussi was my first permanent part ner.

Did you use a Steadicam on Blue? Sometimes it

As a non-musician, I was fascinated by the shot

elements, which very often help a lot.

You've actually shot more films with Zanussi than anybody else.

is hard to tell. N o, I never use a Steadicam . F or many years I have been w orking w ith a hand-held cam era. Stead icam dam pens the rhythm b etw een the actors walking and the cinem atographer’s steps. So, I am trying a different technique. I am trying to adapt my way of working with the actors. I am breathing with them. I am walking the same steps. In my opinion, I am getting the identical effect, and much faster because you don’t need all the

phy as a way of showing how Julie sees the world around her. Always, if I have tim e, I try to do quite a few additional takes. They give the direc to r the ch an ce during ed itin g to put in sm all

Again, in Europe, a Steadicam is always a cer tain budget problem. Now I am very well-known as a cinematographer who is doing a lot of hand held camerawork - up to 90 per cent of the takes are hand-held in some of the movies I’ve made.

As far as I know, Zanussi’s very interested in doing som ething new w ith me, but change is always interesting. Y ou’re getting other options, another chance, and it’s something extremely inter esting in this profession that you learn to see the world together. And this is one of the risks: that your kind of imagination would not be responsive enough to somebody else.

F R A M E W O R K S N O W O FFERS T R A C K L A Y IN G C o n t i n u i n g t o lead t h e w a y in n o n - l i n e a r t e c h n o l o g y , F r a m e w o r k s n o w p r o v i d e s ful l d ig i t a l n o n - l i n e a r s o u n d t r a c k laying. W e are the first facility in Australia to offer the new 24 tr a c k A v i d A u d i o / V i s i o n . A u d i o / V i s i o n is t o ta lly compatible with our Avid Film Co mposers, including 44k hz and 48khz digital audio sampling and digital non -line ar picture. This allows us to take the audio and picture files directly from the picture cut. This avoids time consuming conforming from original D A T ’s required with o t h e r systems. Likewise, A ud io /Vi si on is the only t ra c k laying system using no n- lin ea r picture giving the sound e d i t o r the same speed and flexib ili ty of the Avid Film Composers.

Ring Stephen F. Smith about a picture and sound “ package” fo r your next film.

Suite 4, 239 Pacific Highway, N orth Sydney 2060. Phone (02) 955 7300 Fax (02) 954 0175

CAMERAQ.UIP (AUST) P.L. M OTION PICTURE EQUIPMENT RENTALS

W e áre moving our Melbourne office on the 1st of May:-

434 CLARENDON ST, SOUTH MELBOURNE 3205 PHONE (03) 699 3922 FAX (03) 696 2564 -

Also at:-

77 DOGGETT ST, FORTITUDE VALLEY, QUEENSLAND 4006 PHONE (07) 854 1919 FAX (07) 852 1814 340 KING GEORGES AVE, SINGAPORE 0820 FAX 1651 293 2141

C I N E M A P A P E R S • A UGUS T 1 995

technicalities

An Assortment of “A”s and a “B” Dominic Case looks at film stock changes at Agfa; Animal Logic's work on Alex Proyas' Adidas commercial; Avid's new Australian office; and post-producing a puppet film, The Bell y the time you read at Wolfen, Germany. Twelve years later, this edition of Cin the Belgian company, Gevaert, intro duced a faster, but orthochromatic, film em a P a p ers, the emulsion, with limited sensitivity to red SMPTE Conference colours. Soon, however, faster panchro and E xhibition in matic emulsions became possible - the Sydney will be first ones approximately 12 ASA! Accel over. Following the erated by the introduction of sound trend of the past films, demand grew for more and more couple of shows, film speed, and the two companies this one is ov er Agfa in Germany whelmingly electronic, with barely a and Gevaert in Bel sp rock et in sight. Still, th-e re ’ll be others, a gium among competed with faster and finer-grained emulsions. In review of any filmic aspects of the show 1936, Gevaert was one of the first com - and of the Conference seminars - in the next “Technicalities”. So, for this time, an assortment of pieces with nothing in common except the initial ‘A’. There’s a retrospective of Agfa negative stock, bowing out of the world film scene after more that 80 years; a look at Animal Logic’s work on the Adidas spot for Andrew Mason and Alex Proyas; mention of the new Aus tralian office of Avid; and an interview with the makers of a short film, The Bell, which doesn’t begin with A, but which did start life at the AFTRS and finish up with the AFC. As is often the case, I have interests to disclose: an occasional consultancy with Animal Logic (though not con cerning the Adidas ad) and a credit as post-production consultant on The Bell.

panies to introduce triacetate safety base film instead of the highly-flammable nitrate base. Black-and-white films have contin ued to be m anufactured up to the present, but both companies moved on to play a leading role in the development of colour systems. My own collection of film relics includes a sample book of coloured tints and tones manufactured by Agfa in the late 1920s. In the mid1930s, a process known as Gasparcolor - after its Flungarian inventor Dr Bela Gaspar - was operating in London, and

less successfully in Berlin. The process used a complicated combination of dou ble-sided film, with emulsion layers front and back, and rotating filters in front of the camera lens, to expose alternate red, green and blue separation images. The negative stock was manufactured by Gevaert, but prints were made on an Agfa tripack film which worked by a sil ver dye bleach process (very similar to today’s Cibachrome process). This early pan-European venture predates the post war A gfa-G evaert com bination by several decades.

Vale Gevacolor T he sudden announcement earlier this year that A gfa-G evaert was to cease manufacturing colour negative film stock marked the close of a long era in which the company was a leading player, in both worldwide and Australian filmmaking. The com pany was in the forefront of colour film technology dur ing W orld W ar II, with the Germ an A gfacolor well ahead of com peting processes in America and elsewhere. Arguably the first substantially Australian colour feature film, Je d d a was filmed in 1 9 5 5 on G evacolor. Possibly the biggest production in Australia - in terms of shot footage, and, by all repute, in terms of crew employed - Mighty Morphin P ow er Rangers was shot on Agfa X T negative, shortly before manufacture ceased this year. The story started in 1913 when Agfa began production of motion-picture film C I N E M A P A P E R S • AUGUST 1995

technicalities Meanwhile, Agfa had been working hard on the colour coupler process, first devised in 1911. The main difficulty had been in preventing the colour couplers - chemicals that cause the dyes in each layer to form colours - from diffusing through all three layers at once. Even tually, Agfa’s emulsion chemists, led by Dr Wilhelm Schneider, solved this prob lem, and Agfa launched its tripack negative-positive process in 1939. Pro duction on a feature started almost immediately at the Babelsberg Studios in Berlin, encouraged by a government that was keen to see German product compete with American colour pictures. Remember that this was the heyday of Technicolor three-strip: Becky Sharp, the first Technicolor feature, was made in 1935, and 1939 was of course the year of G one with the Wind. It would be two years before Frauen sind doch Bessere Diplomaten was com pleted. The delays were not caused by the outbreak of war, so much as the constant re-shooting demanded as the Agfa negative was modified and improved almost with every roll. How ever, its release was follow ed immediately by a second production, Die Goldene Stadt, and 11 features were shot on Agfacolor during the war. While war had not interrupted film production in Germany, it did ensure that Agfa’s patented anti-diffusion chemistry did not reach America. Con sequently, Agfacolor had no rivals. However, as soon as the Allied forces occupied Berlin in 1945, technical mis sions were sent to investigate and report on the colour process. The report of the Field Intelligence Agency (Technical), dated January 1946, covers, in just 39 pages, details of chemical emulsion manufacture and coating, methods for special effects, film printing and pro cessing, and even shows film stock costs and the rates of pay of laboratory work ers. According to pre-war exchange rates, colour negative stock cost 11 cents (U.S.) per foot, compared with 3 cents per foot for black-and-white negative. As a yardstick, unskilled labour is quoted at 23 cents per hour. When Berlin was partitioned, the original Wolfen emulsion factory equip ment was moved to Shostka, in Ukraine, and film manufacture continued under the name Sovcolor. The Wolfen factory was eventually recommissioned and operated under Russian management, but meanwhile, in the West, a new Agfa factory was built at Bayer Works in Lev erkusen, West Germany, to restart the Agfa business. With Agfacolor patents now one of the spoils of war, other manufacturers around the world could improve their colour negative process. The first East man colour integral tripack films based on this technology appeared in 1950,

and Fuji in Japan followed the same unprotected patents. However, at Mortsel in Belgium, Gevaert moved faster, and released its first colour negative film - type 6.51 - based on the Agfa patents in 1948. Local documentaries and short films led up to a major French feature film - Bluebeard - in 1951. For the next few years, Gevacolor was to dominate the European m arket, although in Britain and America the well-established Technicolor process faced a greater challenge from the American Eastmancolor than from European products. In Australia, feature production in the early 1950s was limited to a few overseas productions, and even fewer locally-funded or -controlled films. The first colour feature was a 20th Cen tury Fox production, Kangaroo, shot in Technicolor in 1952, starring Maureen O’Hara and Peter Lawford - with, fur ther down the list, Chips Rafferty and Charles Tingwell. However, three years later came Charles Chauvel’s Je d d a , photographed in Gevacolor by Carl Kaysar. Australian laboratories at this stage were still operating a complicated twocolour process, already obsolete overseas, and their output was restricted mainly to cinema commercials. As a result, negative for Je d d a had to be processed at Rank laboratories near London. This was no simple exercise, as the production location was some dis tance from Katherine in the Northern Territory. Ice boxes were placed strate gically along the Roper River, in caves and under rock ledges. Raw stock, held in refrigeration in Katherine, was passed along this chain to the location, exposed in 40-degree sunshine, before starting the week-long trip back to London. For urban Australian and for over seas audiences, Jedda was the first sight of the vivid blue skies and orange earth of the Northern Territory. Nowhere else had Gevacolor film produced life like colours that were so unfamiliar to its audience, but so central to the film’s impact and value. Fifteen years later, it would be found that, despite its success at the time, the early Gevacolor emulsion had one shortcoming: it didn’t last. When the National Film & Sound Archive came to reprint Jedda, the negative dyes had almost completely faded, taking with them the striking colours. Fortu nately, black-and-white separations of the entire film - albeit in an overseas cut version - were located at Rank labora tories, and a full-colour duplicate negative and prints were possible. Film stock manufacturers have since then become much more conscious of preser vation, and modern colour negative emulsions should stay unchanged, for hundreds of years, under the proper archival storage conditions.

The Eastman colour process was first set up in Australia in 1958 at Filmcraft laboratories. How ever, the Gevacolor stocks at that time used a dif ferent process. In Europe, this favoured the well-established Agfa and Gevaert stocks: in Australia, with barely enough business to operate one colour process, Gevacolor had little chance. In 1964, Agfa and Gevaert companies merged, although both negative types continued to be produced. Meanwhile, Eastmancolor negative stocks were gaining ground, and had a significant advantage in colour reproduction: integral dye masking. This technique, which gives negative its characteristic orange-pink appearance, compensates for the impu rity of the colour dyes in the film, resulting in richer, truer colours. Agfa and Gevaert negatives at this stage were still unmasked. In 1968, however, a new Gevacolor negative, type 6.55, was intro duced, with masking. In 1974, this was replaced by type 6.80, masked, and com patible with the Eastmancolor process. 1974 was the year that Australian feature-film production boomed. Labs by this time had proved their abilities with colour film after the first locallyprocessed (Eastman) colour feature, Journey out o f Darkness, in 1968. At last, it seemed, there was an opportunity for Gevacolor. It was taken up, in 1976, by cinematographer Peter James, to shoot T he Irish m an . The slightly-pastelly colours of the stock compared with East mancolor suited the Tom Roberts style of colouring that was preferred for the film. However, the Eastman colour process that the Gevaert negative used was already obsolete, having been replaced in late 1974 by the faster, hightemperature ECN2 chemistry. Colorfilm labs had retained the older process for the tail ends of the old stocks, but The Irishman would be the last major pro duction to be processed this way. In 1978, Gevaert released its new ECN2 compatible stock 6.82. At this stage, each manufacturer supplied only one type of colour negative film stock. It was tungsten balanced, medium speed, and used the ECN2 process. In the mid-1980s, Fuji - by now the only other manufacturer outside the Iron Curtain - introduced a new dimension to the competition with a high-speed stock. Before long, all three manufac turers - Eastman, Fuji, and Gevaert had an extensive range of emulsions. Competitive research was leading to a new technology: T - or X T -g rain . Named for the flat tablet-shaped silver halide crystals with an X-shaped crosssection, the new emulsions collected light much more efficiently, with a con sequent increase in speed. The newest generation of Agfa-Gevaert’s negatives - X T 125, X T 320 and later X T 400, all tungsten balanced - had new charac

teristics, including a very slightly lower contrast that favoured telecine transfers, and lent a subtly different “look” to film images. Although the two companies, Agfa and Gevaert, were fully merged by this time, stills materials were marketed as Agfa, while Gevaert continued as the established brand name for motion-pic ture products. H ow ever, the X T generation of emulsions was launched under the Agfa name, showing their relationship to the more widely-recog nized Agfa stills emulsions. The film stocks were still manufactured in Gevaert’s Mortsel, Belgium, manufac turing plant. Overseas, particularly in Britain and Europe, a number of feature films were shot on Agfa film stock. Most notewor thy was David Watkin’s cinematography using X T 320 in Out o f Africa. Watkin also used Agfa negative for Moonstruck, Hamlet, and M emphis Belle. Gorillas in the Mist was also shot on Agfa X T320 by Australian cinematographer John Seale. On television, the series NYPD Blue - celebrated for its television “film look” - was shot on Agfa negative. In Australia, some notable successes and some competitive pricing gradually overcame the reluctance of many film makers to try anything other than the C I N E M A P A P E R S • AUGUST 1995

mmm

Animal Logic in world Adidas ad L eading design , 3D and digital post company Animal Logic recently com pleted work on director Alex Proyas’ latest television and cinema spot for Adi das, entitled M icrochip, fo r British agency Leagus Delaney. The 60-second com m ercial, produced by Andrew M ason and intended for worldwide release, involves more than 70 shots, all but one involving work by Animal Logic. Amid the live-action, 3D animation and multiple models, there is just one product shot, resulting in a campaign that “sells a feeling rather than a shoe”. General M anager and Animal Logic producer for Microchip, Maury Strong, commented: This job was a breath of fresh air. While we get to work on much of the best local and international pro ductions, it’s not often that we see ads as filmic as this one.

familiar Eastman Kodak emulsions. The last decade’s list of films on Agfa nega tive is a fairly representative cross-section of Australian productions. Shooting the 16mm television mini-series Harp in the South and P oor M a n ’s O ran ge, Peter James used Agfa negative for exterior sequences set in Europe, selecting the slightly different, greener look to distin guish them from Australian sequences. M ore recently, T he D e lin q u en ts, Exchange Lifeguards and Tunnel Vision have all been shot on Agfa negative. Film stocks have their loyal sup porters, and others who w ill not consider them. In Australia, one or two names can be noted as consistent users of Agfa negative. One of those, Paul Murphy, shot Mighty Morphin Power Rangers on Agfa negative last summer: probably the biggest single use of nega tive stock in this country. DOP Martin McGrath, who had previously shot The Mystery o f Edwin Drood, returned to Agfa X T 1 0 0 for Dad & Dave On Our Selection, produced by Tony Buckley, who was also responsible for the Harp and Orange mini-series, and, towards the beginning of this episode, for The Irishman. Why stop now? Agfa’s Motion Pic ture D ivision M anager, Graem e W isken, explains that it was a headC I N E M A P A P E R S • AUGUST 1995

" T h e w h o le jo b represented the m o st intricate fo rm of seamless integration. It's v e ry hard to tell w h a t's 3 D and w h a t's n o t." office decision based on worldwide sales and forecasts. While Agfa has stopped making camera negative, it remains a leading m anufacturer of laboratory stocks. Having been a leader back in the 1 9 3 Os.in the introd u ction of safety acetate base, the wheel has turned full circle, and Agfa has for some years placed heavy emphasis on the newer, stronger, and more environmentallyfriendly polyester film base. Theatres increasingly are finding that polyester prints last longer with less wear, while laboratories processing the new CP 10 print film can reduce their water usage. A fu rther advantage, according to Wisken, appears at the end of a print’s life. Many American distributors are finding d ifficu lties in disposing of acetate prints, as the chemicals involved are not even acceptable as landfill. Poly ester, on the other hand, is suitable for recycling at the Agfa factory in Mortsel. Future archivists and film collectors take note - no more lost masterpieces will be found on council tips!

Perhaps the reduction from three to two negative types is an inevitable sign of the times, as economic rationaliza tion and digital technology converge on old friends. Still, the loss should not go without at least a nod towards the significant role played by the Agfa and Gevaert companies in our film heritage. From Babelsberg to the Power Rangers, from Jedda to Dad and Dave-. Vale Agfa, Vale Geva. B ib lio g ra p h y • 60 years in Motion Picture, Agfa Gevaert, 1985 • Bernard Happe, “80 years of Colour Cinematography - an Outline History”, mBKSTS Journal, February 1985 • The Restoration o f Jedda, National Film & Sound Archive leaflet • Lt-Col RH Ranger et al, The Agfacolor Negative-Positive Method for Professional Motion Picture Films, Office of Military Government for Germany (US), Field Information Agency, 1946

The 3D team, led by Lynne Cartwright, and comprising Steve James, Chris God frey, Lindsay Fleahy, Peter MacDonald and Justin Mettam, designed, modelled, lit and animated an enormous number of elements. Robots, droids, memory machines, memory bubbles, explosions and extensions of sets and backgrounds were all produced in 3D to match the live-action sets and vast array of physi cal models. All of the 3D animation was carried out using Renderman and Softimage, linked by Animal Logic’s own designed Softman and Eddie, plus other propri etary software running on a network of SGI workstations. Says Cartwright: A lo t o f the 3D problem s were solved in pre-production. We had an enormous amount of interaction with Alex and Andrew, and lots of storyboard meetings, although the final look o f each scene was finalized in the 3D environment. Technical directors David Booth, Andy Brown and Zelko Dejanovic worked on Henry and Harry using a “whole range o f d ifferent integrating techniques including depth control, adding grain and texture, and colour grading within Henry”, according to Booth. Lockedoff and hand-held camera shots were integrated in split-screen compositions using the ‘A lf camera-steadying feature of Henry to stabilize the images. Detailed work such as rig removal, and “smoothing of certain parts of the anatomy deemed unsuitable for more sensitive audiences”, was undertaken as compositing progressed. Strong: The w hole jo b represented the m ost in tricate form o f seam less

technicalities

integration. It’s very hard to tell what’s 3D and what’s not. Every thing sits so beautifully together that it all looks ‘in camera’, which was the director’s intention. Producer Andrew Mason remarked on the astonishing six-week turnaround for the entire production for Animal Logic. The business of scheduling the 3D and post was very cleverly organized by Animal Logic. The rea son Alex and I want to keep coming back to Australia to shoot is that it’s a heck of a lot more fun doing the post here.

Avid opens in Australia Australians are known to be rapid adopters of new technology. VCRs, CDs, C D -RO M s and mobile phones have all grown faster here than almost anywhere. Now non-linear editing can officially be added to the list, as Avid Technology Inc. announces the estab lishment of a wholly-owned subsidiary office in Sydney. According to Lou Shipley, Vice Pres ident, Asia Pacific and Latin America: Avid is the ninth fastest-growing

public company in the U.S. accord ing to F ortu n e magazine, and the Asia Pacific markets [Japan, China, T hailand and Australia] are the fastest grow ing part o f Avid’s business. Previously, Avid was distributed in Australia by Amber Technology and by Innovative Sound and Media Tech nology. The new operation will be headed by Belinda Hanna, previously Manag ing Director of Borland International Australia. She said: The local companies that have rep resented Avid Technology deserve

recogn ition fo r the success that they have achieved . H ow ever, Avid has now acquired a broad range of multimedia technology through acquisitions and mergers in recent times. Now is the appro priate time to bring these diverse products under a single banner locally. Avid T ech n ology now owns Basys, the leading newsroom computer sys tem, Digidesign, Parallax and Elastic Reality, in addition to its own range of off-line and on-line systems. The new company is to be officially launched at SMPTE ’95.

Microchip.;

C I N E M A P A P E R S • AUGUST 1995

The Bell “A story abou t place and ritual and m em ories held in trust. ” The B ell - also titled L a C loch e - is a short (13 minutes) Super 16 film writ ten and directed by Bart Groen, and produced jointly with Valérie Quéva. Although it started out as a design exer cise at the Australian Film Television & Radio School (where G roen was a design student), the project has grown, and eventually attracted post-produc tion funding of $ 9 0 ,0 0 0 from the Australian Film Commission, largely for

an innovative optical printing technique that runs through most of the film. T h e B ell uses puppets to tell the story of a stonemason living in a Parisian working-class quarter, who has been secretly keeping alive a memory that will be revealed to his neighbours only in his final moments. AFC Project Officer Michael Hill confirm ed that, while he had been impressed by the script, and by the qual ity of the work that had already been done, he was particularly interested in the technique of the film. It was an unusual form for the Australian scene. The detail of characterization in the puppets is rarely seen here, and the film shows a good balance between storytelling and craft. Most significantly for the AFC, the team had already committed a lot of time and work to the production, and had shown “guts and determination” to get to the stage they had. I spoke with Bart and Valérie, and with the film ’s DOP, Jackie Farkas. Valérie explained that Bart had origi nally written the film as a short story while living in Paris. They had consid ered shooting it in Paris, but returned to Australia before doing anything more. QUÉVA: The script was in pretty good shape at that time, and Bart pitched it at the Film School pitchand-toss session, and got a very strong reaction. He came home and said, “It’s really worth shooting but we’re in Australia, we can’t do it live: what about puppets?” I was a bit reticent - the char acters also were very much a part of Paris. But the idea progressed, mainly as a design exercise for the Film School. We made a test, using shaving brushes for puppets, but this took into it a comical animation kind of style, although the story was very dramatic, in a tragic sense. Then the production started, with lots of design input - the reconstruction of Paris in model-making. Three weeks before starting the shoot, there was still a problem with the puppets. Then, by good luck, Bart met M elinda D oring, who has a background in sculpture and paint ing, and from this moment on it evolved from the minimalistic pup pets to very realistic puppets. And that’s when the tragic sense of the story could be brought back into the production.

What were some of the problems you faced in shooting the miniature puppets? GROEN: With stop-frame animation we could have full-length charac ters moving in the background, but with hand-operated puppets shot

C I N E M A P A P E R S • AUGUST 1995

live action, as we had, it becomes more complicated to make them move, so we had to restrict our selves on the storyboard to what movements could be done. FARKAS: The storyboard had to take

very much into account the limita tions of what the puppets could do. We had to get the sense of the architectural space through the interweaving of closer shots. It’s rather spare in terms of the wider shots - just because of the physicality of having to manipulate things. Would you have had that many closeups of faces if they were not so realistic? GROEN: I had always wanted to

relate the shooting style to realistic ways of shooting, rather than hav ing it become a sort of toy-town look. In some ways, by restricting ourselves to get closer to the pup pets with the camera, with the shot sizes, it was drawing us closer to the characters themselves. In that way it was good to have the detail on the faces of the puppets. So the need to come in closer to avoid the wires on the puppets allowed you to make use of the greater realism of the puppets? GROEN: Yes, w ith sim pler faces you can only get on e exp ressio n - one signal - so we w ou ld have had the c h o ic e

o f c h a n g in g

th e

fa ces

betw een each sh o t o r, as we ended up d o in g , h a v in g f a c e s w ith so m uch m ore ch aracter in th em th a t th ey created th eir ow n versatility.

QUEVA: All the puppets are real peo

ple. For example, the stonemason himself is modelled on the French poet and writer, Jacques Prevert. FARKAS: Something that was diffi

cult fo r me was that we had to artificially introduce the depth of field. I think we were working at f/8, sometimes 11, to get enough depth of field to lose the sense of scale. W orking out the depth of

field was tricky. The focus puller Emma Cooper - had a critical role. Each day she w orked out what depth of field we would have had in a full-sized set, and then we had to w ork with the aperture that would give us that, in the model. GROEN: We had a set that was no

more than a quarter of a metre wide, and yet we had a 10K light blasting through the window in order to get enough light. There was one scene where one of the char acters is looking out of the window and whistling. And we had so much light, to try and reproduce the effect of sunlight, that the hot glue that we used to hold her hands by her mouth for whistling kept melting, and her hands kept falling down. FARKAS: This was the biggest

amount of light I’ve ever used con sistently throughout a shoot, and yet the smallest set. I’d be bounc ing a 10K onto a mirror a couple of inches across. I used m irrors quite a lot. Instead of a forest of Cstands, if you just wanted to pick out a particular detail, it was easier to bounce a powerful light. That effectively became the light source, and to some extent you could con trol the shape of the light at the mirror. QUEVA: Jackie and Bart spoke to people w ho’ d done m iniature work, and they said the ratio of lighting time to shooting time was the same as for a live shoot, but no one understood that this was a liveaction puppet shoot. In stop frame, you might spend six hours to light a set you’re going to shoot on for three days in stop frame, so that’s a good ratio. But in miniature, you spend only half an hour on the shot because it’s shot live. So, all of a sudden, the ratio is quite different. FARKAS: I spoke to a friend o f m ine a fterw ard s w h o said th a t th e ra tio o f lig h tin g tim e is th e sam e as th e

technicalities

up. So I always made sure we had the latitude that we needed - just knowing the final thing would be a bit more contrasty. I made sure there was plenty of detail in the shadow areas. This started out as a volunteer-labour student exercise, and yet you managed to get a fully professional AFC budget for post-production several times greater than the total cost of production.

scale of the set: so when we were working quarter scale, it would take us four times as long to light as one to one, and for an eighth scale it would take eight times as long, which is exactly what happened. GROEN: Originally, we expected it would take us a week, but soon we realized it w asn’t going to hap pen, and it ended up taking us three weeks.

W hat about the puppet movements: did you have any sense of how well the actions would work? GROEN: We had done one test with a cardboard set and a shaving brush, but there wasn’t any time for any other tests. Because of the pace of the shoot, it was a few days before we started seeing rushes, and it was only then that I started to get a sense of whether the action was working at the right speed. FARKAS: I just have memories from

behind the camera always of saying “faster, faster”. There was always the temptation to be very deliberate. GROEN: In the end, it worked in our

favour, because we found that the optical sequence gives it an anima tion that compensates for it, and the poetry of the shots on the screen worked much more than I’d anticipated. Jackie’s storyboard was based on there needing to be a cer tain rhythm and resonance, a certain poetry, so she had to struc ture each shot as well as the way the shots would work together. But after we started shooting, I realized that the movements of the puppets had to fit in with that as well. QUEVA: There’s also the thing you

learn in acting: that by slowing down each movement very slightly,

" A ll the puppets are real people. For exam ple, the stonem ason him self is m odelled on the French poet and w rite r, Ja cq u e s P re ve rt." it gives so much more weight to the expression. there was just an intuitive feel for what looked to be about the right sort of speed.

Graham Sharp at the AFTRS intro duced me to the O xberrv, and helped me do a few tests. We did n’t get a perfect result, but we got enough to know that it was going to work.

GROEN: Being so much involved on

QUEVA: Bart gave a test shot to a

the design side of it, and with the puppets, it ended up with Jackie behind the camera making a lot of those intuitive choices.

friend who simulated the move ment with a computer. When we saw the result, the difference was amazing, even though it was a really-rough puppet and a reallyrough shot.

FARKAS: But, at the end of the day,

FARKAS: There were times when I wished I didn’t have that much responsibility. A video split would have been nice, because Bart was doing so much of the puppeteering himself.

You’ve used a complicated optical-print ing technique throughout all the puppet sequences: a mixture of stretch and skip printing with dissolves between frames once a second. When did the idea for the optical printing sequence come in, and how? GROEN: It was before we shot. I was very concerned about the effect of the puppets; when you see it on screen, it’s always going to be a kids’ film. We had to establish in the first few seconds that this was a drama. We had to avoid the Thunderbirds look. So, Glenn Wat son, our m odel-m aker, told us about a p ro ject he’d w orked on before, a stop-frame graphic ani mation, where they used a dissolve between frames rather than having them jump across the screen. Then

GROEN: His computer only gave us

every fifth frame, because of restric tions in his set-up. But it gave us the feeling of real time staying the same - a second is a second, a minute is a minute - but within that minute you get a completely different sense of time passing. And with all the optical tests we’ve done since, it ends up that the one we’ve picked is the one that’s closest to the orig inal computer test. It was shot on 7248. Did you consider a faster stock, knowing you’d need so much light?

GROEN: Well, if the whole produc tion were budgeted professionally, it would have been around $250,000. So, in that respect, even though the AFC has put up a lot, they’re getting good value. And they’d seen m aterial before they made the decision - for them, it’s a bit like backing a horse after the race has started. In fact, one of our op tions before we got the money from the AFC would have been me spending the next six months locked in with the Oxberrv - the dinosaur of the Film School - because it was theo retically possible to do it that way. But I’m constantly surprised at how archaic some of the technology is. For example, there’s no computer control on Atlab’s Oxberry, so to do 80,000 frames you have to push a button 8 0,000 times - although maybe it’s only on projects like this that it becomes relevant.

Post-production has included blow-up to 35mm interpositive, followed by a massive optical-printing operation, with more than 11 minutes of the film being manually step-printed, frame by frame, in A tlab’s optical departm ent. This sequence involves more than 600 dis solves, and nearly 4,000 freeze-frames. Even with a fully-budgeted post-pro duction phase, the film has taken months longer to finish than was orig inally scheduled. Michael Hill suggests that this con firms that supporting the film was the right decision: there was some possibil ity that they could have struggled through the finish with less - or no funding, but the same difficulties could have arisen, with the distinct possibility that the film would have taken years to finish, if at all. As it is, at the time of writing, The Bell was in sound post-pro duction, with the aim of finishing in time for AFI Awards entry.

FARKAS: We did some tests on ’93.

