Issuu on Google+

The Queensland Film Industry Gears Up

A Feeling for Snow Geoffery Simpson Defines the Look

n Armstrong's La est Triumph



edited on

Lightworks by Anne Carter, Peter Carrodus & Tony Paterson THE LATEST AUSTRALIAN PROJECT TO BE E D IT E D ON L I G H T W O R K S F o r 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 c a ll : 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 nit 1 1 5 /4 5 G ilby Rd M t W a v e rle y V ic 3149 Tel: 61 3 5 5 8 9 3 77 Fax: 61 3 558 9 2 9 8

Q u in to C o m m u n ic a tio n s P ty Ltd U nit 4, 3 5 8 E a ste rn V a lle y W a y C h a ts w o o d N S W 2 0 67 Tel: 61 2 417 51 66 Fax: 61 2 417 5 337

Q u in to C o m m u n ic a tio n s (N Z) Ltd 8 T he 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: 64 9 4 8 6 1204 Fax: 64 9 4 8 6 1216


C I N E M A P A P E R S • MARCH 1995


Ross Dimsey and Film Queensland by

S c o t t M urray

A n ew D irector at Film Q u een slan d prom ises a g reater sense o f com m u n ity an d a ren ew ed push to see the lo ca l industry assum e n ation al im portan ce

14 IN S H A R P F O C U S

An Overview of Queensland's Independent Screen Culture by

S ue W ard

W hile n ot everyone south an d w est o f the Q u een slan d b ord er kn ow s it, the tropical state has a vibrant lo ca l film scene

18 T H E W A S H -U P O N P A R A D I S E B E A C I by

L iz J acka


Stuart C unni ngham

This relatively-short-lived serial is already a cultural icon fo r its blending o f Australian an d A m erican soap form u lation s

22 S E A R C H IN G F O R S U C C E S S

Local Film Culture and the Brisbane Internationa Film Festival B y M i c h a e l M ea d ows

D oes a film festival contribute productively to ÂŤ local film industry, or is it just a holiday fo r buj an d a PR stunt fo r form ally-attired politician s;


Inbits Technicalities


N e w Media Festivals History Legal Ease Inreview Inproduction Niloham itic Nine

Ken Berryman is manager of the Melbourne office of the National Film & Sound Archive; Emma Coller is an aspiring Melbourne filmmaker; John Conomos lectures at the College of Fine Arts, University of NSW; Stuart Cunningham is Senior Lecturer in Communications at Queensland University of Technology (QUT); Dom inic Case is a motion picture technical consultant;

Old Novel, New Women Margaret Smith talks to director Gillian Armstrong about her post-feminist version of the Louisa May Alcott classic, L i t t l e W o m e n , and to DOP Geoffrey Simpson about a film which has already started people talking about possible Academy Awards. PAGE 4 Solrun Hoaas is a feature and documentary scriptwriter and director; Liz Jacka is widely-published author on film ; Chris Long is a Melbourne film historian; Peter M alone is editor of Compass Theology Review, M ichael M eadow s is a former ABC journalist who lectures in the Department of Media and Journalism at QUT; M argaret Smith is a freelance w riter on the arts; Clive Sowry is a Wellington-based film historian;

Tom Spira is a principal in the law firm of Hart & Spira; Sarah Stollman is a production designer who has worked w ith Hal Hartley, John W aters and Alan J. Pakula, among others; R. J. Thompson teaches in the Cinema Studies Department, LaTrobe University; Sue W ard is a post-graduate at Griffith University researching aspects of film culture in Queensland; Raymond Younis is a lecturer at the University of Sydney.

b its

....March-1995 N umber' 103 . •.. ■ Editor Scott Murray . '


Tethncal Editor Dovirsic Gasi ;■ ■ ■■ Acting Assistant Editor:

\tiss\ r^NblC^A Advertising B\rr\ TiniR

Ronin Films

Oft, e Cat O ddspot I • 'Legal Adviser D an Pfarcf ' (HOKDiNG R lDIK'H, SOUUTORS) . MTVBoard of Directors “ C II I STI > \Kl (C I i>T MAN) !/,.P&TRI<T:iA AkI aF/R gSS- DlMSEY, ;


l‘ Miller

' Founding Publisher^ Pi per Bin by, Scott Murray, .'


* ■-.■Phiurfl Mora ...


•- L evel. 3,-171 LaTrobe Street,


~ Melbourne 3000. T el- (0T) 662 9992. Fax (03) 662 9993 F rank Daniels


pty i id

i - :■

;4aN ;%:c

- . N etwork Distribution. CQ PYRfG H I 1995 - MTV PUBLISHING LM T ED -."




ndrew Pike, Managing Director of Ronin Films, announced on 5 Jan­ uary 1995 a restructure of the company. Agreement was reached to sell the Academy Twin and Walker Cinemas in Sydney to the Palace-Village partner­ ship. The exhibition activities of the company, through the Electric Shadows Cinema and management of the Centre Cinema in Canberra, remain under the control of Ronin Films. The sale of the Sydney cinemas enables a restructure of Ronin to take place. The theatrical and non-theatri­ cal divisions will be consolidated and relocated to the company's Canberra office.


Acc^ums T ory T aouk

D ' n- Gru I i , \ m




Subsetipt ons & Office Assistance



The Palace-Village partnership contin­ ues at great pace, w ith a triplex opening in the Como Centre, South Yarra, and the George Twin in St Kilda (where Pulp Fiction immediately set a box-office record). Together with the Academy Twin and Walker Cinemas purchases in Sydney, and more cine­ mas planned, the initiative is changing the face of exhibition (and thus distrib­ ution) across two states.






«m <

h m vy a r m

. T

h is

v f v .v r w



- paOUSHED E^ 'E K Y -m o MONTHS _ - ‘

; .


m ued




. I


:'•'■ • 1 1 6 ARCm.K.S'T.RBEf^.Fll ZROY, •' V • : • Y i c ^ U l A , Al!STRAUA 3 0 6 5 ,


P iJST A t ADDRESS: P O BO X 2 2 2 1 , V; ■ FiT2R O Y M l ) Q V i c t o r i a ,3 0 6 5 ,. •

FA X ' ( 0 3 ) 4 1 6 4 0 8 S



Cinema Nova Two new screens will be added to the Cinema Nova tw in in Lygon Street, Carlton. Nova 3 and 4 w ill open late March 1995. Jointly owned by Natalie Miller and Barry Peak, the Cinema Nova opened two-and-a-half years ago and its continued success has led to the current extension plans. Miller said, "The additional cine­ mas will enable us to screen more films and cater for our expanding audience."

Dalton has many years' experi­ ence in the industry, including three years as Investment Manager, M e l­ bourne office of the Australian Film Finance Corporation, General Manager of the Australian Children's Television Foundation, and principal of his own film and television production company. "I am very excited about this position and look forward to the opportunity of expanding Beyond's operations in Vic­ toria", he said.

CORRIGENDUM n the previous issue, Scott Murray's introduction to the Australian Film Commission supplement listed the AFC's financial involvement in Susan Lambert's Talk as $1.81 million. This was a typographical error; the figure should have read $1.18 million (as given in the 1992-93 AFC Annual Report). Producer Meaghan McMurchy also wrote to say the all-up total is, in fact, $1.276 million. Cinema Papers apologizes for the error.


WOMEN IN FILM What s wrong with this picture?


esearch commissioned by the Media, Entertainment and Arts Alliance reveals that gender discrimi­ nation is alive and strong in the Australian film industry. The Alliance's study reveals that less than 16% of the film s released since 1933 were pri­ marily driven by a female character. Of the 32 released since January 19931, only five had a female protago­ nist: The Piano, No Worries, Sirens, Muriel's Wedding and Spider & Rose2

Beyond. Beyond International Limited has appointed Kim Dalton to run the com­ pany's operations in Victoria from 6 February 1995. Dalton will establish a Melbourne office and liaise with producers in Vic­ toria, South Australia and Western Australia. Beyond w ill be looking for a range of suitable film and television projects for acquisition by the company (to either produce and/or distribute).

Our new address is: 116 Argyle St, Fitzroy, VIC 3065. Tel: (61 3) 416 2644. Fax: (61 3)4164088

Women had co-leading roles in a fur­ ther five film s: The Heartbreak Kid, Secrets, BeDevil, The Wide Sargasso Sea3 and Traps,4 Male rites-of-passage stories were a regular feature of the period, including On My Own, Love in Limbo, Map o f the Human Heart, The Nos­ tradamus Kid, Lex and Rory and Hammers Over the Anvil. The study reveals that little has changed since Women in Film & Tele­ vision President Sue Maslin surveyed the Australian film industry in 1992. Maslin's study concluded that less than a third of films released in 1991 and 1992 featured women in central roles. Maslin claims that: Australian feature films continue to be overwhelmingly about men's sto­ ries. This doesn't reflect the society in which we live or the cinematic fan­ tasies of the majority of audiences. When women's stories do reach the big screen the results speak for themselves. Of the five [Australian] films about women's lives released since January 1993, four reached the top ten of [Australian] box-office rentals in Australia. The Piano and Muriel's Wedding have been two of the most celebrated films at the Cannes Film Festival in recent years. Joint Federal Secretary of the Media Alliance, Anne Britton, claims that Limited roles for women has led to income disparity between the sexes. On average female performers earn about 50% of what their male col­ leagues earn. Figures recently released by the Aus­ tralia Council reveal that the mean income for male and female perform­ ers in 1992-93 was $14,000 and $8,300 per annum respectively. 1 The press release did not give the point at which the Alliance stopped counting Aus­ tralian features theatrically released since 1993. Research for Australian Films 19781994: A Survey o f Theatrical Features shows the total at the end of 1994 to be 42 (or 44 counting two Super8 features which were theatrically-released). Cinema Papers, therefore, challenges some of the specific figures, categorizations and exam­ ples given, but believes the general results of the survey to be correct. 2 There Is also, at least, Mary and Lucky Break. 3 This film is not Australian, even though it had an Australian producer. 4 There is also Redheads, Country Life. etc.


Australian production through its "Distinctly Australian Producer Fellow­ ships". Established in 1993, they are being awarded over a four-year period, with a total budget of $3.5 million. The January 1995 list of 25 fellowship win­ ners was chosen from 82 applicants. The Fellowships are designed to give striving producers a chance to ini­ tiate or consolidate script and project-development plans, underpin overhead or travel costs, link profes­ sional attachments to their development plans and put forward other beneficial initiatives. The Aus­ tralian Film Commission's Director of Film Development, Tim Read, said the standard of applications was very high overall: Development costs between produc­ tions can be very high and generally it's unpaid work for producers. We are giving them very important breathing space to concentrate on work that they may otherwise have not developed or have had to develop part time in order to survive in the industry. Of the successful producers, 12 are women and 17 are men. The selection panel (Tim Read, John Sexton and Claire Dobbin) chose a range of pro­ ducers from the starting-up to the established.

Blackfella Films The Indigenous Branch of the Aus­ tralian Film Commission, in association w ith the State Film Agencies, announced on 19 January the Indige­ nous Drama Initiative. Six projects are to be shot on film, w ith budgets of up to $100,000 per episode. The films w ill be released in early 1996. The aims of the initiative are: • To produce 6 x 10 minute short narrative dramas; • Provide the opportunity for Indige­ nous Filmmakers to explore the drama genre; • Provide the opportunity for the general public to view a variety of images created by Indigenous Filmmakers; • Network Indigenous Filmmakers with established Filmmakers; • Develop and enhance the craft of filmmaking among Indigenous People;

Producer Fellowships Scheme

• Encourage the pursuit of excellence among Indigenous Filmmakers; and

he Australian Film Commission on 18 January 1994 announced a further investment in the future of

• Provide the opportunity for Indige­ nous actors to be cast in a greater variety of roles.




1995 F F C Feature Film Fund:


How Filma wilt be Selected

Director of the Multicultural Arts Trust of SA before training through the Aus­ tralian Film Television & Radio School and entering the film industry in 1989.



films and documentaries. These include the documentary series Heaven's Breath, The Anim al Contract and Backlash. Seeary w ill be working with the investment team concentrating initially on accord documentary projects.

SOUTH AUSTRALIAN FILM CORPORATION n 20 December 1994, the South Australian Film Corporation announced tw o new management appointments: Damien Parer as Man­ ager, Film Development, and Julia de Roeperas Manager, Marketing. Judith McCann, Chief Executive Officer of the SAFC, said:


The Corporation has attracted two highly experienced professionals in key positions to work with the local industry in building South Australia's re-emerging film and television pro­ file. Their interest is as much a tribute to the talent base here as it is to the SAFC's new role in fostering and marketing the state's creative ener­ gies and production opportunities.

selected projects is still expected to be ! | 30 June 1995. \ F F C Appoints \

Sue Seeary as Project Manager

Sue Seeary has joined the FFC as Pro­ ject Manager in Sydney. Most recently, Seeary was associate producer and production manager of The Adventures o f Priscilla, Queen of the Desert. She was producer of The Crossing and has worked as associate producer and/or production manager on various feature

he Australian Film Institute announced the appointment of Bob Weis as Chairman of its Board of Direc­ tors. Weis replaced Daryl Jackson, AO, who served as the AFI's Chairman for the past four years. Weis, a film and television pro­ ducer, has also held the position of President of the Screen Producers Association of Australia. In announcing the appointment, Executive Director of the AFI, Vicki Molloy, thanked Jackson for his contri­ bution.


j \ | I

Parer is a film and television producer w ith 28 years of experience in the industry. His most recent productions in South Australia were the award-win­ ning mini series Grim Pickings for the South Australian Film Corporation and Tracks o f Glory for Barron Films. In 1994 he produced Bough Diamonds, a feature film, from his current production base in Queensland. De Roeper has worked in arts marketing since 1979, and in the film industry for the past six years. She was Publicity Co-ordinator for the Adelaide Festival in 1980 and for


Come Out 1981, Marketing Manager \ for the State Theatre Company in | 1982-3, and Marketing Manager \ for the Adelaide Festival in 1984 and i 1986. She then spent 18 months as

I regret that I am leaving the AFI, par­ ticularly at such an interesting time, but I am pleased to be leaving the organization in very good shape both financially and administratively.

Mid-December 1994

8 November 1994

Following the first meeting of the Film j Fund panel, the FFC clarified a number j of the procedures involved in the selec- ¡ tion process for this year's Film Fund, i I The panel comprises Tristram j Miall, Mac Gudgeon and Jocelyn Moor- j house, w ith Lynda Flouse acting for ¡ Moorhouse until she returns to Aus- ! tralia after the filming of The Making o f an American Quilt. In the event Moorhouse is unavailable to participate in the final selection process, the FFC w ill then seek to recruit a director to the panel. In this case, Flouse w ill remain on the panel. At this stage, the panel expects to read and therefore assess each of the scripts submitted to it. Accordingly, subject only to an unexpected volume of projects, script assessors will not be used. For this reason, filmmakers are advised to submit their projects as soon as possible so as to avoid a "bunching" of projects on 31 March 1995 (the clos­ ing date). All applications should be sent to the Sydney or Melbourne office of the FFC, with application forms that are available from these offices. As soon as they are received, they w ill be passed directly onto the panel for reading. When the panel has short-listed the projects, it w ill interview the cre­ ative teams (producers, w riter and director) regarding the script they have submitted. There will be no opportuni­ ties for further drafts to be submitted. Decisions w ill be based on the script submitted at the time of application. The FFC has revised its application form to exclude distributor delivery items from the budget. Accordingly, while the budget cap of $2.5 million will remain, this is exclusive of delivery items. Filmmakers should obtain the revised application form from the FFC. The announcement date of the

Molloy said:

The AFI announced it w ill establish a "high-profile industry committee" to oversee plans for the annual AFI Awards Presentation. The Committee will comprise one eminent member of the film and television industry, two film distributors, two members of the Screen Producers Association of Aus­ tralia and two representatives from

cinema papers turns 21! To celebrate 2 i years o f co n tinu ous p ublication as a m agazine, Cinem a Papers has re cl esigne d-t.b e m agazi ne J and m oved itsLacldress..... y

The new shape deliberately recalls the large format of those the AFI. pioneering Cinema Papers from December 1973 23 December 1994 to January 1986. Chairman Bob Weis announced today Thoughtfully re-designed that Ruth Jones has been appointed as by Parkhouse Publishing, the new Chief Executive. Jones comes to the AFI from the the changed format Sheraton Towers Southgate, where she incorporates many new 11 November 1994 A has been Public Relations Manager editorial features. he Australian Film Institute While Cinema Papers has since 1992. Her background in the arts announced that its Executive Direc­ attempted to cover th e . includes working as a publicist for the tor, Vicki Molloy, was to "regretfully" diverse aspects of the Victorian Arts Centre in 1990-92, and leave the AFI due to a restructure of the Australian film and as Press Secretary and later Minister­ organization. Chairman Bob Weis television industry on an ial Adviser to Ministers for the Arts in acknowledged the contribution Molloy annual basis, there will the Victorian Government from 1985 to has made during her eight years in the now be that widespread 1989. She holds a BA (Hons) in Visual position: coverage in every single Arts and has recently completed a The AFI regrets losing Vicki Molloy, issue. The bigger format Graduate Diploma of Business (Mar­ but, following a recent review, it has also means a return to the keting) at Monash University. been agreed that the AFI needs to be large photographs and 23 January 1995 restructured. Unfortunately, there will graphics synonymous vyitb be no position for her in the new Jones took up her appointment as earlier Cinema Papers. structure. Chief Executive. © The pages may be fewer, but the word count is, in fact, up. The new Cinema Papers is a larger, brighter and more extensive version of its old self. We hope you like it, too. Cinema Papers takes this opportunity to thank all of our friends who so generously helped with the move! Cinema Papers would also like to record its appreciation for two long-serving contributors to the magazine, who have both left to pursue other interests: Designer lan Robertson and Assistant Editor Raffaele Caputo. Both have laboured for Cinema Papers for some seven years and have had a large impact on the magazine's development. We wish them well. i l L J j J i L H j ]j,


Armstrong's Lai

This issue: Winona Ffyder and Christian Baie in Little Women,



C I N E M A P A P E R S â&#x20AC;¢ MARCH 1995

jp p p q p p s

M argaret S m it

talkd with director G illian A rms

an? DOP

C I N E M A P A P E R S â&#x20AC;¢ MARCH 1995


D I r e c t o r

Gillian Armstrong Little Women is Gillian Armstrong’s seventh feature, and her third in the U.S. It is already her biggest commercial success and, with My Brilliant Career (1979) and Higbtide (1987), her most critically acclaimed. What attracted you to making Little Women? Actually, I had some doubts about doing the film when it was first offered to me, partly because I felt it touched on some of the themes I’d already dealt with in My Brilliant C areer [1979], and partly because there had been other movies made of the book. But I was seduced into the project by my very pleasant producer, Denise DiNovi, and by Amy Pascal, the studio head, and also by finally meeting and talking to Winona about the project. Denise pointed out that my worries about its dealing with some of the themes in My Bril­ liant Career were not all that important, seeing as there is probably a whole generation who haven’t seen that film. Denise also pointed out that C areer was really about a young woman finding herself and finding her talents as a writer. While that is part of the story of L ittle W om en , it is also about family and growing up. Our main character, Jo March, continues where we leave Sybylla. She does grow up, become an adult and find her first love. In a lot of ways, it goes a lot further. Did the other films of Little Women influence you at all? I only had a very vague m em ory of the Katharine Hepburn L ittle W om en [George Cukor, 1933]. I saw it when I was quite small and I decided that it would be better not to look at it again, or any of the others1. I didn’t want them to influence or block me. When I started work with the screenplay writer, Robin Swicord, I asked her about some of the scenes that were in the book but not in the screenplay. She said, “Oh, I didn’t want to do that, because they did that in the other movies.” It was good that I was free from the burden of worrying about the other films, and I said, “I think our obligation is to the book. Let’s just go back to the book and make the best script we can.”


she talked the studio into developing the screenplay. Robin and she did two drafts together and I was sent the second. We then did two or three official drafts together, though there were re-writes of certain scenes going on right up to the time we were shooting. Were there any particular films which inspired the look of the film?

We actually went back to paintings by Amer­ ican artists of that period. Sergeant was one I really liked. W e also looked at some of the European artists. It was a question of finding various images that I, the designer and [DOP] G eoff [Simpson] felt had the right feel for I still haven’t seen the other films, but I’m the story. actually very curious to see them now. I also got a book of early American pho­ Because the book is so autobiographical, did tographs that were taken just a little bit later, Louisa May Alcott's own personality influ­ in the 1880s. There is a beautiful collection ence the interpretation of Jo March? , of early images of women in a house quite I did a lot of research into Louisa’s life, as did similar to Orchard House. It is quite a plain Robin Swicord and W inona. There was a sort of country house, and there is a photo­ point, in fact, where Winona was starting to graph of them in the garden picking pears. be confused about what was Louisa and what That was quite inspirational, with the feeling was Jo, and I said, “Stop reading about Louisa for light sources and so on. and let’s just concentrate on Jo .” We then chose the colours from various Robin and I did use some parts of Louisa’s paintings. real life to fill in the background of the story, It was also a part of the research that we because some things were not properly stated did about the w hole A lco tt fam ily and in the book. It was interesting to know why Orchard House, which is where Louisa wrote the M arch girls were so different, and how the book and is now a museum. T he first they had been brought up in a family that was thing that I did was go there and visit. Then so ahead of its time. They had a mother who as soon as Ja n R oelfs, our prod uction encouraged education for women, and who designer, started, he went straight to Boston didn’t see the marriage market as the be-alland actually spent three days at Orchard and-end-all for her daughters. House. He even got to see drawings of their We also discovered they were a part of one garden and what herbs and plants and trees of the early philosophical groups in America, were there. W e based the house very much the Transcendentalists, who were based in on the real house. New England with Emerson and Thoreau. So The Transcendentalists were like the first we put a little bit of that into the film. hippies. It was a back-to-nature movement, a How many drafts of the script were done reaction against the industrial revolution. before you came in? C oncord was a la the country outside of B oston . This group of philosophers all Robin worked on the script with Amy Pascal. decided to live in the same area. They were It was something that they were both very vegetarians and they were very involved in a interested in. natural look of furniture. Louisa’s father, Amy is the main studio executive at Bronson, built the weird natural-wood fence Columbia, and her full name is actually Amy we have in front of the house. It was this Beth Pascal - she was named after the char­ whole thing of going back to nature. At the acters of Amy and Beth. L ittle W om en had time, all the other fences in the other houses been something that she had been very pas­ were very upright Victorian picket fences. I sionate about, as was her mother, for a long think he was hammering J o ’s whole child­ time. Amy had tried to get various studios hood - the eternal renovator! interested in the project over the years. There was also a great love of ancient About a year before I came on, Amy G reek and Rom an philosophy and art. In became a powerful executive at Columbia, and

C I N E M A P A P E R S • MA RC H 1995

C I N E M A P A P E R S â&#x20AC;¢ MARCH 1995


As director (features): 1979 M y Brilliant Career 1982 Star Struck 1984 Mrs. Soffel (U.S.) 1987 Hightide 1991 Fires W ithin (U.S.) 1992 The Last Days of Chez Nous 1994 Little Women As director (other): 1968 Storytime (short) 1969 Four W alls (short) 1969 Several films of one to five minutes, completed only to double head, including an animation. Made at Swinburne Film School 1969 Old M an and Dog (short) 1970 The Roof Needs M ow ing (short) 1971 Shit Commercial (short) 1972 Decision (short) 1973 One Hundred a Day (s h o rt)-a ls o w riter 1973 Satdee Night (s h o rt)-a ls o w riter 1973 Gretel (s h o rt)-a ls o w riter 1976 The Singer and the Dancer (short) -a ls o co-writer, producer 1976 Smokes and Lollies (documentary) 1978 A Busy Kind of Bloke (documentary) 1980 Touch Wood (documentary) 1981 14's Good, 18's Better (documentary) - also a producer. A shorter version of this film is called M ore Smokes, M ore Lollies 1983 Bop Girl (short) 1983 Not Just a Pretty Face (documentary) 1986 Hard to Handle (documentary)

1988 Bingo Bridesmaids & Braces (documentary)

Also, 1972 N ew Life N ew South W ales (documentary) - editor 1972 Balina Country Town (documentary) -e d ito r 1972 Promotional film for Levi's - editor 1975 Promised W om an (fe a tu re )-a rtd ire c to r 1975 The Removalists (feature) - assistant designer 1976 The Trespassers (fe a tu re )-a rtd ire c to r 1977 A Time and a Place (documentary) - editor

their drawing room, Bronson put in two arches either side of the fireplace and placed Grecian or Roman busts inside them. Some of these things would have looked most abnormal for the time. It was so differ­ ent and so real, it was how Louisa’s life was, so we recreated a lot of that in our interior set. Did you use real locations for all the other houses?


We were taken on one of these tourist things the first week I was there by the film produc­ tion people and shown a number of period houses. I said to the designer, “Could you show me some more? I’ll be back in ten days.” I rang him later and said, “How are you going?”, and he said, “G illian, I think we saw the four period houses.” [Laughs] One of them was the Women’s University Club in Vancouver, so it felt a really appro­ priate place. In that one house we actually did London, Nice and the Concord Ball. It was a

very big mansion, and Jan did a very clever job in the set dressing. It was a bit like, “Okay, w e’ve shot London now. L e t’s go over to Nice.”, and we’d walk next door! You also gave the girls a very natural look. It looks as if they don't have any make-up on. I think it’s very important in a period film to really get the proper period look. Nothing’s worse than seeing a film ten years later and finding it looks like the fashion of the time it was made, whether they have the bangs that were in fashion at one time or the kick-ups at another. And all the girls, including Winona, were very happy to grow out their eyebrows, and have an absolutely “no make-up” look.

We also purposely cast all pale-skin girls. Winona, luckily, already had pale skin, but it was important to try and tie them together as sisters. As soon as an actor was cast, we sent them a note saying, “Do not go in the sun. Do not bleach your hair. Grow everything and please come back to us au naturel.” Another interesting actor in the film is Christ­ ian Bale. Christian was the little boy in E m pire o f the Sun [Steven Spielberg, 1987], after which he did two American films which never really took off: Swing Kids [Thomas Carter, 1993] and N ew sies [Kenny Ortega, 1992]. I hadn’t seen eith er of th ose. It was

™ 8

C I N E M A P A P E R S • MA RCH 1995


and said, “I think it’s wonderful you are doing the film ! I ’d love to be part o f i t ! ” I said, “You’re too young to be the Professor and you are too old to be Laurie”, and he said, “Well, if there is anything, I’m happy to do any tiny part; just happy.” So I said, “W ell, would you do Jo h n B ro o ke?” and he said, “Yeah, fine!” That was wonderful! We were also thrilled to have Gabriel Byrne [as Bhaer]. The film was one of those rare times where the whole cast were very easy-going, non-egocentric, low-key people who were happy to be in a film. We had great fun. How much rehearsing were you able to do before the shooting? We had two weeks’ rehearsal, though Winona and Christian started their ice-skating lessons two months before we started shooting. And how long was the shoot? It was an eleven-week shoot, plus second unit. We shot in New England before we started the proper shoot. We managed to do all the snow stuff up there in December. Then, just as I fin­ ished my cut, we went back to the same town in M assachusetts, Deerfield, to do the Fall shoot. It was great to be able to have this full circle of the seasons. How did it feel to work with your biggest bud­ get to date?

Winona who said to me, “You should check out this Christian Bale.” And he was fantas­ tic. I hope we will all see a lot more of him now. He’s actually English. And what about the other men in the film? You probably had more choice casting your men than casting women. Actually, it was very hard to cast Laurie. Chris­ tian was one of the first people that I saw. Then I saw all these young American men. We really had an enthusiastic turn-out, but so many of them are now into body-building, which is really incorrect for the period. Also, there was a lot of young American actors who play very “street”. They were all doing “Mar­

C I N E M A P A P E R S • MA RCH 1995

lon Brando���! They couldn’t deal with the lan­ guage at all. They were so used to improvising grunting that to speak period dialogue and sound natural was actually quite an art. I think Robin wrote beautiful, very simple, very naturalistic period dialogue. It has the flavour of the time. But the actors were more like, “Oh Jo, baby!”. I mean, with one of them it literally slipped out! They couldn’t help themselves! With the other two parts, I had fantastic fun looking for Professor Bhaer and Joh n Brooke. Eric Stoltz, whom I’d met earlier on another film I ’d been thinking of doing in America but which ended up collapsing, called

Actually, it wasn’t a very big budget if you think about it, for a period film with two major stars. The budget was probably about what Mrs. Soffel was ten years ago. Little W om en was $7m more, but costs have probably gone up about that much. Actually, it was a very tight budget and a very tight schedule. It was only brought in, and looked so fantastic, because of the great dis­ cipline of the Australians on the team, who have worked with two cents, and a designer who has worked on independent European films. We were all like weeping and saying, “We thought we’d be in Hollywood one day and things would be easier!” But so much goes up the top. Your stars are paid so much and the studio takes a lot off the top as well, with various expenses. It wasn’t a luxurious shoot; it was very tight, and very tough. What I’d like to say to all Australian read­ ers is that it was a huge rush finishing it for a Christmas release. I’d always wanted to come back to the New England town of Deerfield, where we shot the opening snow sequence, to have a real feeling of continuity of time. But by the time the studio finally gave the go-ahead to return to do the Fall shoot, I was in the mid­ dle of post-syncing the sound and w orking with the com poser on the music. I physically just couldn’t do it. p54

1 L itt le W om en (M ervyn L eR oy, 1 9 4 9 ) and L ittle Women (David Lowell Rich, tele-feature, 1978). There is also a BBC mini-series.


D ¡ r e c t o r


P h o t o g r a p h y

Geoffrey Simpson

Australian cinematographer Geoffrey Simpson has worked as DOP on a number of significant films, including The Navigator: A M edieval Odyssey (Vincent Ward, 1988), Green Card (Peter Weir, 1991), Fried Green Tom atoes at the Whistle Stop Cafe (John Avnet, 1991), The Last Days o f Chez Nous (Gillian Armstrong, 1992), Deadly (Esben Storm, 1992), The War (Jon Avnet, 1994), and Little Women (Gillian Armstrong, 1994). Simpson is now able to choose his films from an incredible array of projects, both here and overseas. He says he’s been attracted to performance-based films where the actors are more important than the action, and is grateful he has not had to film Hollywood ‘nasties’. How did you decide on Little Women's look? The look of a film is defined by the script and by the art department. It is a self-evolving process to which a lot of people contribute. On L ittle W om en , we had Jan Roelfs, a Dutch designer, who started the shoot very nicely with an Academy Award nomination, with his partner, for O rlando [Sally Potter, 1992], and Colleen Atwood, who did the cos­ tumes from Los Angeles. They made a huge contribution. The look defined itself, in the sense that the film is set in the 1860s, with a lot of light coming from candlelight and kerosene lantern sources. I wanted it to look warm and be very rich. In pre-production, the gaffer and I tested different gels, played around with colour tem­ perature and came up with a colour that I liked. The timer - or the grader as they are called in Australia - got the colour we wanted and we stuck to it throughout the film. Then Arthur Cambridge, who did the answer print here [at Atlab], fine-tuned it, improving it in some cases. Were you pleased the final grading was done here? I think it was John Seale who once said to me, “Thank God for Kodak and Arthur Cam­ bridge”, which was a great line and is very true. Arthur is a fantastic grader and a very


nice man, who has been in the industry a long time. He is one of those people who still has a great passion for his craft. I was certainly very pleased to come back here and have him pushing the buttons. Does working with someone like Arthur Cambridge allow you more control? When working in the States, it is usually part of my contract that I go back and have at least one session with a timer. But it’s much bet­ ter to be here: you can spend a week looking at a couple of answer prints, then come back again and check things again. You can keep your finger on the pulse. Gill also kept an eye on things, as did Nick Beauman, our editor. He followed it through by checking the prints in the States. We made the masters and the dupes here, but the 1,500 release prints were all done in the States. Because Little Women is about boisterous young women, did that also influence the look? The boisterous quality was more of a perfor­ mance thing. In particular, I thought Winona did a great kind of changing from the young Jo to an older but still a bit immature Jo, to finally the Jo who is trying to be a writer in New York. Photographically we could lighten things a bit, like brighter and fairly energetic in the hair-burning scene, but it comes more from performance than cinematography.

What about the camera tracking? It really suits the film by giving it a sense of movement. Gill and I both tried to move the camera. The shots were worked out very clearly during our five weeks of pre-production. When we were on set, we used the time really well. There wasn’t much wasted cover­ age. If we decided to track, or do a close-up, that is how it was cut. There were some vari­ ations and options, of course, but the coverage and design in Gill’s head was pretty much how the film ended up. Does working like that mean the shooting ratio is quite low? Usually it does. I not sure what the ratio was on L ittle W om en , but we certainly w eren’t wasteful. The studio wouldn’t let us be! Did any other films influence your cinematog­ raphy on Little Women, particularly older Hollywood ones? I don’t think so. It was probably much more influenced by modern films, with their rich­ ness and degree of contrast, which is now a contemporary look. One film that came out last year which I really liked was Searching fo r B ob b y F ischer [Steven Zaillian], shot by Conrad Hall. It was photographed very beautifully and it also had a kid as a star. That certainly was one film that stayed in my mind. You receive influences from many sources: from different pictures, contemporary and older, from paintings, from photographers. What about the earlier versions of Little Women, like the one with Katharine Hepburn [George Cukor, 1933]? I saw about 20 minutes but found it virtually unwatchable and switched it off. Katharine Hepburn was very Hollywood, very over-thetop. I haven’t see the June Allison-Elizabeth Taylor one [Mervyn LeRoy, 1949], Little Women opens with a snow scene, which is very blue. What did you want to achieve there? It was partly a contrast to what is to come later. The film is about Christmases and a warm and happy family, even if the father is away at war. Gill and I wanted a very warm, homely kind of feeling to come from the photogra­ phy. To contrast that, I made the exteriors cold and slightly bleak. Still, whenever we see

C I N E M A P A P E R S • MARCH 1995

(partial) 1980 Breaking Point (documentary)

our girls running through the snow, they are happy and boisterous and colourful. Actually, the snow was totally artificial. W e sprayed very thin chopped-up bits of paper onto bushes and trees with jets of air and water. The air would blow the confetti on, and the fine mist would make it stick to the leaves. In the background, there were snow blankets, which are basically huge white sheets. In the scene where Laurie is pulling the sled with the girls, he is walking on crushed ice we got from the fishermen in Vancouver, who were using it to store their fish. All the snow you see, apart from the titles sequence, which was real snow in a place called Deerfield, is artificial. Did you get that blue look when you shot it. or was that added in the grading? A bit in the grading, and a bit from not using the full colour correction in the filtration. Actually, it was freezing that first day we w ere in D eerfield. T here was some fog around, so some shots may look as if there is a fog filter. Many of the set-ups are very dark. Did you use candlelight to get the soft lighting on their faces? No, it was all lit, and to a reasonable degree; it wasn’t wide-open super-speed lenses.

C I N E M A P A P E R S • MARCH 1995

1981 Centrespread (Tony Patterson) 1981 Mad M a x 2 (George M ille r)-se co n d unit 1986 Playing Beatie Bow (Donald Crombie) 1986 Edens Lost (mini-series) 1987 Initiatipn (Michael Pearce, non-theatrical feature)

1988 The Navigator: A M edieval Odyssey (Vincent Ward) 1988 Jilted (Bill Bennett, non-theatrical feature) 1989 Celia (Ann Turner) 1989 Till There W as You (John Seale, non-theatrical feature) 1991 Green Card (Peter Weir)

1991 Fried Green Tomatoes at the W histle Stop Cafe (Jon Avnet) 1992 Deadly(Esben Storm) 1992 The Last Days of Chez Nous (Gillian Armstrong) 1993 M r W onderful (Anthony Minghella)

1994 The W a r (Jon Avnet) 1994 Little W omen (Gillian Armstrong)

One person who encouraged me in the degree of darkness was art director Jan Roelfs, who said early on that he didn’t mind if we didn’t see all of the set. He said he could always do with more money to put things in it, but he was quite keen for things to be suggested and not lit in such a way that you saw every detail. There wasn’t “Boo hoo h o o ” from the art department if things were dark. In fact, they encouraged me and gave me the confidence to push for the richness and contrast.

Did you light for a whole scene, or did you re­ light for each angle? Each set-up was a re-light. We had quite a lot of time because of the lengthy women’s make­ up and wardrobe changes. W e didn’t have to come on the set early; we would arrive on time. Winona, who had a 12-hour deal so she wouldn’t have to be called early, would be in make-up while we’d be lighting. That gave me a lot of time to get the first set-up. We would block in for the whole scene and then I would fine-tune it from angle to angle and shot to shot. We obviously did the big, diffi­ cult choreograph camera move first, and then went in to pick up the close-ups afterwards. Often when we were ready, I could say, “I don’t like this” and change it. We had the time because of the make-up. What about your working relationship with Gillian Armstrong? This was your second film with her. Yes, Gill and I also did The L ast Days o f Chez Nous about three years ago. I really like work­ ing with Gill and Chez N ous was a wonderful film to work on. It was a great crew and we were all in this tiny house in Glebe in the mid­ dle of summer, with Bruno Ganz sticking his head in the air-conditioning duct at every opportunity!


m There was much more pressure on Lit­ tle W omen. It was a bigger film, with a lot more money involved, and the studio was breathing down our neck. That is one of the things about working in Australia that you don’t have in the States. You have responsibilities to your producer and the FFC or whomever the money comes from, but it’s not the same sort of pressure that you get from a studio. Columbia Pictures had lost a great pile of money on some of its recent films, like Last Action Hero [John McTiernan, 1993]. It was being very careful, shall we say, and our budget was fairly tight for what we were doing - a costume period piece with a lot of sets and some big builds. Each depart­ ment could have done with a little bit more money, and we were hopeful that Colum­ bia would give us some, but it didn’t. There was certainly a lot more pressure than on Last Days o f Chez N ous and Gill was tense. I knew exactly where that was coming from and that was fine. There was never any dramas or problems. It was good. Where were you when you were contracted onto the film? I was filming Kevin Costner at night in the Georgia woods, in the mud and rain, for Jon Avnet’s film, The War. I left there and went to New York for a day. Suddenly, I was in Deerfield filming snow scenes for the title sequence, with period wardrobe, awesome cast and snow, a million miles away from Georgia and night shoots and rain and guns and M l6s. Then I went and had a week and a half in Vancouver meeting Jan Roelfs and his art department, and going with Gill to the locations in Victoria, and on Vancouver Island, where our ‘Orchard House’ was. I then came back to Sydney. I was here for about a week and a half, then turned around and went back to the States, when I had another three weeks or so in pre-production. What I tend to do, as the sets are built and locations are locked-off, is take lots of photographs. So does Gill. We both had huge reference files. Gill and I start to work out our camera angles during these surveys. We take pho­ tographs from certain angles and get a feeling of how the light works naturally, or might work with some help. Staring at those photographs day after day gives you a really good idea and sense of the over­ all visual tone of the picture. Obviously it changes once you get on the set, but I’ve done that with all the films over the past four or five years and find it useful. Gill had books filled with photos and she’d use some of mine sometimes and some of hers. W e both have that visual sense, which is maybe another reason why I like working


with her. I feel very attuned, and often I can anticipate exactly what she wants. Of your many other films, was any a similar experience? Each film is different. Som eone asked me the other day whether I would ever want to be a direc­ tor, and the answer is categorically no. D irectors w ork much too hard. C ine­ matographers work hard, but directors work incredibly hard. One of the things I really love is the variety of the cinematographer-director relationship. I’ve been very lucky to have worked with a great bunch of directors. I suppose my big break into America

was working with Peter W eir on G reen Card. He is a fantastic guy. We had prob­ ably a month of pre-production, which was a lot of time to get to know each other and to get a sense of the film. We knew where we were going and what we were doing with it. Did you use a storyboard on Little Women? N ot real storyboards as such. Gill often does little stick-figure drawings in her note­ books, and there are the still photographs taken on surveys. I also tend to take pho­ tographs of the actors rehearsing, though I did that much more on The War. P5 4

C I N E M A P A P E R S • MA RCH 1995





F i l m


V i c t o r i a

ecognising the cultural significance of film Ay supporting organisations, projects and events which fester the appreciation of film and television and develop an audience and infrastructure for Australian production. Proudly supported by

A u s t r a l i a n F i l m In s t i t u t e M e l b o u r n e I n t e r n a t i o n a l F il m F e s t i v a l Mo d e r n I m a g e Ma k e r s A s s o c i a t i o n Open C hannel • E xpérim enta C i n e m a P a p e r s • M e t r o Ma g a z i n e ATOM Aw a r d s • A W G I E Aw a r d s

4th Floor, 49 Spring Street Melbourne, 3000 Telephone (03) 651 4089 Facsimile (03) 651 4090




From Ross Dimsey has worked more sides of the Australian film and television industries than many. He is an experienced director (Blue Fire Lady), scriptwriter (Morris West's The Naked Country) and producer of features (Kangaroo); a producer of television (A Thousand Skies); he has been Chief Executive of the Victorian Film Corporation (now Film Victoria); was an early president of SPAA; and is currently a Board Mem ber of Cinema Papers. In short, Dimsey has the wide range of skills that many see as necessary for his new position as Director of Film Queensland. In fact, eighteen months prior to his appointment, Dimsey had already moved north to Brisbane from his base in Melbourne. Dimsey: I came up here at the invitation of Film Queensland, which afforded me some develop­ ment assistance under the Producer Relocation Scheme. I saw then, and I still believe now, that the Queensland industry is one that is absolutely ripe for development and growth. The move seemed like a good idea at the time and it’s proven to be one. I formally took up the job as Director on 24 November last year. FQ had been w ithout a director for nearly 12 months, with Judith Crombie very ably acting in the position.

