Cinema Papers October 1977

pjlpllli sm .. ■ ¡

'■* '

E

D

r

tiHaving achieved the distinction of winning an Oscar this year and having accumulated, over the years, international audiences counted in millions, we make the claim that Film Australia is far more than the official film /production house of the Federal Government: it’s the industry’s “Vital Alternative” 59 {iln these days of intense competition for government funds, Film Australia’s position in relation to competition with private enterprise must be clearly understood. We consider that Film Australia must do what is socially important and socially meaningful and that, consequently, Film Australia must be a pace-setter, at the frontier of society, the very point where the Australian character is constantly forming and emerging. That position is not competition with private enterprise; it’s the use, in a responsible way, of public resources to do things that private enterprise can not be reasonably asked to do.

Among the challenges we face are the potential of videotape and the changing patterns of distribution; we realise that to get our message across, we must go where the audiences are; when we talk of audiences, we mean the general adult public, children, the university population, special interest groups and institutions, among others.95 t i A Film Australia crew is filming in the USSR. Our other current projects include a 90-minute study (in 11 parts)

of a country town, a third series of classroom discussion films and a new Bruce Petty film titled “The Magic Arts”. We are now scheduling another feature for cinemas, three more features for television, and a documentary series to be filmed in China.

Just a few of the good things coming° from Film Australia. 99 r , .. ^AustralianJtlm Commisswtu

—

jm

b

.

iS i

.n

¡hat special excitement 11 be experienced when Fred Schepisi’s m )f Jimmie Blacksmith” mm plays Hoyts Theatres ross Australia in 1978.

m90:iixt§m

1YEAR $8 00 * g g Name..

Address Postcode

To commence with Issue 14 ( Issue 15 (

) October. ) January.

’Australia only. For overseas rates see overleaf.

Cinema Papers Pty. Ltd. !43Therry Street. Melbourne, Victoria, Australia 3000

CINEMA PAPERS The grooviestg ift you're ever likely to g ive We’ll enclose the card. You enclose $8.00*.

Please send.......................................................................................

Address............................................................................................ ...................................................................... Postcode.................... as a Gift, a year s subscription of Cinema Papers fro m .................................................................................................

Message..........................................................................................

‘Australia only. For overseas rates see overleaf.

Cinema Papers Pty. Ltd. 143 Therry Street, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia 3000

(

r

N

FOR THE SCENE INTERNATIONAL

oaaoo A ssociation of T eachers of Film & Video

SCREEN INTERNATIONAL

S ubscribe:

(kingPublications Ltd.342Wardour St.LondonWL)

(Four Issues, Free Books, Catalogues) $10.00 (schools), $8.00 (individuals) (both tax deductable), $4.00 (students and unemployed). Forward cheques and orders to: ATFAV (Metro), 243 Queensbury St, Carlton, 3053.

Graduate Diploma in Applied

FILM AND TELEVISION One-year practical production course commencing 13 February, 1978 The course is designed for people holding professional qualifications (in any discipline) who wish to make television, film or animation programs as an aid to their professional practice.

Depending upon industrial experience, a small number of applicants who do not hold formal qualifications may be admitted.

The course will be conducted on Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday of each week. Applications close on Monday, 21 November, 1977.

Further details and application fo rm s available from :

m mm tueas

The Secretary, Faculty of Art, Swinburne College of Technology Box 218, Hawthorn, 3122. Tel: (03) 819 8124 A division of Swinburne College of Technology Ltd.

THE VICTORIAN FILM CORPORATION RECENTLY PURCHASED THE WARDROBE FROM THE FILM THE GETTING OF WISDOM. THESE PERIOD COSTUMES ARE NOW BEING STORED AT CRAWFORD PRODUCTIONS AND ARE AVAILABLE FOR HIRE AT REASONABLE RATES TO FILMMAKERS. IF INTERESTED PLEASE CONTACT RON WILLIAMS ON 42 1311.

Its am azing som e of the things you pick u w henvou use Adah

-

.1 1 I

^

i

B

j ■ HITS

George Patterson’s make history with their multi-award winning “Memories” commercials for OTC They were processed by Atlab.

£\ Jmf ia

Award winning commercials deserve award winning post­ production. That’s why Denis Weedon, and George Patterson’s, chose Atlab to process and transfer to videotape their brilliant “Memories” commercials for their client OTC. Because at Atlab we have the expertise and equipment to bring out the best in every job. Of course not everything’s an award winner, but it’s nice to know that at Atlab you’re on the winning side.

GIVING QUALITY SERVICE TO THE M OTION PICTURE INDUSTRY A tlab Film & Video Laboratory Service, Television Centre, Epping, N.S.W. 2121.

Telephone: 850224

follow the pradactlonof a full-length feature from go to show!

TH E

Tasmanian Film Corporation

PROJECT

BORN 5th SEPTEMBER 1977

■ Film Production . S till Photographic Work .Sk ille d Personnel .16/35 Facilities . Equipment Hire CONTACT THE CORPORATION FOR FILMING IN OR OUT OF

' The South Australian Film Corporation is to make a feature film during 1978 based upon BLUE FIN by Colin Thiele the author of STORM BOY. The script is being written at present by Sonia Borg. The Producer is Matt Carroll.

The Corporation is inviting teachers and primary and secondary school students to follow this film being made, from the script right through to exhibition. A wide variety of educational material is being prepared for use next year. BLUE FIN will be released in each State a few weeks before the end of the school year in 1978.