I’d never used it before, and it was really disappointing. I’ve seen other films shot on ’93 looking really fab ulous. But it looked so flat. So we chose 7248. All the way through the shoot, I had in mind that it would be blown up to 35 mm, and I knew the contrast we would get in the blow

T h e B ell Writer-director: Bart G roen . Produc ers: V alérie Q uéva , B art G r o en . D esigners: D aran F ulham , B art G r o en . D irecto r of photography: J ackie F arkas. Head m odel-m aker: G lenn W a tso n . Puppet-m aker: M elinda D oring . Editor: Anne Pratten . Sound designer: L iam E gan. © C I N E M A P A P E R S • AUGUST 1995

optical & graphic

R .y

• • • • •

llil

T itlin g S p e c ia lis ts

1 0 0 0 Typefaces on line Extensive Proofing system Accept IBM or MAC Files for discount All fo rm a ts including anamorphic Quoting a pleasure

CHRIS

5 Chuter St, McMahons Point, North Sydney, NSW 2060

Phone: (02) 922 3144

ROWELL

PRODUCTIONS

PTY

LTD

S U I T E D 172 F IL M A U S T R A L I A B U I L D I N G

Fax: (02) 957 5001

ETO N RO A D L IN F IE L D N SW 2 0 7 0 T E L : (0 2 ) 4 1 6 2 6 3 3 F A X : (0 2 ) 4 1 6 2 5 5 4

Kingsgrove A partments M E L B O U R N E

• A U S T R A L IA

S p e c i a l P e r f o r m i n g Art s r a t e s for our F u l l y Self Con t a i n e d & Serviced Apart ments • Comfortable 4 S ta r Apartments • Serviced Daily • Just Ten Minutes from the CBD • Transport Available Outside Our Door • Right in the Heart of Cosmopolitan St Kilda CALL TOLL FREE 1 8 0 0 0 3 3 7 8 6 4 4 F I T Z R O Y S T , S T K I L D A VI C 3 1 8 2

^ d W E E K

lh u /m iM c; c o u r s e N W A N T ED TO LEARN THE NU TS A N D

BOLTS OF W R IT IN G A F IL M SCR IPT? A i10 -n o n se n se , p ra c tic a l, d y m a n ic co u rse cover in g a ll asp e cts of w ritin g fo r film a n d TV. T opics include : structi jre , scenes & sequencing, sub plots, possive vs. dynamic scripts, script m e ch a n ics, rewriting techniques, scrip t la n g u a g e , character & conflict, c h a ra c te r fu n c tio n s , building suspence, th e film b iz , m arketing & m arket analysis M E L B O U R N E C LASSES B E G IN 2 2 JU L Y & 2 5 J U L Y A T U N I. O F M E L B O U R N E S Y D N E Y C LASSES B E G IN 2 3 J U L Y & 2 4 J U L Y A T W E A C EN TR E Call Screenwise now for Free information kit on (03) 9482 5355 or write to Screenwise at P0 Box 164 Carlton South VIC 3053

2 OSC/RS & 2 KEYCODE-SCANNING WORKSTATIONS FRAME CRITICAL NEG CUTTING DIRECT FROM EDL OR VIA A POS CONFORM NEG PULLS - STOP TO STOP OR M IN IM U M ‘HANDLES’ FAST COMPILE ONLINE EDLS ANY FORMAT DISK/EDL IN OR OUT GRADING EDLS FOR TELECINE OR ‘OFF-TAPE’ GRADING

l ^ c a l N

T e r r ^ l ^ a e p j c h

9 4 1 6

9 6 £ | l

fax Terry H a e b ic liK 4 1 6 M 0 8 8 — » C I N E M A P A P E R S • AUGUS T 1995

1 0 5 /6 CLARKE STREET CROW S NEST NSW 2 0 6 5

shorts

Sourcine a Maiden’s Head Freda Freiberg examines the emerging cinematic voice o f Marie Craven and her first 35mm film. he heroine of Marie Craven’s button. W e would seem to be c o n new film , M a id e n h e a d , is fronted with fears residing in the body called Alice. The name not of the young woman (an old-fashioned only shrinks the gap between girl), fears that must be quelled so that perform er and role, as the she can emerge confident, self-assured, p e rfo rm e r’s name is lite r active and capable. ally Alice (Garner), but rings Alice is overcome by paranoia in with references to that other three of the sketches: in the encounter Alice, the creation of Lewis with the saleswoman in the hatshop; Carroll. Like A lice’s A dven in the encounter with adult sexuality in tures in W on d erlan d , the film the is half bus; and in the street scene, when a dream and half nightmare. If she does suburban jogger transforms into a mur n ’t actually grow bigger or sm aller, derous pursuer. The panic situation, Craven’s Alice nevertheless shrinks and heavily dramatized by the use of hand swells in stature; and, at the opening of held cam era, fast cutting, and other the film ’s first extend ed narrative filmic means of generating suspense and sequence, even if she doesn’t walk through it, Alice is literally looking in a looking glass. If the name Alice has remained in common usage, however, one can not say the same for the term “m aidenhead”. This word has an anachronistic ring: it was a euphemism for virginity in a fictional era when young ladies kept theirs until the time when they were bed ded by the hero, on marriage, thus ensuring respectability, or seduced and abandoned by the villain, thereby ensuring that they would forever after live in a state of disgrace; in the first scenario, becoming one man’s property, in the second, every man’s property. Perhaps Craven is reviving the term to underline the connections with V ictorian fiction (children’s and w o m en ’s); perhaps also to rem ind us of the h istory of the repression of female sexuality. But maybe too she is using the term , Godard-like, as the sum of its com p o n en t parts, m aiden + head, whereby maiden = young single I woman, old-fashioned girl and/or vir provoking identification with the hero gin, and head = the seat of the intellect ine, arises out of an everyday experience, and the im agination, the exercise of and is resolved in an anti-clim ax. In self-control and common sense, and/or the process, common feminine fears are an addict. T h e film is made up of a highlighted: fear of entrapment in mar series of sketches which dramatize the riage, of the hard sell (social and fantasies o f a young w om an; th eir commercial), of the feminine mystique, source is in a maiden’s head. of sexuality (hetero and homosexual), of H ow ever, there is no head to be rape and violence. seen in the opening anecdote which pre Some of the film ’s scenes can be cedes the title. We see only the clothed described as classic Freudian scenarios torso of the young A lice, a headless representing primal fantasies: fantasies to rso. Alarm bells are ringing. She of seduction and of the primal scene. presses first one hip-pocket button, then The film is not just about feminine fears, the other, but the bell keeps ringing. about seeing oneself always as potential Finally, she succeeds in silencing the victim. It is also about feminine desires: ringing by pressing the right belly-pocket for control, for recognition, for intimacy,

a parable about the fragile female psyche | learning to I overcome feminine / repression.

for the caress of flesh on flesh. These desires emerge most strongly in the final two sketches, when the heroine is trans formed into a mature, confident adult, enjoying the experience of sexual encounter and the approbation of her peers. This trajectory, whereby Alice progresses from playing the rôle of vic tim to playing the rôle of active protagonist, suggests that this short experimental film is perhaps a parable about the fragile female psyche learning to overcome feminine repression, and gaining the confidence to act and move in the world. But, if it is a parable, it is not a plod ding or humourless one. The humour is there at the start: in the witty, aphoristic verve of the pocket but tons; in A lice’s over-reactions to ordinary situations; and in the excess of her popular acclaim in the final fantasy of fame. It is also there in the hyperbolic transform ation of the ordinary into the extraordinary in the scene in the littlest room, when plain white toilet-paper transforms magi cally into flow ing silk drapery, exquisitely light and richly colourful. Colour is a primary component of the film. T hrough the skill of Nicolette Freeman’s photography, its use in costume and decor assumes an almost abstract quality and a power ful resonance. At times (as in the disco scene), the film seems like a symphony in red and blue. Over and above the symbolic associations of particular colours (e.g., red connot ing passion, desire, danger), which are deployed in the costume design, there is also the sensual delight in colour for its own sake. In the street scene, where the suburban jogger pursues and panics Alice, Alice wears a red shirt and blue pants; her pursuer wears red pants and a blue top. This not only suggests that the pursuer is her alter ego, or her com plementary half, it also provokes interest in colour and costume as a com posi tional element in the film. This kind of approach to colour in costume is most pronounced in the concert scene, where all the women in the audience - and there are only women present - are dressed in differently-coloured dresses, forming a kaleidoscope.

in salmon satin dress and tiara, singing to a select audience of women at a pri vate concert in a domestic interior. She sings a strange aria, called “The Queen’s Lament”, after which she is applauded by the audience, w hich includes the figure of Alice, whose presence has been suppressed until the end of the scene.

This concert scene is initially quite perplexing, for it is the only scene which does not centre on Alice. It centres on The Queen (Jan Friedel), a diva dressed C I N E M A P A P E R S • AUGUST 1995

The song bemoans The Queen’s “cursed hair”, the “crown” that every woman must wear. Is this another variation on the meaning of “maidenhead” - a head of undisciplined hair? Is the diva a rôle model for Alice or a cautionary tale? The formal situation, indoor setting and mature age of the diva contrast with the inform al street setting and youthful person of Alice in the finale, when Alice is applauded by a group of cheering young female fans in a passing bus. Alice would seem to reject the diva’s kind of fame. She prefers the street to the concert stage; pop cul ture to high culture; youth to age; the informal to the formal.

C I N E M A P A P E R S • AUGUST 1995

These interpretations notw ith standing, I found the concert scene heavy and opaque dramatically, even if it was supposed to represent a stagey and contrived situation (it’s the old problem of how to represent boredom without boring the audience). Further more, the lyrics of the song are not clearly communicated to the audience because they are not clearly distin guishable on the soundtrack. Otherwise, Philip Brophy has done an excellent job of crafting the sound track, so that it is more like a soundscape than a soundtrack com posed of separate musical and sound elements. Like the colour, the sound

contributes most effectively to the dream-like effect of the film. This film enjoys higher production values than Craven’s last film, Pale Black. Unlike the earlier film, it was shot on 35mm film, in full colour, and employed the con siderable professional skills of an experienced cast and crew. W hile acknowledging the contribution made by the beautifully-crafted and -edited photography and soundtrack, and the fine performance of Alice Garner as Alice, M aidenhead remains a work that was conceived and directed by Marie Craven, and one whose concerns are not dissimilar from those of her earlier film, Pale Black.

The higher production values and lack of voice-over narration may make the film seem less personal, but it retains Craven’s signature, in its enigmatic qual ity, its ambivalences and tentativeness, and its formal playfulness, while dis playing an increased confidence in the manipulation of the medium of film. Craven operates in a space somewhere between the avant garde and the popu lar, in the general territory of Chantal Akerman’s musicals in shopping malls, if not yet with the stamina or assurance of Akerman. Her film is a welcome addition to the increasingly diverse range of feminine voices to be seen and heard in the Australian cinema. ©

history

Australia’s First Films: Our First Producers Abroad In part 14 o f this series, Chris Long and Clive Sowry examine the first major film made by an Australian production unit overseas. n 1901, Melbourne’s Salvation dental expenses were also to be covered Army Lim elight D epartm ent by the New Zealand government. made a 56-m in u te film , the The New Zealand cabinet approved longest and m ost im portant the expenditure on 20 April 19013 Work production of New Zealand’s ing details were subsequently negotiated colon ial period. 1 901 R o y a l between the Salvation Army Limelight Visit to N ew Z ea la n d is New Department’s chief, Major Joseph Perry, Z ealan d ’s oldest surviving and Hugh Pollen of the New Zealand movie, excepting a fragment of Colonial Secretary’s Department. Boer War troop footage.1 New Zealand government correspondence on A D istinguished D irector the commissioning and productionJoseph of Perry was an ideal director for the Royal Visit film also survives to indi the New Z ealand Royal T ou r film . cate our indu stry’s early m ethods, Although born in England, he emigrated problems and costs. to New Zealand with his parents as a

A N ovel O ffer

On 5 March 1901, with the Duke and Duchess of Y ork’s New Zealand visit approaching, the Salvation Army offered New Zealand Premier Richard Seddon its film facilities to produce “some permanent memorial of the festivities” ’ . In an attem pt to make profit jf from its Lim elight jj| Department, the SalvaJlj tion Army had alreadymade sim ilar offers to Australia’s colonial gov ernments, and arranged to produce similar Royal Visit coverage in Victoria. With the precedent of the Salvation Arm y’s film ing T h e Inauguration o f the C om m onw ealth for the New South Wales Government in January 1901, New Zealand’s cabinet gave the offer favourable consideration. It requested a quote for filming “the pro ceedings at the M ao ri gathering at Rotorua, and of, say, a quarter of a mile of a procession at each of the four prin cipal cities, namely A uckland, Wellington, Christchurch (and) Dunedin” ’. An estimate of £ 100 to £ 2 5 0 was given for film ing 200 to 500 feet (three to eight minutes) of fes tivities in each of the five location s m entioned . T he film stock would cost a shilling per foot (£3 per minute) for both negative and positive “being the present English p rice”4. Travelling and inci

boy of ten in 1874.6 At mneteen years of age, the young bootmaker and Dunedin Fire Brigade member attended one of New Z ealand ’s first Salvation Armymeetings and joined shortly afterwards. He spent more than two years at various New Zealand Salva tion Army Corps before his posting to Australia in jjj^ October 1885. Perry revisited New Zealand in 1896, by then in command of the Salvation Army’s M e lb o u r n e -b a s e d Limelight Department. Touring various public JS L iV halls and Salvation Army venues in the South Island and low er N orth Island, he exhibited his large co lle ctio n of lantern slides, many of his own making, with a bi-unial dissolving projector. The accrued profit was raised for the Pension Fund of the Army.8 A nother Lim elight tour of New Zealand occurred late in 1 8 9 8 , when Perry accompanied Commandant Her bert Booth to present the lecture, “The Social W ork of the Salvation Army”, illustrated by 200 lifemodel slides and 14 one-minute films. Perryhad produced all of the visuals and supervised the screenings as Booth delivered the narration. En route to New Zealand, they presented the lecture in the saloon of the R.M.S. “Waikare”, and in the following fo rt w night gave further screenings

in six towns to an enthusiastic recep tio n .9 The Lumière Ciném atographe used for their film presentations could also function as a cam era, and Perry reported taking “two or three M aori films” 10 during this tour, the first films to be made abroad by an Australian pro ducer. It is probable that these were shot at Otaki on 2 December 1 8 9 8 , where they had a Maori welcome at the [...] railway station, this being one of the leading corps in Major Holdaway’s division. The blood-and-fire natives [Salva tion Army members] greeted the Commandant in characteristic fash ion, nose-rubbing being indulged in ad lib, to the delight of all co n cerned.11 These films were taken during their rail journey from W ellington to New Plymouth. Only one New Zealand film is known to have been shot earlier, that being A. H. Whitehouse’s Opening o f the A uckland Exhibition, taken the previous day.12 With the advent of Australian Fed eration, Perry’s major film commissions to record the celebrations for the New South W ales governm ent (January 19 01 ) 13 and for the Victorian govern m ent (M ay 1 9 0 1 ) 14 made him our leading documentary producer. Perry in N e w Z ealan d - 1901 Perry was the most widely travelled and experienced filmmaker in Australasia

Left: The 1901 Royal Visitors: Their Royal Highnesses The Duke (later King George V) and Duchess (later Queen Mary) of Cornwall and York, the son and daughter-in-law of King Edward VII. Above: First moments of a mammoth event: Auckland Wharf, 11 June 1901, just before the berthing of the Royal Visitors and commencement of the Royal Visit to New Zealand, 1901.

when he returned to New Zealand on 19 May 1901A He accompanied Com mandant Booth on this tour, presenting the lecture, “Soldiers of the Cross”, in A uckland, W anganui, W ellin g ton , C h ristchu rch, D unedin and In ver cargill.16 Described as “a story of the Christian Martyrs, specially illustrated by 200 life model views and 20 bioscope pictures”1" {not a feature film), the lec ture drew packed houses. A djutant James Dutton took over as projectionist for the South Island venues, as Perry was busy preparing to film the Royal Visit.18 Major Perry arranged with the Gov ernm ent and with local recep tio n committees for the erection of special platforms from which to film the pro cessions, “not only that he may be free from interruption by the public, but also because it is essential that the machinery should be as free from vibration as pos sible”19. To travel to each locality visited by the Royal Couple, Perry arranged passage on the special government train and boat services. Travel passes were provided for Perry and his crew of three assistants. Tw o, Captain Jo h n Brodie C I N E M A P A P E R S • A UGUST 1995

and Adjutant Ebenezer Jackson, came from the Limelight Department in M el b ou rne, while the third , E rnest Gladding, was from Auckland. Official passes to let them through police and military barriers were also issued, along w ith “N .Z . G ov ernm ent Kinematographist” labels for their baggage.20 W ith these arrangements com pleted, Perry’s freedom to choose subjects to shoot in each location was maximized.21 Filming began on 11 June 1901 at Auckland. Shortly after the berthing of the “Ophir”, the Governor, the Premier and ministers boarded the ship to wel come the Royal Couple.22 Perry filmed the arrival of the welcoming party and afterwards filmed the Duke and Duchess stepping ashore. The next camera posi tion was beside the Mayor of Auckland’s platform . Photographs show that the C I N E M A P A P E R S • AUGU S T 1 995

Warwick Bioscope Model “A” camera was used here, but we have no record of what - if anything - was filmed.25 Fol lowing the mayoral welcome, the royal procession moved up Queen Street and on to Government House, where Perry was on hand to film the arrival of the royal carriage and its escort. A marchpast of Friendly Societies was also filmed here. No further filming took place in Auckland. T h e R oyal C o u p le’s first day in Rotorua was spent viewing the thermal areas of Whakarewarewa and Tikitere. At W hakarewarewa, Perry filmed the Pohutu and W airoa geysers erupting, and other scenes of the royal party view ing the re g io n ’s natural w onders. A highlight of the visit was the great Maori “hui” of welcome at the Rotorua race course on 15 June. Here Perry filmed

hakas, poi dances and the presentation of gifts from the many M ao ri tribes attending to the Royal Couple. In W ellington, T he N ew Z ea la n d Tim es of 19 June 1901 reported on the progress of the filming: Some successful kinem atograph film s of yesterday’s proceedings were secured on behalf of the Gov ernm ent by M a jo r Perry, o f the Salvation Army, and his assistants. The operators had a commanding stand on the wharf, and had a ‘good shot’ at His Royal Highness as he stepped ash ore, in a favou rable light. Their next position was on the sunny side of the W estport Arch, close to the line of the procession. H ere about 2 7 0 feet of excellent film was secured. At the Town Hall ceremony, the stand available was

not very suitable, but some results will follow. M ajor Perry will take other films in W ellington, and he w ill also be at w ork during their R oyal H igh n esses’ v isit to Christchurch and Dunedin. It may be m entioned th at he to o k over 2 0 0 0 feet of film at Auckland and Rotorua. In addition to fine Kine matograph pictures of hakas and poi dances at R o to ru a, he has taken numerous stereoscopic and ordinary photographs.24 In Christchurch, the military review at Hagley Park was the principal event of interest, more than 600 feet of film being exposed. The parade of troops, 10,700 strong, was drawn from the Volunteers and C adets, including men recen tly returned from the Boer W ar, who were presented w ith medals by the Duke.

history

Wellington, 19 June 1901. Perry and assistant in fore ground with Warwick model "B" camera filming medal presentation ceremony at Parliament House. Duke of York at top of steps in busby making presentation. From Loughnan's Royalty in New Zealand, p. 187. Clive Sowry collection. Hagley Park review, Christchurch, 24 June 1901, show ing the special camera platform. Model "A" Bioscope with cloth cover being operated on the right of the stand; model "B" on tripod standing Idle in the fore ground of the stand. From The Weekly Press, Christchurch, 3 July 1901. Clive Sown/ collection. Route of New Zealand Royal Tour, 1901. Course of the RMS "Ophir" (fine line) and of the Duke's overland jour neys in both islands (heavy lines). C. Sowry collection. From R. A. Loughnan's Royalty in New Zealand, New Zealand Government Printer, Wellington, 1902. The Union Steamship RMS "Walkare", on which Booth and Perry gave the first shipboard screenings of Aus tralian films, en route to New Zealand, Initially between Melbourne and Hobart on 16 November 1898, and later between Hobart and The Bluff (Invercargill). Photograph from The War Cry (Melbourne), 3 December 1898, p. 9. Courtesy of George Ellis, Salvation Army Archives, Melbourne. Saloon of RMS "Walkare", In which Herbert Booth and Joseph Perry presented their film-illustrated lecture, "The Social Work of the Salvation Army In Australia", while en route to New Zealand, November 1898. From The War Cry (Melbourne), 3 December 1898, p. 9. Cour tesy of George Ellis, Salvation Army Archives, Melbourne.

New Zealand had already sent six con tingents to South A frica, and medal presentations to returned men were made by the Duke in other New Zealand centres he visited: Auckland, Rotorua, Wellington and Dunedin, where the tour ended on 27 June 1901.25 Perry finished filming that day, The last shot covered the departure of the royal train from the Dunedin railway station as the royal party left for Lyttel ton to embark via the s.s. “Ophir” for Tasmania. It was stated at this time that Perry had used some 5 ,0 0 0 feet (83 minutes) of film in New Zealand.26

C am eras, B udget and Results In a letter dated 22 May 1 901, Perry advised the Colonial Secretary, “I have two of the very latest cam eras with me.”2 Although it was reported that one of Perry’s cameras was capable of being “operated for 35 minutes contin uously, 1 2 5 0 feet of film being used without a stoppage”28 —a reference to the Warwick Bioscope Model “A” cam era - none of the films taken appears to have exceeded 150 feet, the capacity of the Warwick Bioscope model “B” cam era, which he also had w ith him. It would appear that negative film was

available to him in lengths of no more than 150 feet. R eference is made to some films being “duplicates”29’ which could indicate that the two cameras were in use simultaneously in some loca tions to produce a negative for users other than the New Zealand Govern ment. It is known that some films taken by Perry were not included in the list of subjects supplied to the New Zealand Government, and it is likely that the R otorua films advertised for sale by Baker & Rouse would not have been made from the government negatives, but from negatives exposed simultane ously in another camera. Perry reported on the results of his filming in a letter dated 17 July 1901 to New Zealand Premier Seddon.30 This letter gives us a good idea of the con tent of the completed film, with brief descriptions and lengths of the sub jects covered (see Filmography). Perry noted that, while the co n tract only called for 2,500 feet (42 mins) of nega tive to be shot, he actually shot 3 ,3 6 0 feet (56 mins) The government, feeling it was entitled to claim all the negatives, indicated a w illingness to purchase everything listed by Perry.31 This lifted the cost of the film itself from the expected £ 2 5 0 to £ 3 3 6 . A file note reveals that Pollen expected incidental and travelling expenses to be £ 6 0 or £ 7 0 32, but the final total came to £107/10/-.33 It would have been even higher if Perry and his crew hadn’t been given free government travel passes. The invoice for producing the film was issued by the Salvation Army on 22 November 1901. It is curious that this was issued in favour of the general fund of the Salvation Army rather than The Australian Kinematographic Company, which the~ Army had set up in January 1 9 0 1 .34 The amount charged for the film itself was £452/5/-; the two pro jecto rs sold to the New Zealand Government to exhibit the films com prised an extra £ 1 7 0 , w hich with travelling and incidental expenses of £107/10/0 brought the project’s total C I N E M A P A P E R S • AUGUST 1995

budget to a massive £729/15/-. This was roughly 30% m ore than the budget on th eir m u ch -to u ted “Sold iers o f the Cross”!35 E xh ib itin g th e Royal V is it Film As the New Zealand government had no means of screening its film, Perry offered to sell it a p ro je cto r “of the latest type”36. W hen the government responded with an order for two pro jectors, Perry saw an opportunity to sell a second print, and offered to make it at the reduced rate of ninepence per fo ot.37 The negatives, two prints, two projectors and accessories finally arrived in N ew Z ealand on 2 0 D ecem ber 1 9 0 1 .38 T h e shipm ent of five cases remained unopened in the Government B uildings until Febru ary 1 9 0 2 .39 Although the government could then screen the film , no im m ediate plans were made to do so, but private enter prise had already seen to that. A Wellington syndicate, The Royal Tour Bioscope Company, gave the first screening of the films “taken for the New Zealand Government” at Welling ton’s Opera House on 30 July 1 9 0 1 .40 On the following day, touring exhibitors Cooper and Macdermott began exhibit ing its p rin t of the R oto ru a films at Wanganui.41 Both companies probably

obtained their prints from Perry’s sales agents, Baker & Rouse. C ooper and M acderm ott apparently only had the Rotorua Maori coverage, whereas the Royal Tour Bioscope Company had the complete tour film, including several scenes which were not filmed for the government (see filmography.) The first planned screening of the Royal Tour Bioscope Company at Wan ganui on 25 July 1901 was abandoned owing to technical problems.42 Even its first successful show, on 30 July 1901 at Wellington, was poorly reviewed by The N ew Z ealan d T im es: T h e pictures around w hich the greatest interest centred were those depicting incidents in connection with the Duke’s visit, especially the Maori display at Rotorua. ‘A Maori Haka’ figured on the programme, but not on the sheet, but the poi dance was well represented. A pic ture of the ‘Peapod G eyser’ was promised, but not performed. Some very effective pictures of the Hagley Park review were shown, and the D u k e’s arrival at A uckland was vividly depicted, though the length was not great.43 A reviewer in Wellington’s Evening Post also expressed disappointment: The exhibition, though good on the

whole, was scarcely up to expecta tions, the screen being small, and som e o f the p ictu res rath er blurred.44 The Royal Tour Bioscope Company’s O pera House season was lim ited to three nights, and was managed by the 2 8 -y e a r-o ld W . F. B row n 45, “ later known as “W alter Franklyn B arrett”, the famous producer of Australian silent films. He later claimed to have filmed the R oyal T o u r as “ O fficia l C in e m atographer on b eh alf of the N ew Zealand Government”46, a claim con tradicted by official records.47 The only known subsequent exhibition of the syn dicate’s print of the film was given at the Missions to Seamen in Wellington on 11 April 1 9 0 2 , by Jo h n H enry Brown48 (brother of W. F. Brow n), a W ellington photographer. Six weeks earlier, J . H. Brow n had inspected the films, p rojectors and accessories purchased from Perry by the govern ment, at the request of the Colonial Secretary.49 The government’s copy of the film was privately screened at W ellington’s

Filming medal presentation at Hagley Park. Perry aligns

Sydney Street Schoolroom on 2 April

the camera tripod, at right, while an assistant checks

1902 to an audience invited by Premier Seddon, including the Governor, Lord

the front viewfinder of the camera beside the camera lens. From The Weekly Press, 3 July 1901. Clive Sowry

Ranfurly.50 The films were introduced

collection.

by Robert Loughnan, official historian of the N ew Z ealand tour. It was reported that the second print had been

Perry and camera assistant, at left, filming the Duke's carriage departing from the ceremony of the laying of the foundation stone of the Canterbury Monument, Vic

dispatched to New Z ealand ’s Agent

toria Square, Christchurch, 22 June 1901. From The

General in London for screening dur

Weekly Press, 3 July 1901. Clive Sowry collection.

ing the Coronation festivities, but no reports of L ond on screenings are

Oldest surviving production account: the invoice for the

known.31 The last known screenings of the

Salvation Army Limelight Department's 56-minute film,

film (or perhaps of a new print struck from the original negatives) were in

Archives of New Zealand, ref IA1 1901/3739 attached

1 9 1 0 , given by the N ew Zealand

Major Perry, our kinematographic expert, and his

Picture Company at Wellington’s Town

renowned assistant, staff-captain Dutton.

1901 Royal Visit to New Zealand. Courtesy of National to IA1 1908/864.

Hall on 25 May.52 Later it was shown in the L ivin g N ew Z ea la n d picture pro

C I N E M A P A P E R S • A UGUS T 1 995

gramme screened at several picture theatres in the W est’s

Em T*

and Hayward’s Pictures chains.33

P^7

retrospective

“A Hundred Years of the Daisy” Barrie Pattison examines the recent Gaumont Retrospective held in Sydney and seen by all too few. he G au m on t C om pany, acco rd in g to ch airm an N ich o las Sey d o u x, is the world’s oldest film producer. L argely funded by Renault (the connection goes back to the 19th Century), a massive Gaumont retrospec tive was sent to New York, complete with new subtitled prints, an English-version compilation history and a booklet. The season was popular enough to be held over for a month. A fragment of the programme was then detached and shipped to Sydney. What happened next is one of the most revealing episodes in the ongoing saga o f specialist exhibition in this country ... but let’s not race ahead. T h e m ore recen t m aterial in the programme was fam iliar from televi sion, video and th eatrical show ing: Joseph Losey’s Don Giovanni (19 7 9 ), Rainer W erner Fassbinder’s Querelle (1 9 8 2 ) and Hans Jürgen Syberberg’s Parsifal ( 1 9 8 2 ) . T h e c o m p ila tio n ’s glimpse of unreleased Yves M ontand film s, and Italian produ ctions from Ettore Scola and Duccio Tessari, looked more tempting. It was welcome, though, to get our first sight o f Luc Besson’s new, U.S.made Léon (The Professional), where B esson regu lar, Je a n R e n o , fin ally moves to the centre of the action. Reno plays the “cleaner” assassin who finds his life complicated by 12year old M athilda (Natalie Portman). The opening where she must walk past the heavies, who are in the act of killing her entire fam ily, and k n o ck on his door, is the best thing Besson has done. Léon has already achieved the contro versy it courted. M o re sig n ifica n t was th e m o st ambitious early film event yet mounted in this country. After horror shows like the AFI’s trying to do Victor Sjöstrom, one feared the worst. However, Paris had taken the m atter m ore seriously than we are used to seeing here. Gau m ont flew in F ran ço is de B eck e r, a pianist and com poser experienced in screening at the M usée d’O rsai, and required that the material be shown in the manner intended. One programme needed a single p ro jecto r load to go through fo u r changes o f ap ertu re, speed, lens and masking, with a flickerfree shutter setting. The Pitt Centre rose to the challenge.

Here, at last, was a demonstration of the Cinémathèque model that Aus tra lia needs. O f co u rse, fo r an unmotivated audience, film from the silen t period was o f no in terest. As always, the invited crowd that filled opening night went away when there was no more free liquor at subsequent screenings. T h e officials who m ight have been expected to be sitting with notebooks open in their laps were con spicuously absent. W hat was on offer, however, was one of the largest missing pieces of film history jig-saw. This material included the p re-W o rld W ar I p e rio d w hen Europe, mid France in particular, was the dominant force in world cinema, simultaneous with film’s evolution from a novelty into the major entertainment form of our time. Our notion of the development of the movies has always had an American accent for various reasons, some of them sound - the availability and excellence of much U.S. m aterial - and some of them suspect - the chauvinism and buy ing power of some American institutions. While many of the pre-W W l short trick films, melodramas, newsreels and com edies shown w ere unsurprising, there were items which appear to have no U.S. counterparts. Day in the Life of a Pair o f Legs (1 9 0 9 ) and Trichnomie (1 9 1 2 ) were done entirely and effec tively in shots o f feet and hands resp ectiv ely , until the fin al tilt up reveals the faces of their players. It was good to finally see comedi ans like Onésime and Calino, but the real pay-off was Jean Durand’s Le Rail way de la Mort (1912), one of his series o f short W esterns with Jo e Hamman. Playing a character based on Broncho

Billy Anderson, Hamman used to gal lop across the Carmargue and shoot it out with Gaston M odot. This film had effective tinting and silhouette effects, and a plot that pre-figured Greed (Erich von Stroheim, 1925) and The Treasure o f the Sierra Madre (Jo h n H u ston , 1948). Hamman leaps from a railway bridge onto a moving train (and slips) and de-rails a locomotive, untroubled by the fact that his Silver City home is d otted w ith th o se tria n g u la r E u ro pean metal power posts. Attention centred on the work of Alice Guy, much discussed since the 1970s, since she is, we are told, the first w om an d irecto r. She also film ed in décors before Georges Méliès, In the examples on show, there was a curious, 19th-Century sensibility. Sur la Baricade (1907) had a mother inter vening to save her son from the firing squad. Madame a ses Envies showed a pregnant woman (in badly-matching medium-shots) gulping down any object in the scene, before giving birth in the cabbage patch. The second o f Guy’s lives o f Christ, La Vie du Jesus Christ, at a half-hour, was the biblical spectac ular o f 1 9 0 6 , but it proved an uninspired re-stag in g , in p ainted M en essier-G arn ier d écors, o f Bible illustrations, which picked up remark ably in V ictor Jasset’s exteriors. The pop-up Jesus (“one of our best super impositions”) is comic now. The body of Guy’s work, her trans fer to the U.S. and marriage to Herbert (The Young Painter) Blache were still to come. Guy had also handled some of the G au m ont P h on o scen es o f 1 9 0 0 -7 . These turned out be mechanically-perfect filmings of then popular artists, like

Now, the most ambitious film-history event yet mounted in this country, using first-rate material in two city theatres, is being described as a disaster.