What was your opinion of Film Queensland prior to your appointment? I thought there was some opportunities being missed, to be honest. FQ ’s over-all approach was not entirely appropriate to the local industry’s stage of development. W e must be careful here to distinguish between the industry on the Gold Coast, which is essentially an imported industry supplying facil­ ities, personnel and so forth to an export industry, and the ‘native’ industry, which is essentially cen­ tred in Brisbane. What were the opportunities being missed in terms of the native industry? I didn’t think a forward-enough view was being taken in terms of what this industry was going to look like in four or five years’ time. In a way, it was understandable in that the previous administration of FQ was looking for a quick start-up. One way to do that was import producers like myself. In a couple of cases, that was successful in beginning to establish a pro­ ducer infrastructure. But it takes more than that to make an industry. It seemed to me it was time for FQ to bite the bullet in regard to its own clien­ tèle in terms of those emerging writers and local producers who had not yet had an opportunity to do major drama - particularly those produc­ ers who might have been working in allied areas such as commercials, corporate and educational work, and documentaries. One has to look at the development of the industry here as a task which will occupy at least three years, with some definite goals at the end. That’s not to say that the attraction of imported producers shouldn’t continue. But I felt that there wasn’t being much left on the ground from pre­ vious policy. People were coming and pictures were being made, but the people were going away again. One couldn’t trace a clear line of devel­ opment of the local client base in that. What have you done to change that situation? The first thing is to recognize what the Queens­ land industry has and what it hasn’t. In many ways, it resembles the V ictorian industry, if

An interview with Ross Dimsey, Director, Film Q ueensland S co tt M u rray



you take out the Crawford factor, of 1979, which was when I was appointed to the Victorian Film Corporation. It’s not good enough to not invest in devel­ opment of people because they lack experience. If one followed that rule, then there would be no development of people up through the system. The policies that we will be putting in place this year, and which will carry us through my term, are in two streams. One is the regular business of FQ, which is equity investment in pictures, and script devel­ opment investment in established producers and established writers, with the overriding factor always being the Queensland elements through the various tests which have been applied in the past to investment. The other stream is investment in people, with a training or personal development com­ ponent. C I N E M A P A P E R S • MARCH 1995


My aim is to see filmmakers in this office

all the time, coming in chatting, whatever. That hasn't been the case in the past"

what you need to get a deal and so on. The Australian Film Finance C orp oration [FFC] is coming up here early in the year. We are running a two-day sem inar on the basics of what the FFC is about. It is targeted at those people whom we believe are skilful and who have the potential to join the ranks of major producers. W e just want to accelerate the process of personal professional development. While there hasn't been a strong independent feature industry in Brisbane, there has been a struggling but continuing short film industry. Are the people that you are looking to develop coming from that area, as well as from commercials, documentaries, corporate work and so on?

We are working closely with the Australian Film Television & Radio School [AFTRS], which has an extremely vibrant office in Brisbane, run by Ursula Cleary. W e have a number of pro­ grammes for writers, directors and producers, who are as yet untested. A condition of this will be that recipients undergo some sort of post-graduate course - for want of a better term - organized by ourselves and the AFTRS. This has already been happen­ ing with writers, and with producers in various aspects of the producing profession. In terms of marketing skills, we will be tak­ ing three or four essentially inexperienced producers to the major markets over the next two years and working those markets with them as a supportive partner. The learning experience is pressure-cooked to a certain extent to get these people up to speed on how the markets work, C I N E M A P A P E R S • MARCH 1995

Yes, on all counts. I’d prefer not to give specific names, because that’s not productive and unfair to those not named, but there is a handful of short filmmakers who look very interesting. We have supported three short films this year and an element in the selection of those films was that the personnel involved showed poten­ tial to go on. That is, we saw the short film not only as an end in itself - to make a movie - but also as an effective stepping-stone to the next phase. As w ell, we were looking at cross-over people. There are a couple of producers here who have been very successful in areas like cor­ porate work and com m ercials, who have indicated they are now ready to move over to features. This is what happened in V ictoria with a number of producers, and I was one of them, coming from commercials directing. Of course, those who are prepared to cross over must recognize that they are at the very bottom of the learning curve in terms of producing drama. There are also some very skilled people work­ ing in education and allied fields who have shown real producing skills and, I have to say, some entrepreneurial skills. They are ready to make the cross-over. You obviously place great importance on producers. Do you, in fact, think the knowledge

What’s Happening in the ’Native’ Industry Currently shooting or in production outside the Movie World Studios are: T h e B la c k w a te r T rail (feature, Ian Barry) Pro­ duced by John Sexton and Julie Foster for Rutherford Film Floldings, the film began post-pro­ duction on 20 February 1995. Financed by the FFC, FQ, Portman Productions and Network Ten, it is the story of a writer who returns to a small Queensland town and becomes entrapped in corruption and cover-up. Scripted by Andrew Russell, it stars Judd Nelson, Dee Smart, Mark Lee, Peter Phelps and Rowena Wallace. Lizzie's Library (television series) This stop-ani­ mation series had been made for the ABC. Soon to start production are: Fire 2 (mini-series) This is the second series, the first having been produced by Michael Caulfield, Simone North and Tony Cavanaugh for Extra Dimensions, in association w ith Liberty Films. Scripted by Tony Cavanaugh, Everett De Roche and Deborah Cox, it told the story of a platoon of firefighters and starred Andy Anderson, Liddy Clark, Shane Connor and Deborra-Lee Furness. O cean G irl 3 (television series) Set to start production in the middle of year, this is the third series for one of Australi­ a's greatest television exports. The first series was executive produced by Jonathan M. Shiff for W estbridge Productions, and was financed by the FFC, Film Victoria and Film Queensland. The first series told the story of Neri, the mysterious girl from the sea who returns to search for the secret of her past and stars Marzena Godecki, David Hoflin and Jeffrey Walker. T h e Last B u lle t (feature, Michael Pattinson) This Japanese-Australian co-production (producers Georgina Pope and Brian Burgess), a sort of Hell

in the Pacific, will star a major Japanese actor and Australian Jason Donovan. Dimsey hopes that three more local features will go into production in 1995, as well as a family television series.


Q U E E N S and expertise of producers in Australia is something that needs improving? Yes... an emphatic “Yes” ! And I include myself among those people. I now recognize that at var­ ious stages of my career some form of post-graduate training in specific areas would have accelerated my personal development as a producer, and made me more effective. Historically, producers have emerged from a variety of areas, and many of those now working successfully are self-taught. That’s a process which takes a long time, where you need a very high degree of opportunity to try and fail. It was the 10BA era which afforded that opportunity. W e all know th at 10BA now lives under something of cloud, but, if one looks at the pic­ tures that were made under the 10BA régime, and if you look at the people involved, you’ll find that there were a number of producers who were given that opportunity to fail. But they learnt as •- they failed, which was a vital factor in acceler­ ating that self-education. I’m faced with a different task. The finan­ cial climate is completely different. M oney is increasingly available to fewer and fewer and m ore-established individuals. In New South Wales and Victoria, we are looking at the agglom­ eration of producer units under umbrellas, which is something we all could see coming two or three years ago. That opportunity doesn’t exist in Queensland and these people I’m talking about will never be given the chance to acquire those skills, or to reach the ranks of active producers, by a naturalselection process. FQ has a real rôle to play in getting these peo­ ple to the point where they are given the opportunity to prove themselves. Whereas most directors and writers reveal their best talents quite early on, even the best pro­ ducers need time to learn the market place and develop and hone their skills.



E xactly. I t ’s to do w ith the respective skills. You can train directors, but it’s self-evident that directing skill - that magic ingredient is innate. People can get better at it by training, but, by and large, there are good direc­ tors who will always be good directors, and there are heaps of others who aren’t so good and who, no matter what hap­ pens, will always be n ot so good. Writers are slightly differ­ ent in that innate skills in the language can be adapted. W e’ve seen some interesting cross-overs into screenplay w riting w ith playw rights, short-story writers and novel­ ists. They can be helped by training program m es. But again, by and large, the ability to tell a story effectively is an innate skill. As for producing, one likes to think of the romantic image of the producer as someone who can pick the winners sim­ ply by instinct. W hile that is self-evidently not possible, the business of producing is largely the business of building teams - financial teams and creative teams. This is a process which can be learned. It relies far less upon that m agic spark of genius to pick the w inner. That’s still an element, and, if you look at some of our most successful producers, that ele­ ment is there. But I think you will find that many of them are also w riters or directors. M aybe the spark is com ing from those areas.


The Film Industry in Queensland Dimsey: The Movie World Studios continue to do a terrific job in terms of bringing money into the state. It ranks as quite a big export industry if you look at it in terms of foreign dollars coming in in exchange for our expertise. As well, the skill levels of the special-effects, art-department and the production-management people down the coast have risen enormously, simply because of that continual throughput of work. There is also the Pacific Film and Television Corporation run by Robin James. Its role is to attract work to the state, either from within Australia or from overseas, and it does a very good job at it. The Queensland film industry, as opposed to the film industry in Queensland, is a separate thing. It's something that can only evolve from the soil. You can't import it. It has to be looked after very carefully in the shadow of the larger imported industry. Now, that sounds as if the Studios dominates; it doesn't. In fact, its geographical separation from Brisbane, which is a harrowing hour's drive away, means it's a separate city. I'm not at all uncomfortable about that. There are cross-over benefits. Certainly, some of the production-man­ agement, art-department and special-effects skills cross over into our own work, though there are some areas which will always be separate. The likelihood of a local picture being able to afford to use one of the major stages down there, or even having the need for a major stage, is remote. But that's fine. Those stages are there to attract those export dollars and they do it very effectively.

When he was Director of Film Queensland, Richard Stewart was also on the Board of the Pacific Film and Television Corporation. Is that something you are or will be? No, though I am one member of a four-member committee which advises the Pacific Film and Television Corporation on its activities, in terms of the Revolving Discounting Fund, crew rebates, payroll tax incentives, Police, Fire and Ambulance, and the various incentives. That committee is Robin James, myself and tw o members of state Treasury. The Director of the Arts, Greg Andrews, is a member of the Board of the PFTC, but the PFTC is an independent company w ith the gov­ ernment as major shareholder. I am not a member of the Board of PFTC and I'm certainly not an employee. We do occupy adjoining office space, and w e certainly co-operate in a number of areas. Certainly, the Revolving Discounting Fund is a powerful incentive for me at Film Queensland to help finance pictures. But otherwise FQ and PFTC are quite separate.

At the time of Cinema Papers' Queensland supplement a year ago, there were many complaints from within Queensland that the federal bodies, particularly the Australian Film Commission (AFC), weren't sufficiently supportive of Queensland. Was that the case and, if so, is it changing?

Exposure, the magazine published by the Brisbane Independent Filmmakers Inc. Contact: Suite 3,60 Berwick St, Fortitude Valley 4006, or tel (07) 252 3394.


I don’t believe that was a fair criticism of the AFC, although it is a body situated in Sydney which has historically tended to focus on Sydney and, to a certain extent, Melbourne. W ith the appointment particularly of Tim Read [as Director, Film Development], I sense a new attitude within the AFC in terms in spread­ ing its effect more equally among the states. This can be seen in the statistics about the recent Pro­ ducer Support Scheme [under the D istinctly Australian Initiative], which showed a national balance. Actually, there were not many applications

from Queensland. That was probably because people didn’t quite know how to go about it. They were not AFC-ready to the same extent as those new producers working in Victoria and New South Wales, who have all the advantages of the networking and service organizations in those states. One of the things FQ will be looking at, par­ ticularly with our short film m akers who are one step back from these emerging producers for m ajor work, are ways in which we can make them more AFC-ready. They must be confident in terms of how they work the AFC system. It is just the simple things of how to apply, how to get in form ation as to w hat the AFC p ro ­ grammes are about, how to build skills and the background which will make them more attrac­ tive to AFC investment. W e all love to whip the old A FC, but I have to say in this case only a very small elem ent was an A FC problem . P ^ 7 C I N E M A P A P E R S • MA RCH 1995


D e v e l o p i n g P e o p le . I n v e s t i n g in the F u t u r e . For further information about Film Queensland's programs of assistance: Telephone 07 224 4536 Fax 07 224 4077




An overview of Queensland's independent screen culture This seems as good a time as any to provide an up-to-date assessment of the state of independent screen production m Queensland. Ross Dimsey has just taken over the Director s chair at Film Queensland, the local film cultural organizations have just received their annual round of funding for 1994-95, the successful applicants for the Short Film Fund have just been announced and there is a general feeling m the air that 1995 may be an interesting year for screen culture m Queensland. Australian Film Commission The AFC ‘heavies’ were recently in town, the first time in years, specifically to listen and talk to the filmmaking community.1 “The Commission will be paying heed to geography”, announced Tim Read, Director of Film Development. “We are prepared to try and give a go to a broad spectrum of fund­ ing applications across Australia.” As part of this commitment to regionalism, staff of the AFC will visit Queensland at least three times a year, to meet filmmakers face-to-face, to advise and discuss projects. The significance of this announcement may be lost to the southern states, which are used to hav­ ing an AFC presence in relative proximity. The last time Queenslanders had the benefit of personal feedback, especially those who were not fortunate enough to be short-listed, was when Richard Keys held the position of Project Officer in the Creative

Development Branch ... and that was some time ago. Certainly, when a funding agency in Queens­ land was revived as the Q ueensland Film Development Office in 1988, filmmakers responded to the more accessible and visible form of local gov­ ernment support. Arguably for valid reasons, the AFC was perceived as more responsive to the cul­ tural milieu of its geographical location. While the AFC is not applying any statistical prin­ ciples, one of the motivating factors for its more pro-active stance is the consistently small number of applications that originate from Queensland. On the last round of development applications, 759 were received, 42 from Queensland (and only 5 of these were funded). In the interests of cultural diver­ sity, the AFC has aims to increase this statistic.

Film Queensland and the AFC After the bleak years of the 1980s, the Queens­ land Film D evelopm ent O ffice, now Film

Queensland, has a large void to fill with modest funds. Its annual budget of about $2 million sup­ ports festivals, film organizations, training and work-experience programmes, and various forms of production support, including the Short Film Fund, which is allocated $ 1 0 0 ,0 0 0 of the budget. In 1994, that boundary was pushed to $114,000 to accom m odate three selected p ro jects, two at $ 3 0 ,0 0 0 plus and one at $ 5 0 ,0 0 0 . The Fund has been operating for four years, but, in the last two, Film Queensland has been viewing its support in terms of people investment rather than purely pro­ ject investment. In 1993, attention was focused on the producer. In 1994, the accent was on the Professional Devel­ opment Fund for mentors to guide/advise selected d irectors through their pro jects. T he Short Film Fund is viewed as a form of professional devel­ opm ent, an apprenticeship w hich hopefully

Kristy Matheson and Michael O'Sullivan in animated conversation in Niamh Lines' Talk Show.


C I N E M A P A P E R S • MA RCH 1995

would lead on to bigger and better things for Queensland. Mark Chapman, Project Officer for Film Queens­ land, said that it was to their advantage that each successful application put forward a creative team of producer, director and writer, as in “a feature-film package”. Selected from a field of approximately 30 applications, the assessors were unanimous in their choices, basing their decisions not only on which scripts worked, but also on the abilities of the direc­ tor, and the relevance of the project to his or her career development. The AFC, on the other hand, is working on a dif­ ferent agenda. The Short Film Fund is orientated towards a premise that applauds cultural diversity and integrity. The Fund is looking for the “innov­ ative, pushing the boundaries”, etc., that places more emphasis on experimentation and challeng­ ing ideas in form and content. It is this style of short film that is found to be more marketable on the international circuit of film festivals. The two agendas may not be mutually exclusive, but one of the excuses used for the AFC’s reluc­ tance to co-fund short film projects has been that project sophistication by Queensland’s applicants has not measured up to the range submitted from the southern states. The AFC continues to maintain its directive towards funding only the “best” pro­ jects, regardless o f w here they com e from . C onsequently, there is still a tension existing betw een the two funding agencies over which scripts should be funded. Sometimes, this hiatus has worked to the benefit of filmmakers. Randall Wood, a documentary film­ maker who has only had the opportunity to work in the short form at, was rejected twice by Film Queensland on his project G oo ri G oo ri D ream ­ ing, which has since been screened on the ABC and won four local awards in Queensland. Wood: I got knocked back initially, then applied to the AFC and Film Queensland for the M icrodoc’s Project. Film Queensland again said no - they didn’t like the script - but the AFC picked it up and Film Queensland agreed to support it. Significantly, it is the M icrodoc’s Project arrange­ ment between the AFC, ABC and Film Queensland - a distribution system of funding set-up specifically to address regionalism and cultural diversity - that has provided this opportunity. In the past, the AFC has been viewed as wary of any commitment to co-fund Film Queensland projects. But the key players have changed, and we have been assured during the AFC’s visit to Queens­ land there is now more willingness to co-operate between the two funding bodies. This may be due to Queensland’s emerging status as a major venue

by Sue Ward C I N E M A P A P E R S • MARCH 1995

Hedley Jade Fisher listens to stories from his great-grandmother's time in Goori Goori Dreaming.

Gunaminy Vanessa Fisher, centre, takes her grandchildren, La Flarmony Carlo, left, and Mullianga Badanthun Fisher, right, back to her grandmother's homeland. Randall Wood's Goori Goori Dreaming.

for national and in tern a­ tional features. Then again, the presence of Queensland academic Stuart Cunning­ ham as a Commissioner of the AFC may be another fac­ tor in focusing attention on Queensland. Screen culture in Queensland The often unacknowledged but significant play­ ers in forming screen culture and more specifically screen literacy in Queensland are the tertiary film and video training institutions. These include the Queensland University of Technology’s School of Media and Journalism, Griffith’s School of Film and M edia, and the Queensland College of Art, now part of Griffith University, though production facilities in all three institutions are predominantly confined to the medium of videotape. These institutions provide production facilities within a learning environment that exposes their stu­ dents to many of the past and contemporary debates on cinematic forms and industry practice. Within this context, students are expected to explore their ideas, and, while they may not wish it to be publicized, many of these institutions have developed a practice of turning a blind eye to those extra-curricular activ­ ities in filmmaking. Film Queensland follows on the work of the tertiary institutions by providing a pub­ lic platform for student work of merit through the Annual New Filmmakers’ Awards and the Brisbane International Film Festival. Mairi Cameron, a QUT student, won the Best Documentary Award this year for Driving Mis Crazy, a quirky documentary on women, their cars and

their relationship with mechanics. She has since won the Short Poppy Award, and has been interviewed on the SBS M ovie Show. Significantly, only she and one other member of the crew were QUT students. Niamh Lines, a Griffith student, enrolled in a part-time honours degree so that she would have two years of access to its com puterized p o st­ production facilities. She has won public recogni­ tion for her video art, T alk Show , an ‘animated’ conversation using the juxtaposition of computerdistorted images with off-beat dialogue. Lines hopes to pursue a career in video art and now feels she is in a stronger position to apply to the New Image Fund, rather than enrolling in another part-time, post-graduate degree. With the presence of these tertiary courses pro­ ducing a number of high-production-quality short videos every year, and with the New Filmmakers’ Awards, a short film/video culture is alive and kick­ ing - at least in Brisbane. Besides the key organizations - the Queensland Cinematheque, Brisbane Independent Filmmaking and W omen in Film and Television (Qld) - there is Ribcage, a new group of women filmmakers and radio pro­ ducers, and Briz 31, the public broadcasting station that has just started televising last year. All have taken advantage at some time or other to tap into



a readily-available source of short videos that gen­ erally don’t cost anything if you know a friend of a friend. The video-makers are pleased to get expo­ sure for their work and the organizations have been gratified by the public support for their screenings. Even local cafés in West End regularly screen shorts to complement their artistic ambience. One of the key players in the independent film area is Brisbane Independent Filmmakers Inc. (BIF). It is an organization that has survived since the mid1 9 7 0 s on little more than the tenacity o f its members. BIF still has a rocky relationship with the funding bodies, Film Queensland and the AFC. For the past six months, all administration has been car­ ried out by volunteers, yet they have managed to maintain an important profile in the independent filmmaking scene. BIF maintains a filmmakers’ support service pro­ viding advice on all aspects of filmmaking from writing submissions, script editing, budgeting, crew­ ing and access to equipm ent (though the organization has little of its own). Director-writer Michelle Warner took out the Australian Writer’s Guild Awgie for the Best Education/Training Doc­ umentary, The Car, The Dealer, His Client and Her Uncle, largely with the production support and expertise of BIF members. BIF also publishes Exposure, a glossy publication devoted to local screen culture. This magazine, pub­ lished every two months, is also reliant on the goodwill of the editorial staff and its contributors - BIF members, independent filmmakers and film students - who contribute to the publication with­ out payment. Exposure is financed by subscriptions, local busi­ ness sponsorship and advertising. Focal support from the Valley Business Association has also funded BIF’s “Mall of Silents”, an event in which the organization projects silent classics onto a 12 x 9 foot screen placed amongst the table, chairs and patrons of the Valley sidewalk cafés, Brisbane’s inner-city alternative scene. Although BIF has had to rely on the entrepre­ neurial skills of its executive members, it is probably the only film cultural organization that has any pres­ ence in Queensland’s far regional centres, through its Qantas Touring Short Film Festival. The airline provides airfares to Townsville, Cairns, M t Isa and Arlie Beach. BIF makes contact with either local filmmaking groups/film societies, or local city/shire councils. A tour is also planned for Charleville and Fongreach. sponsored by Flight West. These tours increase BIF’s membership and the circulation of its magazine, provide contacts for members and a network of local venues. Mindful of regional audience tastes, films are carefully cho­ sen from B IF ’s five-day festival of Short Films that would be appropriate. But as filmmaker Defrim Isai comments:





Unfortunately it comes down to the basic process of changing the culture of regional audi­ ences from the expectations of mainstream feature films. But with the short-film format, peo­ ple grasp a better understanding of what is possible with a low budget. M ain Cameron's Driving M s Crazy: Sally Certainly, the progress experi­ Moran confronts Luke Robertson (neighbour) enced so far in Queensland can be and Tony Brown (mechanic) w ith "bloke speak” ; largely credited to Film Queens­ Moran learns the intricacies of ownership; land. Queensland continues to Moran confronts Brown; Lisa Doyle, a fiesty be locked out of the AFC’s Indus­ femme and her car; Andrea McLean, a fiesty try and Cultural Developm ent femme w ith a predilection for big cars; Programme’s “budget lock-in ” Moran and Katherine Lyall-Watson. situation, so the burden of orga­ nizational support for Queensland organizations has fallen onto the shoulders of Film as TAIMA (Townsville) and Murriimage (Gympie), Queensland.2 for the purpose of highlighting issues of advo­ Thankfully, the polite form of coercion under­ cacy, new technologies, and to support regional taken by the AFC and Film Queensland during culture, particularly from the groups that exemplify 1992-93 to nationalize activities of W IFT, Cine­ Queensland’s cultural diversity. matheque and BIF under the one organization has Conclusion been laid to rest. The detrimental effects of this push As one filmmaker admitted, by the AFC and Film Queensland was not only to spend a considerable amount of money on employ­ Film Queensland is a paradox. I can only applaud ing interstate consultants, it also had the tendency them for backing my documentary that was quite to promote an under-siege mentality that stifled nat­ politically contentious. They would have been ural lines of co-operation between the organizations. putting their neck out, yet they consistently fail It is a healthy sign that the heterogeneity of screen to back any winners in the short-film or low-budculture has finally been recognized. get area. This year, Film Queensland has employed a Cul­ It has long been a bone of contention for many tural Development Officer, Sharon Sargent, who in this state that Queensland, since its more recent has initiated monthly round-table discussions ‘revival’, has not produced any work of great crit­ between W IFT, the Cinematheque and BIF. W IFT ical acclaim. Perhaps it is a matter of time and a (Qld), affiliated with the national W IFT (Aust.), has certain amount of fine-tuning on the part of Film always had a very active rôle in issues of local screen Queensland on the projects and people it supports. culture, as well as taking on many of the industry Perhaps it is a matter for Queensland filmmakers issues relating to gender. The Queensland Cine­ to reach that stage of maturity, self-confidence and m atheque’s rôle is to administer the N ational ability to follow through on their ideas. Cinematheque programme, as well as a bi-monthly Queensland does seem to have reached that turn­ programme of guest speakers. This initiative pro­ ing point in critical mass in terms of production and m otes a more effective w orking relationship in the size of the local film community, though it between the government agency and the cultural still lacks a vital television-production base and organizations, with the aim to prompt a more syn­ locally-based distributors. Certainly, the indepen­ ergistic use of existing skills and resources. dent production and exhibition area in Queensland Also being addressed is the need to establish some is going through unprecedented growth, which is form of archival collection in collaboration with the being driven as much by film- and video-makers State Library, of work by local film/video makers and film cultural organizations as by government for preservation and easy access by the public and funding. ® organizations. Griffith Artworks, situated at Grif­ fith University, has provided a leading-edge example 1 The ‘heavies’ were Sue Milliken (Chair), Cathy of what could be done through its project of com­ Robinson (Chief Executive), Sue Murray (Director, piling an extensive video-art collection on laser disc. Marketing) and Tim Read (Director, Film Another more ambitious idea is to stage an annual Development). event that would pull together the various diverse 2 See discussion in interview with Cathy Robinson, elements of screen culture to include community conducted by Scott Murray, Cinem a Papers, No. 102, video work, and the Aboriginal organizations such December 1994, p. 31.

C I N E M A P A P E R S • MARCH 1995

Film Buffs & Chocoholics Unite! Win one of three giant Red Tulip Easter egg hampers (valued at $220.00 each) simply by


subscribing to Cinema Papers by 22 March 1995. Iu&fi

All Australian subscriptions are eligible. The winners will be drawn on 23 March 1995 and notified by Red Tulip. See insert card for subscription details.


Level 10, 1 Elizabeth Plaza, North Sydney 2060 (off Mount Street) • PO Box 1155 North Sydney 2059 Telephone (02) 954 1477 Facsim ile (02) 954 1585

Australia’s leading Film and TV Insurance Underwriting Agency W e S p e c ia lis e in I n s u ra n c e for:

■ ■

Film Producers Indem nity (Cast) N egatives and V ideotapes Errors and O m issions A dditional Expenses Props, Cam eras, Lighting, Sound Equipm ent Public Liability M oney 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 9R ile y ACN: 007 698 062




aradise Beach was a relatively-short-lived ser­ ial screened between May 1993 and July 1994 on the Australian Nine Network, and in sev­ eral international markets. The production and marketing strategy for Paradise Beach was, in con­ temporary Australian long-form serial television, a unique one. While unequivocally an Australian pro­ duction (both for regulatory purposes and for maximizing opportunities for local success), it was aimed primarily at the U.S. market and other major ancillary markets. (It was pre-sold to BSkyB in Britain, South America and Europe territories mostly sight unseen, a testament to the distribution profile of its co-venture partners.1) It appeared to bring together an exceptionallystrong production, distribution and exhibition alliance. Paradise Beach was co-produced by Vil­ lage Roadshow, with its studio complex at the Gold Coast offering complete production facilities, the Nine Network (the strongest-rating network and needing successful local drama and an equity partner in the Studios), and New World International-Gen­ esis, a large U.S. distribution company specializing in mostly U.S. soap opera (Bayw atch, Santa Barbara,


get teen audience at the end of the school year. There was also a deliberate strategy to cover all schedule slots in major markets so that its best performing times could be determined for the relaunch.3 It was disastrously placed in the ‘black hole’ of 3 - 4 pm against Oprah Winfrey on KCBS Los Angeles and so didn’t stand a chance in one of the most important U.S. markets. It did not survive the summer, being pulled from U.S. schedules before it had run the length of its test campaign. Why did Paradise Beach fail? There are several answers, underscoring the inadequacy of any single industrial, cultural or textual explanation. From a purely financial perspective, it was structured in such as way that it couldn’t fail. The experienced partners knew the programme was an experiment and struc­ tured its costs so that it was virtually certain to returning modest profits even if it failed to secure ongoing screen time. Produced at a rock bottom SA150,000 an hour, it certainly would have returned reasonable profits to its backers, especially as costs have been split three ways. Even a 3 per cent rating (which it reached in only a few markets) would return $U.S.18,000 for a 30-second commercial in U.S. syn­ dication.4 And, of course, there were additional residuals from other markets - it was still running on

T H E W A S H - U P ON The Bold and the Beautiful) for the U.S. syndication and international markets. Village had studio space to fill and a commitment to internationalize local pro­ duction and facilities. For their part, New World and subsidiary Genesis, in co-venturing on Paradise Beach, were responding to a contracting U.S. market for soap opera by capitalizing on overseas sources of finance and lower-cost structures, in effect turning the U.S. into a secondary market and diminishing the importance of network sales.2 P aradise B each was virtually simultaneously launched in Australia and the U.S., and followed soon after in other territories. It was heavily promoted in Australia, filling initially an early evening slot directly before the nightly news, then was shifted back a half hour (to insulate its poor performance from the powerful news and current affairs rating period). Neilsen ratings for the programme indicated that it received its highest exposure at premiere (18), dropping quickly to 11 at the end of its first week, and falling into single figures when it was shifted back a half hour to 5 pm. Production ceased in May 1994, with some states running episodes until July 1994. In the U.S., it was cleared by Genesis-New World for 85 per cent (or 150 stations) of the syndication market, an unprecedented exposure for a foreignmade serial. This compares markedly with the 1980s campaign for Neighbours, which was not handled by a major distributor such as New World. The U.S. strategy was to test Paradise Beach during the 1993 northern summer, and then relaunch it in January 1994 if it showed promise. Paralleling the theme of the programme (“It’s where teenagers from every­ where converge to cut loose, find the perfect wave, and fall hopelessly in love”), it was aimed at its tar-


W hy did P a r a d i s e B e a c h f a i l ? T h ere a re severa l answ ers, u n d ersco rin g the inadequacy o f a n y sin g le in d ustrial, c u ltu ra l or te x tu a l exp la n a tio n . RTL5 in Holland, for instance, in mid-1994. However, as a strategy that could be built on by further Australian serial production aimed for long­ term acceptance in international markets, it was a signal failure. This may be in part due to the very fac­ tor which guaranteed its bottom-line security: its extreme low-budget, instrumental production pro­ tocols. This approach to production (actors with very limited experience or models with no acting expe­ rience) and similar limitations in the script and technical departments (partly due to the need to meet regional expectations for Queensland personnel involvement and fulfil requirements under the state’s Revolving Film Fund) virtually guaranteed a fulsomely negative critical reception in Australia, as well as elsewhere.3 This cannot be discounted as a factor in the fate of the programme, especially when serial programming needs to build audience by word of mouth and peer influence. Such protocols irresistibly attracted the wrath of critics. Dubbed “Stupidity Beach”, “Paradise Lost”, “Suffering Paradise” and similar sobriquets, some critics, like Robin Oliver in The Sydney Morning Her­ ald6, adopted something of a personal crusade against C I N E M A P A P E R S • MARCH 1995


it. Those few defences mounted for it centred on the development opportunities it offered for the fledg­ ling Queensland industry and on the cost efficiencies for which it set new benchmarks. Adrien Stewart7 allows that the “virtues of Paradise Beach are mostly industrial”. The rate of completion - five episodes a week - made production the fastest in the country, while it also gave many break-in opportunities to aspiring Queenslanders. One of the programme’s assistant producers, Jo Porter8, also argued that the technical ineptitude of the first series was largely over­ come in the second, a point not pursued by the critical establishment. In some ways, the unprecedentedly hostile criti­ cal reaction was misplaced, as the cost structure and schedule slots (both locally and overseas) for Paradise Beach suggest the pertinent comparisons should be with daytime soap opera, as Peter Schembri and Jackie Malone9 have argued. However, such a reac­ tion was to some extent invited by Village raising high expectations for the product: it was to be a cross between Bayw atch, Beverly Hills 90210 and local product like N eighbours (all of them prime-time, higher-budget and/or established long -term suc­

different episodes, which would never be permitted in U.S. drama.10The only way the programme’s U.S. distributors saw for such difficulties to be over­ come would be for U.S. scriptwriters to have been imported to oversee and generate storylining and dia­ logue. Such importation, of course, would have defeated the objective of qualifying Paradise Beach for the Australian drama quota. Accent certainly could not be discounted as an obstacle. The more significant question, however, was of non-translatable slang or argot. Although experienced executive producer Nick McMahon per­ sonally oversighted the removal of specific Australianisms from the script, it still featured exam­ ples like “go to uni/university” instead of “college” or “school”. More significant (with voice coaches on set to enhance articulation), the effort to speak for international audiences meant that actors spoke slowly and this contributed to the staginess and “frontality” of performance. The distribution principals’ comments on writ­ ing and technical style also went to fundamental issues of televisual culture.11 On the one hand, the storyliners tended to “burn through story” much more quickly than in U.S. soaps. Events and emo­ tional reactions that could be milked far more are tossed off in off-camera asides, for example. Like much Australian audio-visual culture, the programme consistently dedramatized action. Dramatic angles and opportunities occur off camera for cultural

benchmark for audience acceptance. The Australian long-form successes in the U.S. have not been liveaction adult or teen drama. Rather, they have been sci-tech (B ey on d 2000) and children’s animation (Blinky Bill); the first, a format Beyond built up as an exploitable international format, the other a triedand-tested children’s formula from a highly-credentialled Yoram Gross Studios. This underscores the virtual impossibility of seeing for­ eign long-form drama on U.S. broadcast television. Soap opera, more than any other format, must be allowed to build an audience through stable sched­ uling and committed marketing, for their “dispersed narrative structure and incremental characterization make of them an acquired taste”13, all the more when they are foreign. ©

NOTE: This article is an amended extract from a forthcoming book, Away from Home: Australian Television and International Mediascapes (Cambridge University Press). 1 Neil Shoebridge, “Village Goes Global with Low-risk T V ”, Business Review W eekly, 7 May 1993, pp. 10-11. 2 Brian Lowry, “Producers Caught between Regs, Studios”,

PARADISE BEACH cesses). Given the traditions of high-quality prime­ time serial drama produced in Australia, and the lack of daytime and access prime-time traditions of soap opera, together with these invited comparisons, Par­ adise Beach was an easy, if probably misplaced, target. Other factors intervened against the serial. The U.S. market for pre-prime-time soaps has declined considerably. There hasn’t been a successful launch of a new soap opera in many years in the U.S., since The Bold and the Beautiful, and even this pro­ gramme (along with Santa Barbara) has fared better in Australia and Europe than in the U.S. It seems that the fragmented nature of the marketplace and the shortened attention span fostered by multi-channel viewing works against building a traditional soap opera following. In 1994, there is no stripped soap in the U.S. that runs after 3 pm. As well, a crucial ancillary marketing outlet, the soap-opera press (Soap Opera W eekly, Soap Opera Digest and Soap Opera are the three main magazines), did not promote the programme. Decisions on the ‘rightness’, the cultural relevance, of Paradise Beach probably defeated the expectation that the specialist press would jump at the opportunity to get behind one of the very few new soaps in the market in several years. There was a similar absence of promotion in teen magazines like Sixteen, Tiger Beat, and Sassy, which points to its uncertain address to its prime audience. By positioning itself so closely to successful teenage prime-time soaps, the programme was under pres­ sure to capture especially ephemeral teenage argot and fashion. The serial was considered unnecessar­ ily chaste - even kissing was rare; plot scenarios were too ‘square’, ‘cheesy’, and old-fashioned; charac­ ters can be noticed wearing the same clothes in C I N E M A P A P E R S • MARCH 1995

reasons as much to avoid expensive effects or com­ plicated set-ups. Therefore, narrative pacing was unfamiliar: the storylining was too fast (the slowness of U.S. soaps is so that audiences can miss episodes and not miss story), but the emotional temperature was too low. Clearly, the programme’s ‘look’ - its background texture and mise-en-scene - was designed to com­ pensate for eviscerated storyline and wooden performance. This led to the emphasis on what’s referred to as the “MTV moment”12: the lyrical setpiece, slow-motion and/or panorama sequences of sleek bodies set against the ‘unique combinations’ of beach, rainforest or high-rise skylines. Paradise Beach set ‘a new high-water mark’ for location use in lowbudget soaps. It achieved twenty per cent exteriors per episode, a proportion unmatched in the world. The cost of stripped soap in Los Angeles, according to McNamara, is seven times that of Paradise Beach without the locations. The programme continues a long tradition of location exploitation in attempting to position Australian audio-visual product interna­ tionally; the Gold Coast tourist ‘Mecca’ backdrop was central to its marketing concept. The failure of Paradise Beach suggests that, at least in terms of acceptance of foreign long-form drama in U.S. broadcast television, the English language is not necessarily an advantage; Spanish language soaps have more success in cable. This is because the point of comparison will always be to U.S. broadcast tele­ vision - in the soap format, it seems, an absolute

Variety, August 1993. 3 James McNamara (Chief Executive Officer and President, New World Entertainment), Thea Diserio (Senior VicePresident, New World International), and Phil Oldham (Executive Vice-President, Genesis Entertainment) inter­ viewed by Stuart Cunningham, New York, March 1994. 4 Executive producer Nick M cM ahon, quoted in Shoebridge, op. cit. 3 For a dirisively dismissive New Zealand account, see Diana Wichtel, “Ain’t it a Beach”, Listener, 28 August 1993, p . 71. 6 Robin Oliver, “Suffering Paradise”, in “The Guide”, The Sydney M orning H erald , 31 May 1 9 9 3 , p. 15s, and 9 August 1993, p. 15s. 7 Adrien Stewart, “Know Your Product: Paradise Beach”, Exposure, No. 1, January 1994, pp. 6-7. 8 Quoted in Stewart, op. cit. 9 Peter Schembri and Jackie M alone, “Paradise Beach Reconsidered”, C in em a Papers, No. 9 7 -8 , December 1993, pp. 30-3. 10 McNamara et al, 1994. 11 McNamara et al, 1994. 12 Rachel Shohet, “Life’s a Beach in Paradise, Sunday Mail Magazine, 16 May 1993. 13 Stephen Crofts, “Global Neighbours?”, in Robert C. Allen (ed.), As the World Tunes: Soap Opera Worldwide, Chapel Hill, University of North Carolina Press, 1994.