Word is being spread now so that some room can be reserved for this exciting project in the school curriculum. BLUE FIN has been a popular book for years, but PROJECT BLUE FIN should make it a special favourite. Of course, not everybody has to study the book to benefit from the PROJECT. A study kit relating the interest areas of the story across the curriculum is among the educational material to be produced, including: Three Films The Australian Broadcasting Commission is scripting three documentaries on the pre-production and post-production of BLUE FIN for educational broadcast.

Radio Programmes Discussions are under way towards the production of a radio dramatisation, a reading of the book, and interviews with the author, scriptwriter and the filmmakers.

Study G uides The Educational Technology Centre and the Film Study Centre of the South Australian Education Department are planning a film study Pic-a-Pac to parallel the three television docum entaries mentioned above.

A HUMANITIES PACKAGE is being prepared to make BLUE FIN the reference point and catalyst for investigations in the fields of geography, biology, history, social sciences, dram a and art as well as English and film studies.

N ew s Bulletins Progress reports on the filming, as well as special interest materials where requested, can be circulated to educational media throughout the year.

INTERESTED? C o n ta c t the C o-ordinator of PROJECT BLUE FIN a t th e ad d ress below.

South Australian Film Corporation 64 Fullarton road, Norwood, S.A. 5067, P. O. Box 263, Norwood, S.A. 5067 Telephone: 42 4973 Telex: AA88206

TASMANIA m

Tasmanian Film Corporation 64 BRISBANE ST. HOBART, 7 0 0 0 TASMANIA. PHONE.GO 8033 TELEGRAMS: TASFI LM, HOBART.

Spunky Peter Purvis, Pablo A lbers, D avid Stevens, Ian M acrae, Igor Auzins, Don Crombie,Chris Lofven or Fred Schepisi can direct you down the prickly production p ath .all the w ay from thinking caps to client daps. W here?

A t the Him House,2 7 2 G eorge Street Fifzroy. Ring Roy. H ell show you their stuff. 4194100.«

ï 'te Australian FilmInstitute developing afilm culture inAustralia The Australian Film Institute is an independent, non-profit, cultural organisation. It was established in 1958 with the principal aim being to encourage the development of the art of film. In 1976, the AFI adopted a new constitution and it now has a nationally-based membership which is open to the public.

Resource Facilities

The AFI operates the Longford Cinema in Melbourne and the State Cinema in Hobart.

Through it's cinemas, the AFI introduces the public to Australian and overseas films that are otherwise unlikely to be released. The cinemas are attractive, comfortable alternative outlets serving the needs of filmmakers, independent distributors and a large section of the community.

The AFI is actively involved in developing a film culture in Australia through the following activities:

Distributing

An information and resource centre has been established to provide extensive research facilities.

The centre comprises a substantial book library, an extensive collection of magazines, and some vital indices. These include the FIAF index to International film periodicals published since 1972, the British Film Institute's Film Title Index 1908-1974 (containing on microfilm details on over 200,000 films produced throughout the world) and the BFI's personality and general subject index 1935-74. As well as the complete run of a number of significant magazines (including Film Quarterlyand the Monthly Film Bulletin), the centre will soon make available on microfilm every copy of Variety ever published.

Through the Vincent Library, the AFI distributes a w ide variety of 16mm and 35mm shorts, short features and features to individuals, schools, groups, festivals, film societies and other bodies all over Australia. The Library has been operating since 1970 and was named after the late Senator Vincent. It distributes independent Australian and overseas productions, films produced with the assistance of the Experimental Film and Television Fund, maintains collections for embassies as well as a collection of classic features and shorts. The Library has just released a new catalogue which is available for $3.60 (includes postage). The catalogue is an invaluable aid to any person or group interested in film. The Library is situated at 81 Cardigan Street, Carlton, 3053, but films are available for use anywhere in Australia.

The information centre has recently made available a Master Index Of Current Film Periodical Holdings In Australian Specialist Libraries (Members 50c, others $1.00) and Jan Dawson's comprehensive Report On Information Resources, Publications And Distribution & Exhibition Services (Individuals $5.00, Institutions $7.50).

Museum

Tlie Australian Film

Awards The most important annual event for Australian filmmakers. Now in its twentieth year, the presentation of the Awards is televised nationally to draw public attention to the latest achievements of the nation's film industry.

“ The Longford is, in my opinion, the best place to see films in Melbourne."

John Hindle, Nation Review

Gth@r Activities The AFI, in conjunction with the Australian Council of Film Societies, organises film viewing weekends to allow film societies to preview new 16mm acquisitions by distributors. It is hoped that finance w ill be available soon to extend this service nationally.

The AFI operates a festivals bureau and has arranged screenings of Australian films in a number of overseas film festivals.

Australian Film Institute 81 Cardigan Street, Carlton, 3053 Postal Address: P.O. Box 165, Carlton South, 3053 Telephone: (03) 347 6888 Cables: “ Filminstitute, Melbourne" Telex: 32968

★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ 2F! ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★

Publishing In conjunction with publishing houses, the AFI is publishing Australian Film Posters 1906-1958, a colourful compilation of early Australian film posters; and Australian Film 1906-1976, a companion to film in Australia with an entry containing full technical details on every feature film made in Australia. The poster book is due for release in January. Plans are underway to publish a further series of books and monographs.