Mayol, lip-synching to their recordings of pop numbers o f the day in front o f scenic cloths. Also on show, and par ticularly striking, were the examples of the Trichrome colour process from the 1 9 1 0 s. The still lifes o f flow ers and plants, including a stop m otion, drew gasps of admiration, though the process was subject to fringing and convergence faults out of doors, on the evidence of the modern copies. Certainly, the event’s stand-out was the running of two of Louis Feuillade’s serials, Les Vampires (1 9 1 5 - 6 ) andJu dex (1 9 1 6 ) . T h e se are th e lin k between the last century’s penny dread fuls and M ab u se, the H olly w oo d Chapter Plays, James Bond and Manga, a list that many see as a decline. In these, fantastic secret organizafions play out th eir intrigues on the still-recognizable real streets o f Paris. Hooded figures scamper across ro of tops or clam ber up apartm ent-block walls. René Cresté, as the caped cru ", sader, pilots a m otor b oat past rural towns. The weighty trunk o f the mis sionary is represented as containing a bell for his South Am erican church. A ctually, it houses a can n o n w hich shells the prison ship from his hotel window. On a train, a group of butter fly hunters surround a spade-bearded banker and assassinate him with Irma V ep’s hat pin. Like Edouard M athé, as the Mondial Reporter, we recognize her name as a.cryptographe before it anim ates on the Club des V am pires poster. In this character, and that o f the m an-ruining Diana M o nti, Feuillade offers his most memorable star, Musidora, her expressive features and style o f p erfo rm an ce still ap p ealing to a modern audience. Her “vamp” charac ters (the word may derive from its use by Feuillade) are more involving than the forces of righteousness. Contrast her stripping to black tights and diving in to the m ill race to avoid th e vengeance of the De Tremeuse broth ers, or wowing her accom plices with her surprise stage act af th e Club des Vampires, with René Cresté’s stiff elder Judex or Mathé in his bowler hat, over-sf coat and pyjamas leading the kep i’d SWAT team: agreeably-ridiculous. F e u illa d e ’s h ero es all seem to o reliant on their grey-headed mothers. W h ich w ould you ra th er a tten d : Mathé/Philippe Guerand’s bourgeois engagement party, where the highlight C I N E M A P A P E R S , * . AUGUS T 1995

Louis Feuillard's Judex.

is poisoning the butler, or Irma Vep’s betrothal to the master chem ist-poiso n er-g an g c h ie f, w ho is also a lightning sketch artist, with gang girls dancing on the table in their bloomers? M arcel Levesque, the com ic, also provides some o f the films’ most sur prising moments. And how about the scene w here the characters go to the m ovies f| a t th e G au m ont P alais, o f course? The screen image is contrived by having the acto rs stand behind a black surround, anticipating Keaton in S h e r lo c k , Jr . ( 1 9 2 4 ) , and Edw ard D m ytryk’s T elev ision Spy (1 9 3 9 ). T o provide a diversion, a gangster reads from his, journal, shown as unrelated bullfighting scenes, the kind of digres sio n w e ,alw ays th o u g h t Je a n -L u c G od ard got from Dashiell Hammett. T he entrances are as richly eccentric as Peking Opera. Diana M onti lays a,trap fo r Ju d e x , only to^.find the d oors opened by a performing poodle walk ing on its hind legs or by young Bout de Zan, star of hundreds o f Feuillade sh o rt co m ed ies, h ere as the Çooganesque lejylôm e Réglisse. Irma V ep’s plan, to carry o ff the bank dis patch is interrupted by the arrival of the messenger she murdered the night before. T e ch n ica lly , Feuillad e had p ro gressed b eyon d the sta g e-lik e full-length figures of earlier work, like L e Violin, here on show. His composi tions now crop figures at the ankle, the so-called “American” shot, and he cuts in closer on the same action. The cam era, how ever, remains locked down. Pans like the one that shows the Vam pires’ office to be adjacent to that of

C I N E M A P A P E R S • AUGUST 1995

rival gang leader, Fernand Hermann, are so rare as to count as special effects. Awkward 180-degree edits are made when the action moves through door ways. Even though F eu illa d e’s serials have the lim itations o f their time, at seven hours a piece (the gigglers give up early on) they have time to draw us into their own strange art-deco world. T heir juxtaposition o f the weird and the mundane reaches today’s audiences as it did in the years when it was hailed as a source fo r the Surrealist m ove ment. After this, M arcel L’Herbier’s cel ebrated E l D o r a d o ( 1 9 2 1 ) was something of an anti-climax. Eve Fran cis, dignified lead of F em m e d e N u lle Part, is surprisingly effective as Sybilla, the earthy tango sensation of the sleazy E l D orad o nighterie. A tearful plot has her son dying of too much eye shadow, and the action is tricked out with elab orate captions and devices, like a white fa b ric surrou nd on the w edding sequence Only the final suicide, staged on the o th er side o f the drop cu rta in , while the rapist and eccentric dancer goes in to his a ct, now im presses. L’Herbier would go on to do better. Early sound was represented by a new copy o f Z éro d e C o n d u ite (Jean Vigo, 1933) and, more intriguing, the truncated release version of maritime specialist Jean Grém illon’s foray into Jo se p h C o n rad te rrito r y , D in a h la M étisse (1 9 3 1 ). On a passenger liner on its way to Noumea, the orchestra plays “L ittle W h ite L ie s’’ and the Coloured woman is the centre of atten

tion , watched disapprovingly by her black husband, who they hint has skills in voodoo. The wife meets crewman Charles V an el and, w hen he hand les her roughly, bites him. She vanishes and Vanel faces the Captain’s inquisition. Outside o f a peculiar masked-ball sequence, with the husband splashing his fingers in a goldfish bowl, the short ening has given the work a precision, and the playing of Vanel and the cou ple are assured by any standard. The naval detail intrigues. Also new to this country were two films by the legendary Sacha Guitry, b oth o ffe rin g M ichel Sim on in top form . L e P o is o n (1 9 5 1 ) had Sim on locked into a vile marriage with Ger maine Rouver. Hearing about celebrity lawyer Je a n D eb u cou rt, he has him advise on a hypothetical murder. Back home, he applies this knowledge just in tim e. H is w ife has p o iso n ed his w ine. S im o n ’s d efen ce b eco m es a com ic number cross-cut with the vil lage kids’ guillotine games. Equally perverse, L es T rois fo n t la P a ire ( 1 9 5 7 ) was co -d ire c te d by Clement Duhour, who plays the gang leader. Guitry can be seen to be near death from tuberculosis, in his p ro logue appearance, and this was his last work. Simon is the inspector investigat ing a killing captured on film by an (unlicensed) crew . G uitry’s cam era man, Philippe A gostini, him self has quite a large speaking part as the on screen p h o to g ra p h er. T h in g s are com plicated when the clow n recog nized from the film turns out to have a twin, neither o f them being guilty, though both confess. Even at the end of his powers, Gui try was still able to com municate his own cynical-comic world view. O ver a ll, the G au m on t event achieved one o f its aims. How many viewers had considered the company’s output as a unit before? We went from the El Gee in the Daisy pattern (a pho neticized version o f Léon Gaum ont’s initials combined with the flower they call Marguerite, his wife’s name) that the scenic painter added to the sets of th e ir h alf-reelers, to the com putergraphic version now employed. It does link to g e th e r. E l D o r a d o was p art film ed in S p a in ’s A lham bra Palace where Alice Guy shot travel footage. The plot of L es Trois fon t la Paire is re worked in André Cayatte’s L e G laiv e et la B alan ce (T w o a re G uilty, 1963). Léon uses the V am pire gang’s lasso technique on his victims, even if they crash down the film’s stairwells rather than get caught in blankets and stuffed in wicker baskets with “G ” on the side. Can we see a corporate philoso phy? W hen Feuillade made F a n tôm as

in 1913, he was the leading director of an organization which claimed to be the world’s largest film producer, only to see the d om in an ce o f E u ro p ean work wrested away by the more fluid, more realistic American cinema, when T h e B irth o f a N a t io n (D . W . G r if fith ) ap p eared in 1 9 1 5 . W as the e x p e rim e n ta tio n o f the 1 9 2 0 s the equivalent o f H ollyw ood’s flirtation with documentary realism or subjec tive cam era in the 1 9 4 0 s when they lost their status to television? There is a similar shift to conser vatism w ith th e ir re -w o rk in g L ’A t a la n t e (Jean V ig o , 1 9 3 4 ) and Dinah la Métisse against their directors’ wishes, and the support o f establish ment figures like Guitry and Gérard Oury, rather than the trendy Nouvelle V ague. H o w ev er, it was G au m on t w hich brought back R ob ert Bresson out of a six-year retirem ent with Un C o n d em n é à M ort E st É c h a p p é o u le Vent Sou ffle où II Veut (1956). An event like this raises more ques tions than it answers - as it should. W hy is there a gap between the early years of sound and the end o f W orld W ar II? W hat about the hundreds o f other films of Alice Guy and of Feuil lade? Some sources credit him with the early L ’h o m m e A im a n té (1 9 0 7 ) and Une D a m e V r a im en t B ien ( 1 9 0 8 ) , which were shown, and the clip from his L ’A g on ie d e B y z a n ce (1 9 1 6 ) was stunning. a T his is a glim pse o f w orld-class film -history work, a reminder o f the 1960s seasons with which Henri Lan g lo is ’ C in ém ath èq u e re-lau n ch ed Feuillade, though Ju d ex is now an hour longer than the copy, meaning that De Becker was improvising through unfa miliar footage, while L es Vampires has acquired impeccably-filmed new insets, shot in 1985 by the director’s nephew. W atching the gassing o f the society ball, the much anthologized sequence, at the co rrect speed in the best sur viving copy, and com paring it to the usual version, underlined the value of what is being done. And what happened? Though it had been in the pipeline all year, the season arrived at a week’s notice. Background literature, essential to an event of this nature, was confined to the usual glossy sheet which was, even if you got one of the copies amended by hand, inaccurate and inadequate. Press coverage homed in on the participation of Australian celebrity performers read ing tran slation (from bem used to excellent renditions). Once-in-a-lifetime viewing opportunities were given their only runs at the same time, leaving the Academy Cinemas to show E l D orado to o fast and in silence. T h e ^ ch aracter in the row behind me, who’d found he’d just paid P * "

back issues

A guide to what's in stock

T hirte en e arly issues, p re v io u s ly u navailable, are n o w fo r sale (along w ith o th e r issues)! The q u a n titie s are lim ite d , so o rd e r y o u rs to d a y ! See te a r-o u t Subscription Form to order.

Number 1 (January 1974)

Number 11 (January 1977)

Number 28 (Aug-Sept 1980)

Number 48 (Oct-Nov 1984)

Number 68 (March 1988)

Number 90 (October 1992)

Emile De Antonio, Jill Robb, Samuel Z. Arkoff, Roman Polanski, Saul Bass, The Picture Show Man

Bob Godfrey, Diane Kurys, Tim Bums, John O'Shea, Bruce Beresford, Bad Timing, Roadgames

Ken Cameron, Michael Pattinson, Jan Sardi, Yoram Gross, Bodyline, The Slim Dusty Movie

Martha Ansara, Channel 4, Soviet cinema: part 2, Jim McBride, Glamour, Ghosts Of The Civil Dead, Feathers, Ocean, Ocean

Alain Resnais, Brian McKenzie, Angela Punch McGregor, Ennio Morricone, Jane Campion, horror films, Nie! Lynne

The Last Days o f Chez Nous, Ridley Scott 1492, Stephen Elliott Frauds, Giorgio Mangiamele, Cultural Differences and Ethnicity in Australian Cinema, John Frankenheimer's Year o f the Gun V .

Number 12 (April 1977)

Number 29 (Oct-Nov 1980)

Ken Loach, Tom Haydon, Donald Sutherland, Bert Deling, Piero Tosi, John Dankworth, John Scot Days o f Hope, The Getting o f Wisdom

Bob Ellis, Uri Windt, Edward Woodward, Lino Brocka, Stephen Wallace, Philippine cinema. Cruising, The Last Outlaw

Number 13 (July 1977)

Number 30 (Dec 1980-Jan 1981)

Louis Malle, Paul Cox, John Power, Jeanine Seawell, Peter Sykes, Bernardo Bertolucci, In Search o f Anna

David Williamson, Ray Harryhausen, Peter Weir, Antony Ginnane, Gillian Armstrong, Ken G. Hall, The Cars that Ate Paris

Sam Fuller,pBreaker' Morantrethought Richard Lester, Canada supplement The Chain Reaction, Blood Money

Number 31 (March-April 1981) Bryan Brown, looking in on Dressed to Kill, The Last Outlaw, Fatty Finn, Windows: lesbian as villain, the new generation

Number 2 (April 1974) Censorship, Frank Moorhouse, Nicolas Roeg, Sandy Harbutt, Rim under Allende, Between the Wars, Alvin Purple

Bill Shepherd, Cliff Green, Werner Herzog, Between Wars, Petersen, A Salute to the Great MacArthy

Bill Bain, Isabelle Huppert Brian May, Polish cinema, Newsfront The Night the Prowler

Number 18 (Oct-Nov 1978) John Lamond, Sonia Borg, Alain Tanner, Indian cinema, Dimboola, Cathy's Child

Number 19 (Jan-Feb 1979) Antony Ginnane, Stanley Hawes, Jeremy Thomas, Andrew Sams, sponsored documentaries. Blue Fin

Number 20 (March-April 1979) Ken Cameron, Claude Lelouch, Jim Sharman, French film. My Brilliant Career

Number 21 (May-June 1979) Number 5 (March-April 1975) Albie Thoms on surf movies, Charles Chauvel filmography, Ross Wood, Byron Haskin, Brian Probyn, Inn o f the Damned

Vietnam on Rim, the Cantrills, French cinema. Mad Max, Snapshot The Odd Angry Shot Franklin on Hitchcock

Number 6 (July-August 1975) Steve Spielberg, Glenda Jackson, Susan Sontag, Jack Thompson, Bruce Smeaton, The Removalist, Sunday Too Far Away

Number 93 (M ay 1993)

Number 53 (September 1985)

Number 73 (M ay 1989)

Jane Campion and The Piano, Laurie Mclnnes and Broken Highway, Tracey Moffatt and Bedevil, Lightworks and Avid, Australia's first films: part 3

Brian Brown, Nicolas Roeg, Vincent Ward, Hector Crawford, Emir Kusturica, NZ film and TV, Return to Eden

Cannes '89, Dead Calm, Franco Nero, Jane Campion, The Prisoner o f S t Petersburg, Frank Pierson, Pay TV

Number 54 (November 1985)

Number 74 (July 1989)

Graeme Clifford, Bob Weis, John Boorman, Menahem Golan, rock videos. Wills and Burke, The Great Bookie Robbery, The Lancaster Miller Affair

The Delinquents, Australians in Hollywood, Chinese cinema, Philippe Mora, Yuri Sokol, Twins, Ghosts... o f the Civil Dead, Shame screenplay

Number 55 (January 1986)

Number 75 (September 1989)

James Stewart Debbie Byrne, Brian Thompson, Paul Verhoeven, Derek Meddings, tie-in marketing. The Right Hand Man. Birdsville

Sally Bongers, the teen movie, animated, Edens Lost PetSematary, Martin Scorsese and Paul Schrader, Ed Pressman

Number 33 (June-July 1976) John Duigan, the new tax concessions, Robert Altman, Tomas Gutierrez Alea, Edward Fox, Gallipoli, Roadgames

Numbers 34 and 35 SOLD OUT Number 36 (February 1982) Kevin Dobson, Brian Kearney, Sonia Hofmann, Michael Rubbo, Blow Out 'Breaker'Morant Body Heat The Man from Snowy River

Number 56 (March 1986)

Simon Wincer, Quigley Down Under, Kennedy Miller, Terry Hayes, Bangkok Hilton, John Duigan, Flirting, Romero, Dennis Hopper, Frank Howson, Ron Cobb

Numbers 57 SOLD OUT

Number 77 (January 1990)

Number 37 (April 1982)

Number 58 (July 1986)

Stephen MacLean, Jacki Weaver, Carlos Saura, Peter Ustinov, women in drama. Monkey Grip

Woody Allen, Reinhard Hauff, Orson Welles, the Cinémathèque Française, The Fringe Dwellers, Great Expectations: The Untold Story, The Last Frontier

Number 38 (June 1982) Geoff Burrowes, George Miller, James Ivory, Phil Noyce, Joan Fontaine, Tony Williams, law and insurance. Far East

Numbers 79 SOLD OUT

Ian Pringle Isabelle Eberhardt Jane Campion, An Angel A t M y Table, Martin Scorsese and Goodfellas, Presumed Innocent

Priscilla, Queen o f the Desert Victorian sup plement P- J- Hogan and Muriel's Wedding, Ben Lewin and Lucky Break, Australia's first films: Part 9

Number 82 (March 1991)

Number 102 (December 1994)

The Godfather Part III, Barbet Schroeder, Reversal o f Fortune, Black Robe, Raymond Hollis Longford, Backsliding

Once Were Warriors, films we love. Back of Beyond, Cecil Holmes, Undsay Anderson, Body M elt AFC supplement Spider & Rose, Australia's Rrst Rims: Part 10

Number 59 (September 1986)

Australian television. Franco Zeffirelli, Nadia Tass, Bill Bennett Dutch cinema, movies by microchip, Otello

Number 61 (January 1987) Alex Cox, Roman Polanski, Philippe Mora, Martin Arminger, film in South Australia, Dogs in Space, Howling III

Igor Auzins, Paul Schrader, Peter Tammer, Liliana Cavani, Colin Higgins, The Year of Living Dangerously

Number 25 (Feb-March 1980)

Number 42 (March 1983) Mel Gibson, John Waters, Ian Pringle, Agnes Varda, copyright Strikebound, The Man from Snowy River

Number 43 (May-June 1983) Sydney Pollack, Denny Lawrence, Graeme Clifford, The Dismissal, Sumner Locke Elliott's Careful He Might Hear You

Number 44-45 (April 1984) David Stevens, Simon Wincer, Susan Lambert a personal history of Cinema Papers, Street Kids

Number 46 (July 1984)

Number 100 (August 1994)

Number 81 (December 1990)

Brian Trenchard-Smith, Ian Holmes, Arthur Hiller, Jerzy Toeplrtz, Brazilian cinema. Harlequin

Paul Co)t Russell Mulcahy, Alan J. Pakula, Robert Duvall, Jeremy Irons, Eureka Stockade, Waterfront The Boy in the Bush, A Woman Suffers, Street Hero

Milos Forman, Max Lemon, Miklos Jancso, Luchino Visconti, Caddie, The Devil's Playground

Number 99 (June 1994) Krzysztof Kieslowski, Ken G. Hall Tribute, cinematography supplement Geoffrey Burton, Pauline Chan and Traps, Australia's first films: Part 8

Number 40 (October 1982)

Number 41 (December 1982)

Number 9 (June-July 1976)

Number 97-8 (April I994) 20th Anniversary double issue with New Zealand supplement Simon Wincer and Lightning Jack, Richard Franklin on leaving America, Australia's first films: part 7

Henri Safran, Michael Ritchie, Pauline Kael, Wendy Hughes, Ray Barrett M y Dinner with Andre, The Return of Captain Invincible

Number 24 (Dec-Jan 1980)

Charles H. Joffe, Jerome Heilman, Malcolm Smith, Australian nationalism, Japanese cinema, Peter Weir, Water Under the Bridge

Number 96 (December 1993) Queensland issue: overview of film in Queensland, early Queensland cinema, Jason Donovan and Donald Crombie, Rough Diamonds, Australia's first films: part 6

Cannes report Fred Schepisi career interview, Peter Weir and Greencard, Pauline Chan, Gus Van Sant and Drugstore Cowboy. German stories

Number 23 (Set-Oct 1979)

Number 26 (April-May 1980)

The Crossing, Ray Argali, Return Home, Peter Greenaway and The Cook..., Michel Ciment Bangkok Hilton, Barlow and Chambers

Lynn-Marie Milbum's Memories & Dreams, Franklin on the science of previews. The Custodian, documentary supplement Tom Zubricki, John Hughes, Australia's first films: part 5

Helen Morse, Richard Mason, Anja Breien, David Millilkan, Derek Granger, Norwegian cinema. National Rim Archive, We o f the Never Never

Tim Burstall, Australian women filmmakers, Japanese cinema, Crawfords, My Brilliant Career, The Plumber

David Puttnam, Janet Strickland, Everett de Roche, Peter Faiman, Chain Reaction, Stir

Number 78 (March 1990)

Number 95 (October I993)

Number 80 (August 1990)

Number 22 (July-Aug 1979)

Pat Lovell, Richard Zanuck, Sydney Pollack, Pier Paolo Pasolini, Phillip Adams, Don McAlpine, Don's Party

John Farrow monograph. Blood Oath, Dennis Whitburn, Brian Williams, Don McLennan, Breakaway, "Crocodile" Dundee overseas

Number 94 (August 1993) Cannes '94, Steve Buscemi and Reservoir Dogs, Paul Cox, Michael Jenkin's The Heartbreak Kid, 'Coming of Age' films, Australia's first films: part 4

Number 39 (August 1982)

Bruce Petty, Luciana Arrighi, Albie Thoms, Stax, Alison's Birthday

Number 8 (March-April 1976)

Number 76 (November 1989)

Fred Schepisi, Dennis O'Rourke, Brian Trenchard-Smith, John Hargreaves, Dead-end Drive-in, The More Things Change Kangaroo, Tracy

Number 60 (November 1986)

Number 7 (Nov-Dec 1975)

Yahoo Serious, David Cronenberg, 1988 in retrospect film sound. Last Temptation o f Christ, Philip Brophy

Number 92 (April 1993) Reckless Kelly, George Miller and Lorenzo's Qil, Megan Simpson, Alex, The Lover, women in film and television, Australia's first films: part 2

Little Dorrit Australian sci-fi movies, 1988 mini-series, Aromarama, Celia, La dolce Vita, women and Westerns

Robert Altman, Paul Cox, Lino Brocka, Agnes Varda, the AR Awards, The Movers

Francis Ford Coppola, Paul Winkler, Dusan Makavejev, Caddie, Picnic a t Hanging Rock

Number 71 (January 1989)

Number 72 (March 1989)

Number 16 (April-June 1978)

Number 17 (Aug-Sept 1978)

Rim Australia, Gillian Armstrong, Fred Schepisi, Wes Craven, John Waters, Al Clark, Shame screenplay part 1

Clint Eastwood and Unforgiven, Raul Ruiz, George Miller arid Gross Misconduct, David Elfick's Love in Limbo, On the Beach, Australia's first films: part 1

Number 52 (July 1985)

Tom Cowan, Truffaut John Faulkner, Stephen Wallace, the Taviani brothers, Sri Lankan film. The Chant o f Jimmie Blacksmith

Number 4 (December 1974)

Number 51 (May 1985) Lino Brocka, Harrison Ford, Noni Hazlehurst Dusan Makavejev, Emoh Ruo, Winners, Morris West's The Naked Country, Mad Max Beyond Thunderdome, Robbery Under Arms

Number 70 (November 1988)

John Schiesinger, Gillian Armstrong, Alan Parker, soap operas, TV news, film advertising, Don't Call Me Girlie For Love Alone. Double Sculls

Number I5 (January 1978)

Gunnel Lindblom, John Duigan, Steven Spielberg, Tom Jeffrey, The Africa Project Swedish cinema. Dawn!, Patrick

Stephen Wallace, Ian Pringle, Waferian Borowczyk, Peter Schreck, Bill Conti, Brian May, The Last Bastion, Bliss

Number 91 (January 1993)

Number 32 (May-June 1981)

Phil Noyce, Matt Carroll, Eric Rohmer, Terry Jackman, John Huston, Luke's Kingdom, The Last Wave, Blue Fire Lady

Richard Brennan, John Papadopolous, Willis O'Brien, William Friedkin, The True Story of Eskimo Nell

Number 50 (Feb-March 1985)

Number 69 (May 1988) Sex, death and family films, Cannes '88, film composers, Vincent Ward, David Parker, Ian Bradley, Pleasure Domes

Judy David, David Williamson, Richard Rush, Swinburne, Cuban cinema. Public Enemy Number One, The Alternative

Number 14 (October 1977)

Number 3 (July 1974)

Number 49 (December 1984)

Number 10 (Sept-Oct 1976)

Number 27 (June-July 1980)

Number 47 (August 1984)

Nagisa Oshima, Philippe Mora, Krzysztof Zanussi, Marco Ferreri, Marco Bellocchio, gay cinema

Randal Kleiser, Peter Yeldham, Donald Richie, obituary of Hitchcock, NZfilm industry, Grendel Grendel Grendel

Richard Lowenstein, Wim Wenders, David Bradbury, Sophia Turkiewicz, Hugh Hudson, Robbery Under Arms

Number 83 (May 1991)

Number 62 (March 1987)

Number 84 (August 1991) James Cameron and Terminator2* Judgement Day, Dennis O'Rourke, Good Woman of Bangkok, Susan Dermody, Breathing Under Water, Cannes report FFC

Number 85 (November I99I)

Gillian Armstrong, Antony Ginnane, Chris Haywood, Elmore Leonard, Troy Kennedy Martin, The Sacrifice, Landslides, Pee Wee's Big Adventure, Jilted

Jocelyn Moorhouse, Proof, Blake Edwards, Switch: Callie Khouri: Thelma & Louise: inde pendent exhibition and distribution, FFC part 2

Number 64 (July 1987)

Number 86 (January 1992)

Nostalgia, Dennis Hopper, Mel Gibson, Vladimir Osherov, Brian Trenchard Smith, chartbusters. Insatiable

Romper Stomper. The Nostradamus Kid, Greenkeeping, Eightball, Kathryn Bigelow, HDTV and Super 16

Number 65 (September 1987)

Number 87 (March 1992)^

Angela Carter, Wim Wenders, Jean-Pierre Gorin, Derek Jarman, Gerald L'Ecuyer, Gustav Hasford, AR Awards, Poor Man's Orange

Multi-cultural cinema, Steven%pielberg, Hook, George Negus and The Red Unknown, Richard Lowenstein, Say a Little Prayer, Jewish cinema

Number 66 (November 1987) Australian screenwriters, cinema and China, James Bond: part 1, James Clayden, Video, De Laurentiis, New World, The Navigator, Who's That Girl

Number 67 (January 1988) John Duigan, James Bond: part 2, George Miller, Jim Jarmusch, Soviet cinema, women in film, 70mm, filmmaking in Ghana, The Year M y Voice Broke, Send A Gorilla

Number 101 (October 1994)

Australia at Cannes, Gillian Armstrong, The Last Days at Chez Nous, The Silence o f the Lambs, Flynn, Dead to the World, Anthony Hopkins, Spotswood

Screen violence, David Lynch, Cary Grant ASSA conference, production barometer, film finance. The Story o f the Kelly Gang

Number 63 (May 1987)

Cannes '94, NSW supplement Bernardo Bertolucci's Little Buddah, The Sum o f Us, Spider & Rose, film and the digital world, Australia's first films: part 9

Number 103 (March 1995) Little Women, Gillian Armstrong, Queensland supplement Geoffrey Simpson, Heavenly Creatures, Eternity, Australia's Rrst Rims: Part 11

Number 88 (May-June 1992) Strictly Ballroom, Hammers Over the Anvil, Daydream Believer, Wim Wendeds Until The End o f the World, Satyajit Ray

Number 89 (August 1992)

Number 104 (June 1995)

Cannes '92, David Lynch, Vitali Kanievski, Gianni Amelio, Fortress', film-literature connections, teen movies debate

Cannes Mania, Billy's Holiday, Angel Baby, Epsilon, Vacant Possession, Richard Franklin, Australia's Rrst Rims: Part 12

C I N E M A P A P E R S • AUGUS T 1 995

Roman Polanski's Death and the Maiden finds Polanski has returned som ew hat to form, though excessive theatricality and a less-than-convincing ¿^ÊÊÊt^ lead actress has him still nostalgic for * Polanski’s earlier, finer cinematic BRIAN McFARLANE

Two from Russia ALISSA TANSKAYA

F j

glÉ j ^ 1

Virtual aKwMbl t Geography m

examines tw o new L j !!S0*~ - * film s from Russia: « H N ikita M ikhalkov’s Oscar-winning Burnt by the Sun and Yuri M am in’s Window to Paris. Backed up by French m oney, Russian cinema continues to dazzle

JO H N CONOMOS

gets very excited , about a poststructuralist book by M cKenzie Ward ^Sm m SSm m rn which explores four w eird global m edia events

Book R e v ie w s D IS REVIVED

POLANSKI REGAINS FORM... SORT OF • BRITISH CINEMA MARCHES ONWARD

DEATH AND THE MAIDEN Directed by Roman Polanski. Producers: Thom Mount, Josh Kramer. Executive producers: Jane Barclay, Sharon Harel. Co-producers: Bonnie Timmermann, Ariel Dorfman. Scriptwriters: Rafael Yglesias, Ariel Dorfman. Based on the play by Ariel Dorfman. Director of photography: Tonino Delli Colli. Editor: Hervé de Luze. Production designer: Pierre Guffroy.

Costume designer: Milena Canonero. Composer: Wojciech Kilar. Cast Sigourney Weaver (Paulina Escobar), Stuart Wilson (Gerardo), Ben Kingsley (Dr Roberto Miranda). Capitol Rims presents a Mount/Kramer production in association with Channel Four Films and Flach Rims with the participation of Canal+. Australian distributor: Roadshow. 35mm. 103 mins. France. 1994.

The visitor is

author of the prize-winning play

radio news broadcast that her

on which the film is based, and

husband, Gerardo (Stuart

it is as though he has not been

Wilson), is to head a commission

able to let a word of it go.

to investigate violations of rights

Polanski at his best - and one

under the previous régime. He

now needs a long memory to

arrives home to her anger at

Paulina recognizes as that of her

recall this - is a riveting

what she sees as his co-operation

tormentor and violator of 15

filmmaker; however, in this

with the people they had, as

years earlier. He has called to

case, he must share not merely

students years before, fought to

deliver Gerardo’s spare tyre and

hat I suspect is most

praise for the film’s power but

remove from power. The

is subsequently submitted to a

wrong with Polanski’s

also blame for its excessive and

processes of public revenge for

night of vengeance from Paulina,

even embarrassing theatricality.

the acts of torture and

while Gerardo desperately tries

new film is the credit which

Private vengeance for

M »

Dr Roberto Miranda (Ben Kingsley), whose voice

humiliation perpetrated on her

to persuade her to listen to

Yglesias and Ariel Dorfman”.

matters of public outrage is at

are too slow, and, when there is

reason, fearing she will kill

I know nothing of Yglesias,

the core of the film. In a country

knock on the door of their

Miranda.

though his work on

in South America, after a

isolated coastal house later that

(Peter Weir, 1994) is well-

dictatorship, Paulina Escobar

night, she takes matters of

serious issues: it is articulate on

regarded. Dorfman is also the

(Sigourney Weaver) hears on a

revenge into her own hands.

the matter of the appropriateness

reads “Screenplay: Rafael

Fearless

This is a drama about

of private vengeance and on the limited confidence many might feel in the procedures of properly-constituted authority to exact just reprisals. It is also as much about the male oppression of women as about the generalized political oppression endemic to dictatorships.

Dad and Dave On Our Selection s a brave attempt to re-invent Australia’s cinematic past All the women in Whaley's film seem to more or less know what they are doing: they are "God's police" more than damned whores. [...] The real fools in all the versions of On Our Selection are the men.

C I N E M A P A P E R S • AUGUST 1995

in review

cliff, returns to the house where the two men, after drunken, giggly camaraderie, are sleeping: the camera pans the sittingroom where Miranda is on the

Films

the window, tracks her bare feet into the room, then

continued

methodically notes the pieces of string, masking tape and electric

Dorfman, as a Chilean exile

cable she picks up as she

since the overthrow of Allende

approaches Miranda with a gun. This wordless sequence

in 1 9 7 3 , knows about this, and alarmingly clear the terrors of

deserts the director in some of

living in such régimes. But a

the duologues which follow.

film perhaps more than a play

by the sea and on the road

The film seems to grind to a

has to

nearby. The claustrophobic

halt when Miranda is trussed

psychologically; it can tolerate

quality of the setting and the

up, with Paulina’s panties

less readily the use of its

fact that the film is a three-

stuffed in his mouth and blood

medium for obviously polemical

hander focus attention on the

pouring into his eyes from the

purposes; it can hardly bear its

stance of each of the three, and

blow she has given him on the

characters to be mouthpieces for

the nature of the relationships

head. W hat ensues is a series of

ideology, certainly not if this

among them. The growth of

speeches written and delivered

means that the movement must

Paulina’s passion for revenge, of

with scant concern for the needs

stop for the verbal onslaught.

Miranda’s terror as she menaces

of cinematic fluency. Paulina

Polanski’s Death

Maiden

and the

does not avoid these

him with the gun that represents

and Gerardo move out to the

her seizure of phallic power,

balcony for her to explain the

dangers and does not deal well

and of Gerardo’s fear, made

basis for her revenge; when

with them at crucial places in

complex by his love for and

Gerardo moves inside to try to

the film’s action. In many ways,

gratitude to Paulina, that reason

get a confession from Miranda,

the film’s subject suits him: the

will be overwhelmed by

she remains out of hearing but

obsession with revenge, the rôle

violence: all this provides a

visible on the balcony, for all

of sexual perversity, the tense

strong framework for the film’s

the world suggesting an actor

balance of power existing

action. The world outside the

who has just gone offstage so

among a small number of

rain-swept house is evoked only

that a duologue involving

people. Here are motifs that

from what is said, and when, in

different characters can take

recall the very earliest Polanski,

the film’s penultimate scene, the

place.

the brilliant Polish film,

three make their way at dawn to

N oz w Wodzie {Knife in the Water, 196 2 ), the British Cul-de-Sac (1966) and Repulsion (1965),

and the American masterpiece,

Chinatown

(1974), as well as

the power struggles of his striking Macbeth (1971).

The awkwardness with

a cliff-top showdown the effect

which this is managed is

is properly cathartic.

intensified by the heavy

On the other hand, the

theatricality of Sigourney

limited setting and the tiny cast

Weaver’s performance. She has

remind us constantly of the

admittedly an uphill job in

film’s theatrical origins and not

making the character’s long

always to its advantage. Polanski

speeches sound “realistic” - that

still knows how to move a

is, in keeping with the mode of

succeeds as a chamber work.

camera with a maximum of

the film, rather than with the

Apart from the brief framing

sinister or shocking effect, but

obvious artifice one is happy to

sequences set at a string quartet

that sort of skill is not what this

accept on the stage. She is, in

concert, where the eponymous

film most often demands of

short, an embarrassment for

Schubert piece is being played,

him. It serves him superbly

much of the time, though this is

the whole film takes place in the

when Paulina, fresh from

probably less her fault than

one setting of the remote house

pushing Miranda’s car over a

Dorfman’s; his ear for film

Up to a point, the film

dialogue is far from certain. The other two actors suffer less from the over-literary strand in the dialogue, and their performances gain as a result. As well, their characters are drawn with more complexity and there is correspondingly more for the viewer to grapple with in relation to them.

Death and the Maiden is not

a failure, as Polanski’s previous film,

Bitter Moon

(1992), was. It

is, rather, the seriously flawed work of one who may still be a great filmmaker. ® B rian M c Farlane

Directed by George Whaley. Producers: Anthony Buckley, Bruce Davey. Co-producer: Carol Hughes. Executive producer: Jonathan Shteinman. S criptw riter George Whaley. Based on the stories by Steele Rudd. Director of photography: Martin McGrath Production designer Herbert Pinter, Costume designer: Roger Kirk. E ditor Wayne Le Clos. Composer: Peter B est C ast Leo McKern (Dad Rudd), Joan Sutherland (Mother), Geoffrey Rush (Dave), David Field (Dan), Essie Davis (Kate), Celia Ireland (Sarah), Noah Taylor (Joe), Ray Barrett (Dwyer), Barry Otto (J. P. Riley). Australian distributor Roadshow. 35mm. 107 mins. Australia, 1995,

works with a cinematic flair that

at its most telling the film makes

move physically and

H-

couch, stops on Paulina’s face at

ad and Dave On Our Selection is based on the famous stories of Steele Rudd [Arthur Hoey Davis]. There have been tw o earlier film versions: one by Raymond Longford in 1920, which stayed intimately faithful to the book; and one by Ken G. Hall in 1932, which took its sophisticated screwball comedy from Bert Bailey’s play. In 1979, Sydney stage director George W haley wrote his own G: theatrical version, which played to packed audiences. Producer 7 Anthony Buckley w ent to see it and thought it was time for another version to hit the screen. Sixteen years and seven drafts later, Whaley's version of the Australian classic celebrates our stories of the bush, out back o' beyond by the black stump, with a fervour and pride which are not matched by an eagerness to live in the country places where the stories were born. The new version pays homage to the older ones by opening with sepia tones (on a near-square l6mm-format screen) as Dad Rudd, Dave, Mother, Dan, Kate, Sarah and Joe ride on an old buggy through the scrub. The image is cute and endearing. Dad Rudd (Leo McKern) is taking his family to the promised land, which in this case is a small dry 'selection' in south-western Queensland. The ramshackle family is expecting a makeshift house and a farm. When they arrive in the drought-stricken outback, all that awaits them is a tumbledown shed and a few gum trees. But this family w on't be beaten and they get down to work. Mother (Joan Sutherland) organizes 'things' and washps the clothes with the help of the two daughters, while the boys set to exploring their piece of dirt. They may be poor larrikin bushies with hardly an education between them, but they are also after big pickings.