_ L iz J a c k





Searchin I f success does rub off, then the decision to open the third Brisbane International Film Festival with the Australian hit M uriels Wedding (P. J. Hogan) was an inspired one. The attention the Queensland premiere attracted may well have played a significant part in boosting audiences for the Brisbane Festival, ultimately contributing to its claimed success. David Stratton described the opening night as the best he’s been to in 30 years. In fact, almost before it had begun, the Festival was being showered with accolades —a sign of success, surely? Queensland’s daily newspaper, The Courier-Mail, has been a consistent supporter of the Festival, and an editorial a few days before the gala opening made it clear how this particular cultural institution positioned the Festival. The link between the bur­ geoning film industry in Q ueensland and the Festival was assumed. Is this, then, a measure of its success? Is this the rôle of a film festival in Brisbane? The editorial didn’t actually mention the word “cul­ ture”, suggesting instead that “Brisbane’s artistic community is large and growing”. It also explained that “Brisbane is not only beer and skittles, frolics and footy” - but that’s The Courier-Mail. It seemed to be trying to articulate the emergence of a film culture in Brisbane, with the Festival playing a significant rôle. Certainly, the $110,000 in support from the Queensland Government would seem to suggest that the Festival plays a significant rôle indeed - at least, in the eyes of influential state gov­ ernment policy-makers. When was the last time you met a politician who didn’t want to be associated with success? Perhaps the idea of success is bound up in the Festival itself as an organization. If so, how is it dif­ ferent from other festivals? The first person I bumped into while in this particular frame of mind was a young woman working in the Festival nerve centre - a small office above the Regent Showcase Cinema in central Brisbane. I met her in a lift the day before the official opening and she seemed con­ fident: “W e’ve moved from chaos into numbers.” Along the corridor in artistic director Anne Démy-Geroe’s office, the electronic chirping of tele­ phones was chaotic. And they keep ringing: one print is buckled and can’t be shown; another has subtitles too high on the screen; where can you get an NTSC Betacam dub done? Fred Schepisi wants to change his schedule! So is this usual? DémyGeroe seemed amazingly calm: “Every year you have ghastly things happening, like prints that don’t arrive on time. This year, there’s less of that than in the past. But it’s a nightmare logistically.” Logistics. Catching most of the 66 films offered during the nine-day Festival was a big task - even


for film buffs - but BIFF offered all of us a chance to do just that by focusing the action on just one screen this year - Hoyts’ Regent Showcase Cinema in the central city. Positives and negatives aside, it enabled access to around 50 features and an impres­ sive array of docos and shorts - 2 7 Australian premieres in all. As in previous years, the State Library Theatrette on Brisbane’s South Bank was the venue for a range of Festival-related cultural activities like forums on the producer-director rela­ tionship, the documentary and the Western, and multifarious film events including the annual Qld New Filmmakers Awards. But that question again: Was it a success? In terms of paying customers, BIFF 94 attracted a little more than 13,000. Access to specific finan­ cial details are limited because BIFF is a trading company, but the turnover in 1994 was around $ 5 0 0 ,0 0 0 - a similar amount to previous years. O f this, the Q ueensland government and the AFC continue to be major con­ tributors, with the former allocating BIFF $ 2 1 0 ,0 0 0 for the 1994-95 financial year. About half of that amount was used in 1994. The rest is being chan­ nelled into the 1995 Festival. Some argue that, for a city the size of Brisbane, attendance is on the low side - certainly well below that of Sydney and Melbourne. Vancouver, a city of comparable size to Brisbane, attracted around 1 0 0 ,0 0 0 to its 199 4 Festival, and even New Zealand can pull around 50,000. But, as general manager Gary Ellis explains, BIFF is just three years old and hardly likely to be in the same league of the more-estab­ lished festivals. Critics suggest that expenditure of around half a million dollars for 13,000 cinemagoers is hard to justify in terms of cultural outcomes. Maybe so, but BIFF is new and perhaps such criti­ cism is a little premature. So, how do you measure the success of an event like BIFF? Conventional economic indicators would suggest it (a) has potential; (b) is a modest suc­

cess; or perhaps (c) is an abject failure, depend­ ing, of course, on your point of view. But as a cultural institution - as I suggest a film festival is what criteria might we use to chart its progress through the shifting cultural climate in Queensland? What influence does government support (some see it as intervention) have on this cultural resource? In answer to the latter question, long-time film buff Bruce Simpson is adamant: none! And Simp­ son, who is owner-operator of Brisbane’s Classic Cinema, an alternative, arthouse film venue, has been around the industry long enough to offer an educated assessment. If there has been any influ­ ence exerted in selecting Festival films over the years, Simpson suggests the Australian Film Com­ mission has been more active here, linked to its early support for the fledgling Festival ($40,000 in 1992 and 1993). As for the Queensland Government’s role, he has nothing but praise: The important thing is that the Festival would never have got off the ground without the sup­ port of Queensland Premier Wayne Goss. He’ s been very supportive of the Festival and the film industry here. You only have to look at what’s happening at the Warner Roadshow Studios [on the Gold Coast] to see that.

Fred Schepisi: "I'm a great believer in film festivals [...] It's good for the filmmaking community to be exposed to great films." Another person who deserves recognition is [form er Film Q ueensland ch ief executive] Richard Stewart, w ho’s now head of the New Zealand Film Commission. As to its status as a success or otherwise, Bruce Simpson is in no doubt: BIFF 94 was only the third - it’s still a baby. I would have been very disappointed if it hadn’t succeeded. Any hiccups can be put down to teething problems. The Festival this year was a success and it was seen to be a success. Film critic Jonathon Dawson probably doesn’t agree. W riting about the rise o f the Brisbane International Film Festival in a recent edition of Culture an d Policy, he suggests that the event has yet to resolve a key problem : reco n cilin g the demands of film culture with governmental self­ prom otion . But he suggests this is n o t a new C I N E M A P A P E R S • MA RCH 1995

• g « f 5 ^ # - d j o w a n d g e t up to 2 0 % d is c o u n t


I wish to subscribe for 6 issues at 10% o ff! $37.50 (normally $41.70)






s 5

12 issues at 15% o ff! $70.00 (normally $83.40) 18 issues at 20% o ff! $100.00 (normally $125.10)

s ® B a ck issues: $6.00 each

Total no. of issues:

Total Cost $


CTJ •—

N a m e ................................................................................................... T it le ...................................................................................................... C om pan y............................................................................................. A d d re s s ....................... ....................................................................... C o u n try ...............................................Post C o d e ............................ Telephone (H )...................................(W ) ........................................ Enclosed is my cheque fo r $ ........................................................ or please debit my D B a n k c a rd □ M a sterca rd D V is a c a rd Card N o................................................................................................ Expiry D a te ......................................................................................... Signature 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

cc o £

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

' Please list issue Nos required:

uccess Local film culture and the Brisbane International Film Festival phenomenon, with festivals historically serving con­ trary purposes. Growing out of concerns over film censorship in the UK in the 1920s, film societies recognized very early the cultural role of film. Dawson suggests it was around this time that the concept of “film as culture” emerged, setting the stage for the birth of the international film festival as we know it. Stu­ art Cunningham and William D. Routt, writing in Ina Bertrand’s C inem a in A ustralia: A D ocu m en ­ tary History, suggest that it was not until the 1950s in A ustralia th at this notion of “film cu ltu re” emerged, encompassing a range of activities like film festivals, societies, journals, etc. Dawson argues persuasively that mod­ ern festivals retain the “mark of the avant garde”, as market segmentation enabled identification of an arthouse cinema audi­ ence. And he takes issue with the title of the Festival in Brisbane, claiming (quite co r­ rectly) that Brisbane has indeed staged many festivals over the years, with the first in 1966. So calling this upstart the “Third Brisbane International Film Festival” is really a bit much. Dawson points out, too, that there have been several government-sponsored filmrelated events in the past. Have these established a particular m o d u s o p era n d i implicating the Queensland government? Could this kind of government support be equated with success, then? Dawson sees it in more sinister terms. The first BIFF, in August 1992, opened with the Australian premiere of L eth a l W eapon 3 (Richard D onner), which, in Dawson’s words, “seemed to reflect the eclectic, yet commercial orientation of the Festival”. But the 89 hours of films offered that year also included Strictly Ballroom (Baz Luhrmann), which, like M u riel’s W edding, was a boxoffice success, at least, and, like Wedding, it was Australian. But Dawson wasn’t con­ vinced. He argues that the same kind of “ad hoc programming” re-emerged in 1993 with the Festival promoted “as a tourist event rather than a cultural event”. It attracted just over 13,000 paying customers with a bud­ get of around $500,000.

BIFF is not a success in Dawson’s eyes because, he argues, film groups like Women in Film and Tele­ vision, Brisbane Independent Film m akers and Queensland Cinematheque are disenfranchized by a government notion of what constitutes film cul­ ture. He accuses BIFF of existing to showcase “pet projects of the government and to promote self-serv­ ing visions of the élite arts community”, placing severe limits on the contribution that the Festival might make in consolidating local film industries. Dawson’s critique closes with his doubting the effec­ tiveness of BIFF to act as a catalyst for Queensland filmmaking to join the international stage. He con­ cludes: “Rather, the cultural drinkers at the bar seem

by Michael Meadows

C I N E M A P A P E R S • MA RCH 1995

condemned to a diet of foreign cocktails rather than local fine wine.” So for Jonathan Dawson, then, BIFF is definitely not a success. Back inside the Regent Showcase Cinema, with award-winning director Fred Schepisi about to engage a packed house with his industry observa­ tions (albeit at least once referring to w om en’s advancement in the industry as open to challenge) and anecdotes, it is doubtful whether these extra­ neous issues meant a lot. The only indication of uncertainty at the ’94 Festival surfaced in a few ner­ vous film introd uctions w hich left out the “International” part of the Festival’s name. I don’t think many people noticed or cared that much.










our work and the more individual it makes us. It’s certainly the case for me and certainly the case for everyone who works with me who’ve always been interested in films. I can’t speak highly enough of the value of film festivals. So it seems that film festivals might best be under­ stood as being different things to different people. And speaking of difference, Bruce Simpson is in no doubt that Brisbane audiences are different: “Very much so. Years ago, Brisbane had few arthouse movies and that’s changing. BIFF is very good for Brisbane.” Film w riter with the A u stralian F in a n c ia l Review, Peter Crayford, agrees:

They were there to see movies - some for the first and only time this year - and all that really seemed to matter was trying to decide what to see next! Perhaps the idea of success is bound up in the Festival’s achievements. Which audiences does it serve, for example? Is it a “Brisbane” festival? If so, how is it different from other festivals? The answer to this question might resolve the problem of mea­ suring success once and for all. Queensland documentary filmmaker Pat Laughren had just introduced his new production at the State Library Theatrette, R ed T ed an d the G reat Depression. I’d just heard him say that “history is made in the present”. Was this the answer I’d been searching for? I asked him to elaborate: The Festival is important, particularly in Queens­ land, where film production has been thought of as coming out of the Studios. But the actual range is much broader. Festivals are about engaging audiences, and BIFF holds up that possibility. We need a strong film culture to develop in Brisbane. The social goods far outweigh the monetary return in the short term. Years ago, the National Film Theatre of Australia was the only place which offered alternatives. Festivals open your mind to the possibilities. It’s about techniques, social aspects, all aspects - a kind of melting pot, diversity. Diversity. This was getting closer. It was time to enlist the heavies. Fred Schepisi, the recipient of the 1994 Chauvel Award for his contribution to Australian feature filmmaking, should know the answer. In accepting his award, Schepisi acknowledged the part that “alternative” cinema (continental films) in the 1950s had played in influencing his filmmaking: I developed an interest in film festivals because they were the only place, apart from a couple of cinemas in the city, where you could get to see those kinds of films and see the films made by those filmmakers of the past. I’m a great believer in film festivals and I think it’s really exciting that Brisbane is doing the same thing now. I think it’s good for the community to be exposed to great films to help them appreciate what they mean. It’s good for the filmmaking community to be exposed to great films. And the more films from more different places you see, the more it informs


Every place is different, every community responds differently, but here you get a feeling that people are open, and they’re open to a great many diverse selections that are made. I think they’re genuinely enthusiastic. I think there’s an enormous number of visitors who come to Bris­ bane to the Festival. I’m very surprised by how many come from the Australian film community, in particular. Here there’s a sense of showcase as well as serious filmgoing and I like that. David Stratton, who may have a vested interest in being one of the Festival’s two programming con­ sultants, nevertheless goes along with this too: There’s a great deal of enthusiasm. They [the Fes­ tival organizers] seem to go to so much trouble. The opening night for M u riel’s W edding, for instance: I thought they took so much trouble over little details. What about suggestions that BIFF is a promotional arm for the Queensland government? I think that’s a little bit of sour grapes. I can’t see that it’s being over pushed at all. The support the Queensland government gives to the Festival is astonishingly good. I supported the Festival from the start when they asked me if I would give some advice on programming, because this could be a genuine alternative to Sydney and Melbourne Festivals. But it’s still got some way to go - consensus seems to be that no Festival gets established in under five years. And Brisbane audiences? I’ve heard people say that Brisbane audiences are not as tuned in to festival experience and I think that’s probably true because I’ve noticed that they respond in slightly different ways to the films. In Sydney and Melbourne, they automatically clap - and if they don’t clap, they boo. Here, some­ times they don’t, but it doesn’t mean they don’t like the film, it’s just that they’re not used to this idea of clapping a film. It’s a different approach, but it’s a genuine approach.

Hoove, cmnunier lacior, iviuriei s vveaamgj, Lynda House (producer, Muriel's Wedding) and Michael Lake ( Warner Roadshow Movie World Studios).

Below: Opening night party at Brisbane International Film Festival

The rôle of a film festival, specifically, this film Fes­ tival? I think the great thing is that people can come in and see things. Obviously the audiences are of mixed ages and backgrounds just looking for something a bit unusual. The rôle of the Festival is to be a connection, a link, between filmmakers and an audience. I think that’s what’s happening here in Brisbane. Like Fred Schepisi, filmmaker Charles Chauvel cut C I N E M A P A P E R S • MARCH 1995

his teeth on the “continental films’ on offer in selected Sydney cinemas like the Minerva at Kings Cross. And Susan Chauvel-Nelson, who accom­ panied her father on many such visits, suggests another way in which we might measure the suc­ cess of film festivals: developing the audiences’ analytical skills. She recalls going to the movies with her father when she was a girl. She suggests the influence of alternative films on audiences is sig­ nificant: One night in Toowoomba recently I couldn’t sleep and I switched on the ABC to one of those late-night talkback things. There were quite ordi­ nary people ringing in, giving their opinions about films. And they were quite considered opin­ ions. It was really intriguing to see how people were really thinking about the films they went to today and their meaning. And they were quite quick to criticize anything they thought was not up to scratch. It was very interesting. They were not just talking about a night out at the movies. They were far more analytical. BIFF’s Gary Ellis is in no doubt as to. the multifar­ ious rôles of a film festival like BIFF - and the nature of Brisbane audiences:

Top left and above: Chauvel Award-winner Fred Schepisi.

Below: Closing night with Spider & Rose'. Simon Bossel (actor), Lyn McCarthy (producer), Graeme Tubbenhauer (producer), Bill Bennett (writer-director) and Jennifer Cluff (actor).

Bottom: Opening night with Muriel's Wedding. Bill Hunter (actor), Lynda Flouse (producer), Margaret Pomeranz (The Movie Shovd\ and Toni Collette (actor).

There’s no point in us trying to copy Sydney or M elbourne or Canberra. Brisbane audiences are different. They have their own way of life. Brisbane people are very different to people any­ where else in the world, I think. How are they different? Audiences here have their own energy, their own life. It’s taken us three years to understand our audience better, but it’s starting to happen. This year we really made a conscious effort to look at the Australian product and I think we’ve done well. Our opening and closing nights are both Australian films. We premiered Traps [Pauline Chan], which was a major coup for us. Also, doc­ umentary is something we’ve done a lot of good work in this year. And Festival criticism? Is it a state government pro­ motion? Possibly in the first year of the Festival it did becom e a sem i-prom otional vehicle for the government to try to accentuate its rôle in the film industry, but the film industry has developed of its own accord and the Film Festival itself is evolving. The Festival has to develop, has to evolve on its own course and it has to provide what the people want to go and see. We can’t impose a Film Festival and say, Tou will see these films and you will enjoy these films because we’ve decided what’s best for you.’ We spent a lot of time going through that programme. Anne [Démy-Geroe] has done a fantastic job this year getting the right blend there. And BIFF’s rôle in all this? What we’re trying to do is to showcase the best films from around the world and bring those film­ makers here. There’s so many new filmmakers coming through. There’s a lot of energy, there’s a lot of enthusiasm and I think those filmmakers need exposure to international films and interna­ tional filmmakers, including Australian filmmakers, so that they can see that it is achievable, that these

C I N E M A P A P E R S • MARCH 1995

people are real. People can come along and see Fred Schepisi and say he’s not this mythical crea­ ture who operates out of New York. He’s a real flesh and blood person, and I can do this. The response we have from m ost o f our guests is they’re really excited by the freshness of Brisbane audiences. There’s no inhibitions about going up and chatting to people, and that’s some­ thing that’s probably very unique to Brisbane. So, then, how do you measure success? Too many people try to do it in dollar terms, and I don’t think you can. I firmly believe that young filmmakers who come along to the Festival this year, because they’ve had the benefit of seeing Rhinoskin or seeing Fred and having a chat to him after seeing the film tonight, in five years’ time they’re going to be producing fantastic films. I think that can be directly attributed to what’s happening here now. What sort of impact on Brisbane film culture is BIFF likely to have? The local arthouse cinemas - the Schonell and the Classic - have done a fantastic job over the past few years, and we’ve been able to pick up on a lot of the business that they’ve generated. They’ve cultivated certain audiences who have a lot of common ground with us, so we certainly acknowledge the rôle that those cinemas have had. I think they’d say that we’ve been able to do a lot for them, as well. And mainstream cinemas? The local cinemas are a bit reluctant to stick their necks out too far. And the same with distributors - it’s too expensive to do it up here in Brisbane, so they use us as a gauge and watch the response the film generates and they’ll operate on that word of mouth. This year, for the first time, we have just about all of the major Australian distributors actu­ ally come to the Festival. They’ve now come to appreciate and realize that the Brisbane Interna­ tional Film Festival is a permanent event - a high-profile, high-quality event. They’re seeing now that what we can provide is a great show­ case opportunity for them and also a great networking opportunity. W e’re riding pretty high on that. From all this, it seems reasonable to suggest that film festivals - and the Brisbane International Film Festival in particular - can claim to be important cultural resources, which mean many different things to many different people. Such festivals serve multiple rôles spanning entertainment, local exhi­ bition and distribution, and policy-making, and are part of the process linking film industry workers with all of these. Certainly, significant government and non-gov­ ernm ent influences are part of this cultural environment, but perhaps the most worthwhile products of such an alliance are the possibilities which emerge. If BIFF is the kind of multi-purpose event being suggested here, then it plays an impor­ tant cultural rôle in shaping not only the nature of the film industry in Queensland, but also how we define our own culture in relation to others and our place within it. ®


1995 sees the arrival of a new player in Post Production’s First Division. Because Frame, Set and Match have just installed the most advanced telecine in the world. The amazing URSA Gold. Plus, we've also installed one of Australia's most talented and experienced colourists to run it. Warren Lynch joins us in February. Our URSA Gold comes equipped with the brilliant Da Vinci Renaissance colourgrader.

So you’ll get the cleanest, sharpest images and a palette range ol' Leonardo himself would marvel at. With these new arrivals we’re sure you’ ll find Frame, Set and Match is more than a match for the big three. 0 \







PH: ( 0 2) 9 5 4 0 9 0 4. FAX:

( 0 2)

P T Y. L T D . 9 5 4 9 0 1 7.


All that Glisters is not Gold... D om inic Case talks w ith industry h eav ies a b o u t the startlin g n ew Ursa G old . B riefer lo o k s a t th e S u pervisor P rojection Video D isplay E n h an cer; M etro m ed ia T echn ologies, the em c P rim etim e O n lin e U pgrade a n d th e ED I-Tracker. hakespeare probably made his “All that glis­ ters” comment before ever seeing the latest Ursa Gold telecine from Rank - time travel is not listed as one of its many new features, although it can run backwards - but his comment warns us not to be dazzled by shiny new equipment alone. An item in AAV’s newsletter, AAV Online, suggests that it is the telecine colourist who is often the forgotten component - that the Ursa telecine is really only as good as its colourist. Running a telecine has never been an easy job to classify. Clearly, as the technology has progressed, so the term “operator” has become inadequate. In other lives, a colourist is the tinting spe­ cialist in a hair salon; but then a grader works on the roads. Warren Lynch, who has worked as a DOP in between spells at the controls of Apocalypse’s Ursa, suggests “telecinematographer”, which begs my question for this story: What is the role of that person? How has their work developed, and how do they use their technology to con­ tribute to the final “lo o k ” of a production? I spoke with Jeff Raphael at Sydney’s Videolab, and with Stanley Lopuszanski at AAV in Melbourne, as well as Warren Lynch at Apocalypse Sydney. As with most video equipment, there is always a competition to get the latest and best. Currently, the talk is of Ursa Gold. Videolab is getting it, and AAV and Apocalypse are upgrading their Ursas to Gold equivalents. What is the Ursa Gold, and why is it better? According to all three colourists, a fully-equipped telecine - be it a new Ursa Gold, or a standard Ursa upgraded Rank Areas colour corrector used with with the latest features - gives the the Ursa Gold at Apocalypse was capa­ colourist more power than ever to ble of six-channel secondary colour improve the image that reaches the correction. It was possible to take any screen. The Gold offers 4-4-4 digital colour and twist it around to any other colour (see p. 34) for all its image pro­ colour - blues can become green with­ cessing. Facilities such as custom curves, out affecting the other tones in the power windows and dynamic graduated image. However, the effect is over the corrections, available with secondary entire frame. Using other systems like colour correctors such as the Da Vinci the Copernicus (at Omnicon) or the Renaissance, exploit this extra preci­ DaVinci Renaissance, it was possible to sion, and bring many features into the colour grade just part of a frame. Stan telecine suite that were previously only Lopuszanski: possible in on-line editing. Warren Lynch explained that the W ith the Renaissance, we have


"You can fix a lot more in telecine now - putting in patches of blue sky between the trees, just to give it a sunnier look."

C I N E M A P A P E R S • MA RCH 1995

Power Windows and you can almost relight the shot. We’re using it every day now, just to trim up the lighting a little bit; put a cutter in here, and a little bit there, warm up one section. You can track it dynamically (for example, to darken a window in a panning shot). All the graders here find themselves using Power Win­ dows at nearly every session. You can fix a lot more in telecine now putting in patches of blue sky between the trees, just to give it a sunnier look. I’m not saying we can replace Harry or Henry, but we cer­ tainly are doing a lot of fixups in telecine. Not all telecinematography is so hightech. Stan: We’re forever developing and mod­ ifying the machine to make it more user-friendly. Just this morning we were using some filtration on the Ursa, and we’ve modified the cowl­ ing around the bottom near the

mirror to accept a standard 4 x 4 fil­ ter. We use nets, diffusion filters and so on. A lot of the time clients will bring their own in - either to ‘grunge up’ or to soften the image. Do cinematographers get the same effect as if they’d used the filter on the camera? It gives them the option not to shoot with a filter. Then they’ve lost it for ever if it doesn’t work. However, Jeff Raphael pointed out one catch to this technique: Sometimes people put filtering on the telecine - frost or fog or a bit of gladwrap. T h a t’s fine if they’re transferring print. It works as it would on the camera: that is, the whites spread into the black. But on neg it works the other way around: the blacks fog into the white. Some­ times the effect is similar, sometimes it is quite different. Jeff was a bit cautious about the use of filters on the camera:



Most times if they [the DOPs] vary from normal, it turns out that it would be better if they hadn’t. Often I have to remove the effect of filter­ ing. Often it’s overdone, so I have to take some of it out, if it’s a colour fil­ ter they put on: say a double 85. But on a picture screen, the eye needs to believe that the whites are white, and the blacks are black. And if they aren’t, the eye still wants to make it white. So I’ve got to take some of it out, and then I don’t have the same range of control left, and you don’t have the same range of colour left. It’s like: if you want to make mar­ garine look yellow, you don’t put it on a timber table with brown toast and light it with yellow light. Some­ times the answer is to take that colour out, and light it with con­ trasting light. So, if you’re shooting for a TV finish, I have all the colour control that’s needed. It’s the same with fog filters. Sometimes they’re overdone. I usually think a little less is better than a little more. Warren summed up the position: It’s getting to the point where, if you can shoot it nicely on the day, in the camera, without too many effects, then you can bring it back to telecine and make it look just how you want it. Arguments have always raged over the difference between transferring directly from negative, or from a positive print. In the case of rushes, the apparent econ­ omy of bypassing work prints completely, and transferring negative to tape prior to digitizing for a non-lin­ ear edit, has eclipsed any argument about the image quality of either method. But it seems to be producing an expectation among filmmakers that the neg-to-tape look is the “correct” one, because they see it first. Jeff: If you show a client a reasonably good neg rushes transfer, then show them something off a print later on that looks a bit different, they already have a pre-conceived idea of what it should look like. Neg usually shows you less con­ trast, more gradual gradation, more colour separation. That’s good in some cases, but often there’s not much colour in real life. So, to look more like real life, print is better. But that’s my personal preference. Some­ times it works better off neg, sometimes print is better. Stan expanded on this point: My personal feeling is that neg can be very nice, but there’s sometimes too much information. The focus is drawn away from the subject. When a print is made, the focus is drawn more to the subject. Pos has a more


Argum ents have always raged over the difference between transfer­ ring directly from negative, or from a positive print. filmic look to it. When I look at videotape, for example, it’s just too crisp - there’s too much going on. I think neg has something of that look about it. But there are some things that neg suits: pack shots, for exam­ ple, and cars can look fantastically glossy. There’s a process of learning to see. People say, ‘Let’s just put the neg up before we go to the pos.’ And, of course, they say, ‘Wow! that looks great. There’s so much detail.’ Then they look at the pos and say, ‘Oh! it’s a bit dark.’ Well, of course, that’s because it’s been lit dark. So we go around with that a little bit, but we often find that eventually we go back to the pos. There’s a process of learn­ ing to see, and to know exactly what

you want it to look like - although in 16mm we nearly always end up on neg.

ple are using less print. Five years ago it was 90 per cent print, now it’s probably 95 per cent negative.

Jeff Raphael explained another feature of the Da Vinci colour corrector:

I asked about low-contrast prints, and found a surprising variety of opinions. Stan:

Traditionally, you have a logarithmic curve for each colour. Custom curves allows you to plot any curve - linear or even s-shaped. That means, for example, if you have some very ancient film, and the dyes have faded in different ratios, you can put in a gamma correction for each dye that’s suitable for the stock you’re looking at. Similarly, it can give you more of a ‘print’ look to negative, giving the compression in the blacks and the whites that you get when you print a negative, which you normally can’t get - not at both ends of the scale at the same time. I always feel myself that features and drama look better off print, so that could be a plus if you’re going to insist on transferring all that stuff off negative. It could give an appar­ ently more contrasty picture. We seem to be grading negative these days a lot different to, say, five years ago, with more contrast. We’re more likely to clip the whites and crush the blacks than we did. It’s because peo­

Yes, we do a lot of low -contrast prints. We get the lab to print them down a bit and actually make them darker. The Ursa pushes out a fair amount of light, so we can afford it. There’s nothing worse than putting up a print and finding you’ve lost your highlight detail. Jeff agrees but disagrees: Most feature work still comes prefer­ ably off low-con. The telecine will always work better off a low-con. Even before low-con was out, people were making lighter prints on normal contrast stock. I was clearing out Telecine 2 just recently and I actually found an old TCP print. It was the first time I’d seen one, because I was­ n’t at Videolab, I was at VTC, when they came out. It was one of the more closely-guarded secrets between Videolab and Colorfilm. The Gold will give you good results off a normal print, and the normal print has more saturated C I N E M A P A P E R S • MARCH 1995

colours. But if somebody asked me what sort of print to get, I’d say lowcon if I hadn’t seen the material, because I know I can always add con­ trast to it. I can’t take it out so easily. If I’ve seen the material, I might say normal contrast, because sometimes it works better. But that’s if they’re transferring print, which nowadays is the exception rather than the rule. And from Warren, still another answer: We get the odd bit of print, but mostly it’s neg. Then there’s features coming in through the Ursa for mas­ ters. Sometimes, we do those from the interneg, with all the opticals in it and so on. If people are prepared to take the neg out of the lab, then that’s quite a nice way, probably the nicest. The other way is interpos: it’s very nice as well, and all the grad­ ing is done. People tend not to get low con any more, but now with the Ursa I can get good quality from a release print, so low-con isn’t really needed any more. James Parsons [of Atlab] and I have actually been promoting inter­ pos. It tends to compress the whites and lift the blacks, and then on telecine I can expand the image out again. It comes up very clear and gives you a lot of range. It has a dif­ ferent look about it, but a really nice contrast. We have Woolworths com­ mercials on interpos at the moment - they’re done that way. I think I’m the only one who really enjoys it. The others don’t see what I’m seeing. It’s

a pos image, and the telecine is just idling. It doesn’t have to work at all, so there’s no noise. It retains things like whites. We did a comparison for Kodak that was printed both to answer print and to interpos. The original mater­ ial had highlights on screen that were 6 or 8 stops over-exposed, and blacks that were dead as a doornail. The interpos compressed the whites so I could control them and the telecine didn’t give that sort of electronic edg­ ing that you get. So, it’s basically a chemical process of compressing the picture before the telecine sees it. There was a feature we did Vacant Possession - shot on Super 16. Half of it was transferred off the 16mm interpos, the other half was opticals off the 35mm print. You wouldn’t be able to tell the differ­ ence. We had to tune up the old Stradivarius a bit, but they went really well together. Stan added: W e’ve had quite a bit of success on interpos. I did Muriel’s Wedding here - that was on interpos. What’s hap­ pening is that people won’t use a theatre print because it might be too contrasty, and they won’t pay the eight grand or whatever it costs to make a low-con print. We did a Canadian co-produc­ tion here some time ago, and it worked well, so, when Muriel’s Wed­ ding came up, we went straight to the interpos, and didn’t even look at the

print. We had [DOP] M artin McGrath come in, and the director, and we spent three days on it - with the panning and scanning as well. With the increased use of neg-to-tape for rushes transfers, and in the absence of film work prints, the role of telecine transfers in checking the rushes has become quite significant. As Stan put it: DOPs are turning up just for rushes, even at 7 o’clock in the morning. There’s a greater interest in telecine; it’s become the focal point of the industry. We have a bit of an advan­ tage here, having the lab downstairs. Being an ex film grader, I can wan­ der downstairs and look at it on the analyzer, and get a sort of ball-park feel for what would be happening on a print before it even gets to telecine. That’s even a help with the onelight situation. We find we are sitting pretty close to satisfy the needs of cinematographers with one-light transfers. We can sit down at the telecine and see what a piece of film looks like at what we call ‘base mem’, with everything set at unity. I some­ times prove it to them by putting the negative on the analyzer at the lab standard printing lights, and it’s the same. We’ll pull things down a little - there’s a more obvious change when the exposure changes. But if a DOP walks in and says how does it look, I can say, W ell, you’re half a stop over’, and he would usually say, Afes, I shot it half a stop over.’ So we’re running pretty close to

the standard line. But if there is a massive exposure change, then it’ll show up as being very obvious. Telecine is less forgiving - in fact, it’s not forgiving at all. The reality is that you’re compressing a huge amount of information into a very narrow bandwidth, so you have to compro­ mise a little bit. Jeff Raphael: We set up on the Kodak TAF, but then you have to set up the gains, etc., on the first piece of film. People want to see a good transfer. It does­ n’t take much inconsistency of exposure to make a vastly different look from the negative on telecine, particularly if they’re trying to put contrast in to make it look good. If you give them a flatter look to avoid clipping the whites or crushing the blacks, they say, ‘W hat have you done to my rushes?’ The fact is, you’ve had to give them a flat trans­ fer so they can literally have ‘one light’. There’s no way that I’ve thought of relating your corrections back to the cinematographer in terms of the camera exposure. But there are people who can expose consis­ tently enough, so you can boost the contrast and still give them a onelight transfer. But it can be done. The series we’re doing at the moment for Bearfire Films is called On the Dead Side. The rushes are a reasonably good contrast, and they’re very con-

em c P rim e tim e online upgrade - p ictu res and w ords to g e th e r Editing Machines Corporation, a member of the Dynatech Video Group, has announced a number of major enhancements to its digital non-linear on-line editing system, emc Primetime, in version 5.06. The new version incorporates on-line quality titling using Truetype™ fonts - familiar to Windows™ and Macintosh™ users, and representing an almost unlimited variety of type styles, with fully-transparent drop shadows. The titler is an integral part of the editing software, and can be accessed without leaving the on-line editor. Extra video effects possible with the new system include 3D, page turn and fisheye effects, emc is marketed in Australia by Quantum Pacific. C I N E M A P A P E R S • MA RC H 1 995



sistent. The cinematographer is Brian Breheny. I can set up on day 20 and use the same settings as I used on day 1. T hat’s unusual, but it’s really good. Warren Lynch: We have the doco fraternity who take it as it comes, but we try to opti­ mize the pictures a little, and that’s usually acceptable. Police Rescue and so on work well. But mainly with commercials, I’ve had DOPs come in and sit with me so it looks exactly like it’s designed to look when it’s finished. They emerge with their rep­ utation intact, and the agency’s got what it wants. I’ve been setting the machine up to Kodak specs, so I can put the TAF film in, and they can see the film as it’s meant to go over. It gives you a good basis. But then the rest of it you have to set up for the twists, and whatever might come into it from the lab or through different lenses and so on. The other thing is that we’ve had series come in before they start the shoot, and the DOP shoots a few tests - interior, exterior and so on and we grade them and store-those trims. So, when each shot comes up on the slate, we can choose that set­ ting for that shot. The DOP knows what he’s getting. The really high-end DOPs tend to turn out good work - the quality’s always there. Sometimes you’ll get a call to say: ‘It’s a double 85 filter, and a warm sunny afternoon look’, and that’s all you need to know. So what does the Ursa Gold have that adds to all this skill and experience? There are several features: usually the first one mentioned is the ‘Jumpfree’ facility, whereby vertical float is removed digitally. Rank claims that Jumpfree matches and often exceeds the stability of non-real-tim e pinregistered gates, and is quite stable enough for even complex matting and layering jobs. Then there is SilkScan, a means of smoothing out strobe in film and telecine pans. Because film only has 25 frames per second, and video scans 50 times, SilkScan interpolates between each alternate field and creates new intermediate positions. Warren Lynch also lists the new lenses used on Ursa Gold, the ‘High­ light K it’, which, he claimed, gives another stop in the darker areas of neg­ ative, as well as being sharper and clearer. Ursa Gold wall run as slow as 5 frames per second, whereas conven­ tional Ursas were limited to the range of 16 to 30 frames per second. Also, it runs in reverse. So: the machine or the operator?


Which is the one that makes the differ­ ence? A last word from each. Je ff Raphael: I think there’s a general realization that the Ursa look is not dramatically better than a good Mark III. Of course, in 16mm, it’s a lot better. Maybe I’ll contradict myself when we get the Ursa and see the differ­ ence. But clients are quite happy. It’s only imperfect film that needs a lot of these features. All that’s chang­ ing is that you’re getting more and more sophisticated grading controls. Ursa has less imperfections, so you can go further. Warren Lynch: Ursa was the biggest breakthrough. It’s entirely a digital machine which makes it a lot quieter, and the digital thing gives you secondary colour cor­ rection as well. It’s the first time in my career I’ve had a really lovely telecine to work with. I started out on telecine, then went away and did other things, but I came back seri­ ously when Ursa arrived. Stan Lopuszanski: Ursa Gold has some nice little options and things - and we can get a lot of those. But picture-wise it ends up in the hands of the guy sitting there, doesn’t it. NB: On 6 February, Warren Lynch joined Frame, Set & Match as senior colourist on its URSA Gold telecine.

Lightw orks puts Soundfirm in th e pictu re Australia's first Turbo Lightworks non-linear editing system has been delivered to Soundfirm, which has set the system up as a fully-portable, self-contained picture-editing package. The system is being used first on the set of Mighty Morphin Power Rangers, being shotin Sydney by Tengu Productions for 20th Century Fox. Turbo Lightworks offers a higherquality digitization rate of 30 minutes per Gigabyte, together with four channels of on-line quality audio, made possible by using 32-bit processing. Capacity is always a challenge with non-linear systems never more so than with Mighty Morphins, reputed to be shooting over half a million feet of negative. Soundfirm's Roger Savage explained that they have pushed the capacity of Lightworks up to a massive 81 Gigabytes. Nine drives, each carrying nine Gigabytes, are connected simultaneously. Apparently, this represents an upper limit, due to the DOS system's inability to separately address any more drives. However, an unlimited amount of additional storage is possible simply by exchanging drives. Mighty Morphin Power Rangers is following the American method of production, combining film rushes and non-linear editing. All okay takes

of negative from the three or more camera units are work-printed, and synced, then the work print is transferred to video by Videolab and subsequently digitized into Lightworks for rough assembly. Denise Wolfson at Atlab explained that this method gave more security against camera or negative problems and much faster checking of rushes than would be possible without the work-print stage - essential when such large footages are involved. Transfers are directly to NTSC video, as the fine cutting and mixing will all be carried out in the U.S. Roger Savage said that Soundfirm had gained experience with NTSC post-production on Fred Schepisi's productions I.Q. and Six Degrees of Separation, and had set up a complete NTSC editing environment for 20th Century Fox for Mighty Morphins, using the S-VHS tape format and underscanning monitors to check the exact film framing. Lightworks is adaptable to PAL or NTSC frame rates, simply by selecting the appropriate software module. Savage notes an increased amount of overseas production in Australia, and expects that Soundfirm's portable editing package will find a number of applications after the current production has finished. C I N E M A P A P E R S • MA RCH 1995

W E ’ RE N O T W H E R E W E W E R E


MOVED T O AN E X C I T I N G N E W L O C A T I O N . W E A L S O HAVE A N E W P H O N E NUMBER A N D FAX. T E L . 955 7300 F A X . 954 0 1 7 5 . N O W W I T H 5 S P A C I O U S CU TTIN G

R O O M S , F R A M E W O R K S IS N O T



P h o n e S te p h e n F. S m ith on o u r n e w n u m b e r, h e ’ ll be glad t o s h o w y o u a r o u n d .


S uite 4, 2 3 9 Pacific H ighway, N o r th Sydney 2 0 6 0 . Phone 9 55 7 3 0 0 Fax 9 5 4 0 1 7 5


Supervisor projection video display enhancer - big pictures One of the most apparent advances in video imaging in recent months has been in the quality of video-projection systems. Originally flat, smeary and unsharp screen images that had to be viewed from across the street for any sort of comfort, the latest generation of images are coming to look more and more like projected film, and less and less like a TV screen writ large. In many cases, these results are due to sophisticated “display enhancers” such as the Supervisor, seen at NAB and more recently at IBC, and dis­ tributed in Australia by Quinto Communications. The Supervisor elim­ inates the effects of visible line structure and interlace which, when seen on a large screen, can mar any production. Supervisor is more than ■a line-doubler: Snell and W ilcox fil­ tering technology, in the form of a nine-point spatio-temporal filter, really enhances the perceived definition of the display. The gaps between pixels are filled in by comparing not just with the previous line, but with pixels all around in the same field, and before and after as well. Supervisor supports a wide range of display devices, including HDTV monitors, computer-graphic projectors and video walls, and provides a full range of picture-processing controls.

Metromedia technologies bigger pictures Even the biggest projector - film or video - pales into insignificance when compared with the potential size of cinema hoardings produced by Metro­ media Technologies International, whose Australian division has recently moved from M elbourne to Logan, Queensland. According to M M T’s chief execu­ tive, Robin Rust: The visibility and impact of giant images has made icons of enduring stars like Clint Eastwood and Paul Newman. With the release of Batman R eturns, M ichael Keaton and Michelle Pfeiffer were featured in a massive 39 ft [12m] x 67 ft [21m] face which dominated New York City’s Times Square. The images are based on proprietary digital-imaging techniques combined with state-of-the-art computer-driven robotic-painting machines which pro­ duce full colour images. Robin: Acrylic paint is applied to pure white vinyl-coated fabric to make the fin­ ished product tough and durable - for up to five years even in the severest weather conditions. The Queensland production facility has


four drums, each of which paints sin­ gle sheets as big as 19.2 x 6.9 metres which can be combined to make larger images. The machines are colour bal­ anced against a reference standard before every run. A quick calculation tells me that one sheet of a hoarding is about half as big again as a complete print of a 35mm feature. Not just one frame 15,000 frames. These really are “big” pictures. Of course, promotion is a vital part of the filmmaking process

effects of over-cranking shots. Scenes filmed at, say, 30 frames per second, when projected at 24 fps, will show slower action - a trick used in B abe to control animal movements. How­ ever, because a conventional video split still runs at 25 fps, a video playback would not show the speed change. Sav­ age explained that in EDI-Assist, the image from the video split is fed straight to a JPEG card and stored dig­ itally. It can be recorded, and later replayed, at any chosen frame rate,

Analogue, digital, 4-2-2, 4-4-4: What it all means All video systems represent the image by a series of values, describing the colour at each point on the screen. In analogue systems, these image values are conveyed through the chain by a signal of varying voltage a higher voltage represents a brighter point. This signal, although easy to generate, has always been difficult to process as precisely as is needed, leading to compromises, distortion and some variability in the results. Digital systems represent the image values by actual numbers, as in a computer. A set of numbers describing an image can be manipulated through "look-up tables" and other computations to give exactly the results wanted by the equipment designers. As well, there is little or no distortion or variability in the digital chain. Although many machines have some digital components, the Rank Ursa was the first telecine to be completely digital right through from the scan detection to the output. / How precisely is the picture described? Colour video signals are encoded from the red, green and blue values into y, u and v components: y represents the brightness, while u and v describe the colour. The common standard for digital video describes the linear resolution of the image. The 4 in 4-2-2 represents 4 times over-sampling in the brightness signal, while the 2s indicate two times oversampling in the colour signals. Thus there are effectively only half as many pixels for colour information as there are for brightness. This compromise was possible because the human eye is less sensitive to colour resolution than it is to brightness resolution - or sharpness. However, as signal processing and digital effects have become more advanced, there has been a need for more precision, and so the 4-4-4 standard has come into being. As you might guess, this has twice the colour resolution of the 4-2-2 system, although in fact the 4s relate to the internally-used red, green and blue values, rather than the encoded y, u, and v output. and one that tends to be overlooked from the production perspective. But next time you look at your colour ink jet printer, look again. Think big.