Exhibiting

(PicturtMd: A mahogany and brass single lens lantern by W. C. Hughes, late 19th century)

The AFI has under its curatorship a newly acquired collection of cinematographic memorabilia covering the history of cinema up to the coming of sound. Many of the exhibits are exceptionally rare.

It is envisaged that this substantial collection will be opened to the public in the near future.

If you're interested in the AFI why not become an Associate Member? It's the easiest way to keep informed of the activities and services of the AFI. Benefits include: Concessions to AFI cinemas, publications and subscription concessions, a regular newsletter, and voting rights for the Award for Best Film of the Year in the Australian Film Awards.

To join, fill in the details below and send them to the: Executive Director, Australian Film Institute, P.O. Box 165, Carlton South, Vic. 3053 I hereby apply for Associate Membership of the Australian Film Institute and enclose $5.00 (cheque/money order) being membership fee for the period to 30 June 1978.

Nam e.......................................................................................

Address

Signature.

so w h afs yom * p ro b lem ?

Your scenario calls for the hero to be shot out of the sky three tim es . . .

You w ill be doing a lot of film ing in a tropical jungle gorge (during the monsoon season) and your rushes w ill have to travel by flying fox to the nearest helicopter pad, from where they w ill be flown over territory held by hostile savages to the only processing lab w ithin 5000 miles (which incidentally is run by a kinky native with a dietary craving for celluloid and who occasionally eats films) . . . .

Your lead suffers from ophidiophobia (fear of snakes) and has a tric k knee as w e ll___

0 ¿5 O For your final scene (in Arnhem Land) you w ill be flying the Cam bridge Boy’s Choir out from London and you’ve arranged a five-concert tour for them w hile th e y’re here (London, by the way, is rumoured to be having a flu e p id e m ic ). . . '

There is a last minute hassle looming over the music rights Y ou’ve got your AFC loan, you begin shooting in two days, so w h a t’s your problem?

Just don’t forget to arrange your Film Producers Indemnity, Negative All Risks, and other insurances with an expert who understands your business. From the time you call until we arrange cover can be as little as 24 hours. Contact David Solomon — Sydney, or Wayne Lewis — Melbourne; the expert directors who will be handling the placement.

ADAIR INSURANCE BROKING GROUP specialists in insurances for the entertainment industry

Sydney Box 3884 GPO Sydney 2001 (02) 27-8741

Melbourne 163 Collins St. Melbourne 3000 (03)63-6947

Brisbane GPO Box 1022 North Quay, Old. 4000 (07)221-5816

Articles and Interviews

Chinese Cinema An Appraisal: 106

Chinese Cinema Verina Glaessner Phil Noyce: interview Mary Moody Matt Carroll: Interview David Roe Star Wars Special Effects Dennis Way Nicholson Luke’s Kingdom Tom Ryan Eric Rohmer: interview Inge Pruks Terry Jackman: Interview Antony I. Ginnane John Huston: Interview Urs Egger Film Periodicals: Part 1 Basil Gilbert

106 111 116 119 120 124 131 138 142

Eric Rohmer Interviewed: 124

Features

Matt Carroll Interviewed: 116

The Quarter Berlin Film Festival Mari Kutna Guide for the Australian Film Producer: Part 7 Antony I. Ginnane, Leon Gorr, Ian Baillieu Melbourne and Sydney Film Festivals Scott Murray, Tom Ryan .

International Production Round-Up Box-Office Grosses Production Report 1 : The Last Wave Scott Murray Production Survey Production Report 2: Blue Fire Lady Gordon Glenn, Scott Murray Television Comment Directors and Writers Checklists Book Reviews New Zealand Report Columns

104 114 128 134 144 145 147 155 163 169 170 180 182 186

Summerfield Reviewed: 176

Film Reviews

Production Report The Last Wave: 147

Journey Among Women Susan Dermody Mr. Klein Stephen Kennett The Getting of Wisdom Brian McFarlane Cria Cuervos Inge Pruks Summerfield Scott Murray A Bridge Too Far Phil Taylor High Rolling Basil Gilbert

Managing E d ito r: Scott Murray. Editorial Board: Peter Beilby, Philippe Mora, Scott-M urray. Contributing Editors: Antony I. Ginnane, Graham Shirley, Rod Bishop, Tom Ryan, John O'Hara, John Reid, Noel Purdon, Richard Brennan, Gordon Glenn, David Elfick, Andrew Pecze. Design and Layo ut:K eith Robertson, Andrew Pecze. Office Manager: M ary Reichenvater. Assistance: Peter Kelly. Correspondents: London — Jan Dawson, Los Angeles — David Brandes. P a ris — Meaghan Morris, R o m e— Robert Schar, Denmark — Gail Heathwood. Advertising: Sue Adler, Sydney (02) 26 1625; Chris Davis, M elbourne (03) 329 5983. Printing: Ramsay W are Stockland Pty. Ltd., 552 V ictoria St., Nth. M elbourne 3051. Telephone (03) 329 7300. Typesetting: Affairs Computer Typesetters, 74 Eastern Road, South M elbourne 3205. Telephone (03) 699 2174. Distribution: N.S.W.. Vic., Qld., W.A.. S.A.. C onsolidated Press Pty. Ltd., 168 Castlereagh St., Sydney 2000. Telephone (02) 2 0666. ACT. Tas. — Book People, 590 Little Bourke St., M elbourne 3000.