; Our heroes, though, aren't only up against the drought, and ' their own incompetence: they also have a rich squatter as a neighbour who wants to take over their land. He's J. P. Riley (Barry 1 Otto), and there's nothing subtle about his villainous ways. The film introduces him standing on his land w ith his servants like some regal chess piece, his lustful son, Cyril (Nicholas Eadie), beside him. It's one of the most striking images of the film. A fter this set-up, the plot thickens and the screen turns to colour and widens to a 35mm form at We quickly see that Dad, a blustering, blithering patriarch whom we can't help but love, has : the sort of vague, inattentive mind which allows his w ife and daughters to run rings around. Mother is a bemused lady who sits at the head of the table and tries to rein everyone in. Her sense of humour is restrained and ladylike (even more so than in the earlier screen versions), which is a pity if you happened to see Sutherland's mischievously funny performances in Sydney's "Concerts in the Park". All the women in W haley's . film seem to more or less know w hat they are doing: they are "God's police" more than damned whores. The tw o daughters, the pretty and beguiling Kate (Essie Davis), and the fun-loving Sarah (Celia Ireland), can actually think fo r themselves. And Lily White (Cathy Campbell), who's Dave’s beloved, already has tw o children and an outspoken mother (Pat Bishop), who tells the world women should have the vote. The real fools in all the versions of On Our Selection a n te , the men. Dave (Geoffrey Rush), as w ritten in the book and portrayed in W haley's film, is hopelessly awkward, shy and gullible. DareSl (David Field) w ill do anything fo ra buck, and young Joe (Noah Taylor in a masterly performance)

C I N E M A P A P E R S • AUGUST 1995

Dave On Our Selection stutters and stammers his way through life. The 'dreadful' neighbour, J. P. Riley, quickly sizes up the Rudds, like in a good melodrama, and offers a job to Dan that w ill change his life. The w ork involves selling his soul to the 'devil', especially when Dan is ordered to pump the almost-dry river to irrigate Riley's very large cornfield. Dan takes the money and does the job and doesn't tell his own family. Meanwhile, back at the 'ranch', Dad Rudd and the other two sons w ater their corn crop with watering cans. Dad is convinced they w ill earn £75, a fortune in those days, but he doesn't know that Riley has ^flooded' the market w ith his illbegotten corn, and brought the price down to a pittance. Meanwhile, there are love sub-plots aplenty: Kate is being courted by Sandy Taylor (Murray Bartlett), who can sing but can't talk; Dave is courting Lily W hite in the most unlikely of love scenes, where he's almost upstaged by a redback spider; and Cyril is set on seducing Kate by any means

and even dangerous. Dad Rudd is a petty patriarch; J. P. Riley is a ruthless politician who corrupts his son, the local bank manager and much of the town; and Cranky Jack's father still haunts his son from the grave! Watching this assortment of 'white trash', you wonder how Aussies ever 'settled' this land. Of course, we now know that it meant killing the natives, poisoning the earth and polluting the rivers. It was all done, of course, with a certain panache, which until recently sort of made it excusable. Even the local bank manager can be bought and sold in Steele Rudd's book, which has a timely resonance today. There are some excellent performances, especially from Noah Taylor as Joe (I just wish he had more screen time); Celia Ireland as Sarah; and Barry Otto as Riley (who's probably one of the most fantastic villains you'll ever see). It's hard to say anything about Leo McKern's and Joan Sutherland's performances because the actors are almost icons, and are treated as such. A

Australians as half-imbeciles. Was itunAustralian? But the public voted with their feet and it became the most popular Australian film of its time. The sequel, Dad and Dave Go To Town, also introduced the world to a very young Peter Finch, in a great comic role. George Whaley's On Our Selection does have a real contemporary feel, despite being about Aussie battlers a century ago. DOP Martin McGrath and

composer Bruce Best help us capture the spirit of the past, while Herbert Pinter's set designs are rustic and full of atmosphere. I just wished the film could have really let go and pulled all the plugs out, and made itself irreverent and controversial. But there's no denying that Whaley and his producers, Anthony Buckley and Bruce Davey (the partner in Mel Gibson's company, Icon), have created a funny, warm, feel-good movie for

all the family. It depicts our Celtic Australian origins as larrikin, comic, half-insane and very haphazard, which may help the film do well in England because it confirms w hat they think about us. On Our Selection may also do reasonable box office in America, where they have their own hillbilly tradition in the cinema, which some say was partially derived from our early Dad and Dave films. And there's definitely room for a sequel! © M a r g a r e t S m it h

In all the screen versions of On Our Selection, the lathering’ is portrayed as highly questionable and even dangerous. possible. In one marvellous scene, Whaley has Cyril driving his red buggy through the bush like it's the latest sports car. Ip T h e re 's also the darker sub plot about Cranky Jack (Robert Menzies), who's a swagman turned loopy, whom Dad takes on forever because he'll w ork for no wages. In one brilliant scene, Dad and Mother are almost hacked to pieces when Cranky Jack thinks hi's brutish father has come back from the dead. ifrIn . all the screen versions of On Our Selection, the 'fathering' is portrayed as highly questionable

bit more slapstick in the Ken. G. Hall tradition would have showed their talents off even more, and taken On Our Selection to where it belongs in our hearts. Dave in Whaley's version doesn't really achieve the prominence he deserves, and Geoffrey Rush doesn’t leave an indelible impression. So w ill audiences be storming the barricades to see it? When Ken Hall's On Our Selection was released, there was a national outcry from some of the more conservative elements of our society about its portraying

C I N E M A P A P E R S • AUGUST 1995

.. .... £>*•> V.-"j

]iyt)^(^Mi^^TjfB7al •j'frjy-raíflEiiMÍ

fit review Frankenheim er’s liberal

Films continued

popular cultural representations

ways the dialectic of symbiosis

' confederates. It is there in the

(radio, television, magazines,

that exists between prisoners

i em otional roller-coaster

journals and newspapers).

and their guards - a universe of

| dialogue that Dale and his

E verynight recalls two

sado-masochism central to Jean

| inmate peers manage to shout at

Australian prison movies:

G enet’s highly-charged poetic

i each other through the thick

Stephen W allace’s memorable,

universe. D ale’s arrival to Id

I prison walls and during fugitive

character study in B irdm an from

laconic Stir (1980), written by

Division consists of a systematic

| stolen moments as they

A lcatraz (1962), or the various

Bob Jew son and based on his

bashing where his ego defences

\ randomly encounter each other

examples of the exploitation

experiences inside Bathurst

are virtually shattered. His face

i in the ward’s corridor,

movies of the 1970s and ’80s -

Gaol, and, more recent, John

and his taut, tattooed body is

EVERYNIGHT... EVERYNIGHT

familiar with the horrific bashings and rigours of the place that his fellow

Directed by Alkinos Tsilimidos. Producer: Alkinos Tsilimidos. Scriptwriters: Ray Mooney, Alkinos Tsilimidos. Based on the play by Ray Mooney. Director of photography: Toby Oliver. Editor: Cindy Clarkson. Production designer: Steve Meier. Composers: Paul Kelly, Shane 0 ’Mara. Sound recordist: Phil W inters. Cast: David Field (Dale), Bill Hunter (Berryman), Robert Morgan (Kert), Phil Motherwell (Bryant), Jim Daly (Barrett), Jim Shaw (Governor), Simon W oodward (Gaunt), Theodore Zakos (Driscoll). Australian distributor: Roadshow. 16mm. Black and white. 92 mins. Australia. 1994.

prisoners endure in the name of informed penology. E verynight slowly builds up with its cleverly-edited images, sounds and rhythms to becom e a dark, existential tale speaking of D ale’s refusal to play the game, to cringe and lick the prison walls as one prisoner does (who finally succumbs to the prison’s panoptic morality by hanging himself in his cell). Dale, as he puts it, “becomes invisible” : he

lkinos Tsilimidos’

constantly answers back to

low-budget, gritty

Berryman; he raves and rants and walks around in

portrayal of prison life at Pentridge G aol’s maximum

his cell naked; and he

encourages the other

security H Division is a movie that hits you from

prisoners to join in by

the proverbial left field.

Pule (David Held). Alkinos

“resigning” from the obscenely inhuman system.

Tightly-directed and -written, this black-and-white, claustrophobic account of the sadistic brutality that remandee Dale (David Field) receives in prison graphically reminds us of our colonial heritage of cruelty and damnation, where England’s socially-deprived and criminal elements were exiled to Australia’s fatal shores. Prison films - whether 1930s “message” movies like Mervyn LeRoy’s classic I am a F ugitive F rom a C hain G ang (1932), or as film noirs in the 1940s and early-’50s, with Jules Dassin’s B rute F orce (1947) and Joh n Crom well’s C ag ed (1950), or in the early ’60s with Joh n

constitute a powerful part of the

H illcoat’s disturbing, hyperreal

constantly framed in intense

American generic movie

G hosts

close-ups and m id-shots, as are

vernacular. E v ery n ig h t ... E verynight ’ s

...

o f the Civil D ea d

These scenes have a rawedgy, nervous quality to them -

(1988). Thankfully, Tsilimidos,

the cruel prison officers,

rapidly-cut with jumpcuts,

as writer-director-producer,

particularly Berryman (Bill

pans and explosive, profane

success depends partly on our

avoids engaging in character

Hunter). The tight visual

exchanges between the prisoners

knowledge of the prison film

stereotypes and melodramatic

economy of expression gives the

communicating amongst

genre in this context. M ore

narrative set-ups. Instead, we

movie an extra visceral punch:

themselves as they start to

important, it reverberates in our

have a noirish, highly-graphic

we empathize with D ale’s

agree to Dale’s wisdom of going

mind and body because it is an

encounter with the

hellish plight, a world devoid of

against the screws’ “conquer

impressive realist prison film. It

dehumanizing realities of our

compassion and understanding,

and divide” agenda. Dale

speaks in resonant terms of

correctional system.

a world of Benthamite

manages to persuade the others

recent popular history and

The movie’s title refers to

psychological and social horrors.

to create a great com m otion,

Dale’s nightly experiences of

Prisoners have to reach for their

to send the hateful sadism

crime, royal commissions,

hearing his fellow prisoners

gruel through a small hole in

back to Berryman in the war

prison riots and reform are part

being sadistically beaten by

their cell door; through that

of nerves that takes place in a

of our everyday cultural life: we

prison officers. (Why is it that

same hole they address their

series of tension-ridden scenes.

memory. Police corruption,

are familiar with the cruel

our prisons and security services

brutal prison officers who use it

Dale forces Berryman close to

realities of our prisons through

have seemingly more than their

to spy on their prisoners.

the edge, the abyss, a world

the many different

fair share of English/Scottish

Ray M ooney (whose

where his victims can defiantly

personnel? Is this a further

real-life experiences as a

elaborate twist of our colonial-

Pentridge prisoner unmistakably

cringe mentality?)

form the basis of the original

low -budget production

play and now script) has written

values, is a fairly-impressive

The premise of the movie -

assert their humanity to him. Everynight, given its

that Dale is a remandee and

in collaboration with Tsilimidos

directorial debut. Tsilimidos

awaits his court hearing - fuels

a powerful, non-stagey account

and his collaborators have

our emotional response to the

of what it is like to hy€ inside

approached their subject with

brutalities he receives prior to

the deadening realm of our

a tough-m inded intelligence.

his court appearance: by the

correctional system. The sharp,

It is informed as popular

time Dale goes to court, the

scorching dialogue and narrative

entertainm ent rather than as

harsh, insensate system has

situations reek of “doing tim e”,

“blackboard” cinema in the

enframed him.

as in the numerous sadistic,

worst sense of that term.

E verynight documents in many different and believable

Slowly, Dale becomes

hateful encounters between Dale

It is modest in its polemical

and Berryman and his

thematic and atmospheric

C I N E M A P A P E R S • A UGUST 1995

audio-visual architecture, and

BURNT BY THE SUN

that is one of its more appealing features. Another apt aspect is Paul Kelly and Shane O ’M ara’s poignant soundtrack that languidly weaves in and around Dale’s prison life with its melancholic guitar notes. (In certain moments, the soundtrack echoes for me the lingering, serpentine and fiery soundtrack that accompanies Paul Schrader’s

Light Sleeper.)

Everynight is also blessed

with several powerful and finely-rendered performances: David Field (as Dale) comes across as the real M cC oy a character who has lived life from a w orm ’s point-of-view incarcerated in the cold darkness of Pentridge’s H Division; Hunter as Berryman is one villainous mother-fucker of a screw - a character who would help old ladies cross our suburban streets but would randomly and sadistically brutalize his prisoners because he missed his bus to work, or his pet dog pissed on his fishing tackle; and Phil M otherwell is scorching as the ward’s top dog, who initially dislikes Dale but eventually comes around to his point of view.

E verynight... Everynight is

an accomplished, modest work that makes no great claims as radical low-budget cinema, but it will surprise you. The film

Directed by Nikita Mikhalkov. Associate producers: Nikita Mikhalkov, M ichel Seydoux. Executive producers: Leonid Verechtchaguine, Jean-Louis Piel, Vladimir Sedov. Scriptwriters: Nikita Mikhalkov, Roustam Ibraguimbekov. D irector of photography: Vilen Kaluta. Editor: Enzo M eniconi. Production designers: Vladimir Aronin, Alexandre Samulekine. Costume designer: Natalia Ivanova. Composer: Edouard Artemiev. Sound: Jean Umansky. C ast Nikita Mikhalkov (Sergei Petrovich Kotov), Oleg Menchikov (Dimitri (Mitiya)), Ingeborga Dapkounaite (Maroussia), Nadia M ikhalkov (Nadia), André Oumansky (Philippe), Viatcheslav Krioutchkova (Mokhova), Vladimir llyine (Kirik). Studio Trite (Russia)-Caméra One (France), w ith the participation of Canal+. Australian distributor: Roadshow. 35mm. 134 mins. Russia. 1994.

believe and accept the fervoured political beliefs, misconceptions and terrible self-delusions experienced by the characters in Nikita Mikhalkov’s

Sun.

Burnt by the

A glance at Russian history since 1 9 0 0 really makes one wonder how much hardship a people can endure. H ow could these people’s one century consist so entirely of political unrest, torture, hunger, war and general misery? H ow could a man like Stalin get away with

holiday, Kotov is luxuriating in

committing horrendous crimes

his country house, with his

is changed by the arrival of

against his own people and

adoring wife, his precious

Mitiya (Oleg Menchikov). An

then, astonishingly, be praised

daughter and his wife’s

old friend of M aroussia’s family

by them?

Checkovian, slightly-dotty and

and her first lover, a multi

noisy relatives. The sun is

talented young man who has

to answer these complex

shining, the pioneers are

been mysteriously “away” for

questions with one single

marching; somewhere beyond

the past ten years, Mitiya is

Burnt by the Sun attempts

theory: it is the Russian people oscow in 1978: a 65year-old history teacher themselves who have joyfully faces a crowded classroom o f created monsters like Stalin and then proceeded to actively eight-year-olds. In a quivering voice, with tears streaming down participate in their own and her face, she remembers the siege their country’s destruction. W hat is remarkable about this o f Leningrad during World War film is that Mikhalkov offers his II. But she is not crying about theory whilst being painfully her time in the siege, she is conscious of not pronouncing saying, “Comrade Stalin was a judgements on any one person, great man, a great leader, a political belief or era. hero! Only he alone could have Set during one summer’s mobilized the Russian people so day in 1 9 3 6 , the film tells a that we could win the war! ” story of Sergei Kotov (Nikita Overcome with emotion for Mikhalkov), his daughter Nadia Comrade Stalin, the history (Mikhalkov’s real-life daughter, teacher pauses and looks out the Nadia) and his wife Maroussia window, her glazed gaze seeing (Ingeborga Dapkounaite). Kotov only the tortured past o f her is a famous Soviet military country ... leader, hero of the Revolution, a

matters not least because it has

the birch trees, soldiers are

finally home. And though

building a special hot-air

Maroussia’s family is excited,

balloon in honour of Comrade

this excitem ent is immediately

Stalin. Today is a festive, happy

offset by a great sense of unease.

day and citizens are celebrating

There is an understandable

Stalin because he has given them

tension between Maroussia,

a good and prosperous life,

Kotov and Mitiya, but there is

because the horrors of the war

also a more sinister one between

and the Revolution are far

Kotov and this bright young

behind, and only a bright and

man, which has nothing to do

idyllic future, which Kotov and

with his having been

Nadia can see with particular

Maroussia’s lover. And though

clarity, remains. Beneath this

the sun continues to shine

glossy surface, however, lies a

throughout the day, and into

reality teeming with paradoxes

the late afternoon, Kotov’s life

which will eventually shatter it. T o begin with, the grand summer house is not Kotov’s. It

the sun finally sets, for the civil war and the Revolution did

which her family has lived since

happen, and there was a time

long before the Revolution.

when people did take opposite sides.

true believer, a man of great

Maroussia’s family was clearly

film I am writing about; that is a

ideals and courage, a friend and

wealthy once, and part of the

the end of this century.

scene from my own childhood.

colleague of Comrade Stalin’s.

That is not a scene from a

® J ohn C onom os

But it enables me to wholly

On this, his one-day

intelligentsia -

artistic, well-

The political issues raised in the film are complex, and

travelled, multilingual. There is

extravagated by the cross

a family maid, whose services

pollination of personal and

are just as much appreciated by

political. As turbulent political

the Communist Kotov as they

changes affect people’s lives,

are by Maroussia’s old opera

people change and in turn affect

singing aunts, who have no idea

politics - a self-perpetuating

what new-fangled Soviet event

condition which has kept an

they are supposed to be

entire nation in chaos for

celebrating. And although Kotov

decades. In demonstration of

is the man of the house, he and

this,

his beliefs are neither fully

allows itself to become a mere

understood nor appreciated by

ideological exercise, or a

the family. H e, in turn,

political thriller, or a

simultaneously participates in

historiographic drama. It is all

and criticizes this bourgeois

of these things, plus a romance,

lifestyle.

a family comedy, and a film

Only a couple of decades

Burnt by the Sun never

about childhood from a child’s

ago, Kotov and the men of

perspective, and is altogether

Maroussia’s family would have

quite beyond generic definitions.

been at war, or would have

C I N E M A P A P E R S • A UGU S T 1995

and that of his family are forever destroyed even before

is Maroussia’s family home in

pertinent to us as we approach

spine and addresses an issue still

The atmosphere of the day

Stylistically, it is also

considered each other to be

somewhat of a collage. The film

political enemies. But, on this

opens with a scene that could be

day, life continues as if neither

mistaken for one of

the Revolution nor the civil war

Tarkovsky’s: a farm boy

ever took place. Or does it?

running through the fields,

I review Films continued

I subtle in its manipulation of

Russian-French co-productions

I added to the plot when

- most notably,

i everyone learns that the magic

Taxi Blues (Pavel Lounguine, 1990), Luna Park (Lounguine, 1992) and Burnt by the Sun (Nikita

1 window is about to close for the | next 2 0 years.

Window to Paris is a new-

i wave black-comedy, Russian

Mikhalkov, 1994).

I audience emotions and the I \ build-up to the climax works in

Yuri Mamin’s Window to Paris is the latest Russian-French

I a different manner.

offering. Unlike its predecessors,

j and it is both grim and funny as

this co-production does not just

i gloomy reality is packaged into 1 animation-like caricature.

Burnt by the Sun is gorgeous

1 style. It makes fantastical

j aspects completely acceptable,

calling for his mother and

i to look at and the performances

utilize French finances whilst

grandmother - one could be

shooting solely in Russia with

| Occasionally, it slips into the

watching Mirror. Later, it seems

! are superb, particularly Nadia’s. | The film is worth seeing just for

an all-Russian cast, but sets

| form of a musical; it is garrulous

to be Renoir: the forced,

I her outstanding effort. The title

roughly a third of its story in

i and rude (the Russians and even

hyperactive gaiety of family

I of the film is borrowed from the

Paris and with a French actress

1 Nicole use such foul language it

scenes, poking fun at the

j first line of an old Russian song,

in a lead role. The result is a

! does not even get translated in

novelty, as it shows a new

| the subtitles); and is at times i quite surreal. But it makes a

servants, a bit of slapstick. Or is

it Checkov? All that sitting

I film in numerous versions.

Russia which is beginning to

around and drinking tea and

« “Burnt” is a curious translation,

connect with the rest of the

i multitude of pertinent points,

discussing the good old days.

1 the Russian word tending to

planet - and this is the main

| and ultimately serves as a

point of the film.

| touching and profound essay on

which is heard throughout the

And then to Shakespeare: one of j mean something more like the characters even recites some, in English! N ext comes a bit of Fellini: the grim hilarity of the men in gas masks, conducting a

“The weary sun was I saying its gentle goodbye to the 1 sea whilst you told me that there \ is no love.” I “weary”:

Or trust, or peace, or hope,

drill with the gaudily-dressed bathers at a lake-side beach.

I the film seems to suggest. © A lissa T a n skay a

And then a scene reminiscent

Nikolai Tchijov (Sergei

i the bewildering confusion of

Donstov), a down-and-out St

i Russia, caused by the newly-

Petersburg music teacher, moves

' acquired capitalism. The choice of Paris is not

into a room at the grotty flat of the Gorokhov family. They

i accidental. Prior to the

immediately become friends and

i Revolution, French was the

get sloshed to celebrate. In their

1 language of choice for Russians

of early Akerman or even von

drunken stupor, Nikolai and his

Trotta: no moving the camera,

friends discover a concealed

I artists (such as Nikolai). France

window in his new room. They

i was also the preferred

climb out and down onto an

1 destination for travel, and

let the characters walk about, in and out of frame, so far out of frame'they disappear into the next room , have a vodka and come back. Later there are more Tarkovsky references, only this time it is no peasant monk attached to the balloon, but a huge portrait of Stalin. Sounds messy? Uneven? Confused? N ot a bit. Mikhalkov’s mix and match works, because it is not overdone; it is not the core of the film but an added diversion. Oddly, I have discovered two different cuts of this film. The Russian version is more oblique (due to a non-linear structure) than the one being

I Directed by Yuri Mamin. Producer: Guy I Seligmann. Scriptwriters: Yuri Mamin, I Arkadi Tigai. Director of photography: Sergei Nekrasov. Editors: Olga I Andrianova, Joele van Effenterre. I Production designer: Vera Zelinskaya. I Costume designer: Natalia Zamakhina. Composers: Yuri Mamin, Aleksei \ Zalivalov. Sound: Leonide Gavritchenko. j Cast Agnes Soral (Nicole), Sergei ] Dontsov (Nikolai Tchijov), Viktor | Michailov (Gorokhov), Nina Oussatova j (Véra), Kira Kreylis-Petrova (Gorokhov's Mother-in-law), Natalia Ipatova j (Gorokhov's Daughter), Viktor Gogolev I (Kouzmitch), Tamara Timofeeva (Maria j Olégovna), Andrei Ourgante (Gouliaiév), Jean Rupert (M. Prévost). Films du 1 Bouloi-Fontaine-La Sept Cinéma. Australian distributor: NewVision. 1 35mm. 87 mins. Russia-France. 1994.

released in the West. This is fortuitous for non-Russian

W INDOW TO PARIS

ince

glasnost and perestroika

and the end of the readily-

enough complexity, although

\ \

the Russian version is more

i there has been a spurt of

viewers, as there is already quite

available (to the approved few) Soviet government funding,

above middle class, and many

unfamiliar street, have a drink

| during the Revolution many

in an unfamiliar bar where the

| White Russians fled there,

barman will not take their

money and, only once they are

1 a isolating wall around Russia,

safely home and during

| the country had a democracy as

Before the Revolution built

daylight, do they discover that

| advanced as any in the world,

they have spent the night in

i including France’s. So, for

Paris. The window in Nikolai’s

1 Nikolai and the Gorokhovs to

room is a magical “space-warp-

| visit Paris today is a physical and

type-thing” (the film never

bothers to try and explain this

i Russian society could have been

phenomenon).

1 in the 1990s had the revolution

This is where the real fun

j not returned its society to point | zero (for however noble

goes berserk, trying to loot

i reasons). Russia has been in a

Western goods - anything from

i self-defeating time capsule, and

clothes to food to an old

! the space-time warp of Nikolai’s

Citroen - and stash it back in St

j window is a brilliant metaphor

Petersburg, while Nikolai tries

i for the political and cultural

to find a decent job in Paris.

i degeneration Russia has been | through. Given all this, Mamin could

place over the skylight of a young taxidermist, Nicole

i have done more with the plot

(Agnes Soral), who, exasperated

i and his characters once they

with her chaotic and destructive

j reach Paris. As it is, the satire is

Russian neighbours, decides to

| on a fairly obvious level, but

visit them and, in the loony way

i perhaps that is his point: this

well as its down-to-earth,

in which the events proceed in

i base, desperate, confused

realistic and ironically-

this film, gets trapped in St

| behaviour on the part of the

humorous contemporary

Petersburg. (Though

j Russians towards the French is

dramas.

i what the relationship between

example of the latter style.

Window

to Paris is a comedy-fantasy,

he BBC is noted for its elegant historical dramas as

Priest is a very good

W ritten by Jimmy

Nicole’s adventures in St

i St Petersburg - the atice grand

Petersburg feel like anybody’s

j cultural metropolis - and Paris

i M cGovern

worst nightmare, and could not

j has degenerated into.

| strong Liverpool accents and an

However,

possibly do much for the

Directed by Antonia Bird. Producers: George Faber, Josephine Ward. Associate producer: Joanna Newbery. Executive producer: Mark Shivas. Scriptwriter: Jimmy McGovern. Director of photography: Fred Tammes. Editor: Susan Spivey. Production designer: Raymond Langhorn. Costume designer: Jill Taylor. Composer: Andy Roberts. Sound recordist Dennis Cartwright. C ast Linus Roache (Father Greg Pilklngton), Tom W ilkinson (Father M atthew Thomas), Cathy Tyson (Maria Kerrigan), Robert Carlyle (Graham), James Ellis (Father Ellerton), Lesley Sharp (M rs Unsworth), Robert Pugh (Mr Unsworth). Australian distributor: Roadshow. 35mm. BBC. 103 mins. UK. 1995.

aesthetic demonstration of where

begins as Gorokhov’s family

Unfortunately, all this takes

PRIEST

Window to Paris

{Crackers), with

authentic feel for the detail of

Russian tourist industry.) Then,

i ends with hope for a more

i life of the Catholic Church in

Nikolai’s little students also visit

i refined relationship and an

i that city, it is a look at

Paris and refuse to return to

j easier access to the West.

j contemporary problems in the

their derelict old world. Panic is

| priesthood, especially those of

C I N E M A P A P E R S • AUGUST 1995

scandalized to find his parish priest living with his housekeeper, M aria (Cathy Tyson), is overwhelmed by a young girl’s talking about her father’s abuse of her and his being constrained by the confidentiality of the confessional, and his feeling desperate in wanting to help the girl. His own loneliness surfaces, and there is a powerful scene where he prays despairingly in his room which becomes his agony in the garden in his own Gethsemane. The result is that he breaks out of his confines and experiences his gay orientation. It should be said that the film is sometimes frank but not sensationalist in its treatment of the issues. When the police become involved in the plot, one might think the action moves too fast and that this is unreal in terms of cinema realism. But, for the development of the themes, the fate of Fr Greg rushes from disaster to disaster. The resolution of the plot leaves several aspects open. But, from the point of view of the Catholic Church and its belief in the message of the Jesus of the Gospels, it is a satisfying end. The sub-plot of incest in a ministry and contact with

T h e crises o f th e p rie s t do n o t o c c u r in th e social v a c u u m . T h e p aris h io n e rs an d th e ir e x p e c ta tio n s a re s ig n ific a n t.

parishioners, the confidentiality of the seal of confession and, of course, clerical celibacy. It is the last which gets most attention and has already been highlighted in the headlines for reviews and commentary. Compulsory celibacy for Catholic clergy is a real issue

puts it under his arm, walks the

parish family may not be

streets and finally charges the

necessary in a film which offers

bishop’s gate to protest the way

so much to think about it, but

the bishop has handled his case.

it is alarmingly well done.

Many priests, however loyal,

The scenes in the confessional

may resonate with this opening. As might be expected in

of the vicious father and his attempt to justify his behaviour

these days of critique of authority

will appal some viewers. But

figures, the bishop is found

the inclusion of incest raises

wanting in pastoral care and

another issue of sexuality

and one that has had to be faced

community. The writing is

like funerals, first communion

charity - with the convention of

which has to be dealt with by

by the church even more

reminiscent of that used for

(reminding us of Ken Loach’s

his using his silver tea service.

priests who struggle with their

intensely in the past decade,

television series: the quick

style as well as social concern

(It may be the first film we see

own identity.

with so many priests finding

sketching of distinctive

in 1 9 9 4 ’s R a in in g S tones),

where an angry bishop tells a

that they can no longer commit

characters (like the family at the

\ celebration of masses and

difficult priest that he can “piss

themselves to or live their vow

off” from his diocese.)

In the International Year of Tolerance, it opens up many

wake); brief dramatic episodes

\ sermons, confession and

of celibacy, and with so many

that elicit a quick emotional

! reconciliation. Unless audiences

scandals, public and private.

response and personal

parish priest, Father Matthew

It has already been well received

The release of P rie s t, which has

involvement from the audience

climax makes little sense, and

Thomas (a genial performance

at festivals in Britain, Canada,

been made as part of friendly

(the awkward attempts by the

might seem to be a young priest

from Tom Wilkinson), who

the U.S. and Berlin (where it

dialogue rather than as an act of

young priest to anoint a patient

i publicly denouncing his sexual

dramatizes the expected crisis

won the International Critics’

j identity, whereas he is not

of celibacy, the desire to minister

Prize for the Panorama section).

denying it: he is publicly

(and he does it effectively), while

The Catholic members of the

acknowledging his betrayal of

wanting a commitment to a

Ecumenical Jury in Berlin,

woman in his life.

members of the O .C .I.C .

aggression, brings the issues to

being wheeled speedily down a

the general public. And it does

hospital corridor, a bishop

so via the power of story.

pouring tea from a silver

Young director Antonia

service); and a presumption that

Bird comes from an Anglican

audiences will identify with

background and has researched

ethical issues and will be drawn

Catholic life with sympathy. She

to take a moral stance. The crises of the priests do

has brought to life Jim m y M cG overn’s multi-layered

not occur in a social vacuum.

screenplay.

The parishioners and their

j appreciate this, the dramatic

! the community by not remaining faithful to his public vow. ]

But, of course, the title

However, the focus is on the

He is in contrast to the

issues which are of interest to wider audiences than Catholics.