EDI-Assist breaks down barriers EDI-Tracker is the non-linear sound editing system developed by the Soundworks company Electronic Dig­ ital Innovations. Now EDI has produced a spin-off from this technol­ ogy. Moving straight across from sound into picture, and from post­ production onto the studio floor, EDIAssist is a random-access video-assist system, providing camera crews with the benefits of non-linear picture technology in video-split shooting situations. According to Roger Savage, the system was developed for the Kennedy Miller production B abe, to allow the director [Chris Noonan] to see the

simply by typing in the correspond­ ing camera speed. Savage reports that both Noonan and DOP Andrew Lesnie were very satisfied with the results obtained using this. Further developments in EDIAssist have exploited the capabilities of computer digital-imaging systems. Any take can be reviewed immediately, with no time wasted for rewinding. Instant splits between live action and playback are possible, or split-screen scan be set up between a selected freeze frame from the previous shot, and the current live action. This can be useful for checking continuity of action, dialogue or wardrobe. The system is currently in use on M ighty M orphin P ow er Rangers, where its Chromakey facility is used to check colour separation on green-screen shots, and to preview foreground and background positions. This is a significant step forward.

Post-production has been revolution­ ized as a result of the advantages of random-access, fully-controllable dig­ ital imaging, but production methods have not been affected in quite the same way. Not yet, anyway! The intro­ duction of video-assist systems to film production has been, in my opinion, the single greatest change that has hap­ pened on set since sound and colour were introduced. But systems were always limited by the complexity of tape image control. Now post-pro­ duction thinking is being brought forward to the shoot, and digital power comes directly into contact with film. And an idea from the sound people finds an application with the camera department. Expect many more changes from this area.

NEW S EXTRA Avid technology honoured by Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences Avid Technology, Inc. has been awarded a 1994 “Scientific and Engi­ neering Achievement Award” from the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences for its Film Composer digi­ tal non-linear film editing system. The award, to be presented at a Beverly Hills ceremony on March 4, applauds Avid’s development and engineering achievements and recognizes the Avid Film Composer’s contributions to the motion picture industry. Curt Rawley, Avid’s president and CEO, said: This affirmation by the Academy of Motion Picture Television Arts and Sciences confirms the revolutionizing impact Film Composer has had on the art of film editing, and the level of respect this system has achieved among the entire film community. We are truly honoured to receive this prestigious award. Scientific and Technical Awards are bestowed upon developers who con­ tribute to the art and science of filmmaking through technologies or inventions that have proven value to the motion picture industry. Avid’s Film Composer, the first digital non­ linear editing system to provide digitizing, editing and playback of images at 24 frames-per-second, has revolutionized filmmaking among film directors, producers and editors around the world for feature films such as The Fugitive and True Lies. Avid’s latest industry accolade joins the company’s Emmy Awards earned previously from the Academy of Televi­ sion Arts & Sciences for engineering and development of non-linear editing sys­ tems for digital images and sounds. © C I N E M A P A P E R S • MA RC H 1995


2 0 Y ears service to the M otion P ictu re in du stry

Titling Specialists

P ty l t d

• 1 0 0 0 Typefaces on line • Extensive Proofing system • A ccep t IB M or M AC Files fo r discount • All fo rm a ts including anam orphic • Q uoting a pleasure

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

Phone: (02) 922 3144


15mm & 16mm NEGATIVE CL HING


Fax: (02) 957 5001

ETON ROAD LINDFIELD NSW 2070 TEL: (02) 416 2633 FAX: (02) 416 2554

1 9 9 5 S t K i lda F ilm F estival A p r il


a jo r

S urvey


21 - 25 A

u st r a l ia n



FINAL DRAFT for M acintosh $489.00 S h o r t F ilm s

SCRIPT THING M o vie M a s te r' for DOS

Astor Cinem a - 1 Chapel Street St Kilda. Programs available from St Kilda T ow n H a ll: Telephone (03) 536 1397

COLLABORATOR 'D ram atica' Plots Unlim ited CORKBOARD 'Scriptor' M o vie M a g ic

S e s s io n T im e s

Friday April 21 - 8.00pm Opening Night


Saturday April 22 -4.00pm , 8.00pm and 10.00pm Sunday 23 April -4.00pm , 6.00pm and 8.00pm




Monday 24 April - 6.00pm and 8.30pm Tuesday 25 April - 4.00pm and 8.00pm Awards Night T h e S t K ild a F ilm F e s tiv a l o f S h o rt F ilm s g ra te fu lly a c k n o w le d g e s th e assistan ce o f F ilm V ic to ria , A u s tra lia F ilm C o m m is s io n , N S W F ilm a n d T e le v is io n O ffic e a n d C ity o f P o rt P h illip













37 Liverpool St., Sydney N.S.W. 2000 . Telephone (02) 283 3049 Facsimile (02) 283 3035


Congratulates NINO MAMINElTI, A ¡S | ¡ This years AFI winner for BEST CINEMATOGRAPHY on Paul Cox's ‘EXILE1

HEAD OFFICE: 434 CLARENDON ST, STH MELBOURNE 3205 PHONE (03) 699 3922 FAX (Ó3) 696 2564

77 DOGGETT ST, FORTITUDE VALLEY, OLD. 4006 PHONE (07) 854 1919 FAX (07) 852 1814 »


: -



1 : “


| 118 LORONG 23 GEYLANG^ SINGAPORE1438 PHONE [65] 291 7291 FAX [65J^93 21%- H ;

......................................=--S3--- -T—----m-


new media

Significant Sites, Future Trends

visits the XVe Festival International de la Video et des Arts électroniques, Forum des Nouvelles images et de la Culture émergente, Locarno, and Europäisches Medienkunst Festival, Osnabrück.

John Conomos

uropean film and video festivals are often significant sites to gauge current and future trends in film and electronic media. In Europe, with its massive post-Berlin Wall-Soviet com­ munist cultural and demographic turbulence, there are numerous critical, aesthetic, curatorial and stylistic devel­ opments emerging that are suggestive of wider cultural undercurrents oper­ ating in late-capitalist culture. Two important festival sites are the Locarno Video Art Festival and the European M edia Art Festival at Osnabrück in Germany. Both Festivals, in the context of European film and video festivals, are well-established and enjoy a fairly-high critical reputation as important events for showcasing past and recent significant works. What I wish to underscore are how certain films, installations, videos and seminars are indicative of certain aesthetic, formal and technological trends in experimental film and video­ making, and to contextualize these trends in terms of the new media arts that are proliferating in the northern hemisphere. (It should also be remem­ bered that what follows is not by any means a comprehensive critique of European film/video festivals as a par­ ticular cultural institution for screening moving image works, but, rather, an impressionistic overview of m o criti­ cal festival sites in the overall context of European media culture.) The Locarno Video Art Festival, which was organized by Lorenzo Bianda (whose parents, Rinaldo and Ines, are the founding members of this important Festival) and curated by the prominent Italian media critic and curator Marco Maria Gazzano, in asso­ ciation with the French video artist R obert Cahen, featured numerous stimulating videotapes and seminars. Located in the sunny climes of south­ ern Switzerland - a landscape of alpine mountain ranges, a massive tranquil lake dotted with pleasure craft and bungalow-style hotels - reminding one of Nabokov’s early émigré European novels of the 1920s and ’30s, the Fes­ tival showcased numerous works that are suggestive of the new emerging dig­ ital forms in electronic media.


Nigel Johnson's Observer, Observed.

Gianni Toti's Planetopol

Lynn Hershman's Recovered Diary.

David Larcher’s extraordinarily quirky neo-Dadaist videos, Videovoid (1 9 9 3 ) and V id eo-tex t (1 9 9 3 ), are emblematic not only of the artist’s highly-processed collage form of elec­ tronic image-making, but indicate in their conceptual and formal architec­ ture a markedly playful self-reflexivity that questions the tapes’ historical and generic markers. The latter work is particularly suggestive for Larcher’s zany deconstructive impulse to stretch the limits of video’s electronic signal in the immediacy of his studio. (Both works were funded by British, French and German sources, and produced at the Montbeliard TV Centre in France, a site organized by the indefatigable Pierre Bongiovanni, and rapidly becoming one of the most critical places for the emergence of digital cin­ ema and new technologies in Europe.) Dominik Barbier’s engaging docu­ mentary, J ’étais H a m let (1 9 9 3 ), a deftly-constructed portrait of the German avant-garde playwright Hein­ rich M üller, was one (along with the Larcher tapes) of the Festival’s screening highlights, as were Bruno Saparelli’s evocative La Chambre Verte (1993), a languid delineation of Mada­ gascar as a site for memories, reverie and tropical travel, and Irit Batsry’s multifaceted, haunting work, Traces o f a Presence to Come (1993), a videotape that was shown outside of competition, memorable for its liquid imagery and a powerfully-resonant voice-over deal­ ing with identity, collective memory and language. Also, there was Gianni Toti’s mas­ sive collage video, Planetopolis (1994). Just over two hours in duration, this “video-poem-op era-essay” (T oti) explores many various cultural, his­ torical and sociological facets of the urban metropolis of our mass-mediated society in the artist’s inimitable style of image-making. Like Osnabriick’s European Media Festival, Locarno featured a videotheque as well. The selection of tapes were quite varied and grouped under the aptly-named title of “Neo-television”. Several interesting examples come to mind: Lari Flash and Jerome Lefdup’s witty One Eno (1993), a doc­ umentary work (notable for its deadpan humour and zappy visual style) featuring Brian Eno discussing

Robert Cahen's Voyage D'Hiver.


C I N E M A P A P E R S • MA RCH 1 995

his Zen-like approach to artmaking; Lars Movin’s excellent The Misfits - 3 0 Years o f Fluxus (1993), a rare video documentation of the Euro-American Fluxus artists of the late 1950s and ’60s who sought to “deglamorise” the visual arts - many of the relevant artists in question are interviewed in this instruc­ tive w ork; and, finally, Lynn Hershman’s Recovered Diary (1994), a 30-minute tape that encapsulates Her­ shman’s characteristic thematic and visual concerns of her on-going video autobiography (E lec tro n ic D iary): highly personal images of the familial, the Vietnam War, and phallocentric violence in the context of Hershman’s own socio-cultural ethos as an artist, art educator (and, most significant,) mother. As for the seminars, various signif­ icant topics and issues were addressed by a number of different videomakers, theorists, curators, critics and exhibitors/distributors. Gazzano, who was primarily responsible (in associa­ tion with his Festival colleagues) for the selection of the seminars, gave a comprehensive and stimulat­ ing overview of Woody and Steina Vasulkas’ innovative videowork (whose works not only resonate Larcher’s own generic heritage as a videomaker, but the Festival itself, through its major UNESCO affiliations and its worldrenowned Laser d’Or prize, have given prior recognition to the Vasulkas’ rôle as “first wave” pioneers of video art). Pierre Levy, fresh from the Interna­ tional Symposium for Electronic Art in Helsinki, gave an eloquent presenta­ tion on cyberspace in the context of its various shifting cultural, theoretical and technological problematics. Levy’s paper elicited numerous observations and responses from the audience, espe­ cially a lively, engaging response from René Berger, one of Europe’s eminent media theorists, and a vital figure also in terms of the Festival’s formation and history. Among the numerous seminar con­ texts, the Paris-based filmmaker and film theorist M ichel Chion gave an informative presentation on his notion of “audio-vision” apropos of European modernist cinema, experimental video and American narrative cinema. Like the late Serge Daney, Chion’s impor­ tance as a film critic and theorist is finally starting to be noticed in the Eng­ lish-speaking world. Chion, who is a prolific author, and whose background stems from his early work with Pierre Schaffer (concrete music), illustrated his talk with examples from Robert Cahen, Gerardo Silva, Akira Kurosawa, Krzyzstof Kieslowski, Jacques Tati and David Lynch, among others. Another rewarding presentation that should be singled out (one of C I N E M A P A P E R S • MA RC H 1995

Jack Smith.

Karl Kels' 1993 Karl Kels

David Larcher's Videevoid

Paul McCarthy and Mike Kelley's Heidi.

many among the impressive colloquims on new technologies, computer art and virtual reality) was Georges Heck’s dis­ cussion of the issues concerning the distribution and exhibition of experi­ mental film and video in France and elsewhere in Europe. Heck, like Pierre Bongiovanni, has been instrumental in helping to set up the current distribu­ tion landscape in French video. All in all, the Locarno Video Art Festival was a rewarding experience for this participant. It accentuated some emerging audio-visual trends in current electronic media, especially the rapidlyconverging phenom enon between analogue and digital media (as spoken about in various different contexts over the years by such people as Jean-Luc Godard, Gene Youngblood, Raymond Bellour, Anne-Marie Duguet, Nicholas Rodowick, the Vasulkas, et al). Fur­ ther, it showcased a wide variety of works that suggest an on-going sub­ stantial development in forging new aesthetic, cultural and technical agen­ das for electronic art. The European Media Festival at Osnabrück, like the Locarno Festival, also exhibited similar thematic and styl­ istic concerns. However, with this particular festival site (also like Locarno, one of the oldest in Europe), what was quite evident in its overall programming is the emergence of film and com puter-generated work by young artists. Clearly, the new media departments and colleges in Germany, The Netherlands and England are start­ ing to have students graduate from their amply-resourced courses, and are having an impact on such festival sites as Osnabrück. This well-organized and highlystimulating festival had a few interesting works (both film and video) and symposiums. Curated and admin­ istered by Hermann Noring, Alfred Rotert and Ralf Sausmikat and their resourceful colleagues, Osnabrück’s open-ended, mixed-media program­ ming philosophy partly stems from its Experimental Workshop roots. The Jack Smith retrospective (curated by New York director-writer Uzi Parnes, who gave a very helpful introduction to Smith’s films, perfor­ mances, plays and writings) was one of the Festival’s strongest attributes. F lam in g C reatures (1 9 6 3 ), with its camp/parodic erotic concerns and fad­ ing black-and-white granular look, a veritable benchmark film for the American avant-garde film and Pop Art, was definitely one of the more reward­ ing moments at this Festival. So too was seeing Stan Brakage and Phil Solomon’s new hand-painted collage film, E le ­ m en tary P hrases (1 9 9 4 ). Its pulsating vivid colours, asym­ £ 5 " metrical temporal pacing, and p 5 5



Korean Diary Solrun Hoaas,, writer-director o f Aya (1991), visits the fourth Pyongyang Film Festival o f non-aligned and other developing countries, in the D em ocratic People's Republic o f Korea. y visa is ready in ten minutes at the DPRK embassy in Beijing. I catch JS 152, on Air Koryo, the twice-weekly flight from Beijing to Pyongyang. Aya has been in more than twenty overseas festivals, but I decided this was an opportunity not to be missed. From the air, Pyongyang has an almost surreal beauty. Its mythology and monumental architecture creates a sense of unease, but also anticipation. Evening television is a constant reminder that Korea is still in its 100day official mourning period. There are repeated broadcasts of eulogies in mem­ ory of the ‘Great Leader’, Kim II Sung, with clips from his four-decade-long career, and scenes of his wandering among the people - inspecting factories, farms, construction projects - always surrounded by note-taking followers. Aside from news and other programmes designed to heighten morale or pro­ ductivity (a programme on happy street cleaners), I see little else while there, except one local drama. They normally have more entertainment, including for­ eign films, I am assured. As I thought, my invitation was trig­ gered by the screening of Aya in Shanghai last year, where the Festival manager, Kim Kwang Su, saw the film and liked it. The Pyongyang Festival began in 1987 and grew out of the Nonaligned Countries Conference. As the first Australian filmmaker, I am treated as a special guest. Film body and gov­ ernment officials and producers seem to outnumber directors among guests, and there are very few women. Our first official visit is to Mansu Hill to lay flowers and stand for a moment in silence in front of a tower­ ing bronze statue of the deceased leader, Kim II Sung. We are immediately fol­ lowed by a group of women and children who do the same, heads deeply bowed. Later, we are bussed through the wide, eerily-empty streets to Mangyongdae, the Great Leader’s birthplace. My conscientious interpreter, despite his scholarly air, has a welcome sense of humour and self-irony. Over a vodka-and-lime in the bar, we go through some of his queries on the


translation of the dialogue in Aya for the Korean voice-over. We sort out “fair dinkum” and subtle points missed, such as the sexuality of Mac (Chris Hay­ wood). I ask about the attitude to homosexuality and am told it is just not talked about. Not an issue? He is vague, but has no problem talking about it or anything else, I find as time goes by. It is not an interpreter’s job to offer opinions. The Festival is officially opened in the 2,000-seat hall of Pyongyang International Cinema House - on Yanggak Islet in the Taedong River. In the foyer is a photomontage of the Great Leader meeting various foreign leaders. His presence is everywhere, from the elaborate Moscow-style metro to the Children’s Palace. A military band in full uniform occupies one corner of the full house. Men and women in uniform are also present everywhere. I am told they had thought of can­ celling the Festival at the sudden death of Kim II Sung, but, as it has been planned for two years, they decided to go through with it. But there will be no music or dancing at the opening and closing ceremonies as the country is still in deep mourning. Later, I am also told that, although they would not normally censor my film, the brief nude scene would be ‘left out’ using their ‘special technique’ - all out of respect for the departed, as it would not be appropri­ ate under the circumstances. This seems to apply to the public only, as I am assured art and film workers would have already seen the film uncut. I watch the opening Thai film, Nampbu, with a Korean-dubbed voice­ over drowning out the original soundtrack, Japanese subtitles on screen, and French translation in the earphones. At dinner, I talk about film financ­ ing and distribution with the Vice-director of the Korean Film Export & Import Corporation. As in many Asian countries, they produce features for budgets of less than $300,000. They are very keen on more contact with Aus­ tralia. Some time ago, an Australian took a stack of films with him, promis­ ing to try to distribute them, but they have never heard from him since. Our rather sketchy programme has an 8.30 a.m. ‘Special Show’ at our hotel, which turns out to be a 414 hr docu­ mentary on the death of the Great Leader, with endless scenes of mourn­

ers uncontrollably displaying their grief: military officers, chests full of medals and completely dissolved in tears, file past the bier; women, prostrate, weep in the rain in a city square; diplomats and foreign visitors offer condolences to the solemn son and successor, Kim Jong II. It is carefully edited for the greatest emotional impact and very rep­ etitious, but is such an outpouring of emotion on a national scale that it could hardly have been staged, except in the sense that their ‘Training’ began four decades ago under the direction of the Great Leader himself. Feeling somewhat drained, I exchange responses with the newlyarrived Polish television exhibitor next to me. She found the film ‘frightening’ and her initial impression is that the country reminds her of Poland ten or more years ago. There is an interesting Togolese film in the morning, Aziaba, a 60-minute drama on family planning shot on video (all they can afford, says the modest director). I find it refreshingly humor­ ous and quite good. I call in on the film market, which consists of a few small suites with video­ viewing facilities, a meeting room with a bar in a corner. There are local films on display, a few from Hong Kong, Thailand and Eastern Europe, but few buyers. SEK (Korean Scientific and Educa­ tional Film Studio) has quite a large animation production and makes ani­ mated films on order from countries like France (Les M isérables, Gargantua), Poland and Japan. I watch one of their own highly-accomplished animated films, The Boy General, set against the exotic backdrop of the Koguryo dynasty (277 B.C. - 668 A.D.). Not unexpect­ edly for a country of tae kw an do champions, their martial arts scenes are expertly done. In period pieces, women fight as tough as the men. There have been co-productions with the former Soviet Union, including one where heroes from both countries join forces against the Japanese come to pillage the nation’s treasures. I escape my minder and find the salesgirls behind the counter in the local department store no different from else­ where. A wander at dusk along the river embankment past boys fishing and strolling lovers, too; gives the feeling I

could be anywhere. At night, there is lit­ tle streetlight, and you can tell a man is approaching by his cigarette. Yet I feel safer than in the streets of Melbourne. Only once, when I point my camera into the dark part of a smaller subway station, do I get into trouble with a stern-looking young female officer. I sit through a long, but engaging, Nepalese film about exploitation, mur­ der and revenge against a background of village revolutionary struggle, writC I N E M A P A P E R S • MA RC H 1 995


Kim II Sung marble statue and sunset-coloured mural of the sacred M t Paekdu in Grand People's Study House.

ten and directed by visiting R. B. Shrestna ‘Kavita Ram’, who also plays the hero. This Festival offers a great opportunity to see unknown work from small film industries, not often pro­ grammed elsewhere. Then it is my turn to be introduced in highly-formal, almost chanting, tones, by an actress who leads me by the hand to face the 2,000-capacity audience. The two actors doing the voice-over (that almost drowns the subtle M & E track) C I N E M A P A P E R S • MA RCH 1 9 9 5

unfortunately do not speak English, and guess at the timing. “Tell him he is a wonderful lover” comes over a shot of Mac and Aya (Eri Ishida), rather than over Julie Forsythe’s hippie girl and the Okinawan fisherman. The audience might be forgiven for thinking it is a happy romantic ending, but then the fact that Mac is gay escaped the Japan­ ese subtitlers as well, and even some Australian critics. All delegations join in a guided tour

of the Pyongyang Film Studios, built in 1947 and covering a 100-hectare expanse 16 km from the city. Their first feature film, My Native Homeland, was produced in 1949. During the Korean War, we are told, they produced films in caves. Now there are five studios, some decorated with elaborate murals. Again, our visit begins with flowers and silence in front of the giant statue show­ ing Kim II Sung ‘guiding’ the direction of the film, The Flower Girl.

At present, production of feature films is around thirty per year, but they have capacity for much more. I walk through a mock-up mediaeval village set with the Korean actress, Kim Kyong Ae, who played the lead in An Admirable Girl, the Korean film in competition, a tear-jerker about a young woman who sacrifices herself (including her prospects of marriage to a man she loves) in order to look after two orphans. She does an admirable job with the rôle. Like most actors here, she is on a monthly salary and has to take the rôles she is given. She prefers “noble rôles” such as in the film we saw. They have a system of ranking actors, after they have appeared in sev­ eral successful films and been well received by the public, as Merited Actor, and, ultimately the highest accolade, a “People’s Actor”. We observe filming of a period piece about a famous kiseng (courtesan) who enticed and killed the leader of the Japanese invaders in the 16th Cen­ tury. ‘Chinatown’ is a set often used in films from the 1930s, a period partic­ ularly popular for its films on the long liberation struggle against the brutal Japanese occupation (1905-45), when many in the Korean resistance were in exile in China or the Soviet Union. The significance of this period in shaping national pride and resistance to outside interference is often disregarded and overshadowed by Western focus almost exclusively on the Korean War. In a sound studio, a mixer contin­ ues working as we crowd around and see a woman in uniform get shot among river reeds on screen. Later, there is a disco scene - set in Sydney, a Korean writer tells me. The storyline involves a Korean who went to Australia many years ago, a story of old loyalties and betrayal. In the dining room, I notice new delegations, an elegant-looking trio from Uzbekhistan, a trio from Iran, and, seated apart from us, a group of Korean residents from Japan on a visit to their home country. There are numerous other delegations at the hotel - includ­ ing Irish and Thai, and a new group of hefty-looking Russians who disappear into a special dining room. I am told Zhirinovski is here, but not for the Festival. On an excursion to the Myohyang Mountains, I have lunch with two Cam­ bodians, one of whom has worked on Norodom Sihanouk’s films. We saw one of them, M iserable L ife o f a Feasant B roth er an d Sister (1 9 9 4 ), a melodramatic story of love and jealousy set against guerilla P®®



Australia’s First Films: the Royal Visit Films of 1901 In p a rt 12 o f this con tin u in g series, Chris Long a n d Clive Sowry ex a m in e th e film b o n a n z a th at a c c o m p a n ie d th e R o y a l Visit in A ustralia's fe d e r a tio n y e a r he films of 1901’s Royal Visit to Australasia are among the most important of its forgot­ ten movie milestones. • When the Duke of York opened Australia’s first Federal Parliament, at least four local film units covered his tour. • Two British cameramen also covered it, being the first for­ eign producers to visit Australia since the Lumière Company’s Mar­ ius Sestier departed in 1897. • New Zealand’s government com­ missioned Melbourne’s Salvation Army Limelight Department to film its section of the tour - the first major film made abroad by Aus­ tralians. • Several of the films were more than an hour in length. This tremendous burst of production was unprecedented in Australia, and would not be equalled for almost a decade. A representative sampling of the 1901 Royal Visit films survives in our national archives as a testimony to their proliferation and popularity. The Vic­ torian tour film from May 1901 was released on the National Film & Sound Archive video Living M elbou rn e as recently as 1988.

The 1901 Royal Tour Bound to Mother England by “the thin red line of Empire”, Australia’s colonial governments invited Queen Victoria’s grandson, the Duke of York (later King George V), to visit them as early as 1893.1 Following Queen Victoria’s Dia­ mond Jubilee in 1897, the invitation was renewed by the government of New Zealand.2 The Federation of Australia’s colonies in January 1901 rendered a Royal Visit not only desirable, but polit­ ically expedient. Australian troops supported Britain at the Boer War and Boxer Rebellion. Demonstrations of Royal recognition and solidarity were advisable. On 17 September 1900, Queen Vic­ toria assented to an Australian tour by the Duke and Duchess of York3, and on 29 September similar assent was given for a New Zealand tour.4 The Orient


steamship liner “Ophir” was hired and refitted for the voyage, as no Royal yacht could span the required distances between coaling ports.3 The Duke chose the tour’s Royal Suite and the ship’s offi­ cers - an illustrious band of ADCs, ladies-in-waiting and distinguished mil­ itary officers. Queen Victoria’s demise slightly delayed the arrangements, and the sur­ viving films indicate that officers associated with the tour wore black armbands during most of the official functions. Most of the events surrounding the 1901 Royal Visit were filmed. Leaving Portsmouth on 15 March 1901, the “O phir” visited British colonies at Gibraltar, Malta, Aden, Cey­ lon and Singapore before reaching Australia.6The Royals’ landing at Mel­ bourne’s St Kilda Pier oh 6 May was followed by a spectacular procession through the city’s crowded streets. Cam­ era tripods with “pan heads” were used for the first time in Australia to cover the day’s events/

Three days later, the visit culmi­ nated in the Duke’s opening of Australia’s first Federal Parliament at the Exhibition Buildings. On 10 May, 15,000 Australian and Imperial troops were reviewed by the Duke at the Flemington racecourse. Bal­ larat and Sale were visited on the 13 and 14 May respectively. Ballarat’s oldest surviving film was taken during that visit.8 16 May was originally chosen for the “Ophir’”s embarkation from Mel­ bourne, but a bubonic plague outbreak in the port of Brisbane changed the plans.9 Instead, the Duke and Duchess left Port Melbourne station by train on 18 May, bound for Brisbane. There, Aborigines played a large part in the proceedings, but no further films are known to have been made. The Duke and Duchess rejoined the “Ophir” at the Hawkesbury after a rail journey down from Brisbane, and they entered Sydney Heads on 27 May. On the following day, a military review was held for the Duke at Centennial Park, which was

filmed by Joe Rosenthal of the Warwick Trading Company. A visit to the Blue Mountains proceeded on 4 June, and two days later the “Ophir” left Sydney for Auckland, escorted by the cruisers “St George” and “Juno”.10 Melbourne’s Salvation Army Lime­ light Department officially filmed this tour for the New Zealand Govern­ ment.11 On 11 June 1901, there was a welcome at Auckland wharf and a pro­ cession through the city to Government House. Rotorua’s geysers were visited on 14 June, and Maoris performed for the Royal couple at Rotorua’s race­ course on the following day.12 They returned to the “Ophir” at Auckland and set sail for Wellington, arriving on 18 June. Another harbourside welcome was followed by a city procession beneath commemorative arches, and the laying of a new Town Hall’s foundation stone. On 21 June, after laying another foundation stone for some railway buildings, the Royals left per the “Ophir” and steamed to Lyttelton on the 22nd. In neighbouring Christchurch, their reception was filmed, as well as the laying of the foundation stone for the Canterbury Jubilee Memorial in Victo­ ria Square. Nearby Hagley Park hosted a Review of 1 0 ,0 0 0 New Zealand troops on 24 June. The Royal couple travelled by train to Dunedin, where Boer War servicemen were presented with medals on the 26th. The last event of the Duke’s New Zealand tour to be filmed was his departure from Dunedin railway station on the 2 7 th .13 The “Ophir” left Lyttelton for Hobart the same day. Australian Boer W ar Troops made a magnificent procession in escorting the Royal couple into Melbourne over Princes Bridge, which was recorded minutely by Salvation Army cameramen for the Victorian Government. The Mayor (M r Gillott) and his Aldermen are stationed in the Council Dais on the left, against the foot of the temporary Municipal Arch built to honour the Royal visitors. Author's collection.

Looking South Down Swanston Street to Princes Bridge, Melbourne, 6 M ay 1901, a city en fête, w ith an unsurpassed crowd of spectators lining the streets to view the Duke's procession. No royal welcome, before or since, has surpassed these attendances which were vividly recorded on film . Courtesy of P. A. W olfenden.

C I N E M A P A R E R S • MA RC H 1995

Subscribe to

and get up to 20% discount OFFER ENDS 25 APRIL 1995


W Film Buffi & Chocoholics Unite! Win one of three giant Red Tulip Easter egg hampers. See p 21 for details.

Royal Tour of Australasia, 1901, showing places visited by the Royal Yacht "Ophir", M ay-June 1901. Author's collection.

W arwick Bioscope Camera Model "A" had 25minute film capacity, 15 times the load of the Lumière Cinématographe. First used in Australia to cover the landing of the Duke of York in M el­ bourne, 6 May 1901. From The Australasian Photographic Review, 22 May 1901, p. 24. Cour­ tesy Meg Labrum, NFSA, Canberra.

Australia's Royal Visitors, 1901, the Duke and Duchess of Cornwall and York, later King George V (1865-1936) and Queen Mary (1867-1953). Photo by W. & D. Downey of Belgravia, 1901.

Ballarat's oldest surviving film , 13 May 1901. The Duke lays the foundation stone of the Boer War Soldiers' statue. Sid Cook of the Salvation Army Limelight Department took the official film. Author's collection.

Sid Cook (1872-1937), one of the Salvation Army's official cinematographers of the Victorian leg of the Royal Tour, 1901, w ith his W arwick Bioscope camera and tripod w ith pan head. Photo by cour­ tesy of Norma Wood, Brisbane.

The Tasmanian visit may have been filmed by cameraman McGregor of A. J. West and Company. West later recalled the British exhibition of an Aus­ tralian log-chopping film taken during the tour14, probably at the Hobart Domain on 4 July 1901. If so, it was the first film taken in Tasmania. The Hobart visit concluded on 6 July, later stops being made at Adelaide (9-15 July), Albany (20 July) and Perth (21-6 July), where no further films are known to have been shot. After their Australian departure, the Duke and Duchess continued through Mauritius, South Africa and Canada, returning to their children in England on 2 November 1901. The tour promoted Imperialist sen­ timent in a manner later paralleled by the 1954 Visit of Queen Elizabeth II to Australia - the first local visit of a reigning British monarch. Both visits were carefully-staged reminders of our ties with “Mother” England, timed to coincide with periods of increasing Aus­ tralian independence. Today, Britain’s offspring has attained a maturity in administration, in population, in trade and in the arts. “Parental” ties are being shed as Aus­ tralia moves towards Republicanism. The 1901 Royal Visit films were part of the mechanism of linkage to Eng­ land, and are now a valuable record of Australia’s changing attitudes and affiliations The rigidly-structured protocol and class system so evident in the films seems laughably dis­ tasteful to today’s egalitarian Australians. Official film - Victoria The Salvation Army’s January 1901 Inauguration of the Australian Com­ monwealth coverage, made for the New South Wales government, was so profitable that it forced the Army to register The Australian Kinematographic Company on 30 January 1 9 0 1 .16 It was Australia’s


first production company, allowing the Salvation Army to make further films for external agencies. Only five days after the company’s registration, the Salvation Army offered the Victorian government its facilities to film the forthcoming Royal Visit.1' Victoria’s Chief Secretary referred the offer to an independent “Celebrations Committee” headed by Thomajs G. Watson.18 Although this committee’s records appear to be lost, press reports indicate that the contract was given to the Salvation Army no later than 23 March 1 9 0 1 .19 The Limelight Department immediately discarded its old Lumière Cinématographes and upgraded to Warwick Bioscope cam­ eras.20 These had up to 25 minutes of magazine capacity, tripods with “pan” heads, and a range of camera lenses of different focal lengths.21 The photographic firm of Baker & Rouse imported the cameras for the Army and later acted as a sales out­ let for the films22, as they had for the Sydney federation coverage. On 22 April 1901, Baker & Rouse’s magazine, The Australasian Photographic Review, announced the Royal Visit events intended for filming. Victorian and New Zealand coverage would be shot by the

Salvation Army, Sydney events covered by the Warwick Trading Company, and Brisbane films were planned.23 This Bris­ bane filming probably didn’t eventuate. The Limelight Department’s Joseph Perry directed and shot most of the Vic­ torian films with assistance from Sidney Cook.24 However, Perry left with Com­ mandant Herbert Booth to present “Soldiers of the Cross” in New Zealand before the M elbourne Royal Visit ended. They boarded the S.S. “Mararoa” at Sydney on 15 May 1901 and disembarked at Auckland on the 19th.25 Sidney Cook alone shot the Bal­ larat coverage on 13 May, and the Royal Train’s Melbourne departure on the 18.26 Two variant sets of the “official” (governmentally-contracted) Victorian films survive, one from the vaults of Herschells Films27, the other from the Sydney-based Pearson collection which may have originally been the property of the pioneering cameramanexhibitor Ernest Higgins.28 They were combined and mostly released on the NFSA video Living Melbourne (1988). Notes taken from the films, newspa­ per reports and advertisements in The Australasian Photographic Review allow the authors to assemble a composite filmography: Filmography: Official Victorian Royal visit films, 1901 1

T h e O fficia l Landing of the D uke and D uchess of Y o rk at St K ilda [P ier]

Shot 6 May 1901. P. S.“Hygeia”, con­ veying the Royals from the “Ophir”, arrives at St. Kilda pier. The Duke and Duchess disembark, and are introduced by Governor-General Hopetoun to Aus­ tralia’s first Federal Cabinet. The Duke inspects the Permanent Artillery squad, then proceeds with the Duchess along the pier to the shore. A long camera pan shot follows them without a break (the C I N E M A P A P E R S • MARCH 1995

first such shot in an Australian film, made with a Warwick model “A” cam­ era). Length 280 feet (4 mins 40 secs). 2

The D uke's P rocession O ver the Princes B ridge

Shot 6 May 1901. Medium shot of Mel­ bourne Council Dais under the Municipal Arch temporarily built across the South end of Princes Bridge. Colo­ nial Mounted Rifles escort three Vice-Regal carriages, followed by the Royal landau, which halts to acknowl­ edge a presentation from Major Gillott. Length 225 feet (3 mins 45 secs). 3

[Posing fo r O fficia l Photographs


The Opening of Federal P arliam e n t

Shot 9 May 1901. The Duke and Duchess in their State landau en route to the Exhibition Buildings with a military escort. First shot is taken near the Munic­ ipal Arch on Princes Bridge, the second in Spring Street near Parliament House. Length 105 feet (1 min. 45 secs).

11 Laying Foundation Stone of 8

[Raising the Flag Over the Exhibition B uilding's Dom e, M e lb o u rn e ]

Probably shot 9 May 1901 at the moment of Australia’s first Federal Par­ liament’s opening, although the Duchess presided over another flag-raising at the same venue on 14 May 1901. Length 24 feet (24 secs).

Probably shot 6 May 1901. The Duke and Duchess with their Suite and offi­ cers of the “Ophir’’. Matches a photo in Table Talk, Melbourne, 23 May 1901, p. 17, which identifies each partici­ pant by name. Length 50 feet (50 secs). 4

C hinese P rocession

Shot 7 May 1901. Mentioned in The Australasian Photographic Review, 22 May 1901, p. 15. No print is known to survive. 5

[Royal P arty Going to S tate R eception at P a rlia m e n t House, M e lb o u rn e ]

Shot 8 May 1901. Duke and Duchess of York, Lord and Lady Hopetoun, Vic­ torian Premier Peacock and others entering Parliament House by the side entrance abutting Parliament Gardens in Nicholson Street. Length 23 feet (23 secs). 6

Royal Guests Leaving P a rlia m e n t

S old iers' Statue, B a lla ra t

Shot 13 May 1901. Taken at corner of Sturt and Grenville streets, with the Mayors of East Ballarat and Ballarat pre­ sent. NB: The statue was moved to its present site opposite the Town Hall in 1906. Length 35 feet (35 secs). 12 [Royal Train Leaving Port

on G overnm ent H ouse's steps, M e lb o u rn e ]

10 The T rad es Procession

Shot 11 May 1901, probably in Spring Street, Melbourne. Mentioned in The Australasian Photographic Review, 22 May 1901, p. 15. This may be the War­ wick Trading Company film (Cat. 6190a). No print is known to survive.


The Grand R e v ie w at Flem ington of 15,000 Troops

Shot 10 May 1901 from centre of the racecourse, looking across the parade to the Duke, wearing a busby and taking the salute on horseback. Pearson footage includes gun carriages, Colonial Artillery, Infantry, Victorian Mounted Rifles, Military Band, Naval Contingent and Colonial Artillery Band. Living Mel­ bourne has another section with State M ilitia, Queensland’s Cycle Corps, Highland Contingent, Fijian Native Constabulary, gun carriages and Med­ ical Corps’ Ambulance. Combined length 140 feet (2 mins 20 sec).

M e lb o u rn e Station fo r B risbane]

Shot 18 May 1901. Taken from oppo­ site side to passenger boarding platform, indicating that problems may have arisen with obtaining an adequate van­ tage point. Train leaves station and Naval Escort marches away. Length 69 feet (1 min 9 secs).

Royal Yacht "Ophir", re-fitted for the Royal Tour of 1901, in Port Phillip Bay, May 1901.

Royal Review at Flemington Racecourse, 10 May 1901, was filmed by Salvation Army cameraman from a point just to the right of this picture, looking across the parade at the Royal Pavilion on the left. The Duke, on horseback and wearing a busby, takes the salute at centre. Author's collection.

The Australasian Photographic Review of 22 April 1901 (p. 20) announced plans for filming other events which may not have been accomplished:

Culmination of 1901 Royal Tour, the opening of our First Federal Parliament inside the Exhibition Build­ ings, Melbourne, on 9 May, was only successfully filmed by the Sydney photographer Mark Blow.

13 O fficial R eception at B a lla ra t 14 T he D uke D escending the [South S tar] M in e at B a lla ra t

The total aggregate footage shot for the “official” Victorian coverage was prob­ ably about 1,500 feet (25 mins). Footages quoted above are surviving lengths, not the lengths originally shot, for which no record has yet been found.

Commercial films of the Victorian tour

Author's collection.

M ajor Joseph Henry Perry (1864-1943), head of the Salvation Army Limelight Department, chief cameraman on the official (governmental) coverage of the Royal Tour in Victoria and New Zealand, 1901. By courtesy of George El lis, Sa Ivation Army Archives, Melbourne.

Sydney photographer Mark Blow. His last major film was of the 1901 Melbourne Royal Visit, and was the first to exhibit film s of the Melbourne reception in Sydney on 18 May 1901.