Front cover: Richard Chamberlain as David Burton in a dramatic sequence from The Last Wave. (See report on page 147.) Photograph by David Kynoch.

173 .

174 175 175 176 177 178

Melbourne and Sydney Film Festivals: 134

Cinema Papers is produced w ith financial assistance from the Australian Film Commission. A rticle s represent the views of their authors and not necessarily those of the Editors. W hile every care is taken on m anuscripts and m aterials supplied for this magazine, neither the Editor nor the Publishers accept any liability for loss or dam age w hich may arise. This magazine may not be reproduced in whole or in part w ithout the prior perm ission of the copyright owner. Cinema Papers is published quarterly by Cinema Papers Pty. Ltd. Main Office: 143 Therry St., M elbourne 3000. Telephone (03) 329 5983. Sydney O ffice; 365A Pitt St., Sydney. Telephone (02) 26 1625. c Copyright Cinema Papers Pty. Ltd., Number 14, O ctober 1977.

'Recommended price only.

CORPORATION CONTROVERSY The funding policies of the Victorian Film Corporation have been strongly attacked in the press, a possible conflict of interest being suggested between corporation members and those awarded investments. Two of the most vocal critics have been Colin Bennett and Barry Jones MLA*. Mr Bennett was one of those responsible for advising on the setting up of the corporation and Mr Jones is the Labor shadow minister who introduced the concept of the VFC into state parliament.

In response to this criticism, the VFC issued a press statement, but it was not picked up by the daily press. Cinema Papers believes it to be of considerable interest, and it is reproduced below in full. The members of the corporation are Peter Rankin (chairman), Graham Burke, Nigel Dick, Cliff Green, Natalie Miller, John McLachlan and Fred Schepisi.

The Age headline on August 25 accused VFC members of being given “ most film grants". The VFC rarely, if ever, gives grants. All monies put into film and film production are offered as investment.

The figure of $526,500 has been quoted. It is broken down as follows: Summerfield $ 76,500 In Search of Anna $ 50,000 Mary and Joe $100,000 The C h a n t o f J im m ie B la c k s m ith $300,000 Summerfield was scripted by Cliff Green.

He was paid in part for this script by the producer, Pat Lovell, several months before any investment application had been placed before the VFC. Mr Green owns five per cent of the equity in Summerfield.

In Search of Anna: Natalie Miller is the associate producer of this film. Ms Miller has five per cent equity in the film.

Mary and Joe The VFC has not contri­ buted financially to any of the scripts development costs of Mary and Joe. If the film goes into production Mr Green will have five per cent of the film.

The VFC believes that the percentages and figures disclosed above put a very different complexion on the statement in the press that 55 per cent of the corporation funds have gone to its own members' films. Although it is true some VFC m e m b e rs are p ro fe s s io n a lly associated w ith these film s, it is misleading to imply that they are a major beneficiary.

In each of these projects, the applicant for investment from VFC was not a corporation member. They were: Sum m erfield— Pat Lovell; In Search of Anna — Esben Storm; Mary and Joe — Oscar Whitbread and Frank Brown.

The Chant of Jimmie Blacksm ith: In reaching the decision to invest $300,000 in The Chant of Jimmie Blacksmith, the corporation members were conscious of the public and political criticism that this decision was likely to incur.

Obviously the decision was made after careful examination, and there are several points which relate to it which should be taken into consideration before the VFC is judged.

Firstly, VFC members believed then, as they do now, that The Chant of Jimmie Blacksmith will perhaps be the most important Australian film made this year.

The VFC felt unanimously that the script was the .most exciting that had ever come before it.

Mr Fred Schepisi is recognized as one of Australia’s leading directors, and the VFC was determined to see that the film was made by V ictorians and through a Victorian company.

What is not known is that Mr Schepisi, both personally and through his film company, is investing $250,000 in his own film . Mr S ch e p isi’s fees as w riter, producer and director are being deferred; they will be recouped from revenue, and not paid from any State or Commonwealth government investment monies.

Additionally, the investment offer in The Chant of Jimmie Blacksmith was made over two financial years, and the $300,000 must be considered in proportion to $2 million.

The press comment so far has not referred to pre-VFC films which were funded directly by the Victorian government. They include " The Age, August 25 and 27.

104 — Cinema Papers, October

Deal, F.J. Holden and Journey Among Women are representing Australia.

The film s being shown at the Film, Television and Documentary Market are Listen to the Lion, The Singer and The Dancer, Do I Have To Kill My Child?, Chorus and Principals on Stage, God Knows Why, But It Works. Leisure, Final Animated Step, A Tale Of One City and the India series (ABC/Film Australia).

An office will be provided by the Australian Film C om m ission w ith video cassette facilities; 35mm and 16mm screenings will also be arranged. The Australian stand will be managed by Ray Atkinson, the Australian Film Commission's London representative.

Phillip Adams' The G etting of Wisdom, Patricia Lovell's Break of Day (scripted by Cliff Green), and the Homestead Production, Raw Deal. Fred Schepisi's The Devil’s Play­ ground also received distribution assistance from the Victorian government.

In a policy statement published in Cinema Papers No. 11 (page 278), Peter Rankin said: “ In the field of script assessing the Corp­ oration has decided not to use outside script assessors, but for the time being make all asssessment by members of the Board."

Given the present controversy, it is perhaps time for the VFC to state clearly what is meant by “ for the time being” and whether the Board sees this present method of script assessment as being a stop-gap or permanent measure.