(International Catholic Offices

main priest-focus of the film,

for Cinema and Audio-Visuals),

| urges us to look closely at the

Father Greg Pilkington (Linus

issued a press release at the

! priests, their lives, their

Roache), a rather stolid young

Festival praising the film and

i strengths and their sins. At the

conservative priest, full of good

urging the church to use the

opening of the film, we see an

intentions of serving the poor,

wide release of the film to debate its issues. The issues are

expectations are significant.

angry elderly priest praying in

but who discovers frightening

film is its picture o f parish life

M cGovern uses parish

his church; he then takes down

aspects of his sexuality. He tries

those that Catholics cannot and

and its potential for bonding a

community life and activities

to do all the right things, is

must not avoid. © P eter M alone

One of the strengths o f the

C I N E M A P A P E R S • AUGUST 1995

i the large crucifix from the wall,

review This Happy Breed (Lean, 1944) and Passport to Pimlico

RE-VIEWING BRITISH CINEMA, 1900-1992. ESSAYS AND INTERVIEWS

together with little-known areas

or many people, there are

*i1 chapter on a number of

horror cycle between 1968 and

neglected British directors (such Bernard Knowles, Quentin

I I Lawrence, Alfred Roome and Fergus McDonell). McFarlane , models his chapter on the postAndrew Sarris “archaeological [ work on the American cinema”

on Lance Comfort and

without the need to erect a

Lawrence Huntington, Neil

“Sarrisian hierarchy” or

Certainly, the broad patterns

Rattigan on

images of class in British

but there is no widespread

wartime films, Cynthia Young’s

recognition of the filmmakers

rereading of the Powell-

Red Shoes and

| M cllroy’s essay on Brian

i pantheon of filmmakers.

practices of the American studio

Consequently, there are

in which stand-ins, camouflaged

introduction, for example,

i brilliant, fails to live up to the

1 premise that Hurst’s career as a

i by hats, veils, raincoats and

“filmmaker within the British

i other items of clothing, would

| studio system was continually

1 appear in location shots with

' modified by his position as a gay

| abundant ‘matte’ paintings

1 filmmaker within an overall

i homes, county cottages and

\ \

1 prisons.

i M cllroy’s essay turns out to be a

I depicting castles, ancestral

Against this background of rear-projection screens or glass

structure of heterosexual patriarchal cinema practice”,

i routine descriptive overview of j Hurst’s films in the 1930s and

i shots, with a few props in the

1 foreground, such as a railing or

! analysis of Hurst as a gay

' a telephone kiosk to preserve

i filmmaker. I Similarly, Lawrence Miller’s

new films and filmmakers to

consider and enjoy. Whilst I am

i the actors would quickly

the illusion of space and depth,

’40s without any kind of critical

thesis that British film noir “was

who laboured away on studio

Pressburger’s The

i perform their function so that

! as well developed as the

projects in less-than-ideal

Edward Jones on the Losey-

Comfort’s films, especially the

1 the film could be quickly

' American style in terms of

conditions throughout the

Pinter film

moving and atypical World W ar

| finished without having to

1 content and quality, content and

1920s, ’30s, ’40s, and ’50s.

plus an interview with Wendy

II film

! venture outside the studio. After

Whilst Alexander Korda,

Toye with Neil Rattigan’s study

i films described by McFarlane

i experimenting with this system

! cataloguing of British examples

Anthony Asquith and Victor

of the British war films of the

' that invite anybody interested in

1 in a children’s film,

i according to selected themes

Saville have joined Alfred

1950s, which he characterizes as

' the British dramatic intersection

Hitchcock, Michael Powell,

the last gasp of the British

i familiar with some of Lance

The Go-Between,

Great Day, there are

Frozen Falls

Under the

(1948), Rank went

style”, based on a primitive

| (such as “revenge and

| ahead with its first full-length

| vengeance”), and then

i melodrama and the perverse

i Independent Frame feature,

| comparing them with their

Olivier in attaining some degree

Re-viewing British Cinema , 1900-1992 adds

i delights of American film noir

! American counterparts, fails to

of academic and public

reprints of Stephen Bottomore’s

to consider further (such as

David Lean, and Laurence

middle class. Finally,

between the moral polarities of

scavenging through the

Sight and Sound study of British \ Hatter’s Castle, 19 4 1 ; war cinematographer Frederic i Temptation Harbour, 1947; Daughters of Darkness, 1 9 4 8 ; Villiers, lisa Bick’s essay on and Bedalia, 1946). Similarly, Peeping Tom, and interviews

labyrinth of studio films and

with Stephen Frears and

documents that has

Terence Davies.

recognition, the British cinema as a whole has not been subjected to the intense

characterized the study of Hollywood.

Film Criticism

This is a welcome book if

McFarlane points to the peculiar virtues of Lawrence i Huntington’s films, including

The Upturned Glass, with James

for no other reason that it

The 1 9 9 1 -1 9 9 2 Fall/Winter issue of

tried to

chronicles areas and filmmakers

| Mason as a brain specialist who describes his killing of another

worthy of further study. At

partially address this gap in film

times, it goes further than just

i man through an extended

history with articles on British

detailing films and directors, but

1 flashback which takes the form

filmmakers such as Brian

most of the material should be

Desmond Hurst, Wendy Toye

considered as the first tentative

, his medical students.

and Muriel Box, and films such

exploration of relatively-virgin

of a case-history presentation to

Boys in Brown

(1949), starring

| Jack Warner, Richard

| convince. However, like the rest

| Attenborough and Dirk

' of the book, it at least draws

i Bogarde, who were required for

| critical attention to another

i less than two weeks.

i neglected area in British cinema.

\ \

Rank planned to export this system to the non-English speaking colonies whereby all

i background footage, completed i script, matte plates and ' storyboard components could

i VIRTUAL GEOGRAPHY i i i

| be utilized with local actors i replacing the British stars. Thus, i as Dixon points out, the net 1 effect would be to

Also intriguing is Dixon’s

McKenzie Wark, Indiana University Press, Bloomington and Indianapolis, 252pp., index, pb, rrp S25.

ICreative Nation

n the wake of the recent policy

1 statement, McKenzie W ark’s

impart to foreign audiences

the social values encoded in

i is a timely and significant

the background plates for

i contribution to our

the film, thus inviting

' cross-disciplinary understanding

production companies in

| of the shifting cultural, political

other, often colonial nations

i and technological facets of

to further identify with the

i contemporary media. W ark’s

representational then

| prolific, fluent voice in

espoused by the British

i antipodean cultural and media

cinematic patriarchy [...] the

i studies is noted for its

informing instinct behind

1 originality in creating plausible

the system remained an

attempt at cultural

| explaining the “white noise” of

supremacy, with English societal modes of behaviour

! the globalization of media. I 1 Wark articulates a new form of

and class structure firmly

J cultural/media criticism that is a

centred as the desired

| kind of vectoral writing

model of the endeavour.

i interested in describing and

first book,

Virtual Geography,

diagnostic scenarios for

j Fortunately, Rank abandoned

| analyzing the emerging “virtual

J the process after a few features.

| geography” that is rapidly

N ot all of the contributions

| Desmond Hurst in the

i as Charles Frank, Lewis Allen,

and highs are well documented,

1 extended the ‘assembly-line’

' plates’ and rear-projection shots

Demi-Paradise and

i method of film production

i strong promotion of Brian

i which Dixon describes as

which are virtually unknown.

areas of the British cinema

This Happy Breed. The

I for low-budget features. This

British film noir, and the English

i material from Brian McFarlane

McFarlane or Andrew Higson’s

! study of

i extensive use of ‘background

i argues in the introduction to his

Edited by W heeler Winston Dixon, State ' issue of Film Criticism , University of New York Press, 400pp., i American film scholar Wheeler i index, illus.,1994 Winston Dixon, added new

be devalued, as Brian McFarlane

Process developed by the Rank

The editor of this double

| the chapters by Dixon, Brian

1940s as a form of cost cutting

! B film to a new limit with

1975.

1 Rank organization in the late

territory. This aspect should not

such as the Independent Frame Organization in the late 1940s,

i are as interesting or insightful as

(Henry Cornelius, 1949),

I to

i Frame Process developed by the j

Re-Viewing British Cinema

I description of the Independent

! configuring our everyday lives.

C I N E M A P A P E R S • AUGUST 1995

W ark’s main objective

\ of the book - as is the author’s

Like the eerie, infra-red

moment or rhythm in media

of computer virus, but more

(told purposefully from an

i ever-present questioning of the

traces of the anti-aircraft fire in

globalization information, W ark

with the notion of global media

antipodean point of view) is to

j orthodoxies of cultural and

the nocturnal sky above

rightly contends, is pertinent to

events as random, complex,

create a much-needed expansive

\ media studies as they are

Baghdad in the CN N T V Gulf

his advocacy of a vectoral

accidental byproducts of our

map of how the various vectors

\ practised in certain circles in the

W ar, W ark’s project is

writing that operates more as a

computerized information

of the new communication

' academy today. I N on-dogmatically

concerned more with shadowing

“counter-point” than as a direct

world. This has vast

the unpredictable movement of

critique of the more familiar

implications for the way we

post-M cLuhan world of weird

open-ended, Virtual G eography

global media vectors around the

semiotic and “content analysis”

endeavour to grasp the kinetic

global media events that have

avoids dealing in neatly-resolved

world and how they are forming

approaches to this subject. Just

cultural, commercial, historical

been germane to a recent

narratives about these four

“critical mass” information

when we think we have a “fix”

and technological complexities

narrative depicting the

global media events; its

overload (to echo the French

on our global media events and

of global media events as logic

unravelling of the cold war.

improvised and

urbanist Paul Virilio) than with

their complex impact on our

bombs. They are unintended

These global media events are

autobiographical quality is

trying to pin down their floating

audio-visual culture, they seem

effects and byproducts of

signifiers.

to be located somewhere else -

institutions (governed by a New

in an interzone (to evoke

World order of rationality and

technologies are shaping a

“weird” not because they speak

expressive of W ark’s wish to

Media events are complex

of the physical terrain we live

create a vectoral writing that

in, but because they form an

shifts across all areas of

clusters of shifting vectors, as

Burroughs) where their

transnational capital) that are

integral core of the elementary

knowledge and subjects, and

W ark reminds us, obliging us to

refracted fugitive and haunting

responsible for the

geography of virtual experience

does not subscribe (in any banal

write along these vectors - that’s

televisual images, graphics and

dissemination and control of

that is rapidly becoming the

and literal sense) to the

to say, focusing more on media

sounds are daily consumed by

information.

institutionalization of

events’ trajectories rather than

us as part of everyday life and

culture. This “virtual

“interdisciplinary studies”.

conceptualizing them as objects.

its diverse cultural artefacts.

geography”, W ark argues,

Further, what we observe again

W hat are the critical advantages

and again is W ark’s specific

and consequences of adopting

is a book about the future in two vitally-related aspects - (a)

approach is germane to the

everyday order of electronic

is responsible for making us

Though Virtual G eography

In order to come to terms with the more elusive mobile aspects of his subject, W ark’s elliptical, post-structrualist

objective not to generate a

this approach to understanding

new media technologies from

highly-systematic account of

the virtual complexity and

the future of culture under the

book’s success. Rather than

afar - remote control (so to

the underlying causes of these

mobility of global media events

pervasive impact of

address fron t-on his aberrant

speak) - an experience of

particular global media events,

as, to use Virilio’s term,

globalization, and (b) the future

global media events as vectors

telesthia. T o make sense of the

but to anchor them in the

“im age-blocks”? It allows us to

of academic cultural studies and

programmed by capital,

emerging G A TT world of

ever-shifting currents of

question the more traditional

lay cultural criticism as practices

technology, diplomacy, politics,

but limiting aim of getting to

in the context of the emergent

culture, etc., W ark takes up an

the “essence” of a global media

cultural technologies responsible

oblique, off-centre

event in the information

for the increasing blurring of all

poin t-of-entry to his topic (that

experience the vectors of the

globalized media, we are obliged to look at those events which are singularly irregular and

everyday life. T o this critical end, Virtual G eography is a success. As Wark puts it,

troublesome in the regular flow of digital media, and examine

If the relations of globalized

how they cut across and in

perception traverse the

between different national,

bounds of disciplines, then

global and cultural spaces to

one must follow those

form complex feedback loops,

transgressions too. If

slippages and echoes. These

scholarship is to claim itself

question our more conventional

to be ‘radical’, then it must

maps of the mobile and

take a radical approach to

elaborate connections between

scholarship itself as well as

culture, economics and politics,

to its subject. If radical

and their audio-visual

scholarship formerly went to

representations.

the root of the problem of

Virtual G eog rap h y addresses

both method and material,

four such recent events (or

now it must tune in to the

“sites” as they are alternatively

frequencies of everyday life

landscape (as we have seen, for

forms of analogue and digital

example, with most of the

media (photography, cinema,

relevant scholarly analyses of

television, video, interactive

the Gulf War) by exploring its

multi-media) - it must be noted

trajectory, its relation ality ,

that Wark consistently avoids

rather than its “factual” or

joining in with the clamorous

“critical” vicissitudes.

chorus of hype that often

Writing about the new media forces us to look off-centre in our enterprise

heralds these new media technologies. At the centre of W ark’s

to adequately negotiate the

account of his weird global

juxtaposed histories, effects and

events is the critical metaphor of

sites, and relations between

an event as a “logic bom b”. By

global and local media events

this, the author is referring not

and their respective

specifically to the more

representations in our electronic

customary computer hacker’s

media culture. To seek the

idea of logic bombs as a species

is, a central aspect of vectoral writing and post-strucairalism), exemplifying Philippe Dubois’ recent suggestion that much more can be achieved by “slipping in frorn the sid e” than entering by the front door of your m aterial.1 Virtual G eography is a passionate, clearly-structured and erudite book that marks an essential first step for anyone concerned with the open-ended, self-critical adventure of trying to make sense of the emerging digital tendencies in our audio visual culture. W ark’s book

named): the Gulf W ar, the fall

upon which the vector

of the Berlin W all, the Beijing

reshapes everyday life and its

illustrates by persuasive argument

massacre and the “Black

scholarly accomplices, [p. xi]

and a non-authoritarian

marginal, the fugitive, off-beat

essayistic style how critical global

M onday” Wall Street crash of

Consequently, W ark’s critical

1987. W ark focuses on these

acumen in tracing the zig-zag

media vectors are in generating a

in order to illustrate how their

media vectors of his four

virtual geography of the

rationales, within the global and

“weird” events is rooted in (a)

imagination that is shaping the

regional spaces of information

the Sydney post-structuralism

lived experience of our daily

flows, reveal logics which

of the 1970s and ’80s as an

cultural lives. It is a book - warts

denote how, as global events,

antipodean critical response to

and all - that is, in a critical

they failed to exclude noise

the “master narratives” coming

sense, an unfinished

from overwhelming their

from the centres (Paris, London,

“crazy-quilt” of critical

particular codes and narrative

New York), and (b) the author’s

possibilities that see beyond the

strategies.

extensive background in

“gun-flare” of our media events

attempting to make sense of

and scholarly thinking on a

succeeds in addressing another

how the multiplying media

subject that concerns us all.

critical issue : H ow do we

vectors of today’s global media

account for history in a “post

net are problematizing the more

contemporary” world of cultural

established forms of storytelling

amnesia? W ark’s exploring the

conventions and reading

M ise-en-Film , ”

future of cultural studies as a

protocols which have been

( e d .) ,

practice in the context of this

central to our narrative

in g to n and In d ia n a p o lis, In d ian a

question is an appealing aspect

understanding of the world.

U n iv e rs ity P re ss, 1 9 9 5 , p . 1 5 2 .

Virtual G eog rap h y also

C I N E M A P A P E R S • A UGUST 1995

Fugitive Images,

B lo o m

ORSON WELLES: ROAD TO XANADU Simon Callow, Jonathan Cape, London, 1995, 640 pp„ Illus., rrp $39.95

everal critics have argued that the words "T o Be

Continued” on p. 1 2 8 2 of N orm an M ailer’s H a r lo t ’s G h o s t are among the most alarming in recent letters.1 A challenger would be Simon Callow's announcement that T h e R o a d to X a n a d u is but Volume 1 in his coverage of W elles. After all, Callow is the one who assures us on the penultimate page of his text that:

i M a g n ific e n t A m b e rs o n s (1942)

do is simply recommend anyone

j and M r A r k a r d in (1955), a film

wirh an interest in M ien's career

| still way ahead of where other

to read this book. Yes, there are

I filmmakers are up to today.

questions that one wished

T hat said, the book is a

Bjorkman had asked (thus

I | monument of dogged research. those before him, and has

there are many questions that

uncovered and corrected much.

impress with their freshness and

As a researcher, he triumphs.

insight.

: impressed by his diligence, up

| “Raising Kane” in T h e C itiz e n K a n e B o o k , he writes: "sloppily researched, entertainingly : Cook) asks in T h e A d v e n tu re s o f

Yes, Callow is another in that

B a rry M c K e n z ie : "Is he for

parr of his life, when he shouldn’t have been under

made one masterpiece and then

1 attack from the second-rate but i

went downhill. Have they nor seen W elles’ other films? After all, T h e T r ia l (1962) and C h im e s

f r o m S h a n g h a i (1948) is pure

one for women. T he reason for the separate volumes is that each contains nearly 100 cinema's greatest and most

| lauded by all. O f what value is it

achieve it. 'I think I share

uniquely-skilled craftsman.

| that Callow finds Kael's piece

with Hitchcock the ability to

[ "entertainingly w ritten” when it

say what lens goes in the

| headed? Callow fares even worse

The books are jam-packed with

camera and where it stands

more and is happily ploughing

without consulting a finder or looking in the camera,' he

of plays, modern and classic.

through the 900-page O sw ald's

W elles, apart from the score he

i when he ventures into technical

said. 'I just walk over and say

T a le : A n A m e r ic a n M y s te r y

couldn’t control (but what else

i or craft areas. Try this on page

"There it is.”' [...]

while aw aiting the H a r l o t ’s

is news in the studio system?); and T o u c h o f E v il (1958) is

5 0 9 -1 0 , re C itiz e n M in e : Welles made the startling

words. [...] The instinctive

claim to Peter Bogdanovich

placement of the camera

a slightly shorter version (which

that he knew from the first

and choice of lens

some find more enigmatic). All

day of this, his first film

are masterpieces, as is the

[sic-], where he wanted the

(something to which cameramen with years of experience would hesitate to la}- claim) is in the realm of the mvstical, and is not. perhaps, susceptible to further investigation. W elles' claim is not "startling”

Faber and Faber, London, 1994, pp. 288, index, illus., rrp S35.

he only thing better than a question-and-answer

interview with an intelligent director is one conducted by an

interested director can learn

intelligent director. While Srig

within a few hours how the

Bjbrkman has not had the

composition of a shot, from a

international acclaim of W oody

determined camera position,

Allen, he is a fine director in his

will alter in scope and feel by

own right and a well-regarded

changing, say, from a 35m m to

critic. His book-length

50m m to 100m m lens.

conversation with M ien is a joy

Hitchcock didn't need to look

to read and very insightful into

through the camera because he

Allen’s attitude to his own films. in this Faber series (Kieslowski,

chosen the camera position and

Schrader, et al), the format is

the lens. This is nothing magical

down pat: start at the beginning

about it; it is just craft. It is no

then go through the features

more mystical than a shoemaker

one by one in straight Q& A .

choosing the right needle to sew

In M ien's case, the start is his

i th e M o n e y a n d R u n . It closes

would be less of a problem in a

j with M a n h a tta n M u r d e r M y s te ry .

come to terms with one of the

Barbara Learning, W eidenfeld & Nicolson, London, 1995, 549pp., index, illus., rrp S39.95

first film-going and acting ! experiences, followed by T a ke

ing about how films are made book which didn’t attempt to

KATHARINE HEPBURN

Like all the other fine books

composition was once he had

Callow's lack of understand-

auditions.

WOODY ALLEN ON WOODY ALLEN: IN CONVERSATION WITH STIG BJ0RKMAN

and his words hardly "heart-

on a leather sole.

and should be of great use to young actors preparing for

Callow means "first feature”.

stopping”. Any even half-

knew absolutely what the

advice, pep-talk and exercises,

G h o st sequel.

These are heart-stopping

available in both W elles' cut and

camera: in other words, what

monologues from a wide variety

the frame was, and how to

is so unpleasantly wrong-

hese are two separate volumes, one for men and

; immense anguish in the latter

comm entators who think Welles

W elles intended them; T h e L a d y

Dean Carey, Currency Press, Sydney, 1995, 229pp. (Men) and 225pp. (Women), illus., pb, rrp $17.95

i real?”. Kael's article was an I | outrage that caused Welles

annoyinglv-long line of

a t M id n ig h t (1966) are how

MASTER CLASS: THE ACTOR S AUDITION MANUAL [MEN AND WOMEN]

pops a trivializing remark or a

i1 bizarre view. O f Pauline Kael's

being the first, is also the

W elles' career [...]

! But just as soon as one is

| w ritten”. As Dominic (Peter

uncompromised work of

pushing an idea or topic to even greater depth), but, equally,

\ Callow has delved further than

C itiz e n K a n e , as well as last fully achieved,

passages, but the better thing to

I brutally refigured T h e

One could extend this review by listing favourite

A CENTURY OF AUSTRALIAN CINEMA James Sabine fo rth e Australian Film Institute, W illiam Heinemann, Australia, 1995,220pp., index, illus., rrp $49.95.

C I N E M A P A P E R S • AUGUS T 1995

legal ease

The Sound of Music: There’s More than Meets the Eye Richard Silverton examines the legal and copyright issues o f using music on a film's soundtrack. he use of music in film is no longer just another component in the production of a film; it is now big business with asso ciated soundtracks often enhancing box-office returns and the exp loitation of a soundtrack as an album release generating substantial further incom e. R ecent exam ples include T he L ion King and T he C om m itm ents, and, on the local front, The P ia n o , M u riel’s W eddin g and T he Adventures o f Priscilla, Q ueen o f the Desert. The creative process of select ing and commissioning the right music for your film is challenging enough; however, making your way through the complex maze of rights and nego tiating the best is where the real fun usually begins!

and then seeking permission starts again. Even if all permissions are forthcom ing, it may take considerable time to identify the relevant parties and to final ize the licence agreem ents. You may ultimately decide that the production cannot afford a record company’s asking price for a well-known existing record ing. You should also bear in mind that there may be potentially many parties from whom clearances may need to be sought. If the soundtrack in your film

of the Copyright Act. To say the thresh old for “substantial” is eight bars or less is an industry myth. Once copyright in a work expires, the work enters the public domain and is free to be used without seeking per mission. Copyright in music expires 5 0 years after the death of the composer, and, with a sound recording, 5 0 years after the date of first publication. How ever, never assume that particular music is in the public domain; for example,

requires the clearance of rights in certain music, avoid delay in the commencement of the process.

people are always surprised to learn that “Happy Birthday” is not in the public domain. Also be aware that copyright laws vary between countries, so while a song may be in the public domain in one country, it may not necessarily be else where. Ensure that you have made the appropriate enquiries in all the territo ries in which you intend to distribute your film.

W h y All the Fuss? At the time that music comes into exis tence, it is the subject of copyright. The owner of the copyright has the right, to the exclusion of all others, to deal with the music in certain ways, including the right to reproduce the music. If another party wishes to reproduce the music in the soundtrack of a film, then the permission of the copyright holder will need to be sought; otherwise, they will be infring ing the copyright in the music. As a filmmaker, you will need to determine what permissions are required for the music you propose to use in your film. This should be adopted as a pre ventative measure to avoid an infringement of copyright. Remedying an infringement can be a very expensive and negative exercise, but the need can be avoided through good management. Just remember, it is no defence to assert that your infringement was accidental; your intentions are not a relevant con sideration. The process of seeking permission should be commenced at the earliest pos sible stage in the life of a film. The earlier permission is sought, the greater the con trol you will be able to maintain over your production budget and the com pletion date o f the film should you encounter difficulties. If the appropriate rights cannot be secured down the line, then the whole process of selecting music C I N E M A P A P E R S • AUGUST 1995

Seeking Permission - Should I? This really depends on what sort of music you will be incorporating in the soundtrack of your film. W ill you, as producer, be specifically commissioning music for the film or making record ings of existing music? Where the music is not an original score, permission will need to be sought from the particular rights holders. It is an infringement of copyright if a “sub stantial” part of copyright material is reproduced without obtaining the per mission of the holder of the copyright. It only takes the reproduction of a few notes of music in a given sequence to constitute “substantial” for the purpose

Seeking Permission - From Whom? With music, there are often at least two copyrights to consider: the copyright in the musical score, and the copyright in the sound recording of the musical score. Where there are lyrics accompanying the musical score, there will also be copy right in the lyrics. The copyright in the music and in the lyrics will usually be held by a music publishing company, the

rights having previously been assigned to the publishing company by the composer (assuming the composer also wrote the lyrics). Occasionally, a composer will not contract with a publishing company, but will deal directly with a record company. This is not as common, however, as pub lishing com panies often provide development assistance to composers attem pting to get a foothold in their industry. The holder of the copyright in the sound recording will almost always be the record com pany. Do not assume that the artist has any power to grant these rights. The clearance procedure may be complicated if the copyright in the sound recording has been split and granted to d ifferent parties for different territories throughout the world. If this is the case, per mission will need to be sought from the record company in each terri tory, assuming you are intending to distribute your film throughout the territories. The good news is that not all existing music requires permission to be sought from a multitude of parties. If you select music from a production music library, the process is much simpler. The copy right in the music and the sound recording will both be held by the publisher and in most cases licensed through A M CO S (Australasian Mechanical Copyright Owner’s Society). These libraries contain music recordings which are intended to provide back ground music for film, amongst other forms of production. Seeking Permission - How? There is no system of registration of copyright in Australia. There is therefore no publicly available register which can be searched to identify the rights holders of a particular musical work or sound recording. Accessing the relevant infor mation may prove very difficult in which case you should consider retaining a music consultant who specializes in the clearance of rights. AM COS can also assist in this regard. The U.S. does have a system of copy right registration; however, it is important to note that copyright protection will nev-

ertheless exist w ithout registration. Therefore, whilst it may be helpful for identifying a copyright holder in the U.S., it should not be treated as an exhaus tive record of copyright ownership. Seeking Permission On W h at Terms? Once the relevant parties have been tracked down negotiations may begin. You may find, however, that there is not a lot of room to negotiate with the pub lishing and record companies. They tend to issue standard licensing agreements which they prefer not to alter in any sig nificant respects. The asking fee by a licensor for wellknown existing music can be substantial and naturally you will be confined by your budget as to the amount you are prepared to pay. As to the rights, you will need to obtain the reproduction right, otherwise known as the synchronization right. This right enables the music to be reproduced in the soundtrack of the film. You will also need the right to exploit the music by means of the film in all media throughout the world, subject to the prior rights of the Australian Performing Rights Association (APRA). If it is a possibility that the sound track will be released as an album, then you should ensure that you obtain a guarantee that the mechanical repro duction right will be licensed at the relevant time subject to the payment of mechanical royalties. Com missioning Original Music If you are commissioning a composer to compose an original score of music for your film, then you avoid many of the hoops adverted to above. You would contract directly with the composer, securing the synchronization rights in the music as well as agreeing to such matters as a fee, the nature of the music to be com posed, and delivery date (unless the composer was tied to a pub lisher in which case the synchronization rights in the music would need to be obtained from the publisher). You, as producer, would be the owner of the copyright in the master sound recording since you commissioned and paid for its making. If the soundtrack is to have an album release, the contract would usu ally provide that these rights vest in you, with the composer being paid mechan ical royalties. A Final W ord It may be tempting to put the task of clearing the rights in the music you want for your soundtrack in the ‘too hard bas k e t’ ; perhaps to deal with at the post-production stage, or even just prior to marketing. As the music is likely to be integral to the success of the film, delay

ing this procedure may expose your pro duction to unnecessary risk. Seeking the appropriate permissions earlier rather than later will eliminate this risk - music to your ears. ©

HART

SPI RA

Richard S ilverton - H art & Spira Level 2, 88 George Street The Rocks NSW 2000 Tel: (02) 247 5998, Fax: (02) 247 5858

retrospective t0 w atch one 45-m inute programme, commented “That’s K a bit rude!” And the Australian premiere of Les Trois Font la Paire had 11 viewers. Though attendances (and this is interesting) did increase as the word spread, they remained pathetically small. A few greybreads am ong us remember the “Sixty Years of French Film” season which the Cinémathèque F ran çaise shipped out as a box of 16mm reels w ithout leaders and the local film society types, w ith their fingers in the index of Film Till N ow , sorted them out and ran them on hom e-m ovie gear in a church hall to respectable three-figure audiences, at a profit! Now, the most ambitious film-his tory event yet mounted in this country, using first-rate material in two city the atres, is being described as a disaster. It comes at a time when Paddington Town Fiali has closed once more, this time for more than a year; F ilm n ew s went silent for a year, and has closed again; collections which would have been the pride of most archives have been used as landfill; and there hasn’t been a N ational Film Theatre in this country for sixteen years. While saying it here is unlikely to change the situation, the simple fact is that taking serious film activity out of the hands of the people who value it has made Australia a movie no-go area. The extraord inary advances in film study from the rest of the world have been choked off. Well, it’s still the ‘Centenary’ year. W hy, SBS ju st ran an item on the Lumière Museum, identifying Bertrand T a v e rn ie r as “E nglish film m aker Stephen Frears”. The Gaumont event contained elements of the activity that any film community needs to under stand - what the material is and what about it we should take seriously - only now we owe French film culture a bet ter platform. Charles Pathé’s heirs and succes sors must be thinking of a hundred years about now ... or have we blown it for the next century? © __

JVLcKenzie

A lot of people with schizophrenia believe that they get p18 messages through newsread ers and radio announcers. T hey believe that what is being said on the news is actually a secret code for them. I tell you, I kept watching Wheel o f Fortune and I can see there’s logic in it.

It makes as much sense as following your horoscope in a magazine. A bsolutely. K a te’s trying to find answers, which we’re all doing, which we always have been doing. You've been quoted as saying that John Lynch, who plays your lover, Harry, is the best actor you've ever worked with. Why? I guess it’s to do with the nature of the characters and the scenes that we had to do. It was an incredibly difficult film to shoot. John was a complete professional and a very brave bloke. H e’d just jump in the deep end and not really worry about how he looked. It wasn’t about image at all; it was very much about the truth of the char acters and the truth of their story. His approach was a breath of fresh air. John also happens to be a really good actor. Did you feel drained at the end of shooting? Exhausted. T here was one scene where I am having an episode and hid ing in the bathroom. I was scrunched up by the toilet bowl in a fœtal posi tion. The scene took about four hours to shoot. We studied with a nurse called Jeremy, who has done exten sive work with schizophrenia, and he told me that some people, when they are having episodes, tense up all their muscles until they can’t tense them any more. So, naturally, I squeezed up my muscles like this, and four hours later I had the migraine from hell.

I think it does. If I were an unhappy person, all I ’d w ant to do is play happy people. I don’t think I’d want to explore the pain. I rem em ber when I was doing A ngel B a b y , I couldn’t get over the courage required by people who suf fer from an illness that is so misunderstood and who are treated like outcasts, except by a select few who are prepared to listen. You have the personal problems of the disease, w here you’re hearing voices and you’re not quite sure what the reality is, plus the fact that society hasn’t made enough effort to understand or be charitable. I felt like a sham in a way. At the end of the day, I could walk away and go, “Shit, that’s good to be out of that space”, and bloody oath it was. It was a really horrifying space to occupy and I wasn’t really occupying it. I was doing my best to manufacture something that would somehow represent this person. When they called “Cut”, I was fine. I found that film particularly dif ficult because it was particularly real. The story was fictitious, but K ate’s condition was not at all. How much of yourself do you call on when you're playing a part? I d o n ’t go out to put them into pigeonholes like, “That’s my happi ness there”, or “That’s the way I get angry.” In order to play a character, the bottom line is that you must be able to have some sympathy or empa thy with her. T h ere are elem ents within every rôle that do feel very close to me, but that’s the joy of being able to be a C h arlie’s Angel when you’re eight. There’s a certain amount of being able to pretend to yourself. Some teachers are of a school of thought that if you haven’t been raped yourself, then you can’t play someone who has. I just don’t agree with that at all.

A C o m m o n T h re a d

C o m in g U p

The characters you play are often out siders and quite tortured in one way or another. Romper Stomper was the start of that. How much do you iden tify with pain, because that's what seems to be the only thing that links your performances, with the excep tion of This Won't Hurt a Bit!?

After St Joan and the opening of Angel Baby, what's next in the pipeline? I’d like to follow Angel B aby on the festival circuit. After that, there’s noth ing definite. The bottom line for me is charac ters and quality work. My agent has

Torture was imminent for Vanessa, given the nature of her husband’s den tal practice!

striven to keep me on track with good quality characters and a little bit of an array of them as well. I’m not going

No; I haven’t suffered terribly at all in my time. I have seen it, but I’ve had a damn good time of it, frankly. I come from a very close, very funny and happy family.

I just mean som ething that doesn’t ring my bells. You know that you’re going to do something when you read

Does that give you the capacity to stand outside your characters?

to do a dicky rôle. I don’t mean small,

a script and it moves you, and it’s dif ferent, and it has a certain vision and a newness. © C I N E M A P A P E R S • A UGUST 1995

C osi

When do you start discussing a new

their producers and writers, to control

don’t get to see the cut with the pris

project with your DOP?

a film to more or less its final cut. This has to be what every director wants.

tine quality of film . You can keep

W e even choreographed the ending by ourselves, with-

We talk on the phone quite a lot. If

out any help. W hen you see the film, you will realize it is a clumsy

becoming a reality, I send it down to

It’s very hard for us to control things like marketing and so on, but we’d cer

him and see what he thinks. Ellery’s a

tainly want to put our hand in.

attem pt, but it should be. It should come from the heart of the characters.

very experienced film maker. He is very film literate, much more than I

Pamela Rabe, who is a wonderful actress and has an astounding mem

am, and he can certainly see things

ory, helped me quite a lot in working it out. So did the others.

the p ro je ct looks like it’s close to

We go back to T he G reat B o o k ie

their suggestions - some have been good, some have been bad - but

Louis was there for the rehearsals,

things. He contributes quite a lot to the whole feel of a picture.