H ouse, M e lb o u rn e

Shot 8 May 1901. Royal couple board­ ing their State Landau with Victorian Premier Peacock at Parliament Gardens’ Nicholson Street gates. Length 27 feet (27 secs). C I N E M A P A P E R S • MA RCH 1995

1) M a r k B lo w 's Coverage

Sydney photographer Mark Blow’s pre1899 local films, made for his “Polytechnic” venue, were described in Part 5 of this series. P ^ 6


Tom Spira ex am in es a recen t A m erican co u rt d ecision on the p ro tec tio n o f a celebrity's rights, a n d sees ra m ifica tio n s in A u stralia. n early O ctober, I became intrigued when I heard of a recent judgement where Eliza­ beth Taylor’s lawyers failed to stop NBC’s broadcast of a mini­ series about her life. She had attempted a “Slapp suit”, a common action in the U.S. where a person brings an action quickly in order to stop a defendant trying to exercise his or First Amendment right of free speech. The Lanham Trademark Act has, in the past, together with common-law unfair competition and infringement of the right of publicity, provided com­ fort and protection for celebrities and famous persons. In particular, Section 43(a) of the Act states:


Any person who, in connection with any goods or services, [...] uses in commerce any word, term, name, symbol or device, or any combination thereof, which (A) is likely to cause confusion, or asso­ ciation of such person with another person, or the origin, sponsorship or approval of his or her goods or services, or commercial activities by another person [...] shall be liable in a civil action by any person who believes that he or she is or is likely to be damaged by such acts. Taylor’s case sought to stop the fol­ lowing alleged infringements: • The use of her name and image. • The use of her trademark by NBC and the use of her name to pro­ mote the mini-series solely for NBC’s profit. • To stop the use of another actress to portray her (Liz Taylor) in a fashion which is not intended to be a parody but rather is intended to be a factual presentation of her. On 29 September 1994, Judge Diane Wayne in the Los Angeles Superior Court decided, surprisingly enough, that Elizabeth Taylor was not entitled to stop NBC from going to air with the mini-series. The obvious impact for Australian producers seeking to make films, mini­ series and documentaries about or portraying famous persons and celebri­ ties sprang to mind. Does this mean

that we no longer need to acquire rights or permission from them? The U.S. courts have been more recently grappling with a way to bal­ ance the right to reward for the use of someone’s name, image and likeness with the right of a filmmaker to free speech. In recent dealings with U.S. attor­ neys in relation to the acquisition of rights from celebrities and famous per­ her sons, I became aware of a distinctly new and broader approach. Many U.S. attorneys now approach the acquisi­ tion of rights from celebrities or famous persons on the basis of, “W ell, just go ahead and make the film or mini-series and we’ll see what happens.” The Taylor decision and this new approach seemed so unique and dif­ ferent to the law as it had been laid down in the Estate o f E lvis P resley v Russen 513 F.Supp. 1339 (1981), which in its day clarified in the U.S. the position in relation to the right of publicity of famous persons. In that case, the court found that individuals, especially public fig­ ures or celebrities (such as Elvis), had the right to control the commercial value and exploitation of their name, picture or likeness, and that they could prevent others from unfairly appropriating the value in those rights for their own commercial benefit. The court based its decision on the premise that during Presley’s life he owned a proprietary right in his name and likeness which he could license or assign for his commercial benefit and that right of publicity survived his death and became part of his estate. In the U.S., the law used to draw a clear distinction between a public fig­ ure or celebrity being portrayed in a way that was not false or defamatory and being portrayed primarily as a means of commercial exploitation. The first was permitted, the second was not. In view of the Taylor case, the

boundaries of the second appear to have been pushed out further. In both cases, the Plaintiff sought injunctions. In 1981, the Estate of Presley got the injunction; in 1994 Taylor, in person and seemingly alive, failed. What had changed? The law in the U.S. has been mov­ ing in favour of free speech, so much so that in another recent case: CBS Inc v Davis (1994) 510 US 127 L .E .d.2d 35 8 : the Court held that the “most extraordinary remedy” of a prior restraint (an injunction) may be granted only in “exceptional cases” in which “the evil that would result from the reportage is both great and certain and cannot be mitigated by less intru­ sive measures”. With this emphasis on free speech, it is little wonder that the U.S. has such

premise for denying a celebrity pro­ tection in these circumstances in the U.S. is founded in the U.S. constitution and in particular in the First Amend­ ment. In Australia, there is no constitutional guarantee of free speech and hence not the same degree of focus on the issue as there is in the U.S. It has been accepted U.S. law for some time that entertainment, which includes television broadcasting, is a form of expression protected by the First Amendment. As far back as 1928, in the Chap­ lin case, U.S. courts have granted injunctions in favour of a public figure plaintiff when the expression involved included specific copying of the public figure. In Taylor’s case, the judge went so far as to say that she did not believe that a viewer would assume that

open coverage of its courtroom pro­ ceedings, such as more recently O. J. Simpson’s case and slightly less recently the Menedez brothers’ trial. In Taylor’s case, the court went as far as to find the mini-series was not “pure commercial speech”. The difference between the U.S. and Australia on this point is that the

Taylor endorsed or sponsored the m ini-series just because her name appeared in the title. This is clearly a dramatic shift in the law. Therefore, now that the remedy of prior restraint (injunction) is no longer available in the U.S., the law has shifted to the extent where it is or has become a free-for- P®*5 C I N E M A P A P E R S • MA RCH 1 995

Gillian Arm strong's Little W om en EMMA COLLER examines the most recent o f the several screen and television adaptations o f Louisa M. Alcott’s enduring novel. She finds Winona Ryder once again a modern girl in period garb, but is impressed by the intelligence o f the direction and the beauties o f the cinematography and production design.

Yves Angelo’s Le Colonel Chabert was the toast o f Paris late in 1994. Who is the finer: Depardieu or Luchini? Who is Luchini? SCOTT MURRAY explores.




A Siegel Film: An Autobiography

Setting the Scene: The Great Hollywood A rt Directors Viva La France Viva Les Deux

After several years in the critical wilderness, Don Siegel is experiencing a slow but steady re-emergence. R.J. THOMPSON finds Siegel’s autobiography yet another reason for buffs to give his films a try

In an auteurist world where directors and screenwriters dominate much critical debate, SARAH STOLLMAN finds a book which does much to preference the key role o f the production designer.









eview s

5 2




eview s

eceiv ed


5 3



MARY Directed by Kay Pavlou. Producer: Rosem ary B lig h t C onsultant producer: B ridget Ikin. S criptw rite r: Kay Pavlou. D irector of photography: Jan Kenny. Editor: M a rg a re t Sixell. Production designer: Angus Strathie. Composer: Douglas Stephen Rae. Sound re c o rd is t M ark B lackw ell. C ast Lucy Bell (M ary M acK illop), Linden W ilkinson (Older M ary), Rebecca Scully-W atson (M ary 6yrs old), Brendan Higgins (Father W oods), Brian

holiness, of M ary MacKillop by Pope Joh n Paul II in Sydney, on 19 January 1995. T o that

Harrison (Bishop Shiel). R. B. Films.

extent, the film itself became

Australian distributor: Ronin Films.

part of the event.

35mm. 76 m ins.1994.


However, it is an attempt to

he late 19 9 4 release of Kay

portray, examine and interpret

Pavlou’s M ary coincided

the life and impact of a now

with preparations for an event:

famous Australian, the first

the ‘beatification’, the solemn

Australian saint, a 19th-Century

public declaration of her



Nell celebrates the return of the enfant sauvage Michael Apted's N e ll, starring Jodie Foster and Liam Neeson, follows François Truffaut's L 'E n fa n t S auvage and Werner Herzog's The Enigm a o f K asp ar H au ser in celebrating the "wild child", "the mysterious or enigmatic outsider who is suddenly discovered and thrust into society in order to reveal its shortcomings and faults". By deconstructing Foster's woman of the woods, the film cherishes the part wildness can play in restoring modern people to the connections with nature celebrated in stories but lost in everyday lives. p46 tv R

GI N- EM A P A P E R S • MA RC H i 995

e v ie w



a y m o n d


o u n is



! interiors of old railway carriages


i and the colonial ways also all | contribute to Mary’s being j experienced in an Australian i context. Audiences not familiar with i | the detail of Mary MacKillop’s


1 life may wish for more


Co-Producer: Graham Place.

i information and a clearer time-

Scriptwriters: W illiam Nicholson, M ark Handley. Based on the play,

1 line of events. They may be

woman (nun and educator) who

j puzzled by the yen and zest for

lived from 1842 to 1909.

\ bizarre mystical experiences that

With a small-budget, Pavlou

Directed by M ichael Apted. Producers: Renee Missel, Jodie Foster.

i Father Tennyson Wood, who

Idioglossia, by M ark Handley. Director of photography: Dante Spinotti. Editor: Jim Clark. Production designer: Jon Hutman. Composer: M ark Isham.

and producer Rosemary Blight

i inspired Mary to start her

have opted for docu-drama.

! education work and her order,

Cast: Jodie Foster (Nell), Liam Neeson

This has enabled them to select

\ thought appropriate and

(Jerome Lovell), Natasha Richardson

what they consider the most

i desirable (some of which were

significant episodes of Mary’s

i later exposed as self-deceivingly

life, as well as intersperse them

' fraudulent). But this kind of

Distribution, a division of R.A. Becker &

with interviews. These propel

\ spiritual practice was prevalent

Company Pty. Ltd. 35mm. 114 mins. 1994.

the action (giving relevant dates

! at the end of the 19th Century -

and filling in chronological

i as may be seen vividly and with

gaps), as well as comment on action and characters. One

piety to satisfy those who need

might say that the film is an

it spelt out, and enough implicit

annotated drama.

sanctity to show how saints are

“Cinema hagiography” is not a phrase that immediately springs to mind (or runs

involved in a real world.

smoothly from the lips), but

The ABC’s Clare Dunne has

there is a not inconsiderable

written and produced radio

body of films that offer movie

programmes on Mary

lives of the saints. Francis of

MacKillop, and she provides a

Assisi has been dramatized by

personalized yet objective-

Robert Rossellini, Michael

enough commentary throughout

Curtiz, Franco Zeffirelli and

the film. The Irish accent,

Liliana Caviani; Joan of Arc by

however, militates against the

Carl Theodore Dreyer, Robert

‘Australianness’ of the

Bresson, Victor Fleming and

production. Two sisters of St

Otto Preminger. Bernardette of

Joseph (the religious order Mary

Lourdes has been popular and

MacKillop founded), Marie

there have been movies such as

Therese Foale and Margaret

Edward Dmytryk’s The

McKenna, offer genially shrewd

Reluctant Saint, Ben Gazzara as

comments and a German Jesuit

Don Bosco and Pierre Fresnay

official, Peter Gumpel, from the

as M onsieur Vincent (Maurice

Office for Saints in Rome, gives

Cloche, 1947). Alain Cavalier

background information about

won Cannes awards for his

the process of saint-making,

stylized Thérèse (1986). And this

sometimes with a wry touch

list does not include those post-

that indicates we are not simply

biblical epics of early Christian

getting the party line.

martyrs. Kay Pavlou is aware of the


not plaster figures but people who experience struggle and are

But it is dramatized re-enactments that, although

pitfalls of trying to please

brief and often filmed on small

audiences who want humanity

and confined sets, stay in the

and some substance to their

memory. This is largely due to

saints’ stories and those who,

the screen presence of Lucy Bell

influenced by the De Mille

as Mary: her initial appearance

legacy, want their saints to be

in a striking red dress and then

seen to be haloed and hallowed.

on horseback, so that she is seen

By and large, Mary is down-to-

as a woman before being seen as

earth and human (the visit to

a nun; her broad Australian

Pius DC, however, seems too

accent which gives her

hush-holy and the use of light at

| performance an atmosphere of

the end of the miracle sequence

! authenticity; and her speaking

seems over other-worldly).

1 of dialogue, much of which is

Perhaps a good way to put it is

\ taken from Mary’s own letters,

that there is enough explicit

i The bush landscapes, the

Costume designer Susan Lyall.

(Paula Olsen), Richard Libertini (Alexander Paley), Nick Searcy (Todd Peterson). Australian Distributor REP

he figure of the "wild child", I the mysterious or enigmatic j far greater elaboration in outsider who is suddenly \ Cavalier’s Thérèse. discovered and thrust into society The film is a collaboration in order to reveal its shortcomings i of women filmmakers about an and faults, is a theme that has 1 Australian pioneer woman who attracted many filmrrjakers. This j serves as something of an ideal scenario offers irresistible | for contemporary women, and opportunities, especially to the i their place in modern society satirist (s)he can highlight the 1 and in today’s churches. Mary objects of the satire through the | believed in herself and in her gaze of one who stands outside and i causes, and looked male looks in, so to speak, and who is i authorities, especially Bishops, supposedly untarnished by the 1 unflinchingly respectfully in the values and the ideologies which ! eye. (The film has a fair amount pertain internally. Truffaut and | of warranted bishop-bashing.) Herzog, for example, were attracted i And, despite her being to the possibilities here and, not i excommunicated by the Bishop surprisingly, made very fine films: \ of Adelaide, Pope Pius IX L'Enfant Sauvage (1970) and Jeder \ received her and wanted to “lay Für Sich Und Gott Gegen Alle (The Enigma o f Kaspar Hauser, 1974). i my hands on the head of the i excommunicated one”. The These are films which explore the notion of the "savage" in order ! photos of the children educated to deconstruct it, and reveal the | by Mary and her sisters bear presumption and the ignorance that i witness to a significant life for underpins much thinking of this i others which still has its kind. Their ostensible goal, though 1 influence in Australian society. they pursue it in very different John Duigan, who ways, is to mount a critique of 1 subsequently directed Romero, social structures which embody, i made what seems to me a fine legitimize and perpetuate 1 example of Australian cinema perspectives and approaches j hagiography, Fragments o f War: which are perceived to be ! The Story o f Damien Rarer (telescientifically valid but are ! feature, 1988). It opts for the questionable in ethical terms. 1 implicit treatment of personal Truffaut's film suggests the \ integrity that we might call inherent potential which can be | holiness and shows Parer as a tapped in an existential relationship, i decent human being, a man of | something like an l-Thou i his times and a photographer | who understood his reporting of I relationship, but only by a teacher, i pedagogue or scientist Indeed, the \ World War II battles as a i vocation to personalize war, and I agent of socialization comes to be j seen as an embodiment of the new i as mediating the war to those l Enlightenment, and this brings with j who were not on the ! it a morality which has redemptive j battlefields. Duigan’s welli power, if one believes the doctor i researched screenplay also i j and, by implication, the director. ! CONTINUED p. 48

The transition from "savage" to citizen, on the one hand, is effected through such instrumentalities. In Herzog's film, however, the redemptive capacity is situated in the wolf-boy himself: that is to say, in the other who is customarily seen as savage, backward and semihuman. Herzog's aim, it seems, and it is a characteristic one, is to overturn the usual hierarchy. It is the "wild child" who carries-inorder-to-impartthe privileged moral code. It is the other, neither doctor nor citizen, who is mythologized. And the tragedy in the film is not due to the necessary betrayal on the part of the enlightened subject, as in Truffaut, but in the incarnation of evil within the apparentlysocialized host So, w hat does all of this have to do with Nell? W ell, N eills very much in the line which includes such films,.especially Herzog's. It ,, explores the life of a woman, Nell (Jodie Foster), who has grown up in an isolated part of the forest with . her mother and tw in sister (though the latter tw o are deceased when the film opens). She speaks a language which the citizens who discover her cannot decipher. The learned ones among th e m E th a t is, the psychiatrists - speculate that she might be autistic, or that she might be a victim of abuse and neglect. The film, crucially, will make it abundantly clear, at least to the viewer, that these speculations are erroneous, or, in other words, that the doctors are the ones who are ignorant on a fairly fundamental level. The reasons for this strategy ' - th e critique of enlightened or at least educated subjects and expected sources of authority on such m a tte rs -w ill become clearer as the film unfolds (though whether it will be convincing is for the viewer to decide). Nell is transported to a hospital to "protect" her from members of the media, who are either indifferent to her own wishes and to the possibly devastating impact on her existence or believe that the rewards from a scoop outweigh any possible ethical quandaries (e.g., the question of rights, privacy, consent, intrusion and invasiveness, and other such relatively-unimportant matters which are best left to philosophers, idealists and troublemakers). Indeed, one of the film’s strength is the w ay in which it suggests that these gung-ho rnejdia


C I N E M A P A P E R S • MA R C H 1 9 9 5


Nell represents, like Kaspar Hauser, a type of purity and innocence which is uncorrupted by contact with "civilization", and which the film suggests has been lost in the emergence of social and institutional structures such as the psychiatric hospital (where they "screw you and leave you", according to a doctor).

C I N E M A P A P E R S â&#x20AC;˘ MARCH 1995

representatives are complicit in the very process of exploitation which they otherwise loudly and selfrighteously decry. In any case, the hospital has a terrible effect on Nell. She very quickly becomes depressed by the sight of the incarcerated and mentally-unstable victims. The rest of the film deals with the aftermath. Nell represents, like Kaspar Hauser, a type of purity and innocence which is uncorrupted by contact with "civilization", and which the film suggests has been lost in the emergence of social and institutional structures such as the psychiatric hospital (where they "screw you and leave you", according to a doctor). She is very close to her natural, unspoiled environment and this connection seems to sustain, heal and inspire

her. It is, needless to say, the central irony in the film that she is the one who is called by doctors, media representatives and others a "w ild" one. Nell's sympathetic doctor, Jerome (Liam Neeson), and the psychologist, Paula (Natasha Richardson), clearly become recipients of her redemptive and healing presence. (The fact that they are both doctors means that it is difficult to resist the reading that she embodies the "way of nature" in a restorative sense, in contradistinction to a scientific approach which the film's rhetorical modes puts across as uncaring and, paradoxically, quite harmful.) The two doctors, Jerome and Paula, accordingly, find that the defensive mechanisms which they had erected as barriers to shield them from one another and from others - barriers which may be necessary in cities and towns crumble in the presence of this beneficent woman and her wondrous environment. The fact that they gradually learn to decipher and speak her language is a transparent metaphor that really needs no commentary. Significantly, the viewer (a societal being who is a long way from the pristine forests) also learns her language-or, to be more precise, learns to recognize and acknowledge her language as a meaningful and effective alternative, along with the two doctors in the course of the film. The implications, however, should not be ignored, especially with regard to the two discourses in the film and the nature of the relation which the film meticulously constructs: the contrast between the societal (read "pseudoenlightened") view and the naturecentred, as well as theologicallybased view. Nell is contrasted to a number of young men (in "civilization", naturally) who seem to spend all of their time in a pool hall thinking of lascivious matters; she is also linked repeatedly with children both in and out of the hospital. The significations are clear. It also becomes clear that the hierarchy which is overturned in such films is also overturned here. Just as the doctor realizes that the enfant sauvage is no savage at all in Truffaut's film, and, just as the viewer sees the death of Kaspar as a tragedy in Herzog's film, so too Nell comes to be seen as a stable,

sensitive and insightful subject whose language is coherent and meaningful, even though it has been developed partly in response to childhood traumas and anxieties. Nell, ironically, is needed by individuals and doctors like Jerome and Paula. She also comes to be seen as a type of restorer of innocence and of those connections which differentiate the child's perceptions from those of the (fallen, of course!) adult In this sense, the largely conventional film language, with its lyrical and spectacular shots of vast expanses of water, mountains, forest and air, actually serves to heighten the sense of purity and innocence which the film otherwise seeks to foreground. Certainly, there are very strong performances here. Many will no doubt respond to the positive points, of which there are many. There are points made about sections of the media which need to be made, about perceptions which are based on biases, ignorance, heartlessness and strategic exclusions, particularly where the mentally ill are concerned, about the therapeutic effects of interpersonal connections and commitments, and about the rather irresponsible appropriation of the environment But this is a very rhetorical film in both substance and style, and the strategies though familiar can be very seductive. They are intended to be. The oppositions which are set up and rhetorically amplified will not convince others, because these oppositions are constructed in such a stark and polarized manner. The court scene in which Nell's prognosis (on the subject of the ills of contemporary society) is stated, though poignant and lucid, will strike some viewers as too naive and simple-minded. There is something insidious, notwithstanding the film's many laudable intentions, about the rather partial (and largely negative) view of the work of psychiatrists and psychologists in hospitals: this aspect may trouble some who are aware of the dangers of scientism but who see no need to advocate an anti-scientific stance. Still, the fact that the film can raise so many important issues within a well-acted, competentlydirected and attractively-mounted story and still be quite entertaining is very much a point in its favour. It is worth a look. ÂŽ Raymond Y ounis


review Films continued

recognized. Adrift, Chabert has no

most important location in both

sex act in Walerian Borowczyk’s

film and novella. But even if one

1974 Contes Im moraux, as well

feels at times part of an

as to several films of Eric

audience at the Comédie

Rohmer), and he has long been

Française, one is there on a very

gaining a reputation. But

good night. The cast is simply

certainly in France his

superb, with many of France’s

performance as Derville has

choice but to abandon his fate

top actors at their peak: Gérard

lifted him to near iconic status.

to the world of lawyers. This is

Depardieu, Fabrice Luchini,

One simply cannot mention

the most bitter irony in a very

Fanny Ardent, Claude Rich and

Depardieu’s name without being

André Dussollier.

told how the real star of Le

incorporates explicit Catholic

black tale: a hero returns not to

beliefs and practices (some

glory and renewed life but to a

drawn from his letters).

world motivated by uncaring

cannot be cinematic when he


wants: the battle snowscapes of

performance Angelo gets from

Mary is a much more

All this is not to say Angelo

Colonel Chabert is Luchini. Yet another surprise is the

modest film and much more

[...] after the second-hand

Eylau, for example, are

Fanny Ardent as Comtesse

explicitly the life of a saint. But

clothes shop, a lawyer’s office is the m ost horrifying

masterly, painterly and

Ferraud, a striking actress in the

extremely powerful - a difficult

later Truffaut films who has

o f street markets our society has to offer. It is on a par

feat given audiences’ blasé

never really managed to escape

attitude to much cinematically-

criticism for being a model-

with the gambling house,

depicted carnage. Angelo’s mise-

turned-actress. Here, she is sublime, especially in the heart­

it is interesting to see how a secular Australia can handle saints in its cinema. © P eter M alone

LE COLONEL CHABERT Directed by Yves Angelo. Executive producer: Bernard M arescot Scriptwriters: Jean Cosmos, Véronique Lagrange, Yves Angelo. Based on the novella by Honoré de Balzac. Director of photography: Bernard Lutic. Production designer: Bernard Verzat. Costume designer: Franca Squararciapino. Sound: Pierre Garnet. Editor: Thiery Derocles. Cast: Gérard Depardieu (Colonel Chabert), Fanny Ardent (Madam e la Comtesse Ferraud), Fabrice Luchini (M aître Derville), André Dussollier (Monsieur le Comte Ferraud), Daniel Prévost (Boucard), Claude Rich (Chamblin). A Film par Film production. Australian distributor: Palace. 35mm. 110 mins. France. 1994.


he film which held the greatest critical attention in France as 1994 drew to a close was Yves Angelo’s L e Colonel Chabert. It is the most recent of several silent and sound adaptations of Honoré de Balzac’s novella, a work of such biting irony that it is generally ranked amongst Balzac’s finest.

the courts, the lottery office

en-scène is always crisp and the

and the brothel. What is the

tale always moves, despite the

rending scene where Chabert has

explanation ? Because

(inevitable) wordiness.

dinner in his chateau with his

perhaps they place dramas o f the human soul in a scene which is utterly indifferent to their hopes. Balzac was clearly ahead of his era in this dread of a world swayed by lawyers; it is also a tribute to his quality as a writer that he should prove so prophetic. Yves Angelo, whose work is

Given the tragic ironies that

devious wife, and touches her

befall the noble and hapless

best and worst sides in a

Chabert, it is hardly surprising

dialogue that imperceptibly

that Depardieu should have

shifts between betrayal and

been chosen; he is, after all, one of the cinema’s finest actors, and here he can majestically rekindle the soulful resignation

nobler senses catalyzed by guilt. It is a great scene in an excellent, if conservative, film. © S cott M urray

seen at the end of Cyrano de Bergerac (Jean-Paul Rappeneau,

little known in Australia, has

1992). What is surprising is

fashioned a traditional but solid

that, in many eyes, Depardieu is

LITTLE WOMEN Directed by Gillian Armstrong. Producer: Denise DiNovi. Co-producer:

adaptation of Balzac’s tale. The

outshone by Luchini, in the rôle

film is all rather theatrical, and

of Maître Derville, the lawyer to

Swicord. Based on the novel Little

looks at times like a filmed play,

whom Chabert entrusts his fate.

Women by Louisa May Alcott. Director

especially given the design and

Luchini has a long career

Robin Swicord. Scriptwriter: Robin

of photography: Geoffrey Simpson,

execution of several sets -

(one thinks back to his rôle as

Production designer: Jan Roelfs. Editor:

particularly at the lawyer’s, the

the recipient of a tidally-timed

Nicholas Beauman. Composer: Thomas Newman. Costume designer: Colleen Atwood. Cast: Winona Ryder (Jo March), Trini Alvarado (Meg March),

silent version in 1918; George

Kirsten Dunst (Younger Amy March),

Cukor’s 1933 remake with

Claire Danes (Beth March), Samantha

Katharine Hepburn in the

Mathis (Older Amy March), Susan

starring role of Jo March;

Sarandon (Mrs. March), Christian Bale (Laurie), Gabriel Byrne (Friedrich

It tells of Colonel Chabert,

at Eylau, but is considered dead in France and thus stripped of all identity. When Chabert returns to Paris two years later,


A Columbia Pictures Release, A Sony

Allyson, Margaret O’Brien and Janet Leigh; as a TV film in

Pictures Entertainment Company. Australian Distributor: Hoyts. 35mm. 118 min. 1994.


Mervyn LeRoy’s 1949 attempt with Elizabeth Taylor, June

Bhaer), Eric Stoltz (John Brooke).

a French army captain who miraculously survives the massacre of Napoleon’s forces

in the English language at least five times already: once as a

1978 with Greer Garson, Meredith Baxter, Susan Dey

hen Louisa May Alcott

and Dorothy McGuire; and

wrote a novel based on

yet again, as the least-known

he is penniless and unable to

her own childhood and her

and even-less-appealing BBC

convince people he is whom he

family’s life during the


says he is. There could be few

American Civil War, it became

things worse than for a society,

an instant hit upon its

interesting about the latest

and one’s acquaintances, to

publication in 1868. Ever since,

adaptation is that it seems to be

deny so totally one’s very

Little Women has featured as a

an “all-girl” initiative -

existence. The greatest denial is that

“must” on the reading lists of

befittingly, one would suggest,

generations upon generations of

in the case of this peculiarly

by his wife, Comtesse Ferraud,

good middle-class children. It is

“all-girl” novel - with producer

who has not only appropriated

little wonder, then, that such a

Denise DiNovi, writer Robin

his fortune but remarried. For

popular fiction has proven to be

Swicord, “founding” star(let)

her to preserve the life she holds

so attractive to filmmakers. It

Winona Ryder and director

dear, Chabert must not be

has been adapted for the screen

Gillian Armstrong as the driving

What is especially

C I N E M A P A P E R S • MARCH 1995

distant, she seems to be in a different film for much of her on-screen time. This, however, may just all be part and parcel of how she has interpreted her character, or how she was advised to. Ironically, the most difficult performance to admire is that of Winona Ryder. Admittedly, having the uneasy task of the eccentric Jo, who ages ever so subtly in 118 minutes, Ryder does do some things well. But one would be hard pressed to assess this as her best performance. Ryder tends to be spot-on in anything X-generational - Heathers (Michael Lehmann, 1989), Night on Earth (Jim Jarmusch, 1991), Reality Bites (Ben Stiller, 1994), etc. - but, no matter how hard she tries, she remains somewhat of a misfit in any other era but her own. She is not entirely successful in Bram Stoker’s Dracula (Francis Ford Coppola, 1992), or in The Age o f Innocence (Martin Scorsese, 1993), and here, once again in period garb, she does not adapt well. The point is arguable. Is it beneficial to have such a thoroughly-modern girl in a period character’s part so that she can be understood and related to by modern audiences, and therefore make the rest of the film’s narrative more easily forces behind this project. This

Armstrong for these): all are

| temporally-economic, presence

marriage and romance (for her

accessible? Or is it, in fact,

fact alone may be sufficient to

suggestive of a possible

| throughout the film. Eric Stoltz

time, anyway), and it is only

unsettling for the unifying tone

explain why 1994’s Little

Academy Award nomination.

i is quite funny and eccentric as

appropriate that she should end

of the whole film, so carefully

'Women is the best, the most

And fake snow has never looked

1 the slightly repressed tutor, John

up with a man who looks so

constructed through the

intelligent and truly

so good! Even the second unit’s

| Brooke. With a stroke of a light

peculiar beside her.

production design, the

feminine/feminist version to

“seasonal” montages are

i contemporary touch upon an

date. But there are, of course,

entrancing. The aesthetic

| old-world character, Stoltz’s

the best performance, by far, is

further reasons.

appreciation of all this is further

j performance imbues Brooke

that of Claire Danes in the rôle

enhanced by the expansive and

1 with something rather kinky

of Beth. A newcomer to the big

this debate, her “modernity”

visual feast. It is relentlessly and

lush scoring by Thomas

i behind the prim and proper

screen, Danes is subtle and quiet

often extends too far,

ravishingly beautiful. Production


1 façade. Christian Bale, playing

in her charm and sweetness, yet

particularly in the scene where

\ the difficult part of the rapidly-

devastating in her dying scene.

Jo tells Professor Bhaer of her

To begin with, the film is a

Then there is the cast. As

designer Jan Roelfs has already

Of the four “little women”,

cinematography and the dialogue? Whatever the outcome of

proven his talent in O rlando,

the above mention of past casts

i maturing Laurie, demonstrates

Trini Alvarado (as Meg) does

unusual upbringing by

and here he does it again by

may suggest, remakes of Little

1 again the talent he showed in

nothing outstanding, but, then

progressive Transcendentalist

creating the most historically-

W om en have often tended to

j Empire o f the Sun (Steven

again, perhaps this is the best

parents. One forgets for a

accurate, yet beautifully-

attract names that would not

\ Spielberg, 1987). Gabriel Byrne

manner in which she can

moment that one is looking at


become easily lost in the annals

i is an odd choice for Professor

contribute to the ensemble.

Jo March, and instead sees

settings. In this, he is aided by

of film history. The present cast

| Bhaer’s part, but miraculously it

Kirsten Dunst as (Young) Amy

Ryder being interviewed by

director of photography

is unorthodox in its

| works - not just because of his

is, unfortunately, not entirely

someone like David Letterman

Geoffrey Simpson’s best work

combination and stalwart in its

i overall performance, but in the

likeable. She either does nothing

on the topic of her intellectually

to date. The fearlessness of

total performance output.

1 complete romantic mis-

to hide the modern American

hippy parents.

\ matchment to Ryder’s Jo. This

kid of her real self, or interprets

March), who has already

i is one instance of intelligent

her rôle into cloying kitschness,

performance is extremely

Susan Sarandon (Mrs

lighting or, to be more precise, of not lighting too much; the

Moreover, though Ryder’s

many moods and tonal

demonstrated her ability to play

1 casting where it is as much a

reminiscent of Victorian soap

energetic, it is perhaps too

variations of colours; the

gentle-but-heroic mother types

| part of narrative as anything else

advertisements. Older Amy,

energetic when it comes to her

sudden quirky angles (and credit

in L orenzo’s Oil (George Miller,

I in the film: Jo is an unusual girl

played by Samantha Mathis, is

face and eyes in particular. It

should also be given to

1992), is a powerful, if

i with unusual ideas about

rather odd as well. Cool and

seems to be based on the lines

C I N E M A P A P E R S • MA RCH 1 995


in review Films continued

more so, than the spoken word. The images also record a filmmaker’s love of a city.

dazzling technique, but it is the

| tackling this novel yet again,

and finds there frissons and

subtlety of the moral shifts that

! particularly when it has already

feelings local filmmakers have

Their ideas and stories are of

1 been tried so many times

not. Dion Beebe, whose earlier

real value, but their essential

really set the film apart. In a Hollywood world of

\ before? The answer may lie in

cinematography had been so

exploitativeness clashes with the

cocaine-induced scripts and

| the US dollar figures this film

impressive, lights with the

purity of Stace (which may well

Oliver Stone excess, films about

be Johnston’s point).

young murders can hardly be

| since it opened there, on

’40s noir, who sees in the

[...] sharp, gray eyes, which

| Christmas Day.

© Em m a Coller


were by turns fierce, funny, or

Briefly N oted

thoughtful.” Ryder’s eyes are

| i

ETERNITY D irected by Law rence Johnston,

i Producer: Susan M acK innon. A ssociate

camera. This is a conceited sort of thing to do, especially when

Depressingly, though, the in capitalist consumerism.

I has already returned in America

the need to flirt with the

Much will presumably have been written about Jackson’s

post-Stace artists are participants

our of the novel describing the

description to be indicative of

least brief mention here.

inspired by Stace’s deeds.

Sydney with rapturous eyes

character of Jo thus: “She had

brown, but she takes this

New Zealander - it deserves at

later artists and salesmen

A Melbournian, Johnston sees

touch of one in love with

appeared to see everything, and

out into the streets and those

producer: Law rence Johnston. !

As well, this section is a

expected to raise or present

deceptively confining but in

let-down dramatically after the

moral dilemmas beyond the

fact limitless palette of black

emotional high-point of the

most superficial. Rarely, does

and white the tools of a true

scenes leading up to Stace’s

the filmmaker take one down a

artist. The collaboration

death. Intellectually

path only to reverse one’s

between Beebe and Johnston

understandable, Johnston’s

perspective tellingly.

is one of the most striking in

decision is uncinematic - a

recent Australian cinema.

surprise in an otherwise

novel (L o o k at the Harlequins!)

gloriously cinematic, warm

where a character, after having

and noteworthy film.

walked down a street, is unable

At times, though, this preferencing of image is

Vladimir Nabokov wrote a

S crip tw rite r: Law rence Johnston,

J o is really not a flirt at all, but a i

to imagine the reverse journey.

D irecto r of photography: Dion Beebe,

Her vision is too space- and

young woman who is not


Editor: A nnette Davey. Production

altogether comfortable with


designer: Tony Campbell. M usic:


"S ym phony Da Pacim e D om ine" by


Ross Edwards. Sound designer: Liam

effort, Jackson achieves what


Egan. Sound recordist: Paul Finlay.

Nabokov’s character could not.

feminine wiles. Jo is supposed to be gauche, but what gaucheness Ryder displays seems


too cute. Ryder is smart in her


G ordon W eiss (Radio A nnouncer), Noel

acknowledgement of the


Jordan (Young Colin Anderson), Angus

public’s perception of her as the


Benfield (Young George G ittoes). The

argue she is simply doing her

The film travels with the girls in their headlong rush to passion and dismembered reality. To the audience, the parents

W itnesses: D orothy H ew itt, Remo I

G iuffre, M artin Sharp, George Gittoes,

appear as caricatured as they do


Robyn Ravlich, Colin A nderson, Jim

to the girls. But as the inexorable

| Low, Rex Beaver, M ark Balfour, Russell

job of being a Hollywood star. Ryder does not, though,

viewer from having to make the

C ast Les Foxcroft (A rthur Stace),

cute-but-hip waif, and she milks it for every drop. One could

time-bound. But by freeing the

steps to murder become more

Sharp, Tom Farrell, Ruth Ridley, !

manage to undermine what is a

certain, Jackson subtly shifts the

Reverend George Rees, Reverend

audience’s perspective from

Bernard Judd, Paddy N ew nham , M ay

thoroughly well-done job on


Thom pson, Helen Livingstone, Shirley

behalf of the writer and the


W ood, Ridley Smith, Trevo r Dallen,

travelling alongside the girls to standing in front of them; the headlong rush is now towards us,

Sydney Davies. Vivid Pictures.

director. Structurally, the novel

and we are powerless to stop

A u stralia n distribu to r: Ronin.

does not, in fact, lend itself

16mm. 55 mins. A ustralia. 1994.

them, no matter how much we

easily for narrative compression and interpretation to the big screen. It is fragmented and episodic, lacking in strong narrative drive. Written as a fictional family journal, it sacrifices narrative cohesion for the sake of fair allocation of

awrence’s Johnston’s Eternity, as many would

i now know, is a 55-minute

1 documentary ostensibly about j Arthur Stace, the first Australian ! graffiti artist, a man who, i inspired by a personal religious

counterproductive, because much of Eternity is talking heads. The words said, while interesting in themselves, are


might scream. The parents have become

Directed by Peter Jackson. Producer:

only too real, with lives and

Jim Booth. Executive producer: Hanno

feelings as gloriously flawed and

Huth. Co-producer: Peter Jackson.

precious as all others. This

nowhere as pertinent or

Scriptwriters: Peter Jackson, Frances

evocative as the images (which

makes the lead-up to the

Walsh. Director of photography: Alun

are backed with stylized natural

Bollinger. Editor: James Selkirk.

mother’s death harrowing in the extreme; it has the quality one

1 vision, went out and wrote

sound and/or Ross Edwards’

Production designer: Grant Major.

and their particular stories.

| the word “Eternity” on the

music). The resulting tension

Composer: Peter Dasent. Costume

Swicord’s and Armstrong’s

! streets of Sydney and surrounds

between image and word

designer: Ngila Dickson. Sound

execution might have. Few films

deprives Eternity of the fluidity

recordist M ichael Hedges. Cast

in history have so powerfully

time to each of the characters

process of extracting the essential dramatic plot points, and embellishing them with

i some 500,000 times over

\ 40 years. This is a film obsessed with

it needs, and the narrative drive a more conventional

descriptive background detail,

i the tone and textures of image

documentary might have

makes for a less-than-fluid

1 (thus echoing Johnston’s earlier


Melanie Lynsky (Pauline Parker), Kate W inslet (Juliet Hulme), Sarah Peirse (Honora Parker), Diana Kent (Hilda Hulme), Clive Merrison (Henry Hulme), Simon O'Connor (Herbert Rieper). A

imagines a live telecast of a real

preferenced life, so plainly evoked the wrongness of its forced deprivation. H eavenly Creatures is worlds apart from most modern

narrative and some rather dull

| Night Out, a touching and

As well, the theoretical

M iram ax International presentation of

moments. Nevertheless, it is still

i photographic love story with

aspects of the film are at times

a W ingNut Films-Fontana Film

a highly-admirable effort. Also,

i gay undertones). Alongside

clumsy and too obvious. This

Production co-production in

the archaic morality and

j BeDevil (Tracey Moffatt, 1993),

can be seen in all that follows

association with the N ew Zealand Film

dialogue of the novel require

\ Broken Highway (Laurie Mclnnes,

the death of Stace. Various

talent and intelligence to make

i 1994) and M em ories & Dreams

Sydney artists, performers and

it acceptable to 1990s audience,

j (Lyn-Marie Milburn, 1994),

entrepreneurs talk of Stace’s

and here Swicord and

1 Eternity is a celebration of the

legacy and the influence of his

Armstrong are again successful.

i visual in preference to the literary.

work on theirs. In some ways,

will already have had its run by

• It believes images can impart and

this section elicits a telling

the time this issue is released.

(New Zealand’s finest DOP)

question: Why, if it’s so

\ evoke memories and ideas and

connection between the

However, it is such an important

glowing in its autumnal

difficult, would one bother

I emotions as powerfully, if not

presence or voice that sent Stace

work - surely the finest by any


All this, though, begs one



cinema - not only in the brilliance of Jackson’s craftsmanship, but the maturity

Commission. Australian Distributor:

and complexity of the defining

Village Roadshow. 35mm. 99 mins. 1994.

vision. If not already seen, track


eavenly Creatures, Peter

it down - in the cinema where it

Jackson’s fourth feature,

belongs, and with the photography of Alun Bollinger

© S cott M urray

C I N E M A P A P E R S • MA R C H 1 995

o o n





R E Interested

G1 film




E _R j writers,

The New South Wales Film and Television

Government or statutory body representing

Office has the sole responsibility to make,

the Crown in New South Wales. All work

producers and production companies

promote and distribute films and videos

is placed with the private sector of the

are invited to contact the Government

for or on behalf of any department of the

film and television industry in NSW.

Documentary Division.













A N D 2010




( 0 2 ) 3 8 0 6 5 99




109 0



Special Performing Arts rates for our Fully Self Contained & Serviced Apartments • C o m fo rta b le 4 S ta r A p artm en ts

• S erviced D aily

• Just Ten M in utes fro m the CBD

• T ran sp o rt A v a ila b le O utside Our Door • R ight in The H eart of C osm opolitan St K ilda CALL TOLL FREE 1 8 0 0 0 3 3 7 8 6 TODAY!

FROM THE MECCA OF WESTERN FILM MAKING, HOLLYWOOD, COMES THE MAKE-UP RANGE TO REVOLUTIONISE THE INDUSTRY. In the tradition of the great Max Factor, today’s Chairm an of the M ake-up Artists Committee for the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences, Leonard Engelman successfully managed to make his m ake-up expertise available to the whole industry for the first time, TaUT. F e a th e rlig h t w aterp ro of fo u n d a tio n s for a ll s k in p igm en ts, co n to u rin g shadow , stro n g pigm ented co lo u rs an d a su p erb lip s tic k ran g e. E x c e lle n t for TV, F ilm , P h o to g rap h ic sh o o ts an d A dvertising p ro d u ctio n s. U sed by th e s ta r s of M elrose P la ce to B a tm a n F o rev er to m ega s ta r s su c h a s C her, V al K ilm er, M ichelle P feiffer an d Meg Ryan.

TaUT 1800814572 or (02) 212-4301 A gents req u ired in V ic, WA, SA, & NZ. Suite 303A /3 Smail Street, Broadway, 2007.

Credit card facilities available over the telephone. M ake-up: N apoléon

Photography: Jam es Dip las, Hair: Rebecca Mendham


in review



N e w York, 1994, hb, 208pp., illus., index, rrp S69.95

does not extend his generous manner to the contemporary designers of the 1960s to the

extremely interpretive analysis,

present. In fact, his few

sometimes resulting in an

inaccuracies of recent film

oversimplification of the

history, such as declaring Blue

production designer’s intentions.