A.P.

R.O.T.

FILM PRODUCTION TAX BREAKTHROUGH?

AWARDS

Smith, who was earlier an executive producer at the South Australian Film Corporation, and in 1972/73 was the film consultant for the Aust­ ralian Council for the Arts.

Part-time chairman of the corporation is Gil Brealey, former chairm an/director of the SAFC, and p re se n tly a free la n ce film consultant and lecturer at Flinders University, Adelaide.

Other members of the corporation are W. H. Perkins, a former senior lecturer in education at the University of Tasmania; Barbara Manning, director of the Theatre and Education, Tasmania; Colin Hogden. general manager of Tasmanian Drive-In Theatre Holdings; and H. Grierson, an administrative officer with the Premier's Department. M. Smith is also a member of the corporation and D. Donnelly is its secretary.

A.P.

FUNDING CHANGES The 1977 Australian Film Awards were announced in Sydney on September 20, during a national telecast on the ABC. The awards were: Best Film of the Year Storm Boy Best Performance by an Actor John Meillon in The Fourth Wish Best Performance by an Actress Pat.Bishop in Don’s Party Best Performance by a Supporting Actor John Ewart in The Picture Show Man Best Performance by a Supporting Actress Veronica Lang in Don’s Party Best Achievement in Directing Bruce Beresford for Don’s Party Best Screenplay David Williamson for Don’ s Party Best Achievement in Cinematography Russell Boyd for Break of Day Best Achievement in Editing William Anderson for Don’s Party Best Achievement in Sound Editing William Anderson for Don’s Party Best Original Music Score Peter Best for The Picture Show Man Best Achievement in Art Direction David Copping for The Picture Show Man Best Achievement in Costume Design Judith Dorsman for The Picture Show Man

Jury Awards Jury Prize Storm Boy Documentary Category Silver Award We Are All Alone My Dear Bronze Award Greg Honourable Mention Here’s To You Mr Robinson Special Award for Macrophotography Garden Jungle Special Fiction Category Gold Award Love Letters From Teralba Road Silver Award The Singer And The Dancer Bronze Award Do I Have To Kill My Child?

Honourable Mentions The Idyll and In The Beginning

R.S.

Advertising Category Gold Award Italy Special Awards Rover O.T.C. “ Phone Home To-. . series Two Special Awards for Creativity Tom Cowan for Journey Among Women Stephen Wallace for Love Letters From Teralba Road

TASMANIAN FILM CORPORATION

Awards for Cinematography Silver Award Tom Cowan for Love Letters From Teralba Road Bronze Award David Foreman for The Last Harvest Raymond Longford Award The late Charles Chauvel Jedda Award Storm Boy

■

As any'would-be producer in Australia knows to o ‘ well, private finance (ie. non­ government and non-distributor) for film pro­ duction is almost impossible to get, even for the few with one or more successful films.

One of the most frequently proposed explanations of this state of affairs is the totally unattractive way (for private investors) that the Commissioner of Taxation treats their investment. Film is generally considered a unit of industrial property * which means an investment in film production can only be written off — if the film turns out to be unsuccessful — over 25 years. As a film's effective income earning period is 18 months to 3 years, this is hardly an incentive for a high risk speculative commitment.

At the recent Motion Picture Exhibitors Convention at Surfers Paradise, the chairman of the Australian Film Commission, Mr Ken Watts, spoke about what had been rumoured around the production scene for some months — that the AFC was strongly lobbying Treasury for a 12-month write-off of 100 per cent of investment in film production. It appears AFC officials are confident that Treasury will grant their requests, just before the next Federal election, whenever that may be.

A 100 per cent write-off in 12 months will bring Australia into line with Canada, but it is still a far cry from the U.S. situation that existed until a year or so ago, and the present German situation where investors get a leveraged write-off of their investment (ie. they can write off two or three times their actual cash investment).

At the same time, Watts disassociated the AFC from the recent Budget decision to increase the amount of withholding tax paid by film distributors on royalties paid overseas for licences of film copyright. This amount, which has been around four per cent since the Chifley government, was increased to 10 per cent, as originally scheduled.

The extra funds, according to the AFC, go to consolidated revenue, and are not available for film production.

Some commentators, however, believe that the AFC is pleased that their push within the Government has been demonstrated and that as a result we w ill see further 'voluntary' investment in local production.

■ S.K.

MIFED REPRESENTED A group of Australian films are featuring this year in MIFED’s Indian Summer market place. This event is for features completed in 1977 that were not entered in the film market at Cannes. Summerfield, Blue Fire Lady, Raw

On September 5, 1977, the Tasmanian Film Corporation came into being. Created by an Act of Parliament, it replaced the Department of Film Production which had been in operation for 31 years. For the time being, the c o rp o ra tio n is housed at the fo rm e r department’s address at 64 Brisbane St., Hobart.

The functions of the corporation, as defined in its Act, are to produce, distribute, and sell or exhibit films or photographs. It has a pro­ duction team which will be engaged in pro­ ducing films for government and private sponsors; the corporation is also committed to producing feature films, especially those with a bias to family entertainment.

The corporation has an active still photo­ graphic unit and hires out personnel and film equipment.

The director of the corporation is Malcolm ' (See Ian Baillieu’s “ Income Tax and its Appli­ cation to the Australian Film Industry", Cinema Papers no. 12, pages 314, 315 and 382.)