Having ten actors in nearly every scene is a time-consuming exercise. They are all very good and you feel like you want the cam era to be on each of them nearly all the time. You have to be very expedient in your allo cation of screen time. You don’t want to miss out on anything. The approach during filming was to get the best out of a scene, rather than doing ten singles. We had to shoot it in a hopefully interesting way and still capture the essence of the script. Did you storyboard the film after the rehearsals? I’m not a very good storyboarder. On a film like this, you have to be very flexible. It is very much performancebased. You can do w onderful storyboards and then pay no attention to them afterw ard s. They are an advantage for major action sequences, but, in terms of performers, they’re not a great help. Storyboards would have been of some advantage with the big finale, because the cast could have seen how I was planning to shoot it. But time didn’t allow us to do that. I think you have to rehearse in a location before you get a really clear understanding of what you need to do. I pre-plan quite a lot, but I don’t do storyboards. Did your DOP, Ellery Ryan, come to the rehearsals and get a sense of how scenes were going to be blocked? He got an overall sense. But this is our third or fourth major thing together, and we have a shorthand that works very well. I also have a very close relationship with my assistant director, Euan Ked-

How long was the shoot? It ended up being eight weeks. It was originally scheduled for 35 days, but we had the unfortunate thing with Bruno L aw ren ce’s illness. H e ’d already shot quite a few days and we had to redo those scenes. That was a genuine tragedy, but Colin Friels was very confident, very good. Colin plays the nurse, Errol, a sort of hard-edge character. He certainly brought different qualities to the part than Bruno did. It was lucky Colin was available. With Cosi, was there any film or cine matic tradition that influenced you in the look of the film? No. I hope that when people see Cosi they will regard it as a fairly original piece. I didn’t want it to be anything like S p o tsw o o d . I used many of the

mostly - in fact, all the time - they have been totally supportive of my work and of the production. Other interviewers have said, “Tell us about all the problems you’ve had with Miramax.” Well, I can honestly say there have been no problems with Miramax. They have only been fan tastic, though this could all change. They have not come in forcing my hand. A lot of their input into every area of the produ ction is what an executive producer or producer should have. There is nothing wrong with that. You can ’t just throw up your arms and say, “I’m not going to answer you.” A lot of their suggestions have been reasonable and have helped the film . T h a t’s very im portant, because there is nothing more impor tant than what the film ends up looking like. Did you have film rushes during the filming? Yes. That was one of the first things I asked for. I felt it was very important.

parallels in philosophy, my perspec tive is d ifferen t. It should look

It cost extra, but it’s just a different way of viewing things when you have a work print up there on the screen. It was a great bonus to see the rushes on the big screen and know what the film is going to be like. I don’t mind cutting on video, but video doesn’t highlight the best things about what you are doing.

different... it does look different! What about filmmakers you love? I don’t think there are any who are rel evant to Cosi, though there are many wonderful filmmakers whom I can only aspire to be one-quarter as good as. What I can say is that over recent years most films that we get to see here from the States are pretty damn awful. There aren’t many people who are really breaking the mould and becom ing original filmmakers. I don’t think the system allows them to do it, espe cially in Hollywood. You really have to do it independently, unless you break through like [Quentin] Tarantino, with the help of Miramax. Directors like T arantino don’t come around that often, although people are looking for new things now. The general state of the mainstream Hollywood fare is so bland and boring it’s astonishing that it even gets released. So much money

a long time quickens the process and

Australia is that they have an oppor tunity, if they collaborate closely with

C I N E M A P A P E R S • A U GU S T 1995

investor and a partner. They have had

same crew and there is a lot of inte riors, but, although there are some

die. He has a good perspective on what is working and what is not. I t ’s very much a collab orativ e process. Knowing each other for quite makes it more effective.

totally positive. Miramax came onto the picture reasonably early as an

R obbery on television, Grievous B od ily H arm , S p otsw ood and all sorts of

things worked. We also walked through a few scenes, which also helped.

All the influences up to now have been

from different perspectives, not just from a visual one.

Was the shooting script finalized after those discussions? which I thought was important. We changed things when we saw how

How was it working with Miramax?

is wasted. The one good thing for directors in

I don’t bar anybody from seeing the rushes. I am always happy for actors and anyone else to see them, unless they take too much of a singular perspective. You edited on Lightworks. Is this the first time and how have you found it? Cosi is the first feature I have done on Lightworks, but I’ve done things like commercials on the Lightworks and Avid and whatever. I think they’re fan tastic with the time they save you, the options they give you. You are able to look at two or three different versions in a matter of minutes. That’s a great boon for any director. W e are all w anting to be quite organic about things and we must stick to film , but this system is so good, and it w ill probably keep improving. The downside is that you

transferring it back to film and show ing it, but you have to spend more money to do so. I haven’t seen the cut on film yet. I’ve just seen it [video] projected on a screen. But when we have our first producer screenings in the States, it will be on film. What we are doing now is just my cut. The producers get to see it next week, and they’ll probably have some suggestions. We will discuss them. The natural process is to do a direc tor’s cut, and then a producer’s cut. A fter th at, the d istrib u to r, or the investor, has a look at it. D istribu tors used to only look at a film after it was finished, but that doesn’t gen erally happen now, just in case they want to change things. I don’t know what those changes will be, but I’ll be surprised if there aren’t any. The bonus of these screenings is that you get to see the film with other people. T hey may com e up with something that is interesting. That cer tainly has been the case with every other thing I’ve done. They look at it from a very fresh perspective and you go, “Oh, I see.” I’ve found the process to be very, very positive. Ideally, I’d love to show the finished result with all the music and effects. That would give a clearer perspective, because it is very hard to imagine the finished film without them. But that just can’t happen, and you just have to deal with it. How did your editor find working non-linear as opposed to the old ways? Nick Beauman is one of the foremost editors in this country. He had just com e o ff editing L it t le W om en . Although he cut that here in Australia, he had to deal with a studio in the States. Nick was fine. I made sure he was happy with all the things th at he needed to do. There have been no complaints so far. How much post-synch did you have on Spotswood and Cosi? This is the big difference between Australian and American approaches. W e did some on S p o ts w o o d , but mostly for technical reasons. I’m not keen on post-synching. It always sounds a bit iffy. Technically it can be almost perfect these days, but you can sense the slight difference in an actor’s voice. On C osi, we were shooting under most of Sydney’s flight paths: B al main, Gladesville, Rozelle ... That was a real shame, but our sound recordist, John Schiefelbein, did a fantastic job. There will be some post-synching,

but not as much as you would expect

momentum, although there are exam

from shooting in those areas. If you are going to shoot in a city these days,

ples of films sitting on shelves for five years and coming out to be huge suc

you can’t just keep waiting for the best

cesses. I ’d just rather not wait that long.

sound. DOPs have the luxury of occa sionally trying to wait for the best light, but sound is often the poor cousin. Our sound team did a great job; they coped remarkably well. The budget for Cos/'was the same as Spotswood. How hard was that? C o si is a much bigger film than S p otsw ood and the budget was very tight, very tight. Hopefully it’s not reflected in the finished film. Money and time are always going to be problems. Even if you double the m oney and add an extra three weeks o f shooting, we would find something to complain about in terms of not enough time or money. The perspective changes. You talked earlier about the actors’ fees. W ell, if w e’d had a b it m ore money, it would have been nice for everyone to have been paid a little bit more. Location fees and the cost of technical things, like film processing, have all gone up in recent years, but crew and cast costs have stayed down to old levels, which was okay on Cosi because nobody is getting a lot of money out of it. That camaraderie was reflected in the feeling on the set, which was very good. What about the composer? What sort of music is this film going to have? A lot of it will be opera-based, from C osi Fan Tutte. We discussed music with a composer, Ricky Fataar, prior to shooting. Ricky did the music on Spotswood. Unfortunately, he dropped out, because there were a couple of delays, which was a shame. W e hav en’t yet decided on our next composer. W e are talking to a couple of people at the m om ent. I have a fairly firm idea of the music I want for this film, not that I’m musi cally literate. A lot of it w ill stem around opera, but certainly not all of it. It has to balance out very nicely with a nice simple theme in the rest of the film. What is your release plan? I don’t have one as yet. But if the film looks like it’s getting a lot of positive feedback, I would prefer it to be out earlier rather than later. It’s very hard to know. If it were ready now and released straight away, it might get labelled in the States as yet another quirky Australian comedy. You just d on’t know. There are so many variables that go into it. As a general rule, though, I’d rather not sit on it if it’s ready. A film sitting on a shelf for more than a year can lose its

You've missed Cannes this year, so the next major festival that would suit would be Montréal.

directing? You have made several prize-winning television films. W hen I ’m doing my own film s as d irecto r, I find it very d ifficu lt to camera. Looking through the cam

A fter V en ice, there is T o ro n to , Montréal and New York, so there are a few to choose from.

cinematographer very well. This was not a film in which an extremely inter

P2 5

But I owe a great debt to Zanussi, because I learned a lot.

Although Zanussi's and Kieslowski's interests often seem similar, are they very different personalities? They are very different, but they are friends. M o st d irectors are doing always the same story. If I am work ing w ith Zanussi or K ieslow ski, I know more or less what inclinations they have. It’s the quality of an artist: you know they are obsessed by certain developments, certain problems; that they are obsessed by a certain premise, not just for one film but all of their films. Maybe it’s very difficult to name it, but you sense it. It’s natural and I think it is a very positive element. For example, Bine is a much more inter esting film than K ieslow sk i’s B ez K on ca [No Exit, 1984], a film about the same subject.3 You've also worked w ith Andrzej Wajda? Only on two projects. One was as camera operator only, on W esele [The W edding, 1 9 7 2 ], the other was The Conductor. It was a unique experience. In Poland, there was a bit of com petition between who were the two greatest directors, Zanussi and Wajda, and somehow I was connected with the camp of Zanussi, so I didn’t have much chance to work with Wajda. I would love to do another project with him, but working with Zanussi auto matically cleared me from the Wajda camp, which I understand. Bearing in mind your strong opinions on the cinematographer's role, how do you approach a film which you are

a scene, think about the life of your protagonist and how it was before he enters the movie.” That is a key. All of a sudden you realize what kind of

era is so organic for me. On my most recent film, E n a k , I asked the cine m atographer if I could operate the camera. I had a cameraman who is a

M iracles o f Light

advise my students, “If you are in trouble or don’t know how to shoot

observe the actors from beside the

No, Venice. After all, we have a nice Italian title. W e’d certainly like to get into Venice, but I don’t know if we are going to be ready.

Cosi is not necessarily a festival or arthouse film in any way. It’s a nice, fast-paced movie that I hope is enter taining without being too superficial. But, because of its unusual nature, it may get some attention on the festival circuit. ©

resents our psychological state, our psychological approach. This fo r me is som e kind o f m ethod and I ’m always trying to

person he is. It’s much easier then to understand how he is seeing the world around him.

friend of mine - it was a nice collab oration as I understand this sort of

esting look was necessary - just the opposite. We had to photograph it in a very ugly way because I didn’t want too much distance from the archival footage. A lot of the footage we made on the video camera and transferred to 35mm.

The first film you made in the U.S., The Journey of August King, happened to be with an Australian director, John Duigan. I understand that this is a literal journey, not a psychological one! How did you adapt to shooting in America? It was an interesting experience for both of us. For a cinematographer, my way of working was completely not understood. For example, to place a lamp you have to speak w ith two heads of department. The electrician only positions the lamp; for anything to do with gels and cutters, you have to speak with the head of the grip d ep artm ent. It is rid icu lou s; it is another example of how strongly con servative they are. The way we are working in Aus tralia is much more healthy. America is so deeply traditional. You can do things much simpler, much faster, and give your director much more room

M y early films were ch ild ren’s films, but E n ak was a kind of experi mental story, a very low-budget film. I started to do the movie as a kind of collage, having a lot of archive mate rial which I collected from German, American and other archive houses, and NASA. H aving co llected it, I w rote a kind o f speculative story about an astronaut who refuses to com e back to Earth. W e tried to experiment on the level of language, because the film is built like a televi sion programme with a marriage of the archive film, and the footage we made on location. It was released in Poland, but it’s really a television film. You've been teaching in many film schools around the world, including the Australian Film Television & Radio School. Apart from technical details, what kind of philosophical advice do you try to give your students? Being a cinematographer is not only to have a lot of ideas, but being con scious of how a certain style is going to be accepted by the audience. You have to discuss the script with the director to get his personal approach, the reason why he’s doing the film, because it helps enormously to find a key to translate his premise, his idea, into the pictures. Using a picture is always concrete; you can’t have an abstract picture. You may try, but it’s very difficult, especially in terms of cinema, where you have something

and time for the important things. Perhaps it was easier working with Duigan than an American director for your first film there. It’s very difficult to judge. But it was a very enjoyable, though very difficult, experience. It was a period film, set in the beginning of the 19th Century, so again the look of the film was very important. It seems that the producers and John were happy with the way I pho tographed the film. My impression is that the A m erican industry will accept a different artistic vision, pro vided you fit in with their traditional system ! © 1

Schindler’s List (Steven Spielberg, 1993), H ow to M ake an American Quilt (Jocelyn Moorhouse, 1995), Reservoir Dogs (Quentin

in focus and it has a certain physical value.

Taratino, 1992), Pulp Fiction (Tarantono,

How can we use this to describe something so erratic as the secret of the human soul, inner conflicts, some

Colours: Red, Krzysztof Kieslowski, 1994).

bod y’s hidden agenda? T his is something which is always for me the challenge for cinematographers, some thing which is so interesting in this profession. W e have our personal view of the world and this view rep

1994) and Trois Couleurs: Rouge (Three 2 Polish cinem a is divided into produc tion creativity groups. The head of one group was Andrzej W ajda, the leading Polish director for many years. 3 Grazyna Szapolow ska plays a woman who attempts to adapt to the sudden loss of her husband in a car crash which opens the film.

C I N E M A P A P E R S • A UGU S T 1995

Subscribe to

Cinema Papers O ff

and get lip tO

a Y 20% discount

h is to r y ^

Perry made prints of the film for his own use additional to those he supplied to the

New Zealand government. These were show n on Salvation Army B ioram a Com pany tours, in itially during a Q ueensland season in Septem ber 190154, and later in New Zealand from August 1 9 0 2 .55 Independent coverage of the 1901 New Zealand Royal Visit was shot by the local cameraman George Hescott56 and by Chief Petty Officer M cGregor of A. J. West & Co.57

The Film's Surviving Parts T h e governm ent’s Royal V isit films were held by the Government Printer, then sent to W ellington’s Dom inion Museum58, where only these remnants survived decay: R o t o r u a (all n e g a t i v e ) 1 M ao ri G a th e rin g -P a n across Poi Dance 66 feet (definitely Perry footage). 2 M ao ri Gathering - Haka, "Ko-Parua" flag 52 feet (by Perry or Hescott).

The above were stored with negatives shot by the New Zealand cameraman George Hescott at 1901’s Rotorua gath ering, so that the am ount of Perry’s footage surviving is in doubt.59 In Ju n e 1 9 5 8 , M iss M o ric e , a descendant of Premier R. J. Seddon, gave part of a print of the Royal Visit film to the N ew Z ealand N ational A rch iv es.60 T he Salvation A rm y’s involvement in the film was later pub licized in T h e W ar Cry. This induced C ecil N. Sims o f Low er H u tt to tell National Archives that he gave the film to Miss Morice. He said that he inher ited this (w ith oth er film s, now destroyed) from his father, an early film exhibitor and distributor.61 The footage is probably part of either Cooper and Macdermott’s print, or of the Royal Tour Bioscope Compa ny’s print, and contains only Rotorua coverage: 12 M aori Gathering - Pan across Poi Dance 66 feet (same as 1). 13 Royal Couple in M aori Costume w ith Seddon 14 feet.

3 M ao ri Gathering

4 Geysers 164 feet (by Perry or Hescott, or may be a later film by James McDonald).

15 Royal Couple, Seddon and M aori Guide 28 feet. 16 People looking at cam era 2 feet.

5 Geyser [P ohutu?) and "T akatim u "flag 90 feet (by either Perry or Hescott).

17 Crowd m illing in front of geyser erupting 36 feet.

6 Royal Party [in silh o u e tte ] touring geysers 16 feet (Perry or Hescott).

18 Royal Party w ith M aori Guide. Steam visible 20 feet.

7 Royal Party touring geysers [D uchess present] 21 feet (Perry or Hescott). W e llin g to n : A t W e s tp o rt A rch, L a m b to n Q u a y 8 T.R.H. Passing W estport Arch in Carriage 28 feet negative (definitely Perry). 9 Procession w ith Cavalry [M o u n te d Rifles?] 34 feet negative (definitely Perry). 10 Procession w ith Cavalry or A rtillery 5 feet positive (definitely Perry). D u n e d in (p o s itiv e ) 11 Presentation of M ed als at the Octagon 113 feet positive (Perry). C I N E M A P A P E R S • A UGU S T 1995

19 Crowd, w ith Seddon visible 2 feet. O f the possible 56 minutes of the 1901 N ew Z ealan d R oyal Visit film, only 14 minutes (25 percent) survives today. N evertheless, it is the “perm anent memorial of the festivities” that its mak ers intended, and it preserves a rare glimpse of colonial New Zealand in ani mated form. Film ography: Perry's 1901 N e w

W e llin g to n

1 The Governor, the Prem ier and Sir J. W ard's arrival on the A uckland W harf Shot 11 Ju n e 1 9 0 1 . Length: 60 feet (1 min). 2 Landing of T.R.H. The Duke and Duchess of York Shot 11 June 1901. Length: 50 feet (50 secs). 3 T.R.H. The Duke and Duchess of York entering Government House, w ith Escort Shot 11 June 1 9 0 1 . Length: 130 feet (2 mins 10 secs). 4 Friendly Society's M arch Past the Duke Shot 11 June 1901. Length: 105 feet (1 min 45 secs).

1 A rrival of Duke Shot 18 Ju ne 1 9 0 1 . Length: 83 feet (1 min 23 secs). 2 T.R.H. Passing W estport Arch Shot 18 Ju ne 1 9 0 1 . Length: 7 0 feet (1 min 10 secs). 3 Guards and Naval Brigade passing W estport Arch Shot 18 Ju n e 1 9 0 1 . Length: 7 0 feet (1 min 10 secs). 4 A rtillery Brigade w ith Guns passing W estport Arch Shot 18 Ju n e 1 9 0 1 . Length: 5 0 feet (50 secs). 5 Veterans passing W estport Arch Shot 18 Ju ne 1 9 0 1 . Length: 7 0 feet (1 min 10 secs).

R otorua 1 Haka. Royalty in M aori Costume Shot 15 Ju ne 1 9 0 1 . Length: 80 feet (1 min 20 secs). 2 Haka Shot 15 Ju ne 1 9 0 1 . Length: 55 feet (55 secs).

14 Geysers - Horses and Crowd 16 feet.

139 feet (probably Hescott film).

A u c k la n d

3 Haka Shot 15 June 1 9 0 1 . Length: 130 feet (2 mins 10 secs). 4 Poi Dance Shot 15 June 1 9 0 1 . Length: 100 feet (1 min 40 secs). 5 M aori Presentations Shot 15 Ju ne 1 9 0 1 . Length: 7 0 feet (1 min 10 secs). 6 Geysers Shot 14 June 1 901. Length: 125 feet (2 mins 5 secs). 7 Geysers Shot 14 Ju ne 1 9 0 1 . Length: 63 feet (1 min 3 secs). 8 Geysers in action Shot 14 June 1 9 0 1 . Length: 100 feet (1 min 40 secs).

6 Submarine Explosion Shot 2 0 Ju n e 1 9 0 1 . Length: 80 feet (1 min 20 secs). 7 Royal Cruiser. Royal Arthur Shot 2 0 Ju ne 1 9 0 1 . Length: 75 feet (1 min 15 secs). 8 Royal Cruiser. Juno Probably shot 20 June 1901. Length: 61 feet (1 min 1 sec). 9 Royal Cruiser. St. George Probably shot 20 June 1901. Length: 102 feet (1 min 42 secs). 10 Stone Laying W ellington Tow n Hall Shot 18 Ju n e 1 9 0 1 . Length: 65 feet (1 min 5 secs). 11 Stone Laying R ailw ay Buildings Shot 21 June 1901. Length: 130 feet (2 mins 10 secs). C h ris tc h u rc h 1 Reception and passing through Cathedral Square Shot 2 2 June 1 9 0 1 . Length: 100 feet (1 min 40 secs). 2 R eview at Hagley Park

9 Geysers in action Shot 14 June 1901. Length: 40 feet (40 secs). 10 Geysers in action Shot 14 June 1901. Length 40 feet (40 secs).

Shot 2 4 Ju ne 1 9 0 1 . Length: 75 feet (1 min 15 secs). 3 R eview at H agley Park Shot 2 4 Ju ne 1 9 0 1 . Length: 75 feet (1 min 15 secs).

Zealand Royal Film V isit Films 11 Geysers in action (A ) C o v e r a g e f o r t h e N e w Z e a l a n d G overnm ent

Shot 14 June 1 9 0 1 . Length: 130 feet (2 mins 10 secs).

The sequence numbering, description and lengths are taken from Perry’s let ter of 17 Ju ly 190 1 to New Zealand Premier R. J. Seddon.

Shot 14 June 1 9 0 1 . Length: 150 feet (2 mins 30 secs).

12 Rambles Among the Geysers

4 R eview at H agley Park Shot 24 June 1901. Length: 130 feet (2 mins 10 secs). 5 R eview at Hagley Park Shot 2 4 June 1 9 0 1 . Length: 150 feet (2 mins 30 secs).

6 Presentation of M edals Shot 2 4 June 1901. Length: 100 feet (1 min 40 secs). 7 Inspection of Veterans Shot 2 4 June 1901. Length: 100 feet (1 min 40 secs). 8 Stone Laying Shot 2 2 June 1901. Length: 100 feet (1 min 40 secs).

1901. Refer The Evening Post, Welling ton, 27 July 1901 p. 6. (C) P e r r y ' s R o t o r u a c o v e r a g e as c o m m e r c ia lly re le a s e d b y B aker & R o u s e Ltd a n d a d v e r t i s e d in T he A u s tra la s ia n P h o to g ra p h ic R e v ie w , 2 2 J u l y 1 9 0 1 , p . 2 3 .

The descriptions probably don’t relate to the government negatives but to neg atives simultaneously exposed by Perry in another camera.

D u n ed in 1 Presentation of M edals Shot 2 6 June 1901. Length: 150 feet (2 mins 30 secs). 2 Parade of Police [H.R.H. B ody Guard] Shot 2 7 Ju n e 1 9 0 1 . Length 5 0 feet (50 secs). 3 Royal Train leaving R ailw ay Station Shot 2 7 Ju ne 1 9 0 1 . Length: 5 0 feet (50 secs). (B) A d d i t i o n a l c o v e r a g e not m e t i o n e d in P e r r y ' s list o f 17 J u l y 1 9 0 1 1 Ceremonies at the M ayor of Auckland's Platform Shot 11 June 1901. Length unknown. A photograph (see footnote 23) shows Perry, with two assistants, using a W ar wick Bioscope Model “A” Camera. 2 Presentation of M edals at P arliam ent House, W ellington Shot 19 June 1901. A photograph on p. 187 of Loughnan’s official history of the visit (see footnote 22) shows two men operating a Warwick Bioscope Model “B ” camera at this ceremony. 3 Inspection of Veterans at the Octagon, Dunedin Shot 26 June 1901. Length unknown. Reference in T he Press, Christchurch, 28 June 1901, p. 5. 4 Laying of the Foundation Stone of the Queen's Statue, Dunedin Shot 2 7 June 1901. Length unknown. Reference in T he Press, Christchurch, 28 June 1901, p. 5. 5 A Tram Ride Through the Decorated Octagon, Dunedin Shot 27 June 1901. Length unknown. Screened by the Royal Tour Bioscope Com pany at the W ellin g ton O pera House, 31 July 1901. Refer The Otago Daily Tim es, Dunedin, 28 June 1901 p. 3. 6 The River Avon, Christchurch Probably filmed by Perry in June 1901. Length unknow n. Screen ed by the R oyal T o u r B ioscop e Com pany at W ellin g to n ’s O pera H ouse, 31 Ju ly

1 Haka “showing a Maori Haka [a war dance] in full swing, and a panoramic of the vast crowd of people. The only film taken of this event.” Length unknown. Filmed 15 June 1901. 2 The M aori W a r Canoe, weapons, mats, etc., being presented to the Duke and Duchess Shot 15 June 1901. Length unknown. 3 Poi Dance by the Rotorua Poi Dancers Shot 15 June 1901. Length unknown.

that it was a sterile time. In fact, it was the peak production period of M e l b ou rn e’s Salvation Army L im elight Department. In August 1902, it exhib ited its tw o-hou r docum entary presentation on Australia’s history from exploration to federation, Under South ern Skies. W ith 2 0 0 slides and 38 film segments totalling 6,000 feet (100 min utes), it was by far the longest and most com plex Australian screen entertain ment of its time. Previously overlooked by historians, its production saga will be recalled in our next issue.

5 Geysers Shot 14 June 1901. Length unknown, “showing the Seapod [sic] Geyser in full action in the presence of the Royal Vis itors”. This “Seapod” geyser did not exist. The film probably featured the “Wairoa” geyser, which was filmed, and “Seapod” may be a misinterpretation of the written form of “W airoa”.

1 A 33-second segment of one of A. H . Whitehouse’s films, Departure o f the Sec

Shot 14 June 1901. Length unknown. “A splendid film, clear and sharp, show ing the Duke and Duchess, with Maggie the Maori Guide, passing the camera.”

Acknowledgements An article of this type demands exten sive research support, and we are pleased to thank the following institu tions and individuals for their help: - Pat Laughren, Griffith University and the Australian Research Council, for financial support. - N ational A rchives o f New Zealand. - Salvation Army Archives in M el bourne and Wellington: George Ellis & Laurence Hay. - Wellington Public Library. - Alexander Turnbull Library. - Graham Shirley. Last, but not least, our wives, Anne Sowry and Prue Long.

Next Instalment Most Australian film histories skip over the years 1902-4, implying by omission

1902, p. 14. 23 F or

exam ple,

p h otograph

N o.

1038301/2, Alexander Turnbull Library, Wellington. 24 N ew Z ealand Times, 19 June 1901, p. 7. 25 Loughnan, loc. cit. 26 N ew Zealand Herald, 28 June 1901, p. 6. 27 NA IA1 1901/953 attached to IA1 1908/864. 2S N ew Zealand H erald, 24 May 1901, p. 5. 29 NA IA1 1901/ 2 2 7 9 a attached to IA1 1908/864. 31 Ibid. 32 NA IA1 1901/953 attached to IA1

o n d N ew Z ealan d C on tin gen t, shot in January 1900.

1908/864. 33 NA IA1 1 9 01/ 3739 attached to IA1

2 N ation al A rchives of New Z ealan d, W ellin g to n , (NA), IA1

1 9 01/ 953,

attached to IA1 1908/864. 3 Ibid.

1908/864. 34 Ibid. 3i

Cinema Papers, No. 99, June 1994, p. 67.

36 NA IA1 1901/2279a attached to IA1

4 Ibid.

1908/864- A Warwick Model “F’ projector.

5 Ibid.

37 NA IA1 1 9 01/ 2785 attached to IA1

6 NA, Im l5/126. 7

Full Salvation, Melbourne, 1 September 1894, pp. 290-5; “A Limelighter’s Expe

1908/864. 39 Ibid.

T he W ar Cry, New Zealand, 11 Jan u

40 N ew Z ealand Times, Wellington, 29 July

ary 1896, p. 4; 9 May 1896, p. 3. 9

1908/864. 38 NA IA1 1 9 01/ 3799 attached to IA1

rience”.

1901, p. 6.

The W ar Cry, Melbourne, 3 December

41 Wanganui Chronicle, 2 6 July 1901, p. 2.

1898, pp. 9-10; 10 December 1898, pp.

42 Ibid.

9-10.

43 N ew Z ealand Times, 29 July 1901, p. 5.

The Australasian P hotographic R eview ,

44 Evening Post, Wellington, 29 July 1901,

Sydney, 21 January 1899, p. 2. 11 T he W ar Cry, M elbourne, 10 D ecem ber 1898, p. 9; “The Otaki Onslaught”. 12 Clive Sowry, “Whitehouse, A. H .” entryin Dictionary o f N ew Zealand Biography, Vol. 2. (1870 - 1900), pp. 574-5, Brid

6 Geyser

rative, Government Printer, Wellington,

30 Ibid.

4 A M aori Haka in progress Shot 15 June 1901. Length unknown.

to 2 7 th Ju n e 1 901. A D escrip tiv e N a r

get Williams Books, Wellington, 1993. lj Cinem a Papers, N o. 101, October 1994, pp. 5 6-61; pp. 62-3. 14 Cinem a Papers, No. 103, March 1995, pp. 40-3; pp. 56-7.

p. 4. 45 Evening Post, 27 July 1901, p. 6. 46 The Showm an, Sydney, September 1950, p. 15. 47 NA IA1 1901/953 attached to IA1 1908/864. 48 Evening Post, 11 April 1902, p. 6. 49 NA IA1 1 9 01/ 3799 attached to IA1 1908/864. 7,0 Evening Post, 3 April 1902, p. 5. 51 Ibid.

15 NA S51/93, p. 175.

7,2 Evening Post, 26 May 1910, p. 6.

16 Reports are given in N ew Z ealan d H er

53 F or exam ple, at H ayw ard’s Pictures,

ald, Auckland, 21 May 1901, p. 3. The

Christchurch, on 14 July 1910

Yeoman, Wanganui, 1 June 1901, p. 14.

telton Times, Christchurch, 15 July 1910,

The N ew Z ealand Times, Wellington, 28

p. 9; and at West’s Pictures, Auckland, on

May 1901, p. 7. The Press, Christchurch,

23 July 1910 - see N ew Z ealand H erald,

4 June 1901, p. 5. O tago D aily T im es,

see L yt

23 July 1910, p. 12.

Dunedin, 7 June 1901, p. 7. S outhland

j4 The tour began at W arwick on 6 Sep

Tim es, Invercargill, 11 June 1901, p. 2.

tember 1901. See B risbane C ourier , 10

17 N ew Zealand H erald, Auckland, 20 May 1901, p. 5. 18 The Press, Christchurch, 4 June 1901, p. 5; Otago Daily Times, 7 June 1901, p. 7. 19 N ew Zealand Times, Wellington, 27 May 1901, p. 5. 20 NA IA1 1901/ 953 attached to IA1 1908/864.

September 1 9 0 1 ; 11 September 1 9 0 1 ; M aryborough Chronicle (Qld), 12 Octo ber 1901, p. 2. The War Cry, New Zealand, 16 August 1902, p. 3. 56 NA LAI 1901/3728. Hescott only filmed the Rotorua proceedings. 7,7 C in em a P ap ers, N o. 1 0 4 , M ay 1 9 9 5 .

21 N ew Z ealand Times, 1 1 May 1901, p. 5.

“Australia’s First Films - Part 13, Foreign

22 NA IA1 1901/ 2279a attached to IA1

Producers in Australia”.

1908/864; R. A. Loughnan, R oyalty in

58 NA LAI 13/11/67.

N ew Z ea la n d : th e visit o f th eir R o y al

59 NA LAI 1901/3728.

H ig h n esses th e D u k e a?td D u ch ess o f

60 NA A RC H 451/10a.

Cornwall and York to N ew Zealand, 10th

61 Ibid.

C I N E M A P A P E R S • AUGUS T 1 995

F C C Funding Decisions Documentaries Alicia Bitter herbs and honey The edge of instinct In a small valley Life force Red light in full flight Secret fleets Ways of seeing

58 58 58 58 58 58 59 59

Features Children of the revolution Dating the enemy David Williamson’s brilliant lies Floating life

58 58 58 58

Television

The bite Fire II Halifax f.p. 2 Heat Return to Jupiter

Features Production Shine The small man

58 58 58 58 58

Features Pre-production

| 59 59 59 59

The birds do a magnificent tune Full bodied green Life Love amongst the muffins

Features Post-production

Production Survey Children of the revolution David Williamson’s brilliant lies River Street Road to Nhill

Shorts 59 59

Babe - the brilliant sheep pig Cosi Countdown Girl Lilian’s story Lust and revenge Race the sun Tears of the sun Turning april What I have written

59 59 59 59 60 60 60 60 60 60

60 61 61 61

I !

After the beep Banjo Paterson’s The man from Snowy River Blue heelers Bordertown Echo Point The Feds The genie from down-under Lizzie’s library Naked Rainbow’s end The silver brumby Space Spellbinder

Television Pre-production Fire II The last bullet Ocean girl 3 Return to Jupiter Sun on the stubble The violent earth

61 61 61 61 61 61

i i i

Television Production and Post-production 61 61 62 62 62 62 62 62 62 62 62 62 62

production

■

THE S M A L L M A N STARTS • S H I N E C O N T I NU E S • L U S T A N D R E V E N G E W R A P S

F F C F u n d in g D e c is io n s Following the Board meeting on 31 M arch, the FFC has entered into contract negotiations with the producers of the following projects: CHILDREN OF THE REVOLUTION (120 MINS) T r istra m M iall F ilm s D-SW: Peter Duncan P: T ristram M iall PC: J udy Davis , Richard Roxburgh, Geoffrey Rush, Rachel Griffiths

D AVID W IL L IA M S O N 'S B RILLIAN T LIES (110 MINS) B aysid e P ictures P-D: Richard Franklin SWs: Richard Franklin , Peter Fitzpatrick PC: A nthony La Paglia , Gia Carides, Z oé Carides, Ray Barrett. study of sexual harassment about a young woman who tells a mediator from the anti-discrim ination board that she was harassed and w rongfully dismissed by the insurance broker for whom she used to work.

ew know th a t Josef Stalin's last conscious night w as spent in the loving and devoted arms of Australian Joan Fraser. Fewer still know th a t their love child brought Australia to the brink of civil war.