Velvet Patricia Norris’ only

His account of the

production design credit to date,

“metaphorical use of color” in

questions possible inaccuracies

The G odfather II (designed by

about earlier designers of whom

Dean Tavoularis) of “Vito’s

less is known. The recent films that

symbolically, catches fire from

Sennett describes most fully are

the exploding gunpowder and

all of epic quality. This includes

burns red, then turns charcoal

period films (Barry Lyndon,

The publication of a book on

black, the colour of death”,

Amadeus and Empire o f the

production design in film is in

relies on detailed conjecture

Sun), futuristic films {Star Wars,

itself cause for instantaneous

rather than analysis of the

Blade Funner, Brazil), or films

purchases, so rare are books of

overall intentions of the

portraying a warped reality

any sort on this misunderstood


{Blue Velvet). He mentions in

realm of film. Robert S.

in 1976 by Leon Barsacq,

design in film is still expectantly

himself an art director


passing that “truly realistic

Sennett’s beautifully-illustrated

such as Hans Dreier (D ouble

dramas such as Ragiitg Bull

survey attempts to demystify the

Indemnity, Sunset Boulevard),

(1979) or Midnight Cow boy

role of the production

William Cameron Menzies

(1969) have deliberately modest

designer/art director and give

('Things to C om e, G one With the

and iconoclastic art direction”.

proper credit to the little-known

Wind), John Box (Lawrence o f

This points at Sennett’s bias and

art directors, while following

Arabia, A Man For All Seasons),

why his book is far from

the history of set design from

“unsung hero” of film. In his

and Richard Day (D odsw orth,

comprehensive. It is

The Birth o f a N ation (1915) to

piece on Citizen Kane, Sennett

On the Waterfront), are filled

disappointing for Sennett to

Batm an (1989).

discloses the importance of the

with admiration and careful

take such a limited view,

actual art director, Perry

description of their approach

thereby including only about 35

Ferguson, and thankfully explains the credited name of

follow the complete history of

Grand Illusions). AN AUTOBIOGRAPHY

Stagecoach and North by

Don Siegel, fo rw a rd by Clint Eastwood,

N orthwest, Sennett tends to

Faber and Faber, hb, 500pp., rrp $45

romanticize the designer as the

Hollywood biographies are chancy enterprises, tending toward self-congratulatory sameness. Siegel’s A Siegel Film certainly knows whom its hero is, but that doesn’t keep it from

and solution to each film. In

set design, he manages to

addition, the designer’s

from the period post-1975, as

Van Nest Polglase on this and

concentrate heavily on “the

relationship to the director,

so little information is available.

nearly every other film at

golden age of art direction”, the

director of photography and the

Possibly the most complete

Paramount and RKO of this

book on the subject was written


In the complete examinations of films such as Citizen Kane,

films out of more than 200

period of his obsession, 1930-

© Sarah S tollman

{Caligan’s Cabinet and Other

The profiles of designers

Though Sennett professes to

being a lot better than the average. Don Siegel’s career as editor, director, writer, and

period. Polglase acted as an

producer ran from the 1930s to

1955. Although his analysis and

administrator and link to

insight on this period is often

the studio, but in very few

engrossing, this depth of

cases as a creative

information regrettably does not

contributor. Similarly,

extend to the present. As if

Sennett outlines the rôle of

echoing his favoured period,

Wiard Ilmen as designer

to luck, bluff, talent, hard work,

Sennett’s celebratory language

with John Ford on

intelligence and strategic

the ’80s. He began as a gopher in Warner’s film library, at the bottom of the rigid studio system, rose up the ranks thanks

and nostalgic style detract from

Stagecoach, and Robert

mendacity, finishing as an

the presentation of historical

Boyle with Hitchcock on

independent producer-director

and critical material.

North by Northwest.

in the dispersed, chaotic

Sennett breaks his book into


documented. But unfortunately, with few exceptions, Sennett

this material through an

white towel, which, also Robert S. Sennett, H arry N. Abram s,

art department is well

Although it is accurate

production environment of the

twelve chapters. The first nine

that the designer is the least

1980s. From his first film, The

are divided by genre, each

celebrated of the three main

Big Steel in 1949, he was a

structured chronologically, with

creative rôles in film, Sennett’s

practical, commercial director,

titles like “Silent Spaces: Aart

words evoke the Hollywood

successful enough to make

Direction Before Sound,” and

of the 1930s, ’40s and ’50s

thirty-some features, finishing

“Sagebrush in the Corral: the

rather than a less innocent

with Jinxed in 1982. Along the

Hollywood Western.” His final

contemporary viewpoint. His

way, he directed Dirty Harry,

three chapters are devoted

introductions and closures

Invasion o f the Body Snatchers,

respectively to Alfred

particularly maintain this trite

Riot in C ellblock 11, The Killers,

Hitchcock, the designer

style beginning with his first

Escape From Alcatraz, The

Richard Day, and “Two Color

line, “The first art director was

Beguiled, etc. Nor was he prissy

Masterpieces: Mary Poppins

a carpenter.” This allusion to

about television; the book contains an informative

and G one With the Wind. ”

Christ sets a nostalgic rather

Sennett is able to present a

than historical tone to the book.

appendix detailing his television

complex body of historical

Sennett’s anecdotes and wonder­


and anecdotal information

ful stills and sketch collection

within a filmic and

shape this book, but a serious

by Siegel’s first-person voice:

sociological context. Yet he sifts

and complete history of set

cocky, combative, proud of his

The book is held together

C I N E M A P A P E R S • MA RC H 1 995


craft. Never installed by the

Critical; Information; etc.), with

o f B angkok, which is clearly a


industry as one of its icons, he

each major section preceded by

dramatic feature (after all, the


was nonetheless closer to the

a concise but informative article

lead actress, Yagwalak

top than the bottom - a good

(by Jock Given, Jeremy Bean

Chonchanakun, plays a

vantage point. While Siegel - in

and David Court, Mary Anne

character other than herself

this account - always gets the

Reid, Blake Murdoch, and Peter

called Aoi), is not included in

last word in conversations, he

Langmead, respectively).

A le xa n d e r W alker, W eid e n fe ld &

Frank Beaver, Tw ayne P ublishers, N e w

hb, rrp $34.94

York, 1994,410 pp., pb

“Feature Films Released

secrets. Aside from

documentary, is. Also, to call

immersion in Siegel’s

the video Bloodlust a “feature


professional persona, the

film” is to rather over-stretch

Edited by Paul Loukides and Linda K.

book gives a great deal

the meaning of the word

of information in three


One useful addition in the

detailing feuds or

Theatrically in Australia 19909 3 ”, but The Castanet Club,

revealing embarrassing

which is clearly a

areas: the operation and

Fuller, B ow ling Green State U niversity ^ Press, B ow ling Green, 1993,280 pp., pb, rrp $18.95

It is disappointing that

development of the

G et the Picture has not taken

Hollywood production

on board the pioneering

system; production

research of others working in

scholars, exploring the filmic

history details from films

similar fields, or adopted the

conventions of place.

Siegel has been involved

standards of the Chris Longs

in; and, perhaps most

of this world. After all, if any

interesting of all, how

one body is in the position to

Siegel thinks about

incorporate all the new

creating a sequence -

research which is found to be

how he breaks it down

accurate, and to help ensure

into elements and joins


BIG SCREEN SMALL SCREEN: a p r a c t ic a l GUIDE TO W R ITIN G FOR FILM AND T.V. IN AUSTRALIA Coral Drouyn, A llen & U nw in, St Leonards, NSW , 1994,167 pp., pb,

the public record, then the

movement. His work defines the

new edition is “Fast Facts

AFC is that body. It has the

centre of the modern American

1993”, which encapsulates a

money, the personnel and the

action film: clean, wasteless,

year in key stats. These then

precise, kinetic,

lead one on to myriad of more

multi-layered, unselfconscious.

detailed stats, graphs and

Get the Picture is a reference

diagrams, where one can read,

to be valued.

Siegel fashions the

rrp $19.95


government brief to do it. Apart from this small gripe, ® S cott M urray

collection of eighteen essays by eighteen American film

recurrent errors disappear from

it to a central

good sense of humour and more than a dash of down-to-earth pragmatism. The exercises are fun! Even if you are not a

from his life, some of which are

expertise to attest to the

which one would like to be true.

excellent in this field.

As a junior-junior assistant at

As well, the book is

Warner’s in the 1930s, an

peppered with B&W stills, is

economy drive forbade telephone

handsome to hold and easy to

use to all but top executives. In

use. All in all, as has been said

an attempt to impress his boss,

by this author in reviews of

Siegel fixed the situation: he let

previous editions, this is a book

the switchboard operators know

to be read, used and applauded.

that he was Jack Warner’s bastard son.

® R. J. T hompson


At the same time, there are some deficiencies that are not

Books Received

prove to be a thoroughly enjoyable diversion.


rrp $29.95

M ich a e l Finney Callan, Pan Books, London, 1994,361 pp., illus., pb,

ought. For example, many film

rrp $14.95


a co-authored auto) keep on coming. Along with Peter Manso’s mammoth tome, there is this one by Robert Tanitch, which is a much less warts-and-

Braid, The Sher Mountain

all tale.

Killing Mystery, A Country Life, The Fatal B ond [sic], et al). Some of the determinations


about ‘Australianness’, too, are


Sydney, pb, 240pp., illus., rrp $25

puzzling. Why is Fortress, a film


part-financed and -produced (in

invaluable reference for those

a company sense) by the

interested in the size and shape

Australian Village Roadshow

of the Australian film, television

Pictures, called “foreign”,

and video industries.

whereas The Piano is considered totally Australian, despite being

edition is much the same as the

entirely shot in New Zealand

second (Review of the year

and French-financed?

been; Production; Distribution;

C I N E M A P A P E R S • MA RC H 1 995

Equally, The G o o d "Woman

short biography (Viking, 1971) on Edith Wharton, the field has been rather dominated by R. W. B. Lewis with his excellent if ‘standard’ biography (Harper and Row, 1975). However, there is now Eleanor Dwight’s “illustrated biography” as an excellent alternative. It will be of particular interest to those whose interest in Wharton starts

and quality of photographs. Like all Abrams books, it is beautiful to look at, hold and read. It is also sympatheticallywritten, making it a must for anyone with an interest in one of America’s finest and, until recently, least-appreciated writers.

GRETA & CECIL Diana Souham i, Jo nathan Cape, London, 1994,271 pp., Illus., hb

INGMAR BERGMAN: FILM A ND STAGE R obert Em m et Long, H arry M . A bram s, N e w York, 1994,208 pp., illus., hb, rrp $80


LOOKS AND FRICTIONS Paul W illem en, B ritish Film Institute

S tuart Cunningham and Toby M iller,

and Indiana U nive rsity Press,

Edited by Jo nathan Dennis, Le Giornate

U NSW Press, Sydney, 1994,184 pp., pb,

Lo ndon-lndiana, 1994,263 pp., pb,

del Cinema M uto, Pordenone, Italy,

rrp $24.95

rrp $29.95

entirely shot in Australia and

Picture is the best yet and an

pamphlet (University of Minnesota, 1961) and brilliant

he Brando biographies (and

titles are wrong (The Golden

(eds), A u stra lia n Film C om m ission,

The structure of the new

or two out of this book may

A ustralia , NSW , 1994,192 pp., illus., hb,

being addressed as perhaps they

Rosem ary C urtis and S helley S priggs

This third edition of G et the

novice, but simply having a writer’s block, doing an exercise

R obert Tanitch, Random House


iven the rarity of the Louis v JA u ch in clo ss’ pioneering

adaptations, given the number

budding scriptwriters, with a

study and ponder for hours.

AFC’s track record is generally

1994,296pp., illus., hb, rrp $69.95

with the recent spate of film

This author doesn’t have the

which are probable, and some

E leanor D w ight, A bram s, N e w York,

comprehensive and

autobiography as a screenplay,

accuracy of all the stats, but the


intelligent handbook for

crammed with dialogue scenes fundamentally accurate, some of


N icolson, London, 1994,319 pp., illus.,


isn’t interested in settling scores,

DICTIONARY OF FILM TERMS: t h e / e s t h e t ic

1993,44 pp., pb, rrp $15





Paul Ju lian Sm ith, Verso, London, N ew

M ic k M a rtin and M arsha Porter,

Diana M a yc h ick, Pan Books, London,

York, 19 94,169pp., illus., pb,

B allantine Books, N e w York, 1994,1581

1994,239 pp., illus., pb, rrp $12.95

rrp $34.95

pp., pb



Armstrong It was very hard for me to contemplate sending someP 9 one else to direct any shots for my movie. This wasn’t like sending out a second unit to do dawn shots; these were shots that had to be fitted into the story. I had the idea then to check if any of the Australian cinematogra­ phers who live in LA would be able to do it. I said, “Ring an Australian cinematographer and see whether there is a com m ercial director around, because I trust their opin­ ion.” They rang [DOP] Peter Levy, who said, “Well, Mark Lewis is here and we’ve worked together. We’d be happy to do it.” It was a very odd situation to sit down and draw my storyboard and go through the scenes with Mark and Peter and say, “You know, I want the soldiers coming in here. And, if you get the church again, the last time I moved left to right, so move left to right again.” They were fantastic and I felt a wonderful brotherhood in being helped out by some other Aus­ tralians. I said to Peter, “You know this has got to look good. This is Geoffrey’s Academy Award that you are helping!” So often Academy voters vote for landscape. They never under­ stand what a cinematographer really does. Movies that have pretty land­ scape shots in them are the ones that get nominated. So I said, “You have a huge burden on your shoulders! You’re going back for the landscape shots!” They did a great job with the Fall sequence and I owe them both a big lunch! How much of the post-production did you do in Australia? We did it all in Australia. [Editor] Nick Beauman came over to Canada and was cutting as we were going. As soon as we wrapped, we all flew straight back to Sydney. Nick, unfor­ tunately, had to start with a new assistant: he had a Canadian assis­ tant there and an Australian assistant here. He did the final cut here. We also did all the sound here. Lee Smith was our sound designer and he had a huge team of sound editors, because it was such a short post-production. I think we had almost twelve people working on the sound. Tim Jordan, who did all the dia­ logue tracks, came back to me in America, while I did all the post-sync with the actors.


I then had to point out to the studio that the best way to make use of the time we had was to shoot the titles in Australia as well, and to do all the initial grading here. So, Belinda Bennetts from Animal Logic, who did the titles on [The Last Days of] Chez Nous [1992], designed the title sequence and they were shot here by Roger Cowland at Atlab. Then, Arthur Cambridge, who has done the timing [grading] on all my films since The Singer and The Dancer [short, 1976], did the timing and the interneg here. It was only taken back to America for the final print, at the studio’s wish. We did the sound mix at Soundfirm with Gethin Creagh and Martin Oswin, and also with Phil Heywood from Atlab. Because it was so pres­ sured, we also did some FX mixes at Atlab. We were actually using two sound stages at once. Only the final prints to the soundtrack were done in America, because the studio wanted a Sony Digital track and the Americans are the only ones who have the technique to do that. So, the entire post-production was done in Australia. Rosemary Dority at Spectrum was our pro­ duction co-ordinator. Everybody worked day and night to get this film out. We fin­ ished the sound mix at 3.30am on Thursday in Sydney. Gethin had to get back in the next day and do transfers so they could go off to LA. By Sunday, they were printing in LA. Nick Beauman arrived on Mon­ day to check the first print off. I arrived on Tuesday and checked the second print, and the first press screening was that afternoon. Then I checked the various prints and Dolby SR, Dolby A and the Sony Digital soundtrack. It was crazy not to have the sound mixer there to check the prints. Gethin then came over to LA. One day later, we started the press junket with all the girls. The premiere was on the Sunday night and the follow ing Wednesday it opened. So how are you feeling now? I’ve had three weeks at the beach, and now I’m ready to have the next six months off! [Laughs]. Do you know what you might be doing this time next year? Actually, my aim now is to go back to reading books and see a few movies. I haven’t seen a movie in a while. At one stage, it looked as if you might have wanted to be a writer.

You're a filmmaker who is very attracted to writers. Someone else has pointed out to me how many stories I’ve done about writers; The Last Days o f Chez Nous is another. I said, “It’s not that I go looking for stories about writers, but that writers have w ritten stories about themselves. They have often been their most honest works and I’ve reacted to the honesty of their writing.” To me, they are stories about people trying to find their artistic pathway. It happens to be writing because writers have written those books. But no, I’ve always wanted to be in the visual arts. ©

Simpson The only scene I think we storyboarded was the icep12 skating sequence, partly because we were very pinched for time and money. We had to make sure that every single shot was used. By the way, that’s not ice either. It is all pretend: teflon and all that sort of stuff. It was quite a tricky thing to pull off. Now that you are doing many American films and working with big­ ger budgets, is it harder to come back and do Australian films? A little bit harder, probably. But even in America there are compro­ mises on big-budget films, though of a different degree, obviously. I remember being very surprised when I walked onto one of the loca­ tion surveys with Green Card. I’d been muttering to the gaffer about how three cherry pickers and 12Ks in each of them would be good for such and such. We then had a pro­ duction meeting and someone piped up, “Geoff wants this and this.” I got everything I had mumbled about on my wish list. That sort of thing is unusual in Australia. Americans have the atti­ tude that the way to solve a problem is to throw money at it, whereas Australian crews try to make it work with a number 8 piece of fencing wire. The attitude here is that there is always another way to solve a problem; it doesn’t have to be the most expensive way. Still, it can be difficult coming back to do pictures. Obviously you want to keep the standard as high each time, and probably get better on each film you do. That means you have to be even more thorough with pre-production and planning

here, and make that lack of time and money work for you. Are you doing an Australian film next? Yes, it’s a film called Shine, about David Helfgott, a child pianist who basically becomes a very damaged human being and is institutionalized for 10 years. He then gets out and comes back, still damaged, but a bril­ liant musician. It’s a fantastic story, a father-son relationship, partly set in England and partly back here in Australia. Scott Hicks, who is directing it, has had the screenplay for five years. He won an Emmy late last year for his documentary Sharks o f Steel. He’s also made several features and doc­ umentaries. He has been itching to do this for a long time, and I ’m really looking forward to it. What, in fact, attracted you to cinematography? My background was art school. I went to the South Australian School of Art and did a Graphic Design course. I was very interested in still photography and had a dark room in the bathroom. I also started to watch a lot of festival-type films and really fell in love with the medium. I travelled to England and did a year at the Lon­ don Film School, then back to South Australia in the early days of the South Australian Film Corporation. That was a fantastic time for all of us, because we were working in dif­ ferent departments on a lot of different films, on documentaries, short dramas and a lot of the early SAFC features. Like Picnic at Hanging Rock [Peter Weir, 1975]! I was Electrics 1 on Hanging Rock, and an assistant director on Sunday Too Far Away [Ken Hannam, 1975]. I had a wide range of experience and worked with a lot of different peo­ ple, which was fantastic. I then started shooting docu­ mentaries and television com ­ mercials for the SAFC. It was a great training ground. How do you feel about your work at the moment? It is wonderful and totally extraor­ dinary that I am able to pick and choose the sort of projects that I do. Being able to say “N o” feels very strange, but I am very lucky to have reached the point in my career when I do have that freedom of choice to do a film which is the sort of film I’d go and see in the cinema. © C I N E M A P A P E R S • MA RCH 1995


new media ___

the occasional black frame made this film (in contrast to f7 0 7 the more “retro-form alist” inspired films on exhibition) a welcome viewing experience. Karl K els’ black-and-w hite zoo film, 1993 Karl Kels, a precisely-crafted “m inim alist” w ork, redolent with absurd humour and a self-reflexive exploration of the vocabulary of struc­ tural cinema, was an accomplished film of note. Featuring two identical takes of hippos from the same camera posi­ tion, this popular film deftly examined the cinematic and structural relation­ ships between the animals, light, space, movement sequences and water. The colour animation film, Ah Pook is here (1 9 9 4 ), by Philip Hunt, a witty and subtle adaptation of a William Bur­ roughs text, displayed a very elliptical use of analogue and digital concerns and techniques. Hunt’s playful approach to his subject - “Ah Pook the Destroyer” is situated in a post-apocalyptic uni­ verse debating with his alter ego the metaphysical dialectic between life and death, etc. - colours the conceptual and formal architecture of this impressive puppet animation work. Klaus Wyborny’s autobiographical film, Aus dem Z eitalter des Ubermuts (Dischtung und W ahrheit) (From the Age o f High Spirits (Poetry and Truth), 1981-1994), a multi-faceted comic and lyrical work, loosely based on Goethe’s representation of his own youth, is notable for the filmmaker’s accom­ plished, subtle approach to his subject. In a m ajor critical sense, this film (which is the fourth part of a fivepart series) is a clever exploration of recent European intellectual history as experienced by an individual who sees the world as a place for the continual enrichment of one’s own emotions and thoughts. For this w riter, one of more impressive tapes was Mike Kelley and Paul McCarthy’s collaborative colour piece, Heidi (1992-3). Its transgressive themes, structured on Joanna Spyri’s novel of the same name, dealing with sexual abuse of children, death, insanity/normalcy, and the illusory nature of life, are graphically rendered by the innovative use of partial and life-size rubber dolls and two large painted backdrop sets. It was shot entirely on claustrophobic set which was installed at the centre of gallery. H eidi, with its powerful Bataillean undercurrents and many references to horror cinema, modernism and perform ance art, polarized the audience. It is a scorch­ ing performance video (one of the best in recent years) that critiques the seam­ less architecture of filmic language and the myths lived by all in the name of C I N E M A P A P E R S • MA RCH 1 995

art, social conformity and rationality. Robert CahenV V oyage d ’H iv er (1993) was also one of the more laud­ able tapes on show. Its bright colours (reds, blues, yellows and greens), shot in Cahen’s characteristic pointillist style of electronic image-making, effectively captured the poetic silence of the Antarctic. We see and hear the earth, sea and wind in a slow-motion chore­ ographed image, and the soundtrack is of exquisite beauty. People are shown in extreme close-up and long shot as they journey in the awesome ice wilderness. C ahen’s tape, with its haunting, fleeting images, evokes a lost childhood; it speaks of memory, reverie and the unattainable. The installation component of the Festival had several interesting works. Boris Gerrets’ meditation on time as an expression of im mobile eternity (inspired by a St. Augustinus text), enti­ tled T im elP iece (1 9 9 4 ), with its spherical structure of a twirling mon­ itor enclosed in a cosmological-looking globe, is a captivating work that pro­ pels the viewer to walk around the installation like a satellite going around a planet. Our perception of the vividlycoloured images on the m onitor changes as we navigate this highlyresolved installation. M artin Spanjaard’s neo-Dadaist rolling interactive robot ball, A delbrecht, is also a witty work (that speaks to you) as it zig-zags its way across the floor of the gallery. A d elb rech t is a seven-year-old robot that signifies to the engaged gallery spectators not only the complex history and iconography of the robot in the history of sciencefiction cinema and the new electronic media, but, in its dialogue with you, conveys quite directly a sense of reflex­ ive humour as it interacts with the patrons. Nigel Johnson’s interactive instal­ lation, Observer, Observed (1994) - as its title suggests - is a fairly uncompli­ cated T-shaped delineation of the artist’s long-standing interest in the fas­ cination for our own self-reflected images. Johnson’s piece consists of two basic parts structured towards render­ ing the gallery viewer’s interactive bodily movements as a source of voyeurism for other visitors. Another installation which had a large spectacular form to it was Haruo Ishii’s Hyperscratch. The gallery-goer can interact quite easily with a touch­ screen monitor, thereby manipulating images and sounds that resemble the audio-visual forms and concerns of a video game which are projected on to a large video screen. Immersed in an enormous creative space, the gallerygoer experiences these images and sounds in a form of real-time synchro­ nization that is in marked contrast (so

Ishii argues) to the hyper-reality of our global communication systems. The various seminars and work­ shops at Osnabrück centred on the current issues of the information super­ highway and contemporary media practice; interactivity as it relates to installation art (the Australian electronic artist Simon Biggs gave an informative talk on his more recent works) and the cinema (curators/producers Ingeborg Fülepp and Heiko Daxl also gave a stimulating presentation on their involvement with interactive cinema); virtual art (Ulrich Plank spoke about his current experimental work inspired partly by the visual ambience of the Sahara Desert); and, finally, the presentday distribution and funding problems facing experimental filmmakers and cul­ tural producers/curators working in a post-MTV Europe. On the latter theme, notable British film curators David Cur­ tis and Steve Bode participated, as did the German filmmaker Klaus Wyborny. Osnabrück provides one with a sig­ nificant keyhole appreciation of the current aesthetic and cultural forces shaping today’s European media land­ scape. Clearly, it is a significant festival site that has much to offer (like the Locarno Festival) in the way of what established and less-established experi­ mental film and media artists are doing in terms of the newer directions of vir­ tual reality, interactivity and computer animation. Above all, both Festivals provided ample proof that analogue and digital artforms are co-existing and enriching each other in ways we still have to chart. (©

festivals fighting, written by Sihanouk and shot right here in the d 39 b ** Myohyang Mountains, using a Korean crew, some extras and techni­ cal back-up, but imported Cambodian actors. The range of films at the Festival is surprisingly broad. It includes three Polish films (including a Felicks Falk), three Hungarian (including a Sandor Sara), three German (among them Fass­ binder’s The Marriage o f Maria Braun), films from Sweden, Finland (Rauni Mollberg), China (Country Teachers), Bangladesh (the subtle Chekhovian sis­ ter-drama, The Conch-blue Prison), films from Colombia, Peru, Cuba, Malaysia, Indonesia, India and Lebanon, among others. There are no American films. I was told they have attempted to arrange screenings of South Korean films and invited filmmakers, who wanted to come personally, but were refused permission. (A South Korean film team I dealt with before the Festi­ val expressed a desire to visit the North and have more contact, but could only

meet filmmakers from the North at overseas film festivals.) At the closing ceremony, A ya is given the most prestigious award in the Information section, the Prize of the Federation of Art and Literature Work­ ers Unions, its third international award. The Korean delegation is very warm in their congratulations. Many comment particularly on the detail in the film. Ironically, the film has been so well received here, but could not be released in South Korean, despite distributor interest, because, we were told, there is a ban on screening films that have Japanese songs in them. The top Jury Award goes to the very moving and restrained Vietnamese film, Wild Reeds, screened after the closing ceremony. At the closing ban­ quet, I sit at a table with, among others, members of the Palestinian embassy, representing their documentary In tifa d a h , who, on hearing I am of Norwegian background, tell me “Nor­ way is our friend.” At the start of my 23-hour train ride from Pyongyang to Beijing, a cheerful Mongolian producer rescues me from the compartment I was due to share with two well-dressed Chinese gentlemen, who have taken over all the luggage racks. We lunch with a Mon­ golian director and actress on fried fish, ham sandwiches and Korean soju liquor. They have a two-day trip to Ulan Bataar, and speak only Mongolian and Russian. I quickly exhaust my vocabulary and we carry on via a Russian-English phrasebook - much like writing an absurdist script. They are wonderfully warm people and have a marvellous sense of humour. As they were the runners-up in the Information section, we congratulate each other and apologize for missing each other’s films. I think this might be my last festival with Aya, unless I am invited to Ulan Bataar - or perhaps Bathurst next year. ©

legal ease ^____

all and not surprisingly caught up with the “let’s see what happens” practice which has been emerging amongst U.S. entertainment attorneys. However, one contingency: do not forget the laws of defamation and other actions in damages that would still exist for Taylor after the publication of the mini-series by NBC. In Australia, the Trade Marks Act together with the Trade Practice Act, and in particular s52 (false and mis­ leading actions), provides protection for famous persons and celebrities within Australia. Obviously, when Aus­ tralian films travel to the U .S., filmmakers must be now aware of the shift in law and the weaker position of celebrities. @


history After attending the Paris Exhi*12^3 bition in 190029, he contracted p43 with British distributors to send him films for exhibition at Sydney’s Centenary Hall in York Street. They opened with the 25-minute Funeral o f Q ueen Victoria on 23 March 1901JO, barely two months after the event. With shipping delays between England and Australia, it was then considered to be a speedy exhibition. Noting the profitability of exhibit­ ing news films of recent events, Blow planned to be the first to exhibit cover­ age of M elbourne’s Royal Visit in Sydney. He travelled to Melbourne with his assistants, shooting most notable events in the first week of the Royal Visit from carefully selected photo­ graphic stands.31 Concluding his coverage on 11 May 1901, he purport­ edly secured longer and more lively films than the “official” cameramen. Only Blow managed to film the interior of the Exhibition Building during the first opening of Federal Parliament on 9 May 1901. The scene is now a national icon through the famous Tom Roberts painting of the scene. The loss of Blow’s films makes the prediction of their value to posterity particularly ironic: It is doubtful whether any historian of English history after years of study and research, has given such true and valuable information of any royal event [...] The coming generation may yet be taught his­ tory by way of entertainment.32 The films were quickly processed and printed at Blow’s “Crown” photo­ graphic studio. He combined them with Warwick Trading Company films of the “Ophir’” s departure from England.33 The whole series went on show at Cen­ tenary Hall on 18 May 190134, weeks ahead of the official films’ first Sydney screening. While Blow’s operator F. J. Jenkins projected the pictures, a Mr Lyne narrated from the stage.3’ There were no identifying titles on films at that time. The quality of Blow’s show attracted a Command Performance, which he gave for the Duke and Duchess at Government House, Sydney, on 1 June 1901.36 Blow had then begun to shoot coverage of the Sydney Royal Visit, but no complete listings of his Syd­ ney coverage has yet been found. Perhaps the most notable aspect of Blow’s coverage was its length. His film of the Royal Review at Flemington alone comprised “14,000 pictures”3', or roughly 14 minutes of screen time. The whole show extended over two hours.38 Even given that the introductory films


were British, it was a significant, featurelength Australian film presentation by anyone’s standards. Following the season at Centenary Hall, Blow took the Royal Visit films for a tour of country New South Wales from 20 July to 5 October 190139, when he briefly re-occupied Centenary Hall. His last-known association with Aus­ tralian film production was in December 1901, when he shot footage of England versus Australia cricket test matches in Sydney.40 On 23 January 1902, his oper­ ator, Jenkins, gave a lecture on cinematography to the Photographic Society of New South Wales41, but sub­ sequently Blow wholly reverted to a career in “still” photography.

Filmography: Mark Blow's 1901 films As slides alternated with films in Blow’s shows, some items below may be just “stills”. Only Blow showed the films. There is no evidence of their sale to other exhibitors, and none of them is known to survive:

ernor-General of Australia [Lord Hopetoun] [...]43

9 May 1901. Earliest known reference: The Sydney Morning H erald, 20 May 1901, p. 3. 9

Filmography: Stephen Bond's 1901 films

E xh ibition B u ild in g Interior: O pening of Federal P a rlia m e n t

9 May 1901. Earliest known reference: The Sydney Morning H erald, 20 May1901, p. 2 10 T he Grand [M ilita ry ] R e v ie w on

None of these are known to survive. All w-ere 35mm films, made on Bond’s own camera and printer, and shown on pro­ jectors made by himself: 1

10 May 1901. Earliest known reference: The Sydney Morning Herald, 11 May 1901, p. 2.

6 May 1901. Earliest known reference: Everyones, Sydney, 13 June 1923, p. 38. 2

12 F ijian " W a r D a n c e " perform ed at Sydney S how ground by Fijian N a tiv e C onstabulary

c. 10 May 1901. Earliest known refer­ ence: The Sydney Morning Herald, 23 May 1901, p. 10.

Royal Procession Passing U nder th e S t K ild a A rch

11 The Trad es Procession [M e lb o u rn e ]

11 May 1901. Earliest known reference The Sydney Morning H erald, 18 May 1901, p. 12.

Landing of th e R oyal C ouple at St K ilda P ie r

Flem ington R aceco u rse

6 May 1901. Earliest known reference: Punch, Melbourne, 23 May 1901, p. 607. 3

S to c km e n 's D isp lay

7 May 1901. Earliest known reference: Punch, Melbourne, 23 May 1901, p. 607. 4

Royal P arty R eturning A fte r O pening Federal P a rlia m e n t


A rriv a l of the "O phir"

13 Sydney: T he D uke A w a rd in g

at Port P h illip B ay

5 May 1901? Earliest known reference: The Sydney Morning H erald, 23 May 1901, p. 10. Showed the “Ophir” with a convoy of warships from various nations.

M e d a ls to B oer W a r V ete ran s

1 June 1901. Earliest known reference: The Sydney M orning H erald, 3 June 1901, p. 8. 14 England versus A u s tra lia T est C rick et


T he Landing at St K ilda P ier

6 May 1901. Earliest known reference: The Sydney Morning Herald, 11 May1901, p. 2.

December 1901. Earliest known refer­ ence: The Australasian Photographic Review, 21 December 1901. 2)


R eception by M a y o r and A ld e rm en at P rin ces B ridge

6 May 1901. Earliest known reference: The Sydney Morning Herald, 23 May 1901, p. 10. 4

The P rocession through S w an sto n S treet, M e lb o u rn e

6 May 1901. Earliest known reference: The Sydney Morning Herald, 20 May 1901, p. 3. 5

The S to c km e n ’s Procession

7 May 1901. Earliest known reference: The Sydney Morning H erald, 18 May 1901, p. 12. 6

T he C hinese Procession

7 May 1901. Earliest known reference: The Sydney Morning Herald, 18 May1901, p. 12. 7

Royal Party's D ep a rtu re from the R ecep tio n a t P a rlia m e n t House

8 May 1901. Earliest known reference: The Sydney Morning H erald, 20 May 1901, p. 3.


Scene Outside Exhibition Building: Opening of Federal Parliament

Stephen Bond's C overage

The pioneer Melbourne projectionist and film equipment manufacturer Stephen Bond has been discussed in Part 9 of this series (August 1994). He pro­ duced a flurry of Melbourne films at the time of the Royal Visit, shown to the Duke and Duchess at a Command Per­ formance at Government House, Melbourne, on Friday 17 May 1901.42 Stephen Bond’s son, Rupert, recalled the event almost 22 years later: We photographed all the [Royal Visit] celebrations, including the landing at St. Kilda, and were under Royal Command to show- the pic­ tures at Government House, Melbourne. We w-'orked day and night in the dark room to have them ready on time. We used our own [home-made] machine, and after the performance their Majesties con­ gratulated us on the splendid photography and projection, and were pleased to see that everything, including camera and machine, were made [by us] in Australia. The programmes were made of silk, and were printed in the colors of the Duke and Duchess, and of the Gov­

9 May 1901. Earliest known reference: Punch, Melbourne, 23 May 1901, p. 607. 5

T he C hinese P rocession

7 May 1901. Earliest known reference: Punch, Melbourne, 23 May 1901, p. 607. 6

Panoram a of S w anston S treet T aken from a T ra m c a r Going to St. K ilda

Shooting date unknown. Earliest known reference: Punch, Melbourne, 23 May 1901, p. 607. 7

Sydney: T e n t P egging By Indian [M ilita ry ] O fficers

c. January 1901. Taken around the time of the Inauguration of the Common­ wealth. Earliest known reference: Punch, M elbourne, 23 May 1 9 0 1 , p. 607. More films were almost certainly shot locally by Stephen Bond in 1901, as the Royal Command presentation on 17 May 1901 lasted “nearly two hours”44 and included one film which lasted “over twenty minutes”4’, which “was much longer than any (the Duke) had seen in the old country”46.

Next instalment British cameramen come to Australia to film the Royal Visit. Ackn owl edgem ents Pat Laughren and Griffith University (Brisbane), and their Australian Research Council Grant, provided the core financial support for this series. Their commitment to the importance of documenting Australia’s oldest films i l l N E M A P A P E R S , : M Afl-C H 1 9 9 5

contrasts strongly with the lack of archival work in this area. Others directly providing assistance for this article were: M elbourne: V ictorian Public Records Office: Ian McFarlane; Salva­ tion Army Archives: George Ellis; National Film & Sound Archive Mel­ bourne Office: Ken Berryman, Helen Tully, Zsuszi Szucs; military consultants: Barry Videon, W arrick Lisle; Ross Cooper; La Trobe Library Newspapers; M imi Colligan; Bob Klepner; Peter Wolfenden. Ballarat: J. A. Chisholm, F. & J. Puls. Sydney: Judy Adamson, Graham Shirley, Alan Davies, New South Wales State Library. Canberra: National Film & Sound Archive: Meg Labrum. Brisbane: Richard Fotheringham, Ron West, Kev Franzi. Gladstone: Pamela Whitlock. Hobart: Peter Mercer, Alison Mel­ rose; State Library of Tasmania: Tony Marshall. Britain: John Barnes of St Ives, Cornwall, our inspiration and mentor. New Zealand: Turnball Library, National Archives, Wellington. As always, we also extend thanks to our wives, Prue Long and Anne Sowry. 1 Sir Donald Mackenzie Wallace, The Web o f Empire, Macmillan, London, 1902, p. 3. 2 Ibid. 3 Ibid, pp. 6-7. 4 Ibid, p. 7. 3 Ibid, p. 8. 6 Ibid, pp. 15-112. 7 Video compilation Living M elbourne, released by NFSA, Canberra, 1988, includes the 6 May 1901 pan shot to which the authors refer. 8 Video compilation Living B allarat, NFSA, Canberra, 1990. 9 Sir Donald Mackenzie Wallace, loc. cit., p. 158. 10 Ibid, p. 211. 11 National Archives of New Zealand, Wellington, Colonial Secretary’s Corre­ spondence, I.A.l, 1908/864. 12 Sir Donald Mackenzie Wallace, loc. cit., pp. 238-60. 13 National Archives of New Zealand, Wellington, Colonial Secretary’s Corre­ spondence, I.A .l, 1 9 0 8 /8 6 4 . Letter 1 9 0 1 /2 2 7 9 . Letter from J. Perry to Premier Seddon listing film sequences, 17 July 1901. 14 A. J. West, Unpublished Memoirs (c. 1930), held by John Barnes, St Ives, Cornwall. 15 Sir Donald Mackenzie Wallace, loc c it, p. 440. 16 Victorian Public Records Office, Laverton: Company registration No. 9539, v. 933, box 39. 17 Victorian Public Records Office, Laver­ ton: Chief Secretary’s Correspondence Index, 1901, p. 15. Lists letter from

C T N E M A P A P E R S • MA RC H 1995

Salvation Army’s Secretary, W. Peart, offering to take a film record of the opening of Federal Parliament, dated 4 February 1901. 18 Ibid, Watson’s name is written on Joseph Rosenthal’s Melbourne press pass, held in Will Day collection, Cinémathèque Française, Paris, Inv. WD C94/1074. 19 The Australasian Photographic Review, 23 March 1901, p. 26. 20 Ibid., 22 May 1901, p.14. 21 Ibid, 22 May 1901, pp. 22-5. 22 Ibid, 23 March 1901 p. 2 6 ; 22 May 1901, p.14. 23 Ibid, 22 April 1901 p. 20. The planned Brisbane films were “The Arrival of The Governor” at Queensland and “The Pro­ cession




Brisbane”. Pamela Whitlock, formerly of Brisbane Town Hall Archives, says that in 1982 some Queensland Royal Visit 1901 films were found in their keep­ ing, but that the material was in nitrate decomposition by that time. The mater­ ial is more likely to have been 1954 Royal Visit material, but the possibility of the earlier material being shot can’t be entirely discounted. 24 The Australasian Photographic Review, 22 May 1901, p. 14; Daily Telegraph, Launceston, 27 May 1903, p. 4 ; Bris­ bane Courier, 11 September 1901. 23 National Archives of New Zealand, reference SS1/93, p. 175. 26 Ballarat Star, 13 May 1901, p. 5. 2/ The print was sent to the Archive by the late Roy Driver, formerly of Herschells Films Limited. 28 Pearson collected some of Ernest Hig­ gins’ personal collection of film soon after Higgins’ death. 29 A ustralian P hotographic Jo u rn al, 20 March 1900, p. 54. 30 The Sydney Morning Herald, 23 March 1901. 31 Ibid, 18 May 1901, p. 12. 32 A ustralian P hotographic Jo u rn al, 20 August 1901, p. 170. 33 The Sydney M orning H erald, 23 May 1901, p. 10. The departure films described here coincide exactly with Warwick Trading Company films nos. 6018 to 6024. 34 The Sydney M orning H erald, 18 May 1901, pp. 2, 12. 35 Ibid, 23 May 1901, p. 10. 36 Ibid, 1 June 1901, p. 10; 3 June 1901, p. 8. 37 Ibid, 20 May 1901, p. 3. 38 A ustralian P hotographic Jo u rn al, 20 August 1901, p. 170. 39 The Sydney M orning H erald, 20 July 1901; 5 October 1901, p. 2; 9 October 1901, p. 2. 40 The Australasian Photographic Review, 21 December 1901. 41 Ibid, 21 February 1902, pp. 57-8. 42 Punch, Melbourne, 23 May 1901, p. 607. 43 Everyones, Sydney, 13 June 1923, p. 38: “Another Pioneer of the Movies”. 44 Punch, Melbourne, 23 May 1901, p. 607 45 Ibid. 46 Ibid.