Despite a seeming increase in funding for the Australian Film Commission in the Lynch budget of August 77. several organizations have had their subsidies cut back.

The Melbourne Filmmakers Co-op was declined subsidy for 1977/78 and has subsequently ceased operation. The Sydney Filmmakers Co-op, however, was granted a similar allocation to last year's and is now about to open a Melbourne office. The National Film Theatre of Australia received $73,000 instead of the requested $98,000 and has been told that they can expect a 10 per cent cut next year but whether this is 10 per cent in real or money terms has yet to be.confirmed.

The Australian Film Institute was given a 20 per cent cutback ($60,000) and this has placed the AFI's operations in jeopardy. The AFI's a ctivitie s include running the Longford Cinema in Melbourne and the State in Adelaide, and the distribution of films through the Vincent Library. The AFI is also involved in publishing and has information and research facilities.

The Experimental Film and Television Fund, which the AFI has administered since its inception in 1970. was at the same meeting taken over by the Creative Development Branch of the AFC and will be run from the new AFC office in Melbourne.

In a statement, the chairman of the AFI. Barry Jones MLA. said: " T h e C o m m issio n has o ffe re d no explanation of the rationale behind its decision. Given that the Commission has received a substantial increase in the 1977/78 Budget from the Australian government, we would have thought that some explanation might have been forthcoming.

"We also want to resolve the implications of these cutbacks and to determine what future, if any. the Commission sees for the Institute. When the Prime Minister announced the transfer of functions of the former Film.

Radio and Television Board of the Australia Council to the Film Commission, he indicated that the transfer was made primarily for administrative expedience, and was not intended to result in a diminution in the creative aspects of film in Australia. “ The recent demise of the Melbourne Film­ makers Co-op and the cutbacks to the Institute and other organizations such as the National Film Theatre of Australia would seem to run counter to that policy. “ No one, least of all the Commission itself, would want the .Commission to become a monolithic body monopolising all aspects of the Australian film scene. We are therefore concerned that the Commission is creating the impression that it is stifling and eliminating in d e p e n d e n t A u s tra lia n c u ltu ra l film organizations."

S.M.

PERSONNEL Peter Rose, who as marketing manager of the South Australian Film Corporation was responsible for executing and creating the media campaign for Storm Boy, has left the SAFC. He is now based in Sydney and is the personal assistant to Terry Jackman, the managing director of Hoyts Theatres.

MCA vice-president for Australia, New Zealand, the Pacific and Japan, Ron V. Brown, formerly based in Sydney, has returned to Hollywood to take over as a Universal vice­ president in charge of special projects.

Australian Film Commission solicitor Lloyd Hart has left the AFC and has joined the New South Wales Film Corporation as its solicitor

THE QUARTER

for one year. Lloyd w ill then join the Queensland Bar. M elbourne s o lic ito r Ian Baillieu has concluded a six months consultancy with the Victorian Film Corporation having drawn up, inter alia, a new form of investment contract.

Fred Schepisi s The Chant of Jimmie Blacksmith is the first totally Australian film to employ a foreign publicist. Geoff Freeman of Denis Davidson and Associates, a London and Los Angeles-based film consultancy, was awarded the position.

A.I.G.

MAKING PRIMETIME The September 14 issue of Variety had a listing of series on U.S. television and the estimated production costs of each episode.

While Australian producers struggle to make television features on budgets of around $140,000, or series episodes for less, U.S. producers generally spend in the vicinity of $360,000 per h o u r-le n g th episode and $170.000 per h a lf-h o u r. Tw o n o ta b le exceptions are The Six M illion D ollar Man at $410,100 an episode and Happy Days at $

200 , 000 .

■

The most expensive live show is ABC's coverage of football each Monday night. At $700,000 a game it makes quite a contrast with the "exorbitant" fee of $100,000 for the tele­ vision rights to Melbourne’s Australian Rules Grand Final. The dearest listed series — and the list does not cover television features— is The W onderful World of Disney at $800,000 an episode. That budget would have been sufficient to make any Australian feature with the exceptions of The Chant of Jimmie Blacksmith and Eliza Fraser.

The listing is as follows: AB C-TV

Baretta................................................................390.000 Barney M ille r ...................................................... 185,000.

Carter Country................................................. 165,000 C harlie’s A n g e ls ...............................................390.000 Donny and M arie...............................................300.000 Eight is Enough................................................ 350.000 Family . : ............................................................365.000 Fish.................................................................... 180.000 Happy D a y s ......................................................200,000 Hardy Boys and Nafcy Drew M ysteries....... 380,000 Laverne and S hirley........................................ 190.000 Love Boat, The.................................................. 380.000 NFL Monday Night F o o tb a ll............................700.000 Operation Petticoat...........................................210.000 Red F o xx............................................................275,000 San Pedro Beach Bums, The .. ......................360.000 Six M illion Dollar M a n ..................................... 410.000 Soap.................................................................. 165.000 S oap..............................................................

165.000 Starsky and Hutch........................................... 395.000 Three’s C om pany........................................... 160.000 Welcome Back, K o tte r.................................... 165,000 What’s Happening........................................... 165.000 CBS-TV A lic e .................................................................. 165.000 A ll in the Fam ily................................................ 270.000 Barnaby Jones.................................................. 365.000 Betty White S h o w ........................................... 165.000 Bob Newhart Show ...........................................200,000 Busting L o o s e ................................................. 170,000 Carol Burnett Show, T h e ................................. 310.000 Fitzpatricks..............................