Feature DATIN G THE E N E M Y (95 MINS) T otal Film

FIRE II (1 3 X 4 3 MINS) Extra D im e n s io n s P roductions Ds: Peter Fisk, Geoff B ennett Ps: M ichael Caulfield, T ony Cavanaugh , S imone N orth EP: M I kael B orglund SWs: T ony Cavanaugh , Everett de Roche

K ey

NOTE: Production Survey formo now adhere to a revioedformat. Cinema Papers regretd it cannot accept information received in a differentformat. Cinema Papéis doed not accept redpondibilityfor the accuracy of any information supplied by prodiwtion companies. Thid id particularly the cade when infor mation changed but the production company maked m> attempt to correct what had already been Supplied (ad with the incorrect Cthulhu entry in the loot idduc)

Following a Board, meeting in April, the FFC has entered into contract negotiations with the producers of the following projects:

Television

EP Executive Producer P Producer Co-p Co-Producer AS Associate Producer LP Line Producer D Director SW Scriptwriter C Cast PC Principal Cast SE Story Editor WD Writer-director

compositional material. This documentary shows Edwards at w ork in the bush on a guitar concerto commissioned by the great classical guitar virtuoso, John W illiam s, amd follow s the piece through to its premiere at the International Guitar Festival in Darwin.

urther stories about a platoon of firefighters in a small innersuburban station in Queensland.

RETURN TO JUPITER (1 3 X 3 0 MINS)

n this science-fiction adventure, five children reunite on a large space platform hovering above Earth and prepare to return to a newlyestablished mining colony on Ganymede, one of Jupiter's moons. Travelling on their state-of-the-art ship, the Icarus, the colonists encounter many dangers.

Documentaries LIFE FORCE (55 MINS, FFC-SBS ACCORD) D on F eatherstone P roductions P-D-SW : Don Featherstone omposer Ross Edwards distils birdsong, insect vibrations and other natural sounds, using them as

C I N E M A P A P E R S • AUGUST 1995

unique m inority culture exists in A ustralia's deaf community. Its history, culture and linguistics are seen through the eyes of a profoundly deaf artist, Peter Adams.

modern comedy romance about relationships. She wants him to commit, and he still w ants to play around. She makes a wish - th a t he were in her shoes. When they wake up, he is. He's in her body. She's in his. Forced to live each other"s lives through work, friends, and sex - they get to know each other as they never have before.

THE EDGE OF IN S T IN C T (55 MINS, FFC-SBS ACCORD) S tephen Ra m sey P roductions

he documentary follow s couples undergoing the IVF programme. It examines the emotional stresses of the procedure - the devastation after failure, the joy of success and the depth of the procreative need.

Following a Board meeting in June, the FFC has entered into contract negotiations with the producers of the following projects:

Feature FLOATING LIFE (95 MINS)

comedy in w hich an Asian family migrates from Hong Kong to Australia and finds it is caught between tw o cultures. A compelling, poignant story about how to be a family in a new land.

IN A S M A LL VALLEY (55 M INS, FFC-SBS ACCORD) O pen C hannel P roductions an d B yza n tin e Film & V ideo P roductions

Documentaries BITTER HERBS A N D HONEY (55 MINS, ABC ACCORD) A mber F ilms D: M onique S chwarz Ps: M onique Schwarz, Susan W eis SWs: M onique S chwarz, Eddie M oses ince First Fleet days, Jew s arriving in Australia have made th e ir home in the M elbourne suburb of Carlton. M any Eastern European Jew s living there chose not to join the cultural melting pot, keeping their language, religion, culture and traditions. This docum entary looks at the w ay they struggled to ensure the survival of these traditions, and the conflicts they encountered w ith M elbourne's w ellestablished German-Anglo Jewish community.

RED LIGHT IN FULL FLIGHT (55 MINS, SBS ACCORD)

D: Clara Law P: B ridget Ikin Co-P: J ohn M aynard SW s: Eddie Fong, Clara Law

S im ps o n L e M esurier

Documentaries

n idealistic solicitor heads bush after a disillusioning first encounter w ith the justice system. In a small country tow n, she witnesses an incident between police and tw o local Aborigines, and soon becomes embroiled in a fig h t for justice.

H ibiscus F ilms

HALIFAX F.P. 2 (3X100 MINS)

hese telem ovies follow the adventures of Jane Halifax, a forensic psychiatrist retained by both police and solicitors. Using her specialized knowledge of criminal behaviour, she helps unravel a series of mysteries involving a convicted rapist, a cop gone w rong and organized crime.

Ps: Paul Barron, J ulie M onton EP: Paul Barron SW: T erry J ohnson

D: Stephen Ramsey P: J ane Ramsey SW: Stephen Ramsey

Television

Ds: Paul M oloney, Steve J odrell Ps: Roger Le M esurier, Roger S impson W s: M ac Gudgeon, David B outland, Kathrine T homson PC: Rebecca Gibney

HEAT (90 MINS) B arron T elevision

T elevision

D-SW: M egan S impson P: S ue M illiken EPs: Phil Gerlach, Heather Ogilvie

F ilm A ustralia P: T erry J ennings EP: Ron Saunders SW: David Ogilvy PC: J ustin Rosniak , A nna Choy, Daniel T aylor, A braham Forsythe, Robyn M cK enzie.

and

D-SW: Dennis K S mith P: J ack W hite EPs: Geoff B arnes, J ohn M oore

Television THE BITE (2 X 9 0 MINS) P alm B each P ictures D: M ichael Carson Ps: David Elfick, Lavinia W arner SW: T erry J ohnson n Australian adventurer and his new English w ife decide to move to Asia and set up a business. The venture quickly turns to disaster and they face financial ruin until assisted by the exotic w ife of a local businessman. But every favour has a p ric e ...

Fla m in g S tar Film s D-SW: Sam ia M ikhail P: Sharyn Prentice n traditional A rabic cultures, raks sharqui (belly dance) is w idely enjoyed, but strictly contained. Samia Mikhail, a Lebanese film m aker and raks sharqui teacher, explores the sexual politics of the dance from contem porary western and oriental perspectives. She examines w h a t it is that Australian women see in the dance, and questions w hy her community here remains locked into social attitudes w hich belong to another tim e and another part of the world.

A LIC IA (52 MINS, SBS ACCORD) S tella M otion P ictures P-D: Philippe Charluet SW s: Philippe Charluet, J ane S earle ix years ago, Alicia Liley was seriously injured in a car accident.

production F F C F u n d in g D e c is io n s continued leaving her brain damaged. Not content w ith regaining a normal life, Alicia set up her own theatre company, Soul Theatre, dedicated to raising public awareness of so many people like herself. This docum entary tells the story of A licia's long journey of recovery and her incredible determination to pursue her dreams.

invasion' of firstly American submarines and later British and Dutch servicemen, and highlights the dramatic social and cultural change that locals faced - forever altering their outlook of the world.

W A Y S OF SEEING

SECRET FLEETS M ask P roductions D: M atthew K elley Ps: Peter D u Crane, Samantha Kelly EP: Peter Du Crane SWs: M atthew K elly, Greg Colgan n W orld W ar II, Fremantle was secretly transform ed from an isolated outpost to the most successful submarine base of its kind, second only in size to Pearl Harbour. This documentary looks a tth e 'cultural

VlNGAN D-SWs: Les M cLaren, A nnie Stiven P: Les M cLaren n examination of the documentary filmmaking process, and the way one culture attempts to translate another. This film explores the process and issues of the documentary experience by sampling aw ard winning Australian films about Papua New Guinea, and through interviews w ith the makers about their strategies used during filming.

P ro d u c tio n S u rv e y Information is as supplied and adjudged as of 14/6/95.

Featured Pre-production CHILDREN OF THE REVOLUTION Production company: T ristram M iall Films Production: 3 JULY 1995 ... P rincipal Credits Director: Peter Duncan Producer: T ristram M iall Associate producer: Greg Ricketson Scriptwriter: PETER DUNCAN Director of photography: M artin M cGrath Production designer: Roger Ford Editor: S imon M artin Government A gency I nvestment Production: FFC, NSWFTO Cast J udy Davis (J oan Fraser); Richard Roxburgh, Geoffrey Rush, Sam N eill, Rachel Griffiths. ew know that Josef Stalin's last conscious night was spent in the loving and devoted arms of Australian Joan Fraser. Fewer still know that their love child brought Australia to the brink of civil war.

D AVID W IL L IA M S O N 'S B RILLIAN T LIES Production company: B ayside PICTURES Australian distributor: ROADSHOW Budget: S3.5 MILLION Production: J uly 1995 ... Principal Credits Director: Richard Franklin Producers: RICHARD FRANKLIN, Sue Farrelly Associate producer: K im McKlLLOP Scriptwriters: RICHARD FRANKLIN, Peter Fitzpatrick Director of photography: GEOFF BURTON Production designer: T racy W att Editor: David PULBROOK Composer: N erida T yson-C hew Government A gency I nvestment

small country tow n leaps to action the day a car-load of lady bowlers tips on the Nhill road.

Shooting stock: K odak 5248, 5298 Video transfers: APOCALYPSE Government A gency I nvestment

COSI

Development: NSWFTO Cast

Production company: S miley Films Distribution company: M iramax Films Budget: $3.5 MILLION Pre-production: 1 2 /1 1 /9 4 - 19/1/95 Production: 20/1/95 - 10/3/95 Post-production: 1 1 /3 /9 5 - 1/9/95

P rincipal Credits

(52 MINS, SBS ACCORD) (55 MINS, ABC ACCORD)

Production: AFC, Film V ictoria

Director: CHRIS N oonan [No DETAILS SUPPLIED.]

Production: FFC, Film V ictoria

Cast A nthony La Paglia , Gia Carides, Z oe Carides, Ray Barrett. study of sexual harassment about a young woman who tells a mediator from the anti-discrim ination board that she was harassed and w rongfully dismissed bythe insurance b ro ke rfo r whom she used to work.

Featured Production SHIN E Production company: MOMENTUM FILMS Distribution companies: Pandora Cinema , Ronin Films , BBC Entertainment Budget: S6 MILLION Production: 7 A pril 1995 ... Principal Credits Director: SCOTT H icks Producer: JANE SCOTT Scriptwriter: JAN SARDI DOP: Geoffrey S impson Editor: Pip Karmel Production designer: SALLY CAMPBELL Costume designer: Sally Campbell Musical director: David H irschfelder P lanning and D evelopment Casting consultant: Liz M ullinar Production Crew Production manager: Elizabeth Symes Insurer: H. W. W ood (A ustralia ) Completion guarantor: Film Finances Legal services: MARSHALLS & Dent Publicity: D ennis Davidson ASSOCIATES Government A gency I nvestment Production: FFC, SAFC, Film V ictoria Cast G eoffrey Rush (D avid ), N oah T aylor (Young David ), S ir J ohn G ielgud (P arkes), Lynn Redgrave (G illian ), A rmin M ueller-S tahl (D avid ' s Father). fter succumbing to the pressure of his father's obsessive love and the fierce competition o fth e concert world as a child prodigy, David Helfgott makes a new beginning in London inspired by his passion for music and the woman he loves.

THE SM ALL M A N RIVER STREET Production company:

House & M oorhouse Films Budget: S3.1 MILLION Production: 18 SEPTEMBER 1995 ... Principal Credits Director: TONY M ahood Producer: Lynda H ouse Associate producer: Catherine B ishop Scriptwriter: PHILLIP RYALL Director of photography: M artin M cGrath Production designer: PATRICK REARDON Government A gency I nvestment Production: FFC n ambitious young real-estate agent misses an im portant land auction when his temper lands him in trouble. Sentenced to community service, he is sent to a drop-in centre terrorized by street kids. Here he is forced to take measure of his courage and to make a choice between property and people.

ROAD TO NHILL Production company: Gecko Films Budget: S1.85 MILLION Australian distributor: RONIN FILMS Production: October 1995 ...

Production company: S mall M an Productions Distributor: SOUTHERN STAR Production: 12/6/95-4/8/95 Principal Credits Director: JOHN HILLCOAT Producer: D enise Patience Associate producer: RICHARD HUDSON Line producer: Sally A yre-S mith Scriptwriter: Gene Conkie Director of photography: A ndrew de Groot Production designer: Chris Kennedy Editor: Stewart Young Composers: N ick Cave, M ick Harvey, B uxa B argeld Other Credits Production manager: Yvonne Collins 1st assistant director: COLIN FLETCHER Art director: Hugh B ateup Gauge: 35 mm Government A gency I nvestment Production: FFC Cast Kerry Fox he story of an expatriate living in Papua New Guinea, who falls in love w ith a woman who rekindles memories of his dead wife. When he takes h e rto his tropical home, she discovers that he has a past - a past that he can neither forgive nor forget.

Director: M ark J offe Producer: Richard B rennan Executive producers: PHAEDON Vass ,

Harvey W einstein , B ob W einstein Associate producer: Lyn GAlLEY Scriptwriter: LOUIS NOWRA Based on the play: COSI DOP: Ellery Ryan Sound recordist: JOHN SCHIEFELBEIN Editor: N icholas B eauman Production designer: Chris K ennedy Costume designer: T ess S chofield Planning and D evelopment Casting: A lison B arrett Casting Casting consultant: ALISON BARRETT Extras casting: Gabrielle H ealy P roduction Crew Production manager: CATHERINE B ishop Production co-ordinator: Em ma SCHOFIELD Production secretary: J ustine D endle Location manager: M aude Heath Unit manager: W il M ilne Unit assistants: Karen Hedley, Paul N aylor Production runner: B elinda Young Production accountant: BELLE Eder Accounts assistant: COLETTE WARD Insurer: Steeves Lumley Completion guarantor: FILM FINANCES Legal services: Heidiman & Co Camera Crew Camera operator: Kim Batterham Focus puller: Sally Eccleston Clapper-loader: BEDE HAINES Camera attachment: J asmine Carrucan Camera type: ARRI 535B Key grip: LESTER BISHOP Assistant grip: T erry COOK Gaffer: J ohn M orton Best boy: M athew Hoile Electrician: PAUL SELLGREN Assistant electrics: A lan York On - set Crew 1st assistant director: EUAN KEDDIE 2nd assistant director: T ony GILBERT 3rd assistant director: RUSSELL B oyd Continuity: Jo WEEKS Boom operator: Chris Goldsmith Make-up: N oriko W atanabe -N eill Make-up assistant: N oreen W ilkie Hairdresser: J an Z eigenbein Special fx: Ray Fowler Stunts co-ordinator: Glenn B oswell Still photography: Phillip L e M esurieur Unit publicists: M aria Farmer, T racey M air Catering: Kollage Catering, K erry Fetzer A rt D epartment Art director: H ugh BATEUP Art department co-ordinator:

Christina N orman Art department runner: J ohn A llan Set dressers: M arita M ussett,

V iv W ilson Draftsperson: T ony W illiams Standby props: PETER Davies

W ardrobe Wardrobe supervisor: H elen Dykes Standby wardrobe: I sobell Carter Wardrobe assistant: CHEYNE PHILLIPS

A nimals Animal trainer: J oanne Kostiuk Animal assistant: T odd M ackay

Film gauge: S uper 16

B A B E -T H E BRILLIANT SHEEP PIG

Construction D epartment Scenic artist: P eta B lack Construction foremen: A ndrew Staig , Patrick Carr Carpenters: GORDON FlNNEY, M artin J ones, M urray S immance Labourer: ANDREW B earman P ost- production Assistant editor: M artin Connor Music co-ordinator: Christine W oodruff Laboratory: A tlab Lab liaison: Ian Russell, D enise W olfson

Government A gency I nvestment

Production company: Kennedy M iller

Film gauge: 1:1.85

P rincipal Credits Director: SUE BROOKS Producer: Sue M aslin Scriptwriter: ALISON TlLSON Director of photography:

N icolette Freeman Production designer: Kerith H olmes Editor: T ony Stevens Composer: Elizabeth D rake

Other Credits

Featured Podt-prodaction and Awaiting Releaoe

B en M endelsohn (L ewis ), B arry Otto (R oy), T oni Collette (J ulie), J acki W eaver (C herry), Pamela Rabe (R uth), Paul Chubb (H enry), Colin Hay (Z ac ), David W enham (D oug), Colin Friels (E rrol), A den Young (N ick), Rachel Griffiths (L ucy), T ony Llewellyn-J ones (K irner), Kerry W alker (S andra ). ewis, a young university graduate, accepts a job directing psychiatric patients in a therapeutic drama course. His control is usurped by Roy, a manic depressive w ho demands that they stage an opera by Mozart, despite the fa ct that none o fth e patients can act, sing orspeak Italian.

C O U N TD O W N Production companies:

P hillip Emanuel Prods, H ips Film & V ideo Prods Budget: $500,000

P rincipal Credits Director: VINCENT M0NT0N Producer: Phillip Emanuel Co-producer: J ohn H ipwell Executive producer: David Hannay Scriptwriter: V incent M onton DOP: Louis I rving Sound recordist: PHIL STERLING Editor: T ed Otton Production designer: N eil A ngwin Costume designer: A phrodite Kondos Composer: N eil $ utherland Planning and Development Casting: Greg A pps Budgeted by: J ohn H ipwell Production Crew Production manager: A nastasia S ideris Production co-ordinator: M yrlene B arr Production secretary: Georgia M urray Location manager: Stuart B eatty Unit assistants: J ulie M urray, B rian O'G rady Production assistants: MARTINE S prdule-C arroll, S imone W ade Production accountant: Eric Low Insurer: H. W . W ood (T ony G ibbs ) Completion guarantor: Film FINANCES Legal services: T ress Cox & M addox Camera Crew Focus puller: PETER WHITE Clapper-loader: B runo Doring 2nd unit DOP: M urray W are Camera type: ARRI STIII SUPER 16 Key grip: PETER Kershaw Gaffer: Peter Ryan Best boy: Greg W ilson Electrician: A dam H unter On - set Crew 1st assistant director: Ed Stevenson 2nd assistant director: B rad Raselli Continuity: JULIE FEDDERSEN Boom operator: STEVEN K ing Make-up: A manda R0WB0TT0M Hairdresser: A manda Rowbottom Choreographer: CASSANDRA M iller Stunts co-ordinator: Z ev Eleftheriou Safety officer: W ally Dalton Still photography: B rian M cKenzie Catering: Food for Film (K eith Fish ) Runners: MATTHEW ROOKE, M ichael Z akhem A rt Department Standby props: Phinn H epworth Armourer: J ohn Fox W ardrobe Standby wardrobe: Katie Graham P ost- production Laboratory: MOVIELAB Lab liaison: M artin Hoyle Cast M arcus Graham (G rady/C hris ), N ikki Coghill (K ate ), Doug B owles (O'R ourke), Stephen W hittaker (K opin sky), J ohn A rnold (F rank ), B ruce A lexander (D etective S ergeant), George V idalis (K eith), A ndrew Curry (J im m y ), J in Yi (K orean Diplomat ), Roland Dantes (Large A sian Guy).

C I N E M A P A P E R S • A UGUST 1995

rom antic th rille r follow ing the journey of a fugitive in his quest to avenge his brother's murder.

Based on the novel by: Kate Grenville DOP: S lawomir I dziak Sound recordist: B en Osmo Editor: L ee S mith Production designer: Roger Ford

GIRL

Distribution companies:

\ i

Cast T oni Collette (L ilian ); Ruth Cracknell; B arry Otto (L ilian ' s Father); M organ Smallbone (F. J. Stroud); S usie L indeman , J ohn Flaus, A nne Louise Lambert .

Production companies:

P hillip Emanuel Prods, H ips Film & V ideo Prods Budget: $400,000

P rincipal Credits Director: Peter T hompson Producer: Phillip Emanuel Co-producer: J ohn H ipwell Executive producer: David Hannay Scriptwriter: Peter T hompson DOP: T im S mart Sound recordist: Steven B est Editor: A ndrew N arozny

i i

Principal Credits

P lanning

LUST A N D REVENGE

he story of four contem porary teenagers, three friends and one outsider, w ho enter a magazine photo com petition. In consequence, one is propelled into an international modelling career.

P rincipal Credits Director: Paul Cox Producers: J ane B allantyne , Paul C ox Executive producer: W illiam T. M arshall Scriptwriters: PAUL Cox, JOHN CLARKE Director of photography: NlNO MARTINETTI Production designer: N eil A ngwin Editor: J ohn Scott Other Credits Production manager: David Lightfoot Distribution guarantee: S eawell Films (France), A d Film (A ustralasia ), Classic Films (B elgium ). Finance: FFC, SAFC. Gauge: 35 m m .

Cast N icholas Hope, Claudia Karvan , Gosia D obrowolska, Chris Haywood, Pamela Rabe , V ictoria Eager . n erotic satire of an heiress who, after a failed marriage and a corrupt fam ily environment, decides to occupy her mind w ith artistic endeavours. She commissions her friend, an internationally-recognized sculptress, to create a w ork in the vein of M ichaelangelo’s David.

RACE THE SUN Production company:

Production company: CML Films Pre-production: 23 /1 /9 5 -1 9 /3 /9 5 Production: 2 0 /3 /9 5 -1 4 /5 /9 5 Post-production: 15/5/95 ... Principal Credits Director: J erzy D omaradzki Producer: M arian M cgowan Co-producer: M ike WlLCOX Executive producers: David COURT, J eremy B ean Scriptwriter: STEVE W right

\ j i i

' j

D evelopment

Production accountant:

B ernadette B reitkreuz Insurer: Steeves Lumley Completion guarantor: First A ustralian Completion B ond Company Legal services: ROTH WARREN Camera Crew Focus puller: S ion M ichel Clapper-loader: A ndrew J erram Gaffer: Paul B ooth Best boy: Steve Gray Generator operator: Gene van Dam On - set Crew 1st assistant director: Karan M onkhouse 2nd assistant director: Karen M ahood Continuity: JULIE FEDDERSEN Boom operator: CRAIG BEGGS Make-up: A manda Rowbottom Hairdresser: A manda Rowbottom Safety officer: B rett A nderson Still photography: W ain Fimeri Catering: Food FOR Film A rt D epartment Art director: FIONA GREVILLE Set decorator: J ill Eden Props buyer: B arry Kennedy Standby props: Hugh Richards W ardrobe Standby wardrobe: K erri M azzocco P ost- production Assistant editor: Rochelle Oshlack Edge numberer: Oliver Streeton Sound transfers: Eugene W ilson Laboratory: ClNEVEX Film gauge: S uper 16 Shooting stock: K odak Government A gency I nvestment Development: AFC Production: AFC Marketing: AFC Cast A ngie M illiken (S orel A therton/G illian ), M artin J acobs (C hristopher Houghton/A very), J acek Koman (J eremy Fliszar), Gillian J ones (Catherine/F rances B ourin).

A ndrew S hort Standby props: Robert " M oxy" M oxham Armourer: Ken JONES Vehicle wrangler: Paul A nderson W ardrobe Costume supervisor: Emily S eresin Standby wardrobe: Gabrielle D unn Costume assistant: B ernadette M cCall A nimals Animal wrangler: JULIE LORRIMAR Construction D epartment Scenic artist: MARTIN BRUVERIS Construction manager: B ob Paton Painter: A ndrew Robinson P ost- production Post-production supervisor:

Gregor Hutchinson

iction and reality become indistinguishable as one person's search for truth encounters another's realization of desire. Based on John A. Scott's Premier's A w ard-winning novel of the same name.

1st assistant editor: N oelleen W estcombe 2nd assistant editor: CLE0 MYLES Laboratories: A tlab (S ydney),

T he Film H ouse (T oronto) Shooting stock: K odak. TEARS OF THE SUN ! Cast ! Production companies: i T ushka B ergen (A pril), A aron B labey (L eif), D ee S mart (K yra), T ayler Kane Robert Lawrence Prods, Fox (D onny), J ustine Clarke (R ose), Production: 20 February 1995 ... B radley Byquar (C harlie), Christopher P rincipal Credits M orsley (C happie), K enneth W elsh Director: JOHN WOO (Father), J udi Farr (M other). Producer: ROBERT LAWRENCE i Executive producer: Stratton Leopold \ he young w ife of an ambitious Scriptwriters: J oel Gross, A lan M cElroy, | bureaucrat, April is accidentally Chris Gerolmo, Ronald Bass i kidnapped by an inept street gang I I during a bungled robbery. Confinement turns to liberation as she comes to TU R N IN G A PR IL realize her young captors offer her a Production company: \ first taste of personal freedom and T urning A pril P roductions I sexual awakening.

C I N E M A P A P E R S • A UGU S T 1995

T racey M oxham

he attractive new science teacher at Hawaii's Kona High takes on a bunch of bored and disillusioned school kids and gives them the inspiration to design and build their own solar car. W hat begins as a Senior Science project becomes an entry in the W orld Solar Car Challenge that takes them across the Australian desert from Darwin to Adelaide.

! i

See previous issue for details on:

Art department runner: M arco PlNESI Buyer-dressers: A licia W alsh ,

Documentaries

Art department co-ordinator:

P rincipal Credits Director: CHARLIE KANGANIS Producers: Richard H eus, B arry M orrow Executive producer: David N ichols Scriptwriter: Barry M orrow Director of photography: David B urr Production designer: Owen Paterson Costume designer: M argot W ilson Editor: W endy Greene B ricmont Other Credits 1st assistant director: B ob D onaldson 2nd assistant director: Richard M cGrath Cast J im B elushi, Halle B erry, Casey A ffleck, Eliza D ushku.

LILIA N S STORY

Sun Productions

Distributor: Columbia -T ristar Production: 6/4—9/6/95

RANGERS I ! SEX IS A FOUR LETTER W ORD

M IG H T Y M O R P H IN POW ER

(M elbourne); 30/3/95 - 10/4/95 (Paris ) ! UNDER THE GUN Post-production: 17/4/95 - 29/9/95 I i i P rincipal Credits ! i Director: J ohn H ughes Producer: Peter Sainsbury | Based on the novel: W hat I Have W ritten i Written by: J ohn A. S cott Scriptwriter: J ohn A. S cott DOP: D ion B eebe I i Sound recordist: L loyd Carrick I Editor: U ri M izrahi ! ALICE Production designer: Sarah Stollman i Costume designer: K erri M azzocco THE CLUB i Composer: Ross Edwards C UR TA IN S FOR M Y C A B IN Planning and D evelopment Script editor: A nnette B lonski GLUED TO THE TELLY Casting: Liz M ullinar Casting i Consultants THE GOOD LOOKER I Casting consultant: Katherine D odd HELL BENTO P roduction Crew Production manager: YVONNE COLLINS ! THE IN D IA C O NN ECTIO N Production co-ordinator: Jo FRIESEN M ELT Production secretary: Em ma J amvold Location manager: T im S cott PAT & EDDIE'S GREYHOUND Unit manager: Steve B rett RACING DAY Production runner: VICTOR FukuSHIMA

Production Crew Production manager: Cathy Flannery Production co-ordinator: J acquie Fine Location manager: Robyn B ersten Unit manager: Paul M alane Production assistant: Sarah M ilsome Production runners: Claire Davidson , A usland Ismail Production accountant: Dl B rown Completion guarantor: Film Finances Legal services: Lyndon Sayer-J ones Camera Crew Focus puller: Robert A gganis Clapper-loader: M ichelle Cloete 2nd unit DOP: W olfgang Knochell 2nd unit focus: PETER TERAKES Key grip: Robin M organ Assistant grip: Paul Hamlyn Gaffer: PAUL JOHNSTONE Best boy: Graeme Cook 3rd electrics: MlLES JONES On - set Crew 1st assistant director: V icki S ugars 2nd assistant director: A dam S pencer 3rd assistant director: Kate T urner Continuity: SUSAN WlLEY Boom swinger: B ob W illiams Make-up: Lesley V anderwalt Additional make-up: W endy Sainsbury Special fx make-up: N ick D orning Hairdresser: Paul WILLIAMS Stunts co-ordinator: GRANT PAGE Safety officer: Robert S imper Still photography: TRACEY SCHRAMM Unit publicist: T racey M air Catering: Camera Cooks A rt D epartment

Production company: I llumination Films Production: 8 /5 -9 /6 /9 5

Production company: Early W orks Pre-production: 12/12/94 - 3/2/95 Production: 6 /2 /9 5 -1 7 /3 /9 5

Casting: Faith M artin & ASSOCIATES Extras casting: K ristin W hitfield Storyboard artist: A nnie B eauchamp

Production designer:

the

and

W H A T I HAVE W R ITTE N

Robert Lantos

he unconventional life of a legendary eccentric w ho recited Shakespeare for a dollar on the streets of Sydney and rode taxis for the price of a sonnet. Lilian’s story is a celebration of being alive. Based on a novel by Kate Grenville.

Race

Director: G eoff B ennett Producers: H eather Ogilvie , Lael M cCall Co-producer: J ohn W inter Executive producers: Phil G erlach, Scriptwriter: J ames W. N ichol DOP: Steve A rnold Sound recordist: B ronwyn M urphy Editor: S usan S hipton Production designer: MICHAEL Philips Costume designer: Clarrissa Patterson

A lex Zabotto -B entley Planning and D evelopment Casting: Liz M ullinar Budgeted by: J ohn H ipwell P roduction Crew Production manager: A nastasia S ideris Production co-ordinator: BRAD RASELLI Production secretary: Georgia M urray Location manager: Stuart B eatty Production assistants: S imone J amieson , Daniela Carelli Production accountant: Eric Low Insurer: H. W . W ood (T ony G ibbs ) Completion guarantor: Film Finances Legal services: T ress Cox & M addox Camera Crew Focus puller: Peter W hite Clapper-loader: B runo D oring 2nd unit DOP: M urray W are Camera type: ARRI S TIII S uper 16 Key grip: PETER KERSHAW Gaffer: Peter Ryan Best boy: Greg W ilson Electrician: A dam H unter On - set Crew 1st assistant director: M ichael M adigan 2nd assistant director: Lucy M aclaren Continuity: JULIE FEDDERSEN Boom operator: Steven King Make-up: Christine M iller Hairdresser: Christine M iller Choreographer: Cassandra M iller Safety officer: B rett A nderson Still photography: B rian M cKenzie Catering: Food for Film (K eith Fish ) Runners: D any Osta, M ichael Zakhem A rt Department Art director: Gabrielle Stewart Assistant art director: Edward M anier W ardrobe Wardrobe supervisor: Cathy Herreen Wardrobe assistant: N aomi Eller Post- production Post-production supervisor: Chris W eir (D igiline ) Laboratory: D igital Film Laboratories Lab liaison: Pamela Hammon Cast Karoline H ohlweg (V ali M artin ), K risty Pappas (J eni Livieratos), A melia W ong (L in Hutchinson ), J amie B rindley (S usan Carmody ), J ack T hompson (V ictor M artin ), Christine Kaman (M aria M artin ), M ary S itarenos (D espina Livieratos), Robert Forza (J annis Livieratos), M aurie A nnese (G eorgio Livieratos), J ustin D'O razio (M ichael Livieratos).

Production: 2 7 /2 /9 5 -7 /4 /9 5

i i i

I !

T otal Film & T elevision, A lliance

I !

\ i

See previous issue for details on:

\ ALL M E N ARE LIARS | i

j i '

ANGEL B AB Y BILLY'S HOLLIDAY DAD A N D DAVE ON OUR SELECTION EPSILON

THE SEARCH FOR THE SHELLENCRUSTED TOILET SEAT

Shorts THE BIRDS DO A M A G N IF IC E N T TU N E Production Company:

S erpentine Film & V ideo P roductions Budget: SI 61,000 Production: 24 /4 -8/5/199 5 Post-Production: 8/5-1 /8 /1 9 9 5

Principal Credits Director: Chris W indmill Producer: SARAH JOHNSON Executive producer: Film V ictoria Scriptwriter: CHRIS WINDMILL Director of photography: PETER Falk Sound recordist: M ark T arpey Editor: CHRIS WINDMILL Production designer: Georgina Campbell Composer: Robin Casinader

P lanning

and

D evelopment

Script editor: A drian M artin Casting: PROTOTYPE

Production Crew Production manager: WENDY Clarke Production co-ordinator: A manda BROTCHIE Producer's assistant: Barbara A gar Unit manager: M onique Grbec Production accountant: MICHAEL A gar Insurer: H. W. WOOD A ustralia Legal services: S hana Levine

(R oth W arren) Camera Crew Camera operator: Peter Falk Camera assistant: Peter Stott Key grip: Freddo D irk Assistant grip: Robert Caldwell Gaffer: J im Hunt On - set Crew 1st assistant director: M ichael M adigan 2nd assistant director: M onique Grbec Continuity: B eth W helan Make-up: Laura M orris Still photography: Greg N oakes Catering: Backdoor Runners: B arbara A gar A rt D epartment Art director: GEORGINA CAMPBELL Assistant art director: Shane A umont W ardrobe Wardrobe supervisor: Kate S eeley P ost- production Sound transfers by: Eugene W ilson Laboratory: ClNEVEX Film gauge: 16mm Government A gency I nvestment Production: Film V ictoria Cast A ndrew B lackman (B ernard), A ngela T wigg (P inry), Rosalind Hammond (A nne ), David T reddnick (M artin ),

production A rt D epartment Set dressers: Caroline Gibbes , T herese Luever A nimals Animal trainer: Penny Dalzell P ost- production

P r o d u c tio n S u r v e y continued M aicom Robertson (Father N eville), B elinda Davey (M useum D irector), A lexis A nthopoulos (O ld M a n ), Irini Pappas (O ld W om an ), Damien Pree (N eighbour), L eif Hughes (K id One). inry is a museum curator who w orks by day. Bernard is a greyhounds photographer w ho works by night. N ewlyweds Pinry and Bernard meet on the weekends to do the w ashing, go shopping and watch old footage from their wedding day. This film is a celebration of love, life and ordinary things.

FULL BODIED GREEN

Scriptwriter: JOHN BRUMPTON Based on the play titled: Containment Written by: JOHN B rumpton Director of photography: M andy W alker Editor: B ill M urphy Production designer: Sarah Stollman Costume designer: Louise M cCarthy

1 i

| i

Planning

D evelopment Script editor: ANNETTE B lonski Casting: Prototype Casting P roduction Crew Production manager: D ebra A nnear Production secretary: Kim K ruger Location manager: M elissa Rymer Unit manager: G ene V an D am Production assistant: LlBBY PORTER

i i i

i | |

P rincipal Credits Director: Paul B arrett Producer: Paul B arrett Scriptwriter: Paul B arrett Director of photography: Ryan Renshaw Editor: Rochelle S rhoj Production Designer: M arissa Cooke Costume Designer: M arissa Cooke Composer: A ndy Parslow

P lanning and D evelopment Casting: S ophie Stawaruk Shooting schedule by: S ophie Stawaruk Budgeted by: Samantha W atson P roduction Crew Production manager: S amantha W atson Camera Crew Camera operator: S imon Grey Camera assistant: Damien W atkins Camera type: A rri SR2 Key grip: Phil M oore On - set Crew 1st assistant director: S ophie Stawaruk Continuity: Rochelle S rhoj Make-up: S hani H oeGHT Hairdresser: Sarah Laidlaw Still photography: M artin S mith A rt Department Assistant art director: Richard Ogden Set dressers: M arissa Cooke, Richard Ogden Props buyer: M arissa Cooke Standby props: Richard Ogden W ardrobe Wardrobe buyer: M arissa Cooke P ost- production Sound editor: Rochelle S rhoj Recording studio: Queensland College of A rt Titles: M arissa Cooke, Paul B arrett Laboratory: ATLAB Off-line facilities: Queensland College of A rt Cast J ulie Ekersley (A ison ), Peter K ent (R ichard), N icole Dennington (H arp Girl), Libby Dean (C hintam ani ), J o anna Lawson (U dhava ), J eff Caruff (E rrol), J ulia Fox (Eve). visually-stylized black view of relationships, dealing w ith infidelity and sex in the modern age.

LIFE Production Company:

Rough T rade Pictures Budget: $474,000 Pre-production: 29 /5 -30 /6/95 Production: 3/7-21/7/95 Post-Production: 24 /7 -30 /11 /9 5

P rincipal Credits Director: Lawrence J ohnston Producer: Elisa A rgenzio

and

I i i i

1 i

1 i i \

i \

i i i

| 1 26), N eil Luxmoore (3,12, 23), M ichael l J oshua (4,18), David Phillips (5, 6,13), \ J udy Colquhoun (7, 8,15), A lison N iselle (9,17), A lison N eilson (25), i Carole W ilkinson (10), J enny S harp ) (11), L ois B ooton (14, 22), Graham Hartley (16, 24), M aureen M cCarthy (19), H elen M acW hirter (20, 21). \ Director of photography: Ron Hagen Sound recordist: J ohn W ilkinson i Editors: Philip W atts , A ndrew S cott, | Ray Daley Production designer: GeorGIE G reenhill i Costume designer: A lban Farrawell ! Composer: T he M usic D epartment | (Garry M c Donald, Laurie Stone ) P lanning

and

eri and the children from the underw ater city of Orca set out in search of an alien device capable, when assembled, of controlling the very movement of the oceans. But the dark forces of UBRI have also stumbled upon its existence and the race is on. At stake is the Earth's salvation or its destruction.

RETURN TO JU PITER ( s e r ie s ) Production companies: Film A ustralia , NHK (J apan ) Production: EARLY 1996 ...

D evelopment

Story editor: PETER H epworth Script co-ordinator: N aomi Powell Tutor: M aree G ray

i \

P rincipal Credits Director: Kate W oods Producer: T erry J ennings Executive producer: Ron SAUNDERS, Kagari T ajim a Scriptwriter: David Ogilvy Production designer: Kazuo S asaki Special fx: Dale D uguid Finance: FFC, NHK Length: 1 3 x 3 0 MINS Cast J ustin Rosniak , A nna Choy, Daniel T aylor, A braham Forsythe, Robyn M cK enzie.

hrough a bizarre tw is t of fate a woman meets her mate.

See previous issue for details on:

B ernadette B reitkreuz insurer: H olland I nsurance B rokers Legal services: Roth W arren S olicitors Camera Crew Focus puller: David Lindsay Clapper-loader: A ndrew Commis Key grip: Ian B enallack On - set Crew 1st assistant director: M onica PEARCE Continuity: J ulie Peddersen Make-up: Stephanie Larman Catering: Eat Your H eart Out Runner: Sandy A ustin A rt Department Art director: RACHEL GUTHERIDGE Art department runner: Chris Saunders Standby props: Hugh Richards P ost- production Assistant editor: J ackie S chulz Edge numberer: Film Sync Sound transfers by: Eugene W ilson Sound editor: Peter W alker Laboratory: ClNEVEX Laboratory liaison: Ian A nderson Film gauge: 16 m m Government A gency I nvestment Development: AFC Production: AFC Marketing: AFC Cast J ohn B rumpton (D es), David T redinnick (Ralph ).

n this science-fiction adventure, five children reunite on a larger space platform hovering above Earth and prepare to return to a newlyestablished mining colony on Ganymede, one of Jupiter's moons. Travelling on their state-of-the-art ship, the Icarus, the colonists encounter many dangers.

Television Pre-production

S U N ON THE STUBBLE ( s e r ie s ) Production companies: Film A ustralia, ZDF (G ermany) Distribution companies: Film A ustralia, ZDF (G ermany) Production: 26 /6 -2 2 /9 /9 5

P rincipal Credits Director: Robert M archand Producer: T erry J ennings Executive producers: Ron Saunders,

Dagmar U n Gureit Scriptwriter: NOEL ROBINSON Based on the novel by: COLIN T hiele Production manager: Cathy Flannery

ife is a story of tw o prisoners, Des and Ralph, as they discover themselves and the true meaning of friendship as they confront their final days in a prison AIDS wing.

LOVE A M O N G S T THE M U FFIN S Production company: L ife Force Films Budget: $15,000

P rincipal Credits Director: Chris A rdill-G uinness Producers: Chris A rdill-G uinness ,

Carol A dams Scriptwriter: CAROL A dams Director of photography: Hans HEIDRICH Sound recordists: David S pinner, Roly M cM anis Editor: B ruce B lake Composer: I an Laurence P roduction Crew Production co-ordinator: Cherry M anfield Producers' assistants: Christine L ittle, J ulie A dams , Faye N alder Camera Crew Gaffers: N ick D eLaine , "C hica " M cD onald Assistant electrics: N ick S eckold On - set Crew Make-up: W illi K enrick Hairdresser: WlLLl K enrick Stunts co-ordinator: J ohn B owring (Pyro-T echnics)

Cast M arzena G odecki (N eri), David H oflin (J ason B ates ), J effrey W alker (B rett B ates ), Kerry A rmstrong (D ianne B ates ), A lex Pinder (W inston S eth), Lauren H ewett (M era), J eremy A ngerson (K al ).

Tutor #2: Cathryn W arren Casting: Protoype Casting ! Budgeted by: Kay B en M ' rad P roduction Crew \ Production manager: AMANDA CRITTENDEN Production co-ordinator: Jo WARREN i Producer's assistant: A manda T rotter \ Production secretary: S usan Combey Location manager: Karen J ones LET M E DIE A G A IN i Unit manager: B rendon B oyd \ Boat co-ordinator: Karl JESIENOWSKI LLOYD'S HEAVEN Whale wrangler: Karl J esienowski Whale robotics: ROBOTECHNOLOGY M A ID E N H E A D ! (C hris Chitty) THE W EB 2 Financial controller: Kay B en M ' rad i Production accountant: Kay B en M ’ rad i Accounts assistant: T im Renwick Paymaster: Kay B en M ' rad i insurer, W illis Corroon Richard Oliver i Completion guarantor: FACB j Legal services: M ichael B rereton & Co 1 Travel co-ordinator: TRAVELTOO FIRE II ( se rie s ) i Freight co-ordinator: Filmlink Production company: Extra D imensions i Camera Crew in association with Liberty Films Camera operator: Phil Cross Production: October 1995-M arch 1996 Focus puller: Gary B ottqmley Distribution company: 2nd unit DOP: Phil Cross B eyond D istribution Pty Ltd i 2nd underwater operator: Ross Isaacs P rincipal Credits Gaffer: Richard Rees- J ones Directors: Peter Fisk, Geoff B ennett i Best boy: A ndrew M oore Producers: M ichael Caulfield , I Electrician: DARRYN Fox T ony Cavanaugh , S imone N orth Assistant electrics: K im J ohr Executive producer: M ikael B orglund Generator operator: DARRYN Fox Scriptwriters: T ony Cavanaugh , ! On - set Crew i Everett de Roche, Peter S chreck i 1st assistant directors: J amie Leslie, Composer: ROGER MASON \ Ian K enny Length: 13 x 43 MINS 2nd assistant director: RACHEL EVANS urther stories about a platoon of Script assistant: M arieke Hardy firefighters in a small inneri Continuity: Paul Kiely, T ara Ferrier suburban station in Queensland. \ Playback operator: J ohn W ilkinson Make-up: M aggie K olev Hairdresser: M aggie K olev THE LAST BULLET Assistant hairdresser: Doug Glanville (t e le - f e a t u r e ) Stunts: N ew G eneration Stunts (M itch D eans) Production companies: T rans T okyo Neri double: Z elie T hompson Entertainment, T wenty -F irst City Inc . Safety officer: Eddy M cS hortall P rincipal Credits i Unit nurse: GAIL CouSLAND Director: MICHAEL PATTINSON | Still photography: Steve B rennan , Producers: T ricia W aites, Graeme Isaac B ill B achman Executive producers: M ark B aron, Unit publicist: A manda T rotter K enji Isomura | Catering: A nnie Harris (P ort Douglas) Scriptwriter: B rian T renchard-S mith A rt D epartment Finance: FFC ( part); N ine N etwork Art director: A dele Flere Cast Standby props assistant: Peter Lyon J ason Donovan. 1 W ardrobe

Production accountant:

Production Company: S pangle D og Budget: $2,800 Pre-production: A pril-M ay 1995 Production: J une 1995 Post-production: J uly 1995

Post-production supervisor: Peter Flynn (A cme Photo V ideo) Sound editor: K earon D eCLOUET Music performed by: Ian Laurence, A ndrew Oh Video special fx: T im Davies Cast Carol A dams (S uzie), J ay Hackett (N eil), Phillip Hinton (G rigor), J amie Oxenbould (C live), Les Foxcroft (Ernie), N ick M cKay (M ate ), Paul B yrne (J ared).

P rincipal Credits Director: M ark D eFriest Producer: J onathan M. S hiff Executive producer: JONATHAN M. SHIFF Scriptwriters: Peter H epworth ( eps 1, 2,

j i | | i !

n Australian soldier is stranded in the jungle during the closing days of W orld W ar II. Sharing the same fate is a Japanese soldier. Sworn enemies at the start, the men gradually come to an accommodation, and mutual understanding and respect w in out over hatred.

OCEAN GIRL 3 ( s e r ie s ) Production company: J onathan M. S hiff Productions Distribution companies: B eyond D istribution , T ele I mages/ITI Budget: $7.8 MILLION Pre-production: 10/4/95-30/6/95 Production: 3 /7 /9 5 -2 /2 /9 6 Post-production: 3 /7 /9 5 -2 8 /7 /9 6

he adventures of the 14-year-old son of a German w heat farmer, growing up in a small Australian farm ing community. Based on the novels by Colin Thiele.

THE V IO LE N T EARTH ( m i n i - s e r ie s )

| |

1 i

\ i

I \

1 i ! |

) i

Wardrobe supervisor: A lban Farrawell Standby wardrobe: B ronwyn D oughty Wardrobe assistant: B ronwyn D oughty

P ost- production Post-production supervisor: J ayne Luxton Assistant editors: Philip W atts , A ndrew S cott, Ray Daley Mixed at: S oundfirm Laboratory: ClNEVEX Printing stock: Kodak Government A gency I nvestment Development: Film Queensland, Film V ictoria Production: FFC, Film V ictoria, Film Queensland M arketing International distributor: B eyond D istribution , T ele Images/ITI

i \ | i ! | 1

\ I l |

Production companies: Gaumont , Crawfords Production: 7 A ugust 1995 ... Director: M ichael J enkins Producers: Philippe V ignes (G aumont ), J ohn K earny (C rawfords) Scriptwriter: Graeme Farmer Based on novel by: JACQUELINE S enes Funding: FFC et in New Caledonia, w here the French settlers and indigenous Kanaks "w ork out their destiny" together, the story follow s the Suttons, a pioneering Australian !rish family, and the Kanaks, w ho are caught between the conflicting legacies of the South Sea Islands and French colonialism.

Television Production and Post-production AFTER THE BEEP ( s e r ie s ) Post-production: 12/6/95 ...

C I N E M A P A P E R S • A U GU S T 1995

P rincipal Credits Director: G eoff P ortman Series producer: Geoff Portman Executive producer: J ohn O'G rady Scriptwriter: J ulie Harris Production manager: Coral PACKHAM

Cast Genevieve Lemon , J une Salter, G enevieve M ooy, K errty W alker, Emily W eare, Giordano Gangi, Richard H ealy, B ruce S pence, Stan Kouros, G reg B epper. o is a single w hite female who is angered w ith life, and who struggles to make sense of the world around her.

B A N JO PATERSON'S THE M A N FROM S N O W Y RIVER

(3rd series ) Production company: PRO Film s (N o . 3) Production:... 22/8/95

P rincipal Credits Directors: Paul M oloney, Steve J odrell, P ino A menta , Dan B urstall, J ulian M cSwiney Producer: JOCK BLAIR Executive producers: Richard B ecker, Russell B ecker Co-producer: Rocky B ester Scriptwriters: Peter Kinloch, T ed Roberts, S hane B rennan , D enise M organ, J utta G oetze, J an Sardi, Stuart W ood, Peter Gawler, Everett de Roche Director of photography: Dan B urstall Production designer: Robby Perkins Editors: Ray Daley, S cott M cL ennan Composer: Peter S ullivan Other Credits Story editor: S hane B rennan Script editor: Yuki A sano

Executive producer: Penny Chapman Associate producer: Jo ROONEY Directors of photography: Russell B acon,

Louis Irving

13-year-old English blue-blood inherits an Australian genie called Bruce. Her w ish is his command - s o r t of!

Scriptwriters: Sue S mith , J ohn A lsop Production designer: M arcus N orth Editors: M ike H oney, Chris S puce

LIZZIE'S LIBRARY

Other Credits Production manager: Lisa S cott Art director: Col Rudder Finance: ABC Length: 10 X 50 MINS Gauge: 16mm Cast Hugo W eaving, Linda Cropper, Peta T oppano, Robert M ammone , Cate B lanchett, J oe Petruzzi, Christine T remmarco, M itchell B utel. ordertown chronicles one year (1952) in the life of a m igrant camp in Australia, where people strive to shake off the ghosts of the countries they have left behind.

ECHO P O IN T ( s e r ie s ) Production company: Southern Star X anadu Production: A pril- O ctober 1995 P rincipal Credits Directors: J udith J ohn, H elen Gaynor,

Karl Z wicky, Steve M ann Producers: Sandra Levy, J ohn Edwards Line producer: Paul Remati Scriptwriters: ANTHONY ELLIS, T racey

Doig, J o Horsburgh,

^ o v e and life in the High Country.

BLUE HEELERS ( s e r ie s ) Production company: S outhern Star Films P rincipal Credits Directors: RlC P ellizzeri M ark Piper, Gary Conway, Richard Sarell, B rendan M aher, Karl Steinberg Executive producer: Hal M cElroy Supervising producer: J ohn HlGGiNSON Line producer: Peter A skew Other Credits Story editor: Caroline Stanton Script editors: M ichaeley O'B rien, Russell Haig Casting: Faith M artin & A ssociates Casting assistant: Elly B radbury Production manager: Linda K lejus Production co-ordinator: Helen BOICOVITIS Production accountant: G ina Hallas 1st assistant directors: David Clarke, Stephen Henley Length: 47 MINS PER WEEK Gauge: VIDEO Cast J ohn W ood, Grant B owler, Lisa M cCune, W illiam M cI nnes, J ulie N ihill, M artin Sacks, Damian W alshe-H owling , Dale Stephens.

J an

THE FEDS (3

t e le - f e a t u r e s )

Production company: Crawford Productions Production: 29 /5 -18 /8/95

Principal Credits Directors: M ichael Offer, Chris T homson, Kate W oods Producer: J an MARNELL Executive producer: J ohn Kearney Scriptwiters: T ony M cDonald, A lison N isselle Directors of photography: David Foreman, Roger Dowling Production designer: Paddy Reardon Editors: B ill M urphy, Denise Haratzis, N e il T humpston Composer: N erida T yson-C hew Other Credits Story editor: J ohn Reeves Production manager: RICHARD CLENDINNEN Art director: VlV WlLSON Film gauge: 16mm Cast Robert T aylor, A ngie M illiken, J ohn Bach , M arcus Eyre, B rian V riends

second series of three tele features.

THE GENIE FROM D O W N UNDER ( s e r ie s ) Production company: ACTF Budget: S4.1 million

P rincipal Credits Producers: Patricia Edgar, Phil J ones Directors: Esben Storm , J eremy Sw an , others

Principal Credits Directors: K en CAMERON, Ian GlLMOUR Producer: Steve Knapman

Rhys M uldoon, A lexandra M ilman , M ark M itchell, J ane M enalaus, M onica M aughan .

C I N E M A P A P E R S • A UGUST 1995

Production company: Chapman Productions

Production: 3/4/95-28/7/95

Principal Credits

Production company: ABC TV Production: 9 /2 /95-13/5/95 ; 1/5/95-30/6/95

BORDERTOW N ( s e r ie s )

NAKED ( m i n i - s e r ie s )

y ^ s e r ia l drama.

Scriptwriter: Esben STORM, Steven J. S pears, others DOPs: Graeme W ood, Craig Barden Production designer: Peta Lawson Editor: Ralph T hompson Length: 13 X 30 MINS Pre-sales: ABC, BBC Finance: FFC Cast

y y s h o w about cops.

he adventures of Lizzie the Librarian, her travelling bookmobile and the tow nsfolk of Long Flat.

Other Credits Story editor: SUSAN B ower-E lu S Production manager: Laura M ay A lcock Art director: M ark Dawson

B ernadette O 'M ahony

Film gauge: S uper 16 Cast A ndrew Clarke, W endy Hughes, B rett Climo , Guy Pearce, Sheryl M unks , Kristie Raymond , B en Geurens, J on Finlayson Length: 1 3x1 HOUR

Production company: Henderson B owman Productions Production:... J uly 1995 Principal Credits Producer: Phillip B owman Executive producers: Phillip B ow man , Peter J ackson Animation director: T im A dlide Scriptwriter: Kate Henderson DOP: B randon A pps Costumes: M in A dlide-S mith , Babette Goncalves-D 'A lmeida Composers: Craig Hanicek, B rian W hite Other Credits Character design: T im A dlide Model construction: T im A dlide, T ony Leitch Assistant animator: J ustin W ylie Art: Liz N orman Gauge: SP B etacam Length: 26 X 5 mins Pre-sale: ABC Distribution guarantor: B eyond Finance: ABC, AFC, FQ Cast N oni Hazlehurst

Production designer: Owen W illiams

Production manager: Art director: Colin Robertson Post-production supervisor: Claire W alsh

Producer: J an Chapman Executive producer: Penny Chapman Co-producer: H elen B owden Scriptwriters: T ony A yres,

Roger M cD onald, N ick Enright, Ian David , A ndrew B ovell, Paul B rown ix television plays reveal w hat men really feel about their lives today. W ritten by men, the anthology aims to present male emotions w ith piercing honesty and uncover the passions beneath the façade of maleness.

R A IN B O W 'S END ( t e le - f e a t u r e ) Production Company: Hips Film and V ideo Budget: Low budget Pre-production: 1/6-21/6/95 Production: 22 /6 -12 /7/95 Post-production: 13/7/95 ...

Principal Credits Director: Denny Lawrence Co-producer: J ohn H ipwell Executive Producer: Phillip Emanuel Scriptwriter: M ichael Cove Director of photography: M ark Gilfedder Sound recordist: Phil Sterling Editor: T ed Otten Production Designer: Ralph M oser

P lanning

and

Development

Casting: PROTOTYPE Casting consultants: Greg A pps Shooting schedule by: J ohn Hipwell Budgeted by: J ohn H ipwell ,

A nastasia S ideris Production Crew Production manager: A nastasia S ideris Production co-ordinator: Scottie Connolly Location manager: Stuart B eatty Unit manager: B rad Raselli Production asssitant: Edwina Fowler Production runner: Sam J ackson Production accountant: ERIC Low Camera Crew Camera operator: M ariana M arusic Focus puller: T om THOMAS Clapper-loader: A ndrew Robertson Key grip: Freddo D irk Gaffer: A dam W illiams On - set Crew 1st assistant director: Craig M atthews Make-up: ClNDY FERRIER

P ost- production

Camera Crew

Laboratory liaison: Pamela Hammond Film gauge: SUPER 16mm Video transfers by: AAV

Focus puller: WlTOLD NlTKlEWlCZ Clapper-loader: M ieczyslaw A nweiler Key grip: EUGENIUSZ KOWALEWICZ Gaffer: Grzegorz B ieler Best boy: Dariusz Lawniczak Electrician: Pawel Chiczewski Assistant electrics: PlOTR K ryska Generator operator: M ieczyslaw Rychta

hen Jack and his sister, Terri, are threatened w ith separation by their foster parents, they decide to follow Jack's dream to find their father, Tom, a merchant seaman. They are pursued by their foster parents, w elfare and the police. The ensuing chase traces Jack and Terri through a variety of cheerful adventures and mishaps. The action converges on the docks where the rainbow's end is successfully attained by all and everybody's dreams are fullfilled.

THE SILVER B R U M B Y

On - set Crew 1st assistant directors: B ob D onaldson,

Chris W ebb 2nd assistant director: Ew a A ndrzejewska 3rd assistant director: A gata D omagala Script assistant: WlESLAWA Goscik Continuity: N icola M oors Make-up: M iroslawa W ojtczak Make-up assistant: Ludmila K rawczyk Art directors: A ngus T attle,

J eremi B rodnicki

( a n im a t e d s e r ie s )

Assistant art director: Geoff Howe

Production company:

Post- production

M edia W orld Features Production:.... J anuary 1996 P rincipal Credits Supervising director: J ohn T atoulis Animation directors: N eil Robinson , M aggie Geddes Producers: Colin J. S outh, J ohn T atoulis Scriptwriters: J on Stephens, J udy M almgren Composer: TASSOS lONNIDES Other Credits Script editor: J ohn T atoulis Pre-sale: N etwork T en, BBC Distribution guarantor: Daro Film D istribution Finance: FFC, Film V ictoria, AFC Length: 13 X 30 MINS Cast Rebecca Gibney, Charles T ingwell, Rhys M uldoon, M ichael Carmen , Richard A spel, J ohn H igginson, J ohn Stanton , Doug T remlett, M arg Downey.

Post-production supervisor:

he adventures of the legendary Thowra, the m agnificent silver brumby and his youthful gang of High Country friends.

M atthew T ucker Assistant editor: Sam Petty Sound editor: Les FlDDESS

M arketing Marketing consultant: Lisa Halbish Publicity: LESNA THOMAS Cast Heather M itchell (A shka ), Z bych T rofimiuk (P aul ), Gosia M algorzata (R iana ), A ndrzej Grabarczyk (B ron), S lawa M ichalewska (M aran ), Erlan B uchan (J al ), J ulia B iczysko (A rla), Stanislaw B rejdygant (S ummoner T oren), Rafal Zwierz (G ryvon). fantasy series about a 15-year-old boy who finds himself accidentally marooned in a w orld parallel to his own.

See previous issue for details on: BEYOND THE CLOSET ( s e r ie s ) BLACKW ATER TRAIL

SPACE (t e le - f e a t u r e )

(t e l e - f e a t u r e )

Production company:

BLUE M URDER ( m i n i - s e r ie s )

URP Production S ervices Production: 27 /2 /95 -12 /4 /9 5

P rincipal Credits Director: David NUTTER Producer: MICHAEL LAKE Executive producers: JAMES WONG, Glen M organ Director of photography: David Eggby Production designer: B ernard Hides Length: 120 MINS Gauge: 35 mm ^ y s c ie n c e -fic tio n adventure drama.

CODY 2 ( m i n i - s e r ie s ) FIDDLER'S GREEN (t e le - fe a t u r e ) FULL FRONTAL ( s e r ie s ) G.P. (7 th

s e r ie s )

G A I-JIN ( m i n i - s e r ie s ) HALIFAX F. P. HEARTBREAK HIGH ( s e r ie s )

SPELLBINDER ( s e r ie s ) Production companies: Film A ustralia ,

H OM E A N D A W A Y ( s e r ia l ) LA W OF THE LAND

Polish T elevision Budget:$7 million Production (Australia): 16/2-28/4/95

Principal Credits Director: N oel P rice Producer: N oel Price Co-producer: Polish T elevision Executive producer: Ron Saunders Associate producer: D ennis K iely Scriptwriters: MARK SHIRREFS, J ohn T homson DOP: M artin M cGrath Sound recordist: Paul W yhowski Editor: Pippa A nderson Production designer: NlCK McCALLUM Costume designer: JULIE MIDDLETON P lanning and D evelopment Casting: Liz M ullinar Production Crew Production managers: Glenda Carpenter, J anusz B. Czech Production co-ordinator: JULIE SlMS Unit manager: Pawel B arenski Assistant unit manager: J oanna Zalewska Production assistant: Louise M cCallum Production accountant: Sandie M orris

(4 th s e r ie s ) M IRROR M IRROR ( s e r ie s ) M IS S IO N TOP SECRET TW O ( m i n i - s e r ie s )

NEIGHBOURS ( s e r ia l ) S A M THE TR A M ( p il o t ) SINGAPORE SLING

t e le - f e a t u r e s )

SOLDIER, SOLDIER ( s e r ie s ) THE FATAL SHORE ( m i n i - s e r ie s ) THE FERALS (2 nd

s e r ie s )

W ILDSCREEN ( s e r ie s ) W IS E UP 2 ( s e r ie s ) YACKITTY YACK ( s e r ie s p il o t )

In a period of sta g g e ri n g c ik e m a t i c n ie d io c ri t y (so the s c o t e s indi ca te ), f e w stând tall.

Amateur H

a rtley

Before Sunrise R ic h

ard

in k l a t e r

Boys on the Side H

erbert

oss

Braveheart M

ib s o n

Caro Diario (Dear Diary) N

an n i

o retti

Crimson Tide T

on y

Cronos G

u il l e r m o

d el

oro

Die Hard with a Vengeance J

o h n

ie r n a n

Ed Wood T

urton

Everynight... Everynight A

l k in o s

s il im id o s

Fresh B

Ya k in

oaz

Immortal Beloved B

ernard

o ger

Losing Isiah G

yllen h a al

Memories

-M

a r ie

Dreams il b u r n

Metal Skin G

eo ffrey

u d o lph

o lfg an g

r ic

n t o n ia

ir d

ic h a e l

a to n

-Jo n

The Secret of Roan Inish J

o h n

; -

H H &

Sa y le s

; 6

;

| ; 1 ;&

8 -

||S

T a la la y

While You Were Sleeping T

u rtleta u b

8 6

6 .•

- -...

ch el

Tank Girl

o h n

6 4

Spanking the Monkey a v i d o. R u s s e l l

;

Rob Roy M

o ch an t

Priest A

Petersen

Les Patriotes E

I S liK a m

- i 1 Hli rara i i 3 i§§ ì i i i M S, i i RSi i i sB Q i |fl| i irai yma rag1i i i i 10 . i tm — f— i i i i i i m i i I.\V- 1 i __ 1__ ra i i i i| | Ii 1111 SB# 1 rv: i 1 1 i 10 1111 i i 111 i 1 1 1 i __ i 1__ trae 1 1 l„ v l:;-y 1 mm sèlsi 11 : i i i i i LM i i 1 1 ! 1 1 1 : . E 1 1. 6 17„ I J1 Hi 1: -.7 rara I g| 1 X ¡¡¡pi li# ¡pipi 111 h 1 1- M 3 li Hi ! ;j __. ,i__ iS r; . ;I 3 .1 i Hi rara nra 1 i Sili Irm ìgud I1## mm

¡Mi 2 i 1ÉÏÏt 1 l | I ÜH 1. -•: i ■■1:77 ¡¡¡|| tfùsê i f|pi i i i

ilplj j j j j j jjSi iggig i i ilS U h, v ¡¡gl 1

1 9H8 i il*

mm BB gg

ÌffS

i Hi ‘fPvd ¡¡¡¡Il i » il Mgi s ì ■- -i __

8 7 7 8 4 8 4 7 8 7 3 5 7 7

1 1 Hi ipp i igÉj : ; 3 l i 1 ;>:7: Sp Égl 7 i Hi ÜÜ 1 9 1 i; i JBb I 5 BB i i msB iffjl i i i ilpl iB§ |gj| i i i __ i__ i i i i i i i i i i i ì|Bg i mË. Ili [7-1 1 l ;, RS 1 1 __ 1__

l># 11. i.. .: l^M I-"- : ip5p

Mi i

i \S \77f

4 .6 â |

6 .6 6 .6

7 5.3

5 9 7

v 8

■ 7.3

5.5

6 .3

••

---- 1---i .1 1 : 6 177__ ilM i i 9 jBB ]gH8 I.I: . i: :' 8 HB ---- 1—■ — sjjg 1 2 1

i H

6 .4

4:6. •' °o

Outbreak W

1 1 m mm i i IPi

aaa

lan

r ig h t

Mrs Parker and the Vicious Circle A

esso n

St e p h

vary

Léon [The Professional] Luc B

o se

Killing Zoe R

o tt

Rime

6 1 1 5 .6 1 1-----------------1 i 5 .8 1 7 i__ 1 1 1 1 1 ' :7 Î

i = ■

! 8 î____________ i |lI§P i 1 , i i mm i WMH U K [*ii ! j^B jlgl ¡i u 1 [1 w

S ii

Hjtf

m Ijjfi ¡¡¡l||

6 .0 ' '" B m

NB: "Nihil obstat: [Lai., 'nothing stands in the way'] Words appearing on the title page or elsewhere in the preliminary pages [...] indicating that it has been approved as free of doctrinal or moral error"

A panel of ninefilm reviewers haà rateò a detection of the latedt releaded on a dcale of 0 to 10, the latter being the optimum rating (a dadh meand not deen). The criticd are: B ill Collind (Daily Mirror, Sydney); Barbara Creed (The Age); Sandra H all (The Bulletin); PaulHarrid (3RRR); Stan Jamed (The Adelaide Advertiser); Adrian Martin (The Age; “The Week in Film”, Radio National); Tom Ryan (The Sunday Age); David Stratton (Variety; SBS); and Evan Williamd (The Australian^).

C I N E M A P A P E R S • AUGUST 1995

the flexible line of credit you control

You only pay interest on the funds you use ■ Turn your property equity into a tax-efficient line of credit ■ Costs less than overdrafts or personal loan interest rates ■ Convenient and portable ■ Invest in property or shares ■ One low up-front fee and no renewal fee.

Access credit from s20 ,0 0 0 to S1 million or

Visit your nearest branch or apply over the phone

131 575

New loans only. Bank and Government charges apply. Terms and conditions available on application.

Bank of Melbourne cuts the cost of banking Head Office: 52 Collins Street, Melbourne 3000

Frame Set And Match has just installed a new Aaton Keyllnk Tlmecode system. Which means you can now shoot sync sound without anybody having to synchronise any rushes. It’s all done in the transfer. In combination with our new Ursa Gold Telecine, it’s a very impressive and practical piece of machinery. Southern Star and the ABC certainly thought so, they’ve just given us all the post production business on their current co-production Blue Murder. Blue Murder is being shot in SUPER 16 on the new Aaton XTR Production timecode cameras from Lemac. Our Ursa Gold also has a new Meta-Speed and Realtime Steadigate package. Which gives you rock steady images in a real time transfer. If you’d like a demonstration of any of this just call

LEMAC FILM ® VIDEO EQUIPMENT

¡A ■V

THE AUSTRALIAN COMPANY

Tony on (02) 954 0904. Aaton Tlmecode and Ursa Gold. It’s a perfect match.

FRAME, PH:

SET

AND

( 0 2 ) 9 5 4 0 9 0 4.

IFF R

MATCH

FAX:

3 *

P T Y.

( 0 2 ) 9 5 4 9 0 1 7.

LTD.