From the Soil So, you feel the Queensland p <!0 film community is on a level footing with the rest of Aus­ tralia and is developing good relationships with the other bod­ ies, federal and state? N ot yet, but give me a year and I think I’ll be able to answer that in the affirmative. Certainly in terms of the AFC I’d love to see at least a part-time office up here. The FFC is very good. They are very concerned to allow access on a broadest possible range, and this upcoming seminar is evidence of that. W e’d also certainly be inter­ ested in helping people get down to Sydney to talk with its invest­ m ent m anagers. Equally, I ’ll be suggesting to the F F C th at we mutually bring to Brisbane an investm ent m anager at regular intervals, simply for interaction, for information-sharing sessions. W e are n ot talking about a lo t o f people in my clien t base to w hom this applies, and they will also get some interaction by attending SPAA conferences. We underwrote attendance at SPAA last year for a number of emerging pro­ ducers, all o f whom found the experience extremely worthwhile. MIP and M IPCOM also afford natural opportunities to not only talk to the feds, but to network with more experienced people. O ne of the problem s here is that there really is no one to talk to. There has been a lot of apprehen­ sion and lack of confidence caused by the fact there is no opportunity for informative networking, simply because everyone is on about the same level. FQ has a natural role to play in reversing that situation. My aim is to see filmmakers in this office all the time, coming in ch atting, w hatever. T h a t h asn’t been the case in the past.

major role in the development of the industries in New South Wales and V icto ria - places like O pen Channel. W hat I have in mind is a pro­ fessionally-managed building which affords some basic facilities - small offices, meeting places, basic edit­ ing facilities, maybe a small studio, a rehearsal space - for any film ­ makers who wish to access it. It will also give the Brisbane industry a very strong feeling of id en tity , w hich it certain ly has lacked up till now, and which I’m very anxious to build up. Other key participants in the Brisbane industry are cultural organizations such as the Brisbane Independent Filmmakers Inc. (BIF), the Brisbane International Film Festival, the Queensland branch of Women in Film and Television (WIFT) and the Cinematheque. What do you see as Film Queens­ land's level of engagement with them? We have just completed a round of funding for these organizations, and we have funded them to the best of our ability. I think they are all very im p o rtan t, from B IF through W IF T , the C in em ath equ e, the Q ueensland Screen Producers, Murriimage and so on. There was a move a couple of years ago to force these bodies to amalgamate. The aim of amortiz­ ing overheads and administrative costs across a number of bodies was correct, but the strategy was com­ pletely ill-conceived. The Film Centre could well be the vehicle by which various service organizations are co-operatively run, managed and administered, while not forcing them to lose thenown identities.

Do you have any other initiatives in development at Film Queensland?

Once again one thinks of the value of SPAA's annual conference which initiates a connection between dis­ parate elements of the industry which doesn't occur for much of the rest of the year.

There are two of special interest. One is the establishment of a Exec­ utive Producer o f G overnm ent Films inside FQ. We did it at Film Victoria with very positive results, particularly on the less-experienced and smaller end of the industry. It actually helped a lot of people get their first break as directors and writers and so on. I have support for the idea, and I hope to see it in place within this calendar year. The other initiative is to estab­ lish a Film Centre in Brisbane. Film centres have historically played a

That’s true. I was president of SPAA when we held the first conference and the sole aim o f it was to get people to g eth er. Sure, we had speakers, a programme and all the rest, but the initial drive was simply to get people together at least once a year, to get them talking and shar­ ing th eir know ledge. And, of course, it works. FQ will be holding a sm all “Queensland-only” SPAA-type con­ ference in the middle of the year, again to encourage netw orking, information sharing and a sense of community in the local industry. ©


F F C Funding Decisions

Chinchilla Dry You Might As Well Live The Last True Action Hero

Docum entaries The Business of Making Saints


Television dram a-Television Features

Speak Quiet, Speak Strong Tales from Oceania

58 58

Cody 2

Legacy of the Wanton Boys


Doesn’t Everyone Want a Golden Guitar 5 8 Red Tides 58 Peter Allen - the Boy from Oz The Century of Cinema - 40,000 Years of Dreaming


Dealing with the Demon Bert Hinkler Flies Again

59 59

Bredl: A Man and His Crocodile

Television D ra m a -A d u lt M ini-series



Children's M in i-series Sun On The Stubble Ocean Girl 3

58 59

Television Drama Adult Tele-feature series


Faces of War: The Batde for the Empire 5 8 Faces of War: The Battle Comes Home 5 8 Ladies Please 58


Blue Murder



Bearfire - the Hot Pit Blackwater Trail Cosi What 1 Have Written

Lilian’s Story Lust Sc Revenge

59 59

All Men Are Liars




further series of three te le­ features about a Sydney "wild cop" called Cody. Irreverent, unpredictable and unbending, Cody isn't afraid to break the rules to get justice.


Documentaries THE BUSINESS OF MAKING SAINTS (55 m i n s ) A lbert Street P roductions EP: Peter T homas . P: Colleen M illing . D: M artin B rook. SW: J ulie M acken. uring Pope John Paul ll's visit he gave Australia its first s a in t M other M ary MacKillop. This documentary looks at the process of saint-making in an attem pt to demystify this ancient tradition of beatification and canonization. W h a t does it mean to be a saint? How does the Church decide who is one? W hy are miracles important to the Church and w hat role does politics play in making saints?


SPEAK QUIET, SPEAK STRONG (56 m i n s &30 m i n s ) Cudjuire Films EP: Barbara M ariotti. Ps: J enny Day, Cathryn Eatock. D: Cathryn Eatock. SW: Cathryn Eatock. his film looks at domestic violence in the Aboriginal community through compelling personal accounts and shows the positive steps these communities are taking to heal the problem of abuse.


Features Pre-production

TALES FROM OCEANIA (13x30 m i n s ) J uniper Films EP: Barbara M ariotti (SBS). P: J ohn T ristram . D: Ian J ames W ilson. SW: N adine A madio . tories and myths celebrating Asian and Pacific peoples: their traditions, customs, spirituality and the connections with everyday contemporary life.


LEGACY OF THE WANTON BOYS (27 m i n s ) W ildfilm A ustralia P: Peter Du Cane . Co-P: Gary Steer. D: Peter Du Cane . SW: Peter Du Cane . w o different animal families living in Australia serve as a m etaphor for the devastation of Aboriginal Australia by European settlement. This documentary follows the life cycle of the Numbat, a gentle marsupial that lives entirely on ants, and the European Red Fox, an aggressive introduced species w hich threatens the survival of native fauna. Ultimately the two families must m eet face to face in nature's killing fields.



Television Drama Television Features CODY 2 (3x90

m in s )

S outhern Star X anadu EP: Errol Sullivan. Ps: Sandra Levy, J ohn Edwards. D: Ian Barry ( plus one OTHER TO BE ANNOUNCED).

SWs: Christopher Lee, Peter Schreck. C: Gary Sweet, Robert M ammone .


documentary about the Tam worth Country M usic Festival w hich attracts over 70,000 fans and big name performers to a N S W country town for 11 days in January.

RED TIDES (55 m in s )

Crow Films EP: M ark Hamlyn (ABC). P: Owen J ohnston. D: J onathan Dawson. SW:J onathan Dawson.

60 60

Billy’s Holliday Countdown Cthulhu Epsilon Girl Love Stories Mighty Morphin Power Rangers On Our Selection

60 61 61 61 61 6 1 61 62

Docum entaries Boystown The Business of Making Saints

Shorts 60

Let Me Die Again

he story of Fred Patterson, the only m ember of the Communist Party ever elected to an Australian Parliament. Idealist, divinity student champion athlete, Rhodes scholar, w ar veteran and barrister, Patterson haunted the establishment until he was brought down by a police baton in 1948.

THE CENTURY OF CINEMA40,000 YEARS OF DREAMING (51 m i n s ) K ennedy M iller

D Director

m in s )

S outhern Star S ullivan P roductions EPs: Errol Sullivan, Penny Chapman. P: Roo A llen. D: M ichael J enkins. SW: Ian David. tories of corruption in the N SW police force in the 1980s reveal the connections between police and criminal cultures.


j !

I | ■ I | ■ |


63 63 63

Television Pre-production 63 63 63 63 63 63

Blue Murder Cody 2 Fire 2 Naked Ocean Girl 3 Sun On The Stubble


Television Production and Post-production 63


S ee list


F u ll details n ext issue

EPs: V ictor Gentile, Gregory Swanborough . Ps: Robert Reynolds, M ax Lloyd. D: Gregory Swanborough. SWs: Peter Duncan , Gregory Swanborough.

SW Scriptwriter C Cast PC Principle Cast SE Story Editor WD Writer-director

NOTE: Production Survey form s now adhere to a revisedform at. Cinema Papers regrets it cannot accept information received in a differentform at, as it does not have the staff to re-process the information.

he story of Australians at w a r with Japan between 1941 and 1945. It w as, according to John Curtin, "our gravest hour", when Australians w ere suddenly fighting for them selves - a Pacific W ar, not a European one. It marked a change in the Australian consciousness.

LADIES PLEASE (55 m i n s ) Latent I mage P roductions

Children s M iniseries SUN ON THE STUBBLE (12x30 m i n s )

Ps: Phaedon V ass , Rebel Penfold-R ussell, V icki W atson . D: A ndrew Sa w . rare insight into the artistry and personal lives of three of Australia's most innovative and creative drag performers: Cindy Pastel (Ritchie Finger), Stryker M eg e r (M ark Fitzhugh) and Lady Bump (Stuart W ilson). Their w ork and lives not only inspired the feature film The Adventures o f Priscilla, Queen o f the D esert but has also influenced performers throughout the world.


Film A ustralia EP: Ron [ surname not supplied ], P: T erry J ennings . SW: N oel Robinson . he adventures of the 14-year-old son of a German w heat farm er, growing up in a small Australian farming community. Based on the novels by Colin Thiele.


Since the 28 October 1994 Board meeting, the Board has approved investment in the following television mini-series:


The Clandestine Epidemic CSA Disability Manual Handling

Oracle P ictures and T he N otion P icture C ompany .

LP Line Producer


Television Drama Adult M m iseries



62 63 63


AS Associate Producer

Ps: Doug M itchell, George M iller. D: George M iller. SW: George M iller. eorge M iller makes the connection between Aboriginal creation myths and the 100-year history of Australian cinema. This documentary will combine archival footage from around 150 Australian films with interviews with contemporary film practitioners and sequences in locations including Kata Tjuta in Central Australia.

Lloyd’s Heaven Maidenhead The Web 2

P Producer Co-P Co-Producer

P: B en Gannon . Co-P: Fran M oore. D: Stephen M cLean. SW: Stephen M c Lean .


I J !

some of whom w ere "39ers" who signed up as teenagers the day w a r w as declared, will give their perspective on w h at th at history means for Australians today.

EP Executive Producer

Gannon T elevision

he story of Peter Allen, Australia's beloved variety entertainer and songwriter. As one of the first openly gay entertainers, Allen won a unique stardom with a mainstream public which loved him for his honesty.


K ey


62 62

The Century of Cinema - 40,000 Years of Dreaming 62 Doesn’t Everyone Want a Golden Guitar 6 2


P: N ick Frazer. D: Lindsay Frazer. SW: Stephen S parke, Lindsay Frazer.


59 59 60 60

Babe - the Brilliant Sheep Pig Bearfire - On the Dead Side

Features Post-production


28 October 1994

59 59 59 59 59 59 59 59 59

Bearfire - “Black Russian” Flying Tigers Lilian’s Story Rough Riders The Phantom Shine The Small Man Tears of the Sun Under the Gun

Features Production

F F C Funding Decisions Following the Board meeting on 23 September 1994 (see previous issue), the F F C entered into contract negotiations with the producers of the following documentaries:

Production Survey

59 59 59

25 November 1994

Documentaries FACES OF WAR: THE BATTLE FOR THE EMPIRE (55 m i n s )

Since the November meeting, tbe F F C Board has approved investment in the following feature film project:


Oracle P ictures and T he N otion P icture Company EPs: V ictor Gentile, Gregory Swanborough. Ps: Robert Reynolds, M ax Lloyd. D: Gregory Swanborough . SWs: Peter Duncan , Gregory Swanborough.

P: J ane S co n . 0: S c o n Hicks. SW: J an Sardi.

he story of Australians fighting in the Second W orld W a r against Germany and Italy to defend the British Empire. W e will follow Australian soldiers, sailors, airmen and nurses from recruitm ent through battle to their eventual return to Australia. Veterans,

fter succumbing to the pressure of his father's obsessive love and the fierce competition of the concert world as a child prodigy, David Helfgott makes a new beginning in London inspired by his passion for music and the w om an he loves.


SHINE (100

M IN S )

M omentum Films


C I N E M A P A P E R S • MA RC H 1 9 9 5

Documentaried .............

. The I

do iS ^ m a a l ' '^ISt



P: Chris H ilton . WDs: David Roberts, Chris H ilton.


P: G raham Chase. AP: M ichael Condon . WD: Graham Chase.

1 i | i

n 1927, Bert Hinkler became the first person to fly solo from England to Australia. A retired Army pilot, Lang Kidby embarked on a quest to re-enact this historic journey in a refurbished Avro Avion a ircraft sim ilar to the one Hinkler flew . Kidby's journey paralleled Hinkler's story since both men are eccentrics, obsessed w ith trail-blazing and forced to battle for funds.

| !


] 1 i \

ur neighbouring region of Asia is facing a drug crisis. Hard-core drug addiction has jumped to unprecedented levels and is spreading throughout South-east Asia, India, Pakistan and China (and into the form er Soviet Union and Eastern Europe). Asia is also facing a catastrophic rise in HIV/AIDS infection due to the w idespread sw itch from opium smoking to heroin injection. This tw o -p a rt docum entary w ill examine the new est drug wave in Australia and Asia, and show Australians on the ground in Asia are pioneering new approaches: education and treatm ent programmes designed to contain the fallout of policy gone wrong.


15 December 1994


P: W ill Davies .

C hase P roductions

m in s )

A spire Films

Look T elevision P roductions

m in s )




i crocodiles. He believes crocodiles are \ much maligned and w ould like to help ' the public understand these animals i better. Bredl is w ell-know n to \ thousands of tourists w ho visit the park 1 at A irlie Beach each year and to i television audiences around the w orld.

Television Drama A dult Tele-feature denied NAKED


Children d Mini-deried OCEAN GIRL 3 (2 6 x 2 3

m in s )

J onathan M . S hiff P roductions

| i | e r i , t h e Ocean Girl, accompanied 111 by her friends from the futuristic u lle rw a te r city of Orca, discovers the existence of a fe llo w space traveller, w ho brings knowledge of an alien device th a t is capable o f healing the oceans. W hen a man-made Catastrophe th reate nsithe sea and the entire Universe, Neri and her-friends .must ra c a to fin o ln e device and assemble it b e fo rilftie sinister UBRI organization beats them to it.

UNDER THE GUN Production company: VlLLAROSA Pictures

BEARFIRE - "BLACK RUSSIAN" Production company: A rts & Energy

ROUGH RIDERS Production company: COWGIRL PICTURES Distribution company: Ronin Films

Principal Credits

Principal Credits

Director: J ames M ichael V ernon Producer: Penny W all Associate producer: Kay VERNON DOP: B rian B reheny Sound recordist: Phil TlPINE Editor: B ob B lasdell Production designer: JOHN P ryce-J ones Costume designer: Edie KURZER

Director: JENNY HlCKS



Producers: T ricia W aites , Graeme I saac DOP: Geoff B urton Editor: J ohn S cott Length: 80 MINS Gauge: 35 mm

young female rodeo rider who is also studying Law at Brisbane University makes her mark in an arena traditionally seen as a domain of men.


Production manager: Lynda W ilkinson Production co-ordinator: S usan W ells Financial controller: L ea COLLINS Completion guarantor: Rob FlSHER (FACB)

Director: M atthew George Producers: Paul Elliot Currie, Richard N orton Co-producer: TONY SHEPARD Executive producers: Fred W eintraub , T om K uhn Associate producers: MIRANDA BAIN, T om J enkins Scriptwriter: M atthew G eorge DOP: Ian J ones Sound recordist: Lloyd CARRICK Editor: GARY WOODYARD Production designer: RALPH MOSER

Cast Richard N orton, Robert B ruce, Peter Lindsey, N icky B uckley, Kathy Long, Peter Cunningham , Stan Longinidis , J ane B adler, T ino Cererano. nightclub ow ner attempts to unload his debt-ridden club on a night w here everything th a t can go w rong does.


Featured Production

THE PHANTOM Director: J oe Dante

[ may

M ovie W orld Studios, Queensland.)

be shot at

BEARFIRE-THE HOT PIT Production company: A rts & Energy Production: 16/1/95 - 17/2/95

Camera Crew

B allantyne . D: Paul Cox. SWs: Paul Cox, J ohn Clarke. PC: Pamela Rabe , V ictoria Eager , N icholas Hope, Gosia D obrowolska, Claudia Karvan , Chris Haywood.

On- set Crew


Director: Karl Zwicky

1st asst director: J amie Crooks Continuity: SUE WlLEY Make-up: A ngela Conte Hairdresser: ANGELA Conte Publicity: LIONEL MlDFORD

Production company: M omentum Films Distribution companies: Pandora Cinema ,

Producers: J ohn M ichael V ernon, P enny W all Associate producer: Kay V ernon DOP: B rian B reheny Sound recordist: Phil TIPINE Editor: B ob B lasdell Production designer: J ohn Pryce-J ones Costume designer: Edie K urzer

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 ichelangelo's David.


Documentaried CHINCHILLA DRY (52


A ccord


P ericles Film P roductions & S adako Films Ps: A ndrew W iseman , Richard Keddie. WDs: A ndrew W iseman , Richard Keddie. docum entary about survival fo r the farm ing families in the droughtstricken plains of the Darling Downs, w here four years w ithout rain have brought them to a point of crisis. The members of tw o fam ilies w ill tell their stories: how they have coped w ith endless dry seasons and w h a t their fears and dreams are for the future.


EP: J onathan M. S hiff. P: J onathan M.

S hiff. Ds: M ark D eFriest, J udith J ohn -S tory. SE: Peter H epworth. C: M arzena Godecki, David H oflin, J effrey W alker.

Chris Gerolmo, Ronald B ass

Camera operator: B rian B eheny

J an Chapman P roductions


Director: JOHN W oo Producer: ROBERT LAWRENCE Executive producer: Stratton Leopold Scriptwriters: JOEL GROSS, A lan M c Elroy,

I llumination Films

EP: P enny Chapman . P: J an Chapman .

ix television plays reveal w h a t 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.

Featured Pre-production

he unconventional life of a legendary eccentric who recited Shakespeare fo r 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.


Production Crew

m in s )

Prods, Fox

Principal Credits

EP: B ill M arshall . Ps: Paul Cox, J ane


SWs: T ony A yres, Roger M cD onald , N ick Enright, Ian David , A ndrew B ovell, Paul B rown .

Imonnatipr^ is;'d adjudgeHms of 6/2/95.

Casting: M aura Fay & A ssociates

CML Films

TEARS OF THE SUN Production companies: Robert Lawrence

Principal Credits


Feature LUST & REVENGE (90

courage. In Australia, w ith the constant threat of bush fires, the public is reminded seasonally of th e ir mettle. In recent years, firefighters have even become sex symbols in both the straight and gay community. The docum entary w ill attem pt to explore the w orld of the firefighter: the risks, the danger, the excitem ent and the glamour.

Production Survey

obbie Bredl operates a w ildlife park

R in North Queensland and has ! developed a special relationship w ith


he unconventional life of a legendary eccentric w ho recited Shakespeare fo r a dollar on the streets of Sydney and rode taxis fo r the price of a sonnet. Lilian's story is a celebration of being alive. Based on a novel by Kate Grenville.


Light S ource Films



WD: Karen B orger. he image of firefighters has always been one of fairness, heroism and

Ps: M ichael M urray, V ic M artin . WD: Vic M artin .

I M I 24 Jan u ary 1995

EPs: David Court, J eremy B ean . Ps: M arian M cgowan, M ike W ilcox. D: J erzy D omaradzki. S: Steve W right. C: Ruth Cracknell , B arry Otto .



' i





A ccord


Cast Daniel Rigney (D ash B earfire), Gary Day (I nspector Stam p ), S hayne Foote (P rimrose), Richard Carter (B ully), David Baldwin (P inky ). ash Bearfire must fight for his life against an ex-Russian naval admiral w ith links to the Russian M afia, who is determined to kill anyone who stands in the w ay of his finding the w reck of a Spanish galleon. This sunken ship contains a fortune in gold and silver. Dash is aided by the strikingly-beautiful marine biologist Kris M organ, w ho unfortunately operates on her own agenda that involves the lost treasure but not necessarily our hero Dash.


FLYING TIGERS Production companies: TRILOGY Entertainment , M organ Creek Prods Distribution company: W arner B ros. Production: 2/95 ...

Principal Credits

Ronin Films , BBC Entertainment Pre-production: 30/1/95 - 30/3/95 Production: 31/3/95 -1 8 /6 /9 5 Post-production: 19/6/95 ...

Principal Credits Director: SCOTT HlCKS Producer: J ane SCOTT Scriptwriter: JAN Sardi DOP: Geoffrey S impson Musical director: David H irschfelder

Planning and Development Casting consultant: Liz M ullinar

Production Crew Production manager: Elizabeth Symes Insurer: H. W. W ood (A ustralia ) Completion guarantor: Film Finances Legal services: M arshalls & D ent

Government A gency I nvestment Production: FFC, SAFC, Film V ictoria

fte r succumbing to the pressure of his father's obsessive love and the fierce com petition of the concert world as a child prodigy, David Helfgott makes a new beginning in London inspired by his passion fo r music and the woman he loves.


Principal Credits


Director: DERAN SERAFIAN Producers: J ohn W atson , Pen D ensham , Richard Lewis . Executive producer:GARY B arber Scriptwrlters.JoE B ateer, Pen Densham J ohn W atson

Distributor: PALACE Sales agent: S outhern Star

Principal Credits Director: J ohn H illcoat Producer: D enise Patience Scriptwriter: G ene Conkie

Fortian P roductions P: Con A nemogiannis , J udy M anczel. WD: Con A nemogiannis . n investigation into suicide in / A u s t r a li a . The docum entary w ill look at w hy Australia h a s o n e o fth e highest suicide rates in the w orld and w h a t can be done to bring it down. It w ill investigate suicide-related issues in Australia such as euthanasia, the suicidé of the elderly, Aboriginal deaths in custody and the high incidence of youth suicide. ji

C I N E M A P A P E R S « MA R C H 1 995


Government A gency I nvestment

Production company: CML Films

Production: FFC

Principal Credits


Director: J erzy Domaradzki Producers: M arian M cgowan,

K erry Fox.

M ike W ilcox Executive producers: David Court J eremy B ean Scriptwriter: STEVE WRIGHT

Cast Ruth Cracknell, B arry Otto.

he story of an expatriate living in Papua New Guinea, who falls in love w ith a woman w ho rekindles memories of his dead w ife. W hen he takes her to his tropical home, she discovers th a t he has a p a s t- a past th a t he can neither forgive or forget.






Production Crew Production manager: LYNDA WILKINSON Production co-ordinator: S usan WELLS Financial controller: Lea COLLINS Completion guarantor: Rob FlSHER (FACB)

Camera Crew Camera operator: B rian B eheny

On - set Crew 1st asst director: B rett Popplewell Continuity: S ue W iley Make-up: A n g e u Conte Hairdresser: A n g e u CONTE Publicity: Lionel M idford

Cast Daniel Rigney (D ash B earfire), Gary Day (I nspector Stam p ), S hayne Foote (P rimrose), David B aldwin (P inky ), B ruce Barry (B uck). ash Bearfire becomes involved in the car-racing politics of pit lane when he is employed to protect Pete, the beautiful female lead driver of a revolutionary new racing car. Dash is pitted against a pow erful and sinister cartel whose octopus-like tentacles dig deep into the racing industry. However, his troubles may be instigated from a more devious and immediate source.


BLACKWATER TRAIL Production company: Rutherford Film

H oldings Production: 16/1/95 -1 8 /2 /9 5 Post-production: 20/2/95 ...

Principal Credits Director: Ian B arry



Production Survey continued Executive producers: A ndrew W arren, Chris B rown Scriptwriter: A ndrew Russell DOP: J ohn Stokes Sound recordist: Paul 'S alty' B rincat Editor: T im W ellburn Production designer: G eorgina Greenhill Costume designer: Phillip Eagles

Planning and Development

sm all to w n in Q ueensland w h e re

he g re w up fo r th e fu n e ra l of his old

Christina N orman

On - set Crew

Post- production

1st assistant director: KARAN MONKHOUSE 2nd assistant director: Karen M ahood Continuity: J ulie Feddersen Boom operator: Craig B eggs Make-up: AMANDA ROWBOTTOM Hairdresser: A manda ROWBOTTOM Safety officer: B rett A nderson Still photography: WAIN FlMERl Catering: Food FOR Film

Assistant editor: A nnie BRESLIN Gauge: 35 mm Length: 90 mins

Draftsperson: T ony W illiams Standby props: Peter Davies

W ardrobe Wardrobe supervisor: H elen Dykes Standby wardrobe: ISOBELL CARTER Wardrobe assistant: CHEYNE PHILLIPS

school frie n d , police d e tec tiv e A ndy

A nimals

A rt Department Art director: FIONA GREVILLE Set decorator: JILL Eden Props buyer: Barry Kennedy Standby props: Hugh Richards

Casting director: M aura Fay & A ssociates Extras casting: M aura Fay & A ssociates

his childhood s w e e th e a rt, Cathy, n ow

Animal trainer: J oanne Kostiuk Animal assistant: T odd M ackay

m arried. Cathy insists th a t her brother

Construction Department

Production Crew

A ndy did not com m it suicide, but w a s

Scenic artist: Peta B lack Construction foremen: ANDREW STAIG,

Production accountant: Eric Sankey Accounts assistant: A nn M cFarlane Production co-ordinator:

J ennifer Cornwell Production secretary: TRICIA MclNALLY Production runner: A ngella M cPherson Location manager: Chris Strewe Location attachment: Gillian W ebb Unit manager: Stuart Lynch Unit assistant: M arc A shton Insurer: H. W. W ood A ustralia Completion guarantor: FILM FINANCES Legal services:

M allesons Stephen J aques Travel agents: SHOWGROUP Freight: S how Freight Vehicle hire: A ustralian Rent-A-C ar

Camera Crew

G reen. A t th e fu n e ra l. M a tt encounters

m u rdered. M a tt is d ra w n into a dangerous w e b of c o ver-up and corruption th a t leads him c lo s e r and c loser to th e truth ab o u t his love for Cathy and th e death of his best friend.

COSI Production company: S miley Films Distribution company: M iramax Films Budget: $3.5 MILLION Pre-production: 1 2 / 1 1 / 9 4 - 19/1 /9 5 Production: 2 0/1 /9 5 - 1 0/3/95 Post-production: 1 1/3 /9 5 - 1 /9 /9 5

Electrics: Eric J ohnston, Darrin Ballan -

Planning and Development


Casting: ALISON BARRETT CASTING Casting consultant: ALISON BARRETT Extras casting: GABRIELLE Healy

1st assistant director: J amie Leslie 2nd assistant director: T odd Felman 3rd assistant director: Gareth Calverley Boom operator: CRAIG W almsley Continuity: KAREN MANSFIELD Make-up: MARGARET STEVENSON Make-up assistant: M aggie S ingh Prosthetics: Pro Fx Hairdresser: Sash Lamey Stunt co-ordinator: DANNY Baldwin Special fx co-ordinator: STEVE COURTNEY Vehicle co-ordinator: HAENRY WARD Catering: A nnie Harris Catering assistant: M artin Harvus Unit nurse: A nnie O'H alloran Stills photographer: J ason B oland Publicity: Fiona S earson (DDA)

A rt Department Art director: M ark Dawson Set decorator: J an M ackay Props buyer: Kristin Reuter Standby props: Darryl Porter Art department runner: M ark Elder Set construction: MlKE ASHTON Set carpenter: Chris P itman

W ardrobe Wardrobe assistant: Penny N eilson Standby wardrobe: Helen M ains

Post- production Assistant editor: B in Li Sound edit: A udio Loc S ound D esign Laboratory: ATLAB Telecine: APOCALYPSE Editing rooms: SPECTRUM

Government A gency I nvestment Production: FFC

Finance FFC, Film Queensland, Portman Productions

Cast J udd N elson (M att Curren), Dee Smart (Cathy); M ark Lee (C hris), Peter

Production Crew Production manager: Catherine B ishop Production co-ordinator: Em ma S chofield Production secretary: J ustine Dendle Location manager: M aude Heath Unit manager: W il M ilne Unit assistants: Karen H edley,

Paul N aylor Production runner: BELINDA 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: B ede Haines Camera attachment: J asmine Carrucan ■ Camera type: ARRI 535B Key grip: Lester B ishop Assistant grip: TERRY COOK Gaffer: JOHN M orton Best boy: MATHEW HOILE Electrician: PAUL SELLGREN Assistant electrics: A lan York

On- set Crew 1st assistant director: Euan Keddie 2nd assistant director: T ony G ilbert 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: JAN ZEIGENBEIN Special fx: Ray Fowler Stunts co-ordinator: Glenn B oswell Still photography: Phillip Le M esurieur Unit publicists: M aria Farmer

T racey M air Catering: Kollage Catering Kerry Fetzer

Cast 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 (Zac ), David W enham (D oug), B runo Lawrence (Errol), A den Y oung (N ick), Rachel Griffiths (L ucy), T ony Llewellyn-J ones (K irner), Kerry W alker (Sandra ). ew is, a young university g raduate,


a c c e p ts a job directing psychiatric patients in a th e ra p eu tic dram a course. His control is usurped by Roy, a m anic

depressive w ho dem ands th a t they s tage an opera by M o za rt, despite the f a c tth a t none of the patients can act, sing or speak Italian.

WHAT I HAVE WRITTEN Production company: EARLY WORKS Pre-production: 1 2 /1 2 /9 4 -3 /2 /9 5 Production: 6/2/95 -1 7 /3 /9 5 (M elbourne); 30/3/95 - 10/4/95 (Paris ) Post-production: 17/4/95 - 29/9/95

Principal Credits Director: J ohn Hughes Producer: Peter Sainsbury Based on the novel: W hat I Have W ritten Written by: JOHN A. SCOTT Scriptwriter: JOHN A. SCOTT DOP: D ion B eebe Sound recordist: Lloyd Carrick Editor: Uri M izrahi Production designer: Sarah Stollman Costume designer: Kerri M azzocco Composer: ROSS EDWARDS

Planning and Development Script editor: A nnette B lonski Casting: Liz M ullinar Casting

Consultants Casting consultant: KATHERINE D odd

lesbianism . S he's hot fo r M ic k , not just be c au s e he's cute and ta le n te d but being a w o m a n he's honest.

B A B E-TH E BRILLIANT SHEEP PIG Production company: Kennedy M iller Director: Chris N oonan [N o DETAILS SUPPLIED.]


Cast A ngie M illiken (S orel A therton/G illian ), M artin J acobs (Christopher Houghton/A very), J acek Koman (J eremy Fliszar), Gillian J ones (Catherine/F rances B ourin ). iction and reality becom e


ind istinguishable as one person's

s ea rc h fo r truth e n c ounters a nother's realization of desire. B ased on John A. S cott's P rem ier's A w a,rd-w inning novel of th e sam e nam e.

Production company: ARTS & ENERGY Production: 1 4 /1 1 /9 4 - 1 6 /1 2 /9 4

Principal Credits Director: J ohn M ichael V ernon Producers: J ohn M ichael V ernon, Penny W all Associate producer: Kay V ernon DOP: B rian B reheny Sound recordist: Phil T ipine Editor: B ob B lasdell Production designer: JOHN Pryce-J ones Costume designer: EdIE Kurzer

Planning and Development

Featured Pod t-prod actio n

Casting: M aura Fay & A ssociates

Production Crew

ALL MEN ARE LIARS Production company: ARENAFILM Distribution company: PINNACLE PICTURES

Production manager: LYNDA WILKINSON Production co-ordinator: SUSAN WELLS Financial controller: Lea COLLINS Completion guarantor: ROB FlSHER (FA C B )

On- set Crew

Principal Credits Director: Gerard Lee Producer: J ohn M aynard Associate producer: Robert Connolly Scriptwriter: Gerard Lee DOP: Steve A rnold Sound recordist: Greg B urgmann Editor: Suresh A yyar Production designer: M urray Pope

Production Crew Production manager: Elizabeth Knight Production co-ordinator: A nnie M cEvoy Production accountant: Chris M cGuire Production assistant: STEPHANIE M euno PA to Gerard Lee: Sally Power

Camera Crew Focus puller: M ike K elly Clapper-loader: A nnabelle Denham Grip: Greg M olineaux Assistant grip: Dan Hutton Gaffer: Paul J ohnstone Best boy: S imon Higgins

On- set Crew

Production manager: Yvonne Collins Production co-ordinator: Jo Friesen Production secretary: Em ma J amvold Location manager: T im S cott Unit manager: STEVE BRETT Production runner: VICTOR FUKUSHIMA Production accountant:

Focus puller: SlON MlCHEL Clapper-loader: A ndrew J erram

m e m b e r A n g e la , w h o is flirting w ith

Development: AFC Production: AFC Marketing: AFC

1st assistant director:

Camera Crew

falls h o pelessly in love w ith band

Government A gency I nvestment

Production Crew

B ernadette B reitkreuz Insurer: Steeves Lumley Completion guarantor: First A ustralian Completion B ond Company Legal services: Roth W arren

cross dresses and joins an a ll-girl

Assistant editor: Rochelle Oshlack Edge numberer: Oliver Streeton Sound transfers: Eugene W ilson Laboratory: ClNEVEX Film gauge: SUPER 16 Shooting stock: Kodak

Development: N S W F T O

Cast T oni Pearen, David Price, J ohn J arratt, J amie Petersen, Carmen T anti .

band in to w n fo r th e local fes tiv a l. He

Post- production

Government A gency I nvestment

Production: FFC

ick, a 16-y e ar-o ld country boy,

Standby wardrobe: Kerri M azzocco

Assistant editor: M artin Connor Music co-ordinator: CHRISTINE WOODRUFF Laboratory: ATLAB Lab liaison: I an Russell, Denise W olfson Film gauge: 1:1.85 Shooting stock: Kodak 5248, 5298 Video transfers: A pocalypse

Principal Credits Director: MARK JOFFE Producer: RICHARD BRENNAN Executive producers: P haedon V ass ,

Harvey W einstein , B ob W einstein Associate producer: Lyn Gailey Scriptwriter: Louis N owra Based on the play: COSI DOP: Ellery Ryan Sound recordist: JOHN S chiefelbein Editor: N icholas B eauman Production designer: CHRIS KENNEDY Costume designer: T ess S chofield

On- set Crew

Patrick Carr Carpenters: Gordon Finney, M artin J ones, M urray S immance Labourer: A ndrew B earman

Government A gency I nvestment


W ardrobe

Post- production

Camera operator: H enry Pierce Focus puller (A): Daniel J anjic Focus puller (B): David Elmes Clapper-loader (A): M argie M cClymont Clapper-loader (B): Kylee B ayliss Camera attachment: JASON B innie Gaffer: K en MOFFAT Key grip: KURT OLSEN Assistant grip: Ken A nderson Best boy: N ick A dam

Camera equipment: SAMUELSON



riter M a tt Curren returns to the

Wardrobe designer: W endy C huck Wardrobe assistant: Sasha D rake

Art department runner: J ohn ALLAN Set dressers: M arita M ussett,

V iv W ilson

Phelps (Frank), Rowena W allace (B eth), Gabrielle Fitzpatrick (S andra ), Daniel Roberts (D avies ), B rett Climo (Father M ichael).

W ardrobe

Gaffer: Paul B ooth Best boy: Steve Gray Generator operator: Gene VAN Dam

A rt Department Art director: H ugh Bateup Art department co-ordinator:

Art director: TOR LARSEN Scenic artist: MATT CONNORS Props buyer: Lea WORTH Standby props: PRISCILLA CAMERON

Cast Daniel Rigney (D ash B earfire), T oni Pearen (B uss ), M ark Hembrow (O 'B rian ), Ken S enga (S hogun), T heresa W ong (M im i ), Gary Day (I nspector Stam p ), S hayne Foote (P rimrose), Richard Carter (B ully), M elissa J affer (M iss Z igfreed), M artin V aughan (Fred), David B aldwin (P inky), Collette Roberts (J ulie), M elissa T zautz (S ally), Frank W hitten (Father Konrad).


ash B e arfire is d ra w n into the s ea rc h fo rth re e a n c ie n t J a p a n e s e

sw ords reputed to possess m ystical po w e rs w h e n brou ght to g e th e r by th e ir

true o w n e r, an evil J a p a n e s e shogun asserting a n c e s tra l claim s to the sw ords. D ash attem p ts to u nravel th e

Lynne-M aree Dansey 2nd assistant director: J ane Creswell 3rd assistant director: Gabrielle Liston Continuity: Karen M ansfield Make-up: Lesley Rouvray 2nd make-up: A nna M cGinley Hairdresser: Lesley Rouvray SFX: B rian Holmes Stunt co-ordinator: Phil B rock

A rt Department

1st asst director: J amie Crooks Continuity: S ue W iley Make-up: A ngela Conte Hairdresser: A ngela Conte Publicity: Lionel M idford

m ystery and is a ided by th e naively s ed uctive and m ute w o m a n -c h ild Bliss.

BILLY'S HOLLIDAY Production company: BILLY'S HOLLIDAY Distribution company:

Roadshow Film Distributors Production: 3 1 /1 0 /9 4 ...

Principal Credits Director: Richard W herrett Producer: T ristram M iall Co-producer: Denis WHITBURN Scriptwriter: D enis W hitburn DOP: Roger Lanser

C I N E M - A P A P E R S • MARCH 1995

production Production Survey

Stunts co-ordinator: Z ev Eleftheriou

Producers: Domenico P rocacci Rolf de H eer Co-producer: S ean Cuddy, D igital A rts Associate producer: S haron J ackson Scriptwriter: Rolf DE H eer DOP: T ony C lark Sound designer: Peter D. S mith Editor: TANIA N ehme Composer: Graham T ardif Creative collaborator: M ike Carroll

Safety officer: W ally Dalton

Planning and Development


Sound recordist: Guntis Sics Editor: S ue B lainey Production designer: M ichael S cott-M itchell Costume designer: T erry Ryan Musical director: Peter Cobbin

Make-up: A manda Rowbottom Hairdresser: A manda Rowbottom Choreographer: Cassandra M iller

Insurer: H. W . W ood (T ony G ibbs )

Production Crew

Completion guarantor: Film Finances

Production manager: Sue W ild Production co-ordinator: S haron M iller Assistant production co-ordinato: Paul Ranford Producer's assistant: M iranda Culley Director's assistant: J ason B ath Production secretary: Laura M ay ALCOCK 2nd unit co-ordinator: B ascia P lachecki Location manager: PATER LAWLESS Unit co-ordinator: M ichael L ippold Unit manager: Chris J ones Assistant unit manager: Rick Kornaat Unit assistants: J ames Hopwood, P eter K odicek

Legal services: T ress Cox & M addox

Camera Crew Focus puller: P eter W hite Clapper-loader: B runo D oring 2nd unit DOP: M urray W are Camera type: ARRI STIII Super 16 Key grip: P eter K ershaw Gaffer: PETER Ryan Best boy: Greg W ilson Electrician: A dam Hunter

On- set Crew 1st assistant director: M ichael M adigan 2nd assistant director: Lucy M aclaren Continuity: J ulie Feddersen

Production assistants-runners:

Boom operator: STEVEN King

D imitri Ellerigton, Lyndie M enken, J ulian Ryan , A nton D enby, Clare S hervington, Sally Charles, A nna M cDonnell, Harriet S palding Script P. A.: Claire Davidson Financial controller: S usan M uir Production payroll: M oneypenny S ervices Production accountant: LlANE L ee Accounts assistant: T rish A sdhenden , J ohn B rousek, Sandie M orris, Christine M oran Insurer: RHH A lbert G. Rubin (T ransA merica ), Steeves Lumley

Still photography: B rian M cK enzie

Casting: A udine Leith

Make-up: Christine M iller

Other Credits

Catering: Food for Film (K eith Fish )

Production Crew

Hairdresser: Christine M iller

Production: Sally A yre-S mith


Art director: M artin B rown

M ichael Z akhem

Make-up: Leslie Rouvray

A rt Department

Completion guarantor: FACB

Standby props: Phinn H epworth

Finance: FFC, N SW Film & TV Office,

Armourer: JOHN

Choreographer: Cassandra M iller

Production manager: S haron J ackson

Safety officer: B rett A nderson

Unit manager: Christopher Corin

Still photography: B rian M cK enzie

Production assistance: J acqui Harrison ,

Gail Fuller, Colleen K ennedy


Completion guarantor: Film Finances

Catering: Food for Film (K eith Fish ) Runners: Dany Osta , M ichael Z akhem

AFC, V illage Roadshow , B eyond Intl.