360.000 Good T im e s ..................................................... 175.000 Hawaii Five-0................................................... 390.000 Jeffersons, T h e ............................................... 180.000 K o ja k ................................................................. 380.000 Logan’s R un......................................................360.000 Lou G ra n t........................................................ 360.000 M * A * S * H ..........................................................210.000 M a u d e .............................................................. 190.000 New Adventures of Wonder Woman, T h e .................................................. 375.000 On Our O w n ..................................................... 165.000 One Day at a Time........................................... 175,000 R a ffe rty ............................................................. 360.000 Rhoda.............................................

190,000 60 Minutes..........................................................270.000 Switch . : ............................................................370,000 Tony Randall Show......................................... 170.000 Waltons, The......................................................375.000 We’ve Got Each O th e r.................................... 165.000 Young Dan’l Boon.............................................360.000 NBC-TV Big H aw aii..........................................................365,000 Bionic Woman, The.......................................... 390,000 Chico and the M a n ......................................... 170.000 C h ip s ................................................................. 360.000 Life and Times of Grizzly Adams, The.................................................... 360,000 Little House on the Prairie, T h e ......................370,000 Man From A tlantis.............................................375,000 M ulligan’s Stew ................................................ 360.000 Oregan Trail, The............................................. 380.000 P o lic e w o m a n .................................................. 380,000 Q u in cy................................................... ■..........385,000 Richard Pryor Show, The............................

270,000 Rockford Files, The...........................................380.000 Rosetti and R yan...............................................370,000 Sanford Arms, T h e .......................................... 180,000 W onderful World of Disney, T h e ................... 800,000

S.M.

WILD BEASTS AND CHRISTIANS There have been many cases where films have been recut by producers or production companies before or after release. Greed, The M agnificent Ambersons, Eve, Sunday Too

Still from Pasquale Festa Campinale’s The Sex Machine, an amusing sex comedy about one man’s search for energy in an energy-starved world.

Far Away, are among the best known. Rarely has the director been responsible for these changes, often made to satisfy a displeased public.

Exorcist II: The Heretic is an exception.

After its release on June 17 in New York, War­ ner Brothers executives, worried by jeering crowds and harsh critical reviews, decided the film should be re-edited. Director John Boor­ man was contacted at his Ireland home and, working off his own print, he recut the film on June 18. This consisted of deleting the original ending where Father Lamont (Richard Burton) and Reagan (Linda Blair) walk "out of the Georgetown house and into, the sunset, while the neighborhood fails to notice that the house has burst into flames” .'

Boorman then flew to Hollywood to do more extensive cutting which was intended to speed up the last few reels. A prologue where Richard Burton's voice discusses exorcism over some stills from The Exorcist was also added and the few sex scenes in the original were deleted to make the film more accessible to a mass audience. This new version ran 110 minutes — seven minutes shorter than the original.

When asked about these cuts, Boorman re­ plied: "We are victims of audience expecta­ tion based on the first picture. The sin I com­ mitted was not giving them what they wanted in terms of horror.. There’s a wild beast out there, which is the audience. I created this arena and I just didn’t throw enough Christians into it.”

This third version was previewed on July 6 to a more favorable response. At that stage, however, Warner Bros, executives were unde­ cided whether they should go to the expense of a new print order on a film that had already cost $11,000,000.

A fourth version was then prepared for foreign release by Boorman and producer Richard Lederer. This needed further deletion — the scene where Father Lamont confesses to having sexual feelings.

Whether this is the version being shown in Australia is unclear, the running length here being only 100 minutes. Boorman has remained remarkably cheerful, repeatedly quoting Irving Thalberg who claimed that films are not made but remade.

S.K.

WHATEVER HAPPENED TO FREE SPEECH? A fter successful and controversy-free screenings at the 1977 Melbourne and Sydney film festivals, Nagisa Oshima's L’Empire des S ens was s u b m itte d fo r c e n s o rs h ip registration. But despite a plea by filmmaker and critic Pierre Rissient, the film was banned.

The distributor, Richard Walberg, then lodged an appeal. This was rejected and Walberg is now faced with only two choices: ' This and all further quotes from Variety.

appeal to the Attorney-General, Senator Durak; or attempt to cut an uncuttable film.

It is difficult to understand why Australia's films censors have objected to L’Empire. The film, undoubtedly, portrays explicit sexual activity, but it is never prurient. And while such explicitness is usually restricted to dubiouslyintended sex education films, there has been the recent exam ple of Pasqual Festa Campinale’s The Sex Machine. This amusing comedy about an Italian scientist who discovbrs a tappable energy source in an energy-starved world — a sexually mating couple — has more than one minute of hard­ core sexual activity. Several commentators have suggested that the censor blinked when watching it, but the Chief Censor, Richard Prowse, did initially ban it. It was released un cu t on ly a fte r a p p e a l. The sexual explicitness of The Sex Machine is, therefore, no accident.

Why then is L’Empire des Sens deprived of a certificate? This refusal, combined with the furore over the attempts to show the film at last year's Perth Film Festival, suggest Prowse is trying to make an example of it. But there is nothing in L’Empire des Sensthat has not already been shown on Australian screens. The castration, for example, is no more explicit than that in La Derniere Femme and the dribbling semen only mirrors an equally frank close-up in Black and White Emmanuelle.

The Oshima film is the victim of censorship politics and is yet another sad example of how little the Appeal Board is prepared to ensure freedom of speech.

S.M.

14th EBU screenings Oct 15-19 Italy Nyon (shorts) Oct 15-22 Switzerland MIFED Film and TV Market Oct 19-23 Italy East-West Film Market(MIFED) Oct 20-24 Italy Sao Paulo (International film market) Oct 21-31 Brazil San Sebastian (nature) Oct 23-28 Spain Oberhausen (sports) Oct 24-28 W. Germany 6th MIFED Indian Summer Film Market, Milan Oct 25-29 Italy La Rochelle(Sailing) Oct 27-30 France Hof Film Days Oct 27-30 W. Germany Teheran(children’s films) Oct 31-Nov 7 Iran Lucca (animation) Oct-Nov Italy Paris Film Festival Nov 2-9 France Luebeck(Northern Film Days) Nov 4-6 E. Germany Asian Film Fest(Bangkok) Nov 4-14 Thailand Chicago Film Festival Nov 4-17 United States Namur(nat’l shorts) Nov 5-6 Belgium Padua (sci-educational) Nov 6-12 Italy Cartagena (maritime) Nov 7-12 Spain ' Virgin Islands Nov 11 -20 U.S.A. London Film Festival Nov 14-30 England Teheran Film Festival Nov 15-27 Iran Leipzig Nov 19-26 E. Germany .

Bilhao (shorts, documentaries) Nov 28-Dec 3 Spain Porretta Terme N ov.

Italy Istanbul Film Festival Dec 1-9 Turkey Huelva (Latin American) Dec 5-11 Spain Florence Festival dei Popoli Dec Italy

s

A.P.

FILM FESTIVALS The following is a list of world film festivals during this quarter. (Not all the dates can be taken as finalized.)

Barcelona (color) Oct 1-8 Spain Sitges (horror) Oct 1-8 Spain CISCO (international fair for cinema, theatre equipment) Oct 3-7 France San Francisco Oct 5-16 United States Manheim Oct 10-15 W. Germany Teheran (super 8) Oct 13-18 Iran Arnhem Oct 13-19 Holland Benalmadena(art films) Oct 14-27 Spain

TRAVELLING FILM FESTIVAL The 1977 Travelling Film Festival began screening a selection of six films from the recent Sydney Festival at Newcastle on September 9, and after visiting Mildura, Wollongong, Lismore, Albury, Broken Hill and Dubbo, completes its travels on October 30 in Bowral. . .

The six films and accompanying shorts for each program chosen represent a precis of the larger Sydney Festival. European in flavor, the films chosen were One Man, Cria Cuervos, Der Fangschuss (Coup de Grace), Cadaver! Eccellenti (The Context), Jonas Qui Aura 25 ans en L’an 2000 (Jonah Who W ill Be 25 in the Year 2000) and Edvard Munch. These are screened in sessions of two films a night from Friday to Sunday.

The Sydney Film Festival, working in association with the Arts Council of Australia, are pre se n tin g rural people w ith the opportunity of viewing first-class international film s, most of w h ich would not gain commercial release in country areas. It is to be hoped that next year the Melbourne Film Festival will implement a similar scheme.

A.P.

Cinema Papers, October— 105

It is now five years since Chinese cinema, in the bracing guise of the Bruce Lee films, made its impact on the Cannes Film market and subsequently broke into the world market. In those five years the Hong Kong Chinese cinema has received considerable artistic recognition.

King Hu’s Touch of Zen was invited to the Cannes Film Festival and has since appeared at innumerable prestigious film events, Li Hanhsiang’s two part historical epic The Empress Dowager and The Last Tempest was shown at the London Film Festival, The Ghost in the Mirror at Perth, and this year’s Rotterdam Film Festival included a retrospective of the work of director Sung Tsun-so.

To a degree, writing about the Chinese cinema of Hong Kong from a Western perspective tends to come down to a matter of backing personal enthusiasm with a series of calculated stabs in the dark. There is a dearth of published information in translation and even if one has access to translations of key articles, one ends up conscious of reaching innumerable deadlocks in an attempt to backtrack from an initially oblique introduction. Jay Leyda’s Dianying: Electric Shadows proves invaluable, of course, but no real substitute for access to the output of, for example, the Shanghai studios of the 1930s and1940s, in which the prolific but young (barely two decades old) Hong Kong industry seems so firmly rooted.

The situation is further complicated by the existence of two Hong Kong cinemas: the Cantonese language cinema and the Mandarin or Peking dialect one. The Cantonese was the first to grow and flourish in the colony, but it was to a degree hamstrung by the budgetary limitations imposed by the need to recoup costs within Hong Kong. Its strength was its indigenous coloring — something looked back on fondly by Chinese critics. It was, however, not at all outside the sphere of influence of the dominant fifties modes: watching some of those films now one is struck by the fidelity with which the ubiquitous Italian/Hollywood fetishes of the period were blueprinted.

M an d arin cinem a was d ev elo p ed to consciously sidestep the Cantonese industry’s financial limitations by reaching a wider South­ East Asian market. To do this it capitalized on its ability to mount historical dramas and epic romances with some pretence of authenticity, (the prime example in this area is the work of Li Han-hsiang), as well as increasingly spectacular action. It was on these trends that Shaw Brothers’ pre-eminent position in the industry was founded. It would be a mistake, however, to see it as a purely artificial off