W ardrobe

Legal services: G iulia B ernardi

A rt Department

International sales:

Standby wardrobe: Katie Graham

Camera Crew

Art director: Gabrielle Stewart

P ost- production

Focus puller: Helen Carter

Assistant art director: Edward M anier

Laboratory: M ovielab Lab liaison: MARTIN HOYLE

Clapper-loader: H elen Carter

W ardrobe

Special fx photography: DIGITAL ARTS,

Wardrobe supervisor: Cathy H erreen

Legal services:

T ony Clarke, M ike Carroll, S ean Caddy Aerial photography: S oftware DESIGN Motion control: J eremy W ebber Motion control electronics: Patrick W alsh

Wardrobe assistant: N aomi Eller

LA: H ill W ynne T roop & M eisinger

Post- production

Sydney: A llen, A llen & H emsley Travel co-ordinator: J ulie WlBBERLEY (S howtravel) Freight co-ordinator: S hane M cK echnie (S howfreight) B ase - office liaison : A nthony A llegre

B eyond I nternational

Cast M ax Cullen, Kris M c Quade, T ina B ur sill , D rew Forsythe, G enevieve L emon , Richard Roxburgh, Rachael Coopes. n the eyes of Billy's teenage daughter, he is a loser. And his girlfriend can't find the key to his heart. But when his pub jazz band takes off and Billy finds he has been m agically blessed w ith the voice of his idol, the legendary Billie Holiday, life throw s him some w ild and w onderful curves. Fame, fortune - and Faust - turn Billy's w orld on its head until w h a t emerges is the true romantic spirit of Billy Apples - voice and all in this rom antic musical comedy, featuring 10 songs, old and new.


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 (Frank ), B ruce A lexander (D etective Sergeant), G eorge V idalis (K eith), A ndrew Curry (J im m y ), J in Vi (K orean D iplomat ), Roland Dantes (Large A sian Guy).


Post- production:

Production: 1 /95 - 2 /9 5 Post-production: 2 /9 5 - 5 /9 5

Principal Credits Director: Dam ian H effernan Producer: D am ian Heffernan

Producer: Phillip Emanuel

Line producer: M ichelle Ryan

Co-producer: J ohn H ipwell Executive producer: David Hannay

Production designer: N eil A ngwin

Executive producer: KEVIN D unn Associate producers: MICHELLE Ryan

J ames M epham Based on story titled: CALL OF CTHULHU Written by: H.P. Lovecraft Editor: Dam ian Heffernan Costume designer: N ic M asson


Production Crew

Casting: Greg APPS

Production manager: M ichelle Ryan Production coordinator: T racy Cook Producer's assistant: S haron T onge Production runner: TRACY COOK Production accountant: M atthew Heffernan

Budgeted by: J ohn Hipwell

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: JULIE MURRAY,

B rian O'G rady Production assistants: M artine S proule-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: P eter W hite Clapper-loader: BRUNO D oring 2nd unit DOP: MURRAY W are Camera type: ARRI STIII SUPER 16

On - set Crew 1st assistant director: Ed STEVENSON 2nd assistant director: B rad Raselli Continuity: J ulie Feddersen Boom operator: Steven King

Government A gency I nvestment


Development: SAFC Production: FFC, SAFC

Producer: M urray Fahey

M arketing

Scriptwriter: MURRAY FAHEY

Director: M urray Fahey

Cast J oy S mithers, M ark Lee, M iranda Otto .

U lli B irve (S he), Syd B risbane (T he M a n ).


David W illiamson , M ichael Genne, A ndre Fleuren Camera operators (camera B):

T racey Kubler Focus puller (camera A): Calum M cFarlane Focus puller (camera B): M ike K elly Clapper-loader (camera A): Rebecca Steele Clapper-loader (camera B): Rob M arsh FX DOP: Steve N ewman Aerial co-ordinator: Gary H ill 2nd unit DOP: lAN JONES 2nd unit focus: Katrina Crook 2nd unit clapper: Frank Flick Camera type: A rriflex Camera maintenance: SAMUELSON's

J l romantic comedy.

n intergalactic love story about a planet earth.

Key grip: Dave NlCHOLS Assistant grips: MlCK VlVIAM,

J orge Escanuela, Paul Smith Gaffer: Chris Fleet Best boy: P hil M ulligan Electricians: M att B uchan , Colin W yatt, J ohn Lee

On - set Crew 2nd unit director: Gary Hymes 1st assistant director: Steve Love 2nd assistant director: Christopher D ow

Film gauge: 16 MM

Co-producer: J ohn H ipwell


Screen ratio: 1:1:85

Executive producer: David Hannay

Co-producer: David Coatsworth

Scriptwriter: P eter T hompson

Executive producer: Chris M eledandri

DOP: T im S mart

Visual effects co-ordinator:

Associate producers: J on Landau ,



Production companies: Phillip Emanuel

Production company: T engu PRODUCTIONS

Prods, H ips Film & V ideo Prods

Distribution company: 20th Century-F ox

Budget: $ 4 0 0 ,0 0 0

Production: 11/94 - 2/95

1st asst director: S haron T onge

Principal Credits

Post-production: 3/95 - 5/95

Titles: Z ap Productions

Director: Peter T hompson

Principal Credits

Laboratory: VFL

Producer: Phillip Emanuel

Director: B ryan SPICER

Key grip: Peter Kershaw Best boy: Greg W ilson


Other Credits

small tow n is terrorized by an unspeakable horror. Two unlikely heroes must save the tow n and indeed the w orld from the threat of the Cthulhu cult. Battling a savage cult and an invisible creature proves to be an adventure of terrifying proportion.

Electrician: A dam H unter

he story of four contem porary teenagers, three friends and one outsider, who enter a magazine photo competition. In consequence, one is propelled into an international modelling career.

Camera Crew Camera operators (camera A):

3rd assistant directors: N oni Roy, M ichael M ecurio, A ndy Howard Script supervisor: Kate D ennis Video-spilt operator: M ichael T aylor Boom operator: A ndy Duncan Make-up: Lynn W heeler Hair supervisor: Lynn W heeler Make-up-hair artist: Christine M iller Make-up-hair assistant: B ec T aylor, K erry J ury Prosthetics designer: W arren B eaton Visual effects supervisor: Erik Henry


Gaffer: P eter Ryan

Cast Karoline H ohlweg (V ali M artin ), Kristy Pappas (J eni Livieratos), A melia W ong (L in Hutchinson), J amie B rind ­ ley (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 L ivieratos), M aurie A nnese (G eorgio Livieratos), J ustin D'O razio (M ichael Livieratos).


Storyboard artist: ESTELLE

D evelopment

Chris W eir (D igiline ) Laboratory: Digital Film Laboratories Lab liaison: Pamela Hammon

Inti, sales agent: INTRAFILMS (R ome)

P lanning and Development

Composer: N eil Sutherland

P lanning

Post-prod, supervisor: TANIA N ehme Mixed at: Hendon Studio , SAFC Opticals: Kevin W illiams Laboratory: DFL Lab liaison: Pamela Hammond Gauge: Super 35 Screen ratio: 1:2.35 Shooting stock: Kodak Video facilities: N etwork 8

Budget: $ 5 0 ,00 0 Pre-production: 1 / 9 4 - 1/95

P rincipal Credits

Costume designer: A phrodite Kondos

Hairdresser: B everley Freeman

Production company: Onara PRODUCTIONS

Director: V incent M onton

Editor: T ed ÔTTON

Make-up: B everley Freeman Wardrobe: B everley Freeman

Budget: $ 5 0 0 ,0 0 0

Sound recordist: Phil Sterling

Continuity: B everley Freeman

Unit publicist: Fiona Paterson

Prods, H ips Film & V ideo P rods

Louis Irving

On - set Crew

rom antic th rille r follow ing the journey of a fugitive in his quest to avenge his brother's murder.

Production companies: Phillip Emanuel


D igital A rts M otion Control Motion control mechanic: PETER Laan Grip: Charlie Kiroff Electrics: Charlie Kiroff



Scriptwriter: VINCENT MONTON

Camera type:

Post-production supervisor:

EPSILON Production companies: Epsilon, Fandango (Rome) Pre-production: Jan - M ar 1994 Production: M ar 1994 ... Post-production:... M ar 1995 Principal Credits: Director: Rolf de Heer

Sound recordist: Steven B est Editor: A ndrew N arozny Production designer:

A lex Zabotto -B entley

Planning and Development Casting: Liz MULLINAR Budgeted by: J ohn Hipwell

M ike Levine Based on: The TV series DOP: Paul M urphy Sound recordist: B ob Clayton Editor: W ayne W ahrman Production designer: Craig Stearns Costume designer: San ja Hays

(LA) Steve Delluso SFX supervisor: T ad Pride SFX department co-ordinator: T om DAVIES SFX stunt rigging: POLLARD PRODUCTION Stunt co-ordinator: Rocky M c Donald Stunt P.A.: A ndrew M cD onald Safety officer: Rob Greenough Creature operators: Russell J ohnson ,

Production Crew

Planning and Development

Production manager: A nastasia S ideris Production co-ordinator: B rad Raselli Production secretary: Georgia M urray Location manager: Stuart B eatty Production assistants: S imone J amieson , Daniela Carelli Production accountant: Eric Low

Casting: Liz M ullinar Casting

M atthew Heimlich , Chris K oranek, Robin S herwood

Casting consultants: Christine K ing

Animatronics technician:

Extras casting: J udith Cruden

N orman M cGeough

Assistant extras casting: J ane Dawkins

Creature dresser: Lorris Perryman

Acting coach: K erry W alker

Creature puppeteers: S imon H ood,

Conceptual artists: Richard N ewsome ,

Phil W indsor, J ane Hurps Unit nurse: M andy Ling

T ed V an Doorne

/ C I N E M A P A P E R S • MA RC H 1995


Production Survey

Post- production:

continued 2nd unit nurse: Patsy BUCHAN Still photography: JlM TOWNLEY Catering: J ohn Faithfull Publicist: Rae Francis

A rt Department Art director: COLIN GlBSON Art department co-ordinator: Regina Lauricella Set designer: B ill Passmore 2nd unit art director: PRISQUE Salvie Conceptual artist: Richard N ewsome Set decorator: T imothy Ferrier Props buyer-set dresser: T ara Kamath Assistant props: Kath B urton Assistant set dresser: M artin W illiams Model maker: Lewis M orley Vehicle wrangler: Gordon Finney



Casting: S usie M aizels Casting consultants: M aizels and A ssociates Extras casting: P eta ElNBERG

Costume supervisor: T erri Lamera Costume standby: J ennifer Sant , A manda I rving, Lyn A skew Additional costumes: B rett Cooper, B reet W ilson Wardrobe assistant: Kelly M ay Costume painter: T ristan Fitzgerald Costume assistant: J ason Gibaud Helmet fitter: Peter Owens Costumer standby: MICHELLE Fallon

Production manager: MAGGIE Lake Producer's assistant: Elaine M enzies Production secretary: Pru S mith Location manager: Robin Clifton Unit manager: SlMON HAWKINS Unit assistants: Paul N aylor, S hane

D ennis S mith Leading hand (wood shop]: Greg Hadju Leading hand (steel shop): M arcus H. S mith Sculptors: T ony Lees, Guido Helmsmetter Scaffold rigger: Peter S margiassi Construction runners: PETER Forbes, Kevin Ricketts Labourers: W ayne Starkley, M ax Haymes Head painter: Gary Grimes Painter: M artin B ruveris Set builder: Dallas W ilson Set finishers: A ndrew Robinson , A lan B rown Brush hand: M atthew Leary

Post- production 1st assistant editors: W arren Paeff, Gordon A ntell Assistant editors: N ick Cole, Richard Pain , A bby M cNabney Apprentice assistant editor: SlAN Savage Sound transfers: SOUNDFIRM Laboratory: A tlab Liaison: Denise W olfsdn Tape transfers: VlDEOLAB Shooting stock: A gfa Video tranfers: VlDEOLAB

Cast J ason Frank (T ommy W hite Falcon ), Steve Cardenas (R ocky Red A pe), A my J o J ohnson (K imberly Pink Crane), J ohn B osch (A dam B lack Frog), Karan A shley (A isha Y ellow B ear), David Yost (B illy B lue W olf), Paul Freeman (I van Ooze), J uliette Cortez (R ita Repulsa), Gabrielle Fitzpatrick (D ulcia ), Paul S chrier (B ulk), J ason N arvey (S kull). ordon sum m ons th e P o w e r R angers


to save th e p la n e t from th e evil and

de s tru ctive fo rc e s of Ivan and his arm y of m onsters.

ON OUR SELECTION Production company: A nthony B uckley Productions Distribution company: Roadshow D istributors Pre-production: 19/9/94 ... Production: 31/10/94 ... Post-production: 19/12/94 ...

Principal Credits Director: GEORGE WHALEY

N aylor, Les T aylor, Glen J enkins Production runner: OWEN MAGUIRE Production accountant: J uanita PARKER Accounts assistant: Cleo M yers Insurer: Steeves LUMLEY Completion guarantor: Film Finances Legal services: PAULA Paizes Travel co-ordinator: T raveltoo

On - set Crew 1st assistant director: T oby Pease 2nd assistant director: Karan M onkhouse 3rd assistant director: LlAM BRANAGAN 4th assistant director: Kate T urner Continuity: PAMELA WlLLIS Boom operator: Chris Goldsmith Make-up: N ikki Gooley, S herry Hubbard Make-up assistant: N oreen W ilkie Hairdresser: Cheryl W illiams Choreographer: Greg Redford Safety officer: SPIKE Cherrie Unit nurse: JACQUIE Ramsay Still photography: ROBERT McFARLANE Unit publicist: One Globe Promotional Catering: Kerry Fetzer

A rt Department Art director: N icholas B onham Art department co-ordinator:

Cathy Chapple Art department runner: M arco PlNESl Props buyers-set dressers: K errie Long, A licia W alsh Props maker: Gillian Farrow Assistant props maker: M ark Lewis Standby props: Robert M oxy M oxham Greensmen: M ichael W haley N elson Reddell

W ardrobe Wardrobe supervisor: Kerry T hompson Standby wardrobe: J ulie B arton Wardrobe manufacture: Helen M ather,

Kate Green

A nimals Animal trainer: Evanne Chesson Animal handler: Candy Rawson -H arris Stable hands: M ark Prett, T ina Hennel,

T racy B ell

Construction Department Scenic artist: A lan Craft Construction manager: B ill Howe Leading hand: JON STILES Carpenters: B ruce Fletcher, M ark J ones L indsay Hedley, J amie H owe, W illiam Radburn , Steve Redden


I con Productions

M arketing: International sales agent: M ajestic Films

Cast Leo M cKern (D ad ), J oan S utherland (M other), Geoffrey Rush (D ave ).


rural com edy based on th e S teele Rudd novels.

See previous issue for details on:


of youth, c u ltu re , crim e and m usic

N e w G uinea.



Production company:EMERALD Films Budget: $262,000 Pre-production: J une 1994 ... Production: Sept 1994 ... Post-production: Nov 1994 ...

Principal Credits Directors: Sally B rowning , A nou B orrey Producer: Sally B rowning Co-producer: Glenys ROWE Executive producer: David W hite, SBS DOP: Roman Baska Sound recordist: M ark W orth Editor: Henry Dangar Composer: David B ridie




Researchers: A nnou BORREY,

M ark W orth Script editor: Sally B rowning Shooting schedule by: Sally B rowning Budgeted by: Sally B rowning

Production Crew Production manager: Karena S laninka Production coordinator: M arcus SCHINTLER Location manager: T ony Fofoe Production accountant: JANE CORDON,

M oneypenny S ervies Insurer: H. W. W ood A ustralia Completion guarantor: Film Finances Legal services: HEIDTMAN & Co. Travel co-ordinator: M argaret M cN ally Freight cordinator: A nnie Davis J et S ervices

Counterpoint Sound Music performed by: David B ridie J ohn Philips Mixer: David W hite Counterpoint S ound Music mixer: David B ridie Laboratory: M ovielab Lab liaison: M artin H oyle Film gauge: 16mm Screen ratio: 10:1 Shooting stock: Kodak 7298 & 7293 Video transfers by: OMNIC0N Off-line facilities: FRAMEWORKS

Camera operator: S usan THWAITES Focus Puller: TlM THOMAS Camera type: A aton XTR Key grip: Glen Day Asst grip: J ohn Balbi Gaffer: Paul J ohnstone Best boy: A ndrew Robertson Asst electrics: Graeme Cook,

uring Pope John Paul ll's visit he gave A u s tra lia its firs t saint:

M o th e r M a ry M a cK illo p . This

J ustin Plummer

d o c u m en ta ry looks at th e process of sain t-m a kin g in an a tte m p t to dem ystify this a n c ie n t trad itio n of bea tific atio n and can o n izatio n . W h a t does it m ean

Generator operator: Peter M aker Steadicam operator: B arry A rmstrong Crane operators: Greg MOLINEAUX,

J o J uhanson

to be a saint? H o w does th e Church decide w h o is one? W h y are m ira c le s

On - set Crew

im p o rta n t to th e C hurch and w h a t role

1st assistant director: Lynn -M arie DANZEY 2nd assistant director: J udi McCROSSlN Continuity: A lly H enville Playback operator: N ICOle Lazaroff Boom operator: N icole Lazaroff Make-up/FHair: Kathy Courtney, N ikki Gooley Wigmaker: AHEAD IN W igs Choreographer: J ohn O'C onnell Stunts co-ordinator: Grant Page Still photography: Lorrie G raham Catering: OUTT0 Lunch

does politics play in m aking saints?

THE CENTURY OF CINEMA40,000 YEARS OF DREAMING Production company: K ennedy M iller Director: GEORGE MILLER Producers: Doug M itchell, George M iller Scriptwriter: GEORGE MlLLER eorge M ille r m akes the connection

Art Department

b e tw e e n A boriginal c re atio n myths

and th e 1 00 -y ea r history of A u s tra lia n com bine archival fo o tag e from around

Art department attachment: N ikki Dl FALCO Set dresser: Lea Lennon Props buyer: Lea Lennon

150 A us tra lia n film s w ith in te rv ie w s

W ardrobe

w ith c o n tem p o ra ry film p ractitioners

Wardrobe supervisor: Rowena BlANCHlNO Standby wardrobe: Rowena BlANCHlNO Wardrobe attachment: Craig B oreham

and s eq u en ce s in locations including Kata Tju ta in C entral A u s tra lia .

T ailor: Chris W ilson

DOESN'T EVERYONE W ANT A GOLDEN GUITAR Production company: VlTASCOPE Director: Lindsay Frazer Producer: N ick Frazer Scriptwriters: STEPHEN SPARKE, Lindsay Frazer


Post- production Assistant editor: Sally Fitzpatrick Sound transfers: SoUNDAGE Sound designer: Liam Egan Foley: S imon Hunt Mixer: David W hite Mixed at: Counterpoint S ound,


d o c u m en ta ry ab o u t the T a m w o rth C ountry M u s ic Festival w h ic h

a ttra c ts ov e r 70,000 fan s and big nam e perform ers to a N S W c ountry to w n for 11 days in J an u ary.

See previous issue for details on:


Opticals: S pringett Optical S ervice Titles: A ntart, Optical & Graphic Laboratory: M ovielab Lab liaison: M artin H oyle Neg matching: Chris Rowell Prods Grader: Kevin Crumplin Film gauge: S uper 16; blow - up to 35 mm Screen ratio: 1:1.85 Shooting stock: Kodak Print stock: KODAK Video transfers by: V ideo 8

Government A gency I nvestment


Production: AFC Marketing: AFC


Shortd LET ME DIE AGAIN Production company: S uitcase Films Budget: $ 18 5 ,3 9 8 Pre-production: 2 2 /8 /9 4 - 1 5 /9 /9 4 Production: 1 6/9 /9 4 - 2 3 /9 /9 4 Post-production: 1 7 /1 0 /9 4 - 3 1 /1 2 /9 4

Principal credits Director: Leone Knight Producer: M egan M cM urchy Scriptwriter: VlKi D un DOP: Susan T hwaites Sound recordist: H ugo de V ries Editor: A nnette Davey Production designer: Kym BARRETT Costume designer: Kym Barrett

Cast Paul Capsis (T he Diva ), J enny V uletic (P rincess Lakme ), Barbara W yndon (Carmen ), T anya Denny (M adame B utterfly), V ictoria S pence (G hostly D iva ), N icholas H ope (P eter), A dam Lloyd (M atthew ), Gabrielle Hammond (J udith), A driana A gricola (C lare).

Other Credits Still photography: B en B ohane Sound transfers by: Frameworks Sound editor: M ark W ard,

Production Crew

Camera Crew

cin e m a . This d o c u m en ta ry w ill



Production manager: S usan W ells Unit manager: HABIB M assad Production accountant: DlANNE BROWN Insurer: ClNESURE Legal services: HART & S pira

Production company: A lbert Street Productions Director: M artin B rook Producer: Colleen M illing Executive producer: Peter T homas Scriptwriter: J ulie M acken.

G D o cL u n e n ta rie j

film ab o u t th e in te ra c tiv e ele m e n ts


Casting consultants: SHAUNA WOLIFSON Storyboard artist: Kym BARRETT Shooting schedule: LYNN-MARIE DANZEY Budgeted by: M egan M cM urchy

in th e urban and rural a re a s of P apua

Development: AFC Production: FFC,

Camera Crew Camera operator: David W illiamson Focus puller: Damien W yvill Clapper-loader: B ede Haines Key grip: B rett M cDowell Assistnat grip: J ohn T ate Gaffer: David Parkinson Best boy: GREG RAWSON Electricians: Darryn Fox, A ndrew M oore

Development: AFC Production: FFC

Government A gency I nvestment


Production Crew

Construction manager: J ohn Rann Construction foreman: Garth Croft Scenic artist: PETER Collias Leading hands: Quentin Conybeare,


Producers: ANTHONY B uckley, B ruce Davey Co-producer: Carol Hughes Executive producers: J onathan S hteinman Scriptwriter: George W haley Based on original novels by: STEELE Rudd DOP: M artin M cGrath Sound recordist: Lloyd Carrick Editor: W ayne Le Clos Production designer: H erbert P inter Costume designer: ROGER K irk Composer: Peter B est

W ardrobe

_ Construction department

Assistant editor: TRISH GRAHAM Editing assistant: LlSA MORRIS Sound editors: Frank Lipson, Peter B urgess Foley: J ohn S impson Mixer: M artin Oswin Mixed at: SOUNDFIRM Titles: Extro Laboratory: A tlab AUSTRALIA Shooting stock: A gfa


Government A gency I nvestment

Set finisher: Frank Falconer Painter: Steve T roke Signwriter: D ean Lewis


m u sical m elo d ra m a a b o u t the q u e e rn e s s of o p e ra , and th e

ope ra tic in real life.

LLOYD'S HEAVEN Production company: ATTITUDE Films Budget: $75,000 Pre-production: 2 /1 /9 5 - 5 /2 /9 5 Production: 6 /2 /9 5 - 1 2 / 2 / 9 5 Post-production: 1 3 /2 /9 5 - 2 5 /5 /9 5

Principal Credits Director: M alcolm Burt Producers: Robyn Evans, Lori-J ay Ellis

C I N E M A P A P E R S ÂŤ MA RC H 1995


production Production Survey Scriptwriter: M alcolm B urt DOP: David B arker Sound recordist: G reg B urgmann Editor: B en A mbrose Art director: Louise Chandler Costume designer: K im Sandeman Composer: A ndrew M iller



Casual electrics: Chantelle Carlin Grip: A drian Kortus Casual grip: A rthur M anousakis

On - set Crew


Casting consultants: Casting Creative Shooting schedule: A ttitude Films Budgeted by: A ttitude Films Producer's assistant: J imi Ellis Production assistant: Em m a Robinson Production runner: B rian M eakin Production accountant: J oanne D riscoll Insurer: B rian H o lund I nsurance

A rt Department Props dresser: D irk Van den Drieson

Post- production: Sound editors: A ndrew M iller, Greg B urgmann Laboratory liaison: Gary K eir Gauge: 16mm Screen ration: 1.33:1 Shooting stock: Kodak 7248 Telecine transfers: A A V

Props buyer/dresser: Paul M acak

Sound editor: Stephen V aughan Mixer: Dean Guam Laboratory: ClNEVEX Facilities: T im Lewis (T he J oinery) Lab liaison: Ian ANDERSON Shooting stock: Fuji Development: Film V ictoria

Producer: PEGGY TODD Director: Catherine Campbell Scriptwriter: Catherine Campbell DOP: Ian M arden



T ony M cGrath (L loyd), S ean Ryan (D 'A rcy), A ndrew M cK inney (Rand ), Cristel Leed (T iffany).:

A lice Garner (A lice), Denise Scott (H at Shop W oman ), Kate A gnew (Friend/T erminator), N ico Lathouris (S chool B us M a n ), J an Friedl (T he Queen), A driano Cortese (M r. Right).

s ister, a hom ophobic cop and a

jilte d q u e e n and w h a t do you get?

Marketing: Daro DISTRIBUTORS, Film A ustralia


he seven episodes of approx. 5 m inutes e ac h w ill d eal w ith




Sponsor: N S W Police S ervice Production company:


G lobe M edia D evelopments


Principal credits


Series director: LUCINDA CLUTTERBUCK Episode directors: Lucinda CLUTTERBUCK,

Camera Crew Focus puller: W arik Lawrance Camera attachment: M att Gudeika Gaffer: B attista Remati Best boy: CHRISTIAN BERNADI






Research: Lysette A shford,


Kerith Holmes

( s e r ie s )


Other Credits



N S W P olice S ervice initiative to

th e rules to g e t ju s tic e .

(2 n d

(t e l e - f e a t u r e )

G.P. (7 th

( s e r ia l )

fu rth e r serie s of th re e te le -fe a tu re s

( a n im a t e d

( m in i

unbending, Cody isn't afraid to b reak


Production Crew


Production manager (live action):


W ills Films

Kate S eeley



Producer's assistants: JAN Lucas ,

Principal Credits Producer: Sara W illiams


FIRE 2 ( m i n i - s e r i e s ) Production company: Extra D imensions association with L iberty Films Distribution company: B eyond D istribution Pty Ltd



s e r ie s )

( s e r ia l )

| a p p ro p ria te authorities.


s e r ie s )


a b o u t a S ydn ey "w ild cop" called

Cody. Irre v e re n t, u n p red ic ta b le and

\ t h a tth e public fa c e s should anyone \ d is c o v e r one and not a le rt the


s e r ie s )


a le rt th e public and m e m b e rs of


s e r ie s )



Gary Sweet, Robert M am mone .

Off-line editor: MURRAY FERGUSON Prod, manager: K elly B rown Post-production: AMBIENCE Duration: 1 x 15MINS; 1 X 20MINS Format: BSP

i th e P olice S ervice to th e e x is te n c e of i illic it drug fa c to rie s and th e d angers



CODY 2 ( m i n i - s e r i e s )

Producer: J ustine M ilne Director: J ustine M ilne Scriptwriter: J ustine M ilne DOPs: A u n Koppe, Colin B ell Sound recordist: T erry Kelly


C I N E M A P A P E R S • MA RCH 1995


Production company: S outhern Star X anadu Director: Ian B arry ( plus one other TO BE ANNOUNCED). Producers: Sandra Levy, J ohn Edwards Executive producer: Errol S ullivan Scriptwriters: Christopher Lee, Peter S chreck

Sponsor: Office on D isability Production companies: S u t s M ac,


( s e r ie s )

conne c tio n s b e tw e e n police and

Principal Credits


Phillip Samartzis Editor: K en Sallows Production designer: Georgina Campbell Costume designer: M argot M cCartney

Kerith Holmes


police fo rc e in th e 1980s re v ea l the



Production designer (live action):

Television Production and Pool -production

crim inal cultures.

Pre-production: 11/4/94 - 15/7/94 Production: 18/7/94 - 24/2/95 Post-production: 27/2/95 - 23/6/95


i n i - s e r ie s )

to rie s of corrup tion in th e N S W


he adventures of the 14-year-old son of a German w heat farmer, growing up in a small Australian farming community. Based on the novels by Colin Thiele.


S outhern Star Sullivan Prods Director: M ichael J enkins Producer: Rod ALLEN Executive producers: Errol SULLIVAN, Penny Chapman Scriptwriter: Ian David



Production accountant: B ernadette B reitkreuz Production assistant: TANIA V ujic -P owell


not given]

Scriptwriter: N oel ROBINSON

Production company:


Production company: ECO Prods Distribution company: Daro DISTRIBUTORS, Film A ustralia

Production manager: A manda Crittenden

Ron [ surname

Television Pre-production



Production Crew

( m i n i - s e r ie s ) Production company: Film A ustralia Producer: T erry J ennings Executive producer:

e xam ined as a cas e study.

See previous issue for details on:




and a p a rtic u la r w o rk p la c e p ra c tic e is

anim ation tec h n iq u e s a re utilized, w ith

Director: M arie Craven Producer: J ohn Cruthers Scriptwriter: M arie Craven DOP: N icolette Freeman Sound designer: PHILIP BROPHY Sound recordists: J enny Sochackyi,


h andbook issued by W o rk C o v e r on

handling s ituations in th e w o rk p la c e

d iffe re n t com po sers for e ach episode.

w o n d e rla n d .

Script consultant: A drian M artin Casting/drama consultant: Paul Hampton Storyboard artist: JANE D ennis

raining video to a c c o m p a n y a

M a n u a l H andling. The video in tro d u ces

en d a n g e re d sp e cies . A v a rie ty of

its a rtific ia lity. A lice in a m odern

Sarah W att , Elisa A rgenzio Producer: Fiona Eagger Scriptwriter: CHARLOTTE CLUTTERBUCK Co-writer: LUCINDA CLUTTERBUCK Sound recordist: Stephen V aughan Editor: Ray A rgall

eri, the Ocean Girl, accompanied by her friends from the futuristic underwater city of Orca, discovers the existence of a fellow space traveller, who brings knowledge of an alien device that is capable of healing the oceans. W hen a man-made catastrophe threatens the sea and the entire Universe, Neri and her friends must race to find the device and assemble it before the sinister UBRI organization beats them to it.


the a u d ie n c e to the ran g e of m anual

V ib ra n t like a m u sical. Frightening in

Principal Credits


Other Credits


1 i i i

Production company:

J onathan M. S hiff Productions Directors: M ark D eFriest: Judith J ohn-S tory Producer: J onathan M. S hiff Executive producer: J onathan M. S hiff. Story editor: PETER H epworth. M arzena Godecki, David H oflin, J effrey W alker .

Off-line editor: M urray Ferguson On-line editor: M atthew Street Sound mix: Global Production manager: Kate T odd Graphics animation: B ump M ap Narrator: D eborah Ellsworth Duration: 21 mins Format: SP

absu rd is t cha m b e rs . A te rra in of



OF N S W Production company: Campbell T odd

M arketing

bizarre logic and da rk em otio nality.

Pre-production: Early October 1994 Production: Late October 1994 Post-production: N ov-D ecember 1994


Sponsor: W orkCover AUTHORITY

Production: AFC, N S W F T O , Film V ictoria, A C TF, A B C , Daro D istributors

OCEAN GIRL 3 ( s e r ie s )



Government A gency I nvestment

serie s of ps y ch o -s e xu al and

Lloyd's Heaven.


i i |

Post- production

Production: Film Queensland


In te rn a tio n a l, S ydney.

Art department assistant: J ohn B rown

Government A gency A sssistance

ix television plays reveal w h a t men really feel about th e ir lives today. \ W ritten by men, the anthology aims to \ present male emotions w ith piercing | honesty and uncover the passions i beneath the façade of maleness.

a n n o u n c e m e n ts fo r th e W o rld

A rt Department

N ick Enright, Ian David , A ndrew B ovell, Paul B rown


A s s e m b ly - D isabled P eop les

Principal Credits

ald ,


w o c o m m unity s ervic e

A rt Department

Development: AFC Production: AFC Marketing: AFC



On - set Crew

Government A gency I nvestment

a ke one bored ra v e r, his dizzy


Catering: LlZ MlLUKEN

Post- production

On- set Crew


On-line editor: BERNADETTE JONES Prod, manager: SARA WILLIAMS Post-production: ÛMNIC0N Duration: 1 X 30MINS; 1 X 60MINS Format: S uper 8

Camera Crew

Assistant editor: M aria Kaltenthaler Sound editors: Craig Carter, Livia Ruzic Foley/ADR: JOHN SiMPSON Mixer: CRAIG CARTER Camera equipment: SAMUELSONS Lighting equipment: Key LIGHTING Laboratory: Cinevex Colour grading: Ian Letcher Titles: Oliver Streeton Editing facilities: N oisy Pictures Sound facilities: ROOM WITH A Vu Mixing theatre: SOUNOFIRM Solicitor: Roth W arren & Co Insurance: ClNESURE Gauge: S uper 16/35 mm Shooting stock: Kodak 7248/7293 Screen ratio: 1:1.66 Shooting ratio: 10:1

Boom operator: A ndrew M iller Make-up: K im M cKay Make-up assistant: Shani H oeght Stills photography: Chris H ealy

J eff M ackay Music: Paul S mith

Other Credits

Camera op (live): M andy W alker Camera assistant: M at T oll

W ardrobe

Camera Crew

I i

1st assistant director: MICHAEL MADIGAN 2nd assistant director: J ohn HARTLEY Continuity: Liz Perry Make-up/Hair: Laura M orris Make-up/Hair assistant: Richard N ewton Still photographer: W ain Fimeri Caterer: H elen Cur ke

Wardrobe assistant: JEANNIE CAMERON Casual wardrobe: Kate S eely

Clapper-loader: J amieson Lowe Camera assistant: Rowena M ollica Camera type: A R R I SR2 Grip: Luke N ixon Gaffer: D ean Russo

1 DOPs: Craig S uttery , S imon Ham mo nd ,

M onica Z etlin Runner: Z oe LAMAERA Animation assistants: Lysette ASHFORD, M eredith Campbell , A nne -M arie B eattie, J ane W allace-M itchell, Jo Guario , S ean H enry Insurer: M andy Robertson (R ichard Oliver) Legal services: Dan Pearce (H olding Redlich)


Producer: J an Chapman | Executive producer: PENNY CHAPMAN | Scriptwriters: T ony A yres, Roger M cD on -

g e q u e l to Fire [see previous issue].


( a n im a t e d

s e r ie s )


te le - f e a t u r e s )

SOLDIER, SOLDIER ( s e r ie s )



i n i - s e r ie s )

( s e r ie s

p il o t )

Production company:

J an Chapman Productions

Full details next issue.


P e te r J a c k s o n (H e a ven ly Creatu%es) rom ps ito m e a h e a d "of Z h an g Yim ou (To L iv e \ Q u en tin T a ra n tin o (PuTf) Fiction) arid R o b e rt R e|dford (Q u iz 'fh o w ) An A ffair to Remember

L eo M cCarey



Whit Stillman


M ike Figgis

The Browning Version


China M oon


John Bailey

Dangerous Game Disclosure

Barry Levinson

7 -








' 4





7 7 '*


Peter Jackson





Interview w ith the Vampire: The Vam pire Chronicles




jpg lj|i ' 4 1




Heavenly Creatures

N eil Jordan Junior

I van Reitman M ary

Kay Pavlov


M ary Shelley’s Frankenstein


Kenneth Branagh The Mask


Charles Rvssell

Naked in N ew York


D an Algrant N ell


' 1 -

^ H

4 1 i¡¡¡SSH Pgj 3 ^


\ l. rmm





9 H | (H i H I j





i: Ì7 lÉ IÌ7 l


1 1




1 1 : i j




7 5


David Elfick


■ H

Once W ere W arriors


5 p 1 i 1 5 % 1 1 ¡¡¡JJ ■ 6 j____________ i 1i Ì °3 i i !_ 7 l 11 1 1 H 7, 11 g j|j Imjim I 1

^ H

8 n p s p

^ H ^ H

Q uentin Tarantino




Robert Redford

Quiz Show




Steven Zaillian

Searching for Bobby Fischer




The Shadow


7 ,


Danny Boyle




To Live





2 1 4- ______ ^ ! f mm

2 8


1 1

s 1 1



h \ Ì

The Nightm are Before Christmas

L ee Tamahori




M ichael Apted

^ H



; i \ !

N o W orries

H H i ■ 7 ¡jj

j E HI B | (¡¡l : ? . . "4 : i



H enry Selick



9 7 9 10

!i j 7 | l | | | Y Ì i 7 |1


,;:v| i I H H H ;1




H - :




Y f7

i 6 1 1____________ 11 I1 | I ( 1

{ 1 ! É | I |

7 7 1 1 1 S I1 i flH H i11


8 8 4 8


H 1 I H ;11 ¡¡Si ¡US1 ^ 1

7 .3


6 .8 1H I wmm

5 .2


W &m mSrn 6 .8 ■


6 .2

111 flit

S ill i|J|jJ 5 .7

7 -

éU&fk WiM-




8 .6



5 .1

WKm 4 .7 WMi.

Éj| 1 2 I fill ¡¡¡8 i : HHHHBH1 6u i 1i H H 9H H 9B Ì


3 .8

■ H H 11 1 »1 1 7 '


i 1 ! 1

H H I HHBh HI h i

7 IE

■ ¡111 ¡¡¡S


g ji io


7 jg|



mm 5 .6 wmimm. ÌWMÈM.


1¡¡S i

wMi 5 .5 WSm. mmim WISp W mm wmm 1111



i f e 2^


H |




¡¡§§ 1i i i 1 i : Ijgg



7 .4

__ __

8 .4 Bts:

V&f 4 .6


Wmm 7 .9


6 4


I__ 1 I!

6 7








7 .8 ■ WBà Wmm. mm- 6 .3 WmT IÉ É S

mm K'WlF-'

5 .0

l|§jÌ? -





__ j




H H i

9 | if! H


; i i\

^ H








Z hang Yimou

1H H



Shallow Grave



?; 7 -v


Ang L ee

Russell M ulcahy


fi '

Eat D rink M an W oman

Pulp Fiction



Drop Zone

Only You

5 -


1 7 IH H I H I 11

^ H








John Badham

N orman Jewison





^ H


Abel Ferrara

w m m


6 .0


mm 8 .2 1 ___H

NB: "Nilohamitic: [...] Of, pertaining to, or designating any one or all of the peoples who speak a language belonging to this group.“ (A Supplement to the Oxford English Dictionary, Volume II: H-N.)

A pond of ninefilm reviewer.) had rated a ¿election ofthe latedt releaded on a dcale of 0 to 10, the latter being the optimum rating (a dadh means notdeen). The critico are: B ill Collirid (Daily Mirror, Sydney); Barbara Creed (The Age); Gavin Dibble (Herald-Sun,)/ Paul Horrid (“EG”, The Age; JRRR); Stan Jamed The Adelaide Advertiser); Scott Murray; Tom Ryan (JLO;The Sunday Age); David Stratton (Variety; SBS); and Evan Williams (The Australian). Barbara Creed and Adrian Martin, who have replaced Neil Jillett at The Age, will alternate. Gavui Dibble, had stepped hifor Ivan Hutchinoon, who id on leave. Sandra H all wad uncontactable.


C I N E M A P A P E R S • MA RCH 1995

Save thousands with our flexible

Home Loans

Q SAVE thousands with your own Personal Repayment Plan. 0

SAVE with no on-going fees.

0 0

SAVE with a low $5 0 0 up-front charge*. PROTECT yourself against rate rises with our Split Home Loan - part variable, part fixed.


New loans only. Bank and Government charges apply. Terms and conditions available on application. *Personal Borrowers only.

Bank of Melbourne cuts the cost of banking Head Office: 52 Collins Street, Melbourne 3000'

BANK 45785

Visit your nearest branch, or call for a Mobile Loan Manager to visit your home or office at your convenience.


Introducing the EASTMAN

film system. F o r l t h e first t i m e , 1 there

is a direct I n k



between your ideas



with the addition of EXR color pr

f i lr j, the technology of the EXR film

fatbijy now lives within


th e


interm ed iate

every step

process — fro m ¿ n e g a t i v e


to f e l e a s e . | | h e


s y s t e m j l Think

of it as a projector for your m t n 4

M Eastm an

Motion Picture System


Call 008 337 935,

for more inform ation.

Eastman Kodak Company. 1 9 93.

Eastman and EXR are trade m arks.

Cinema Papers No.103 March 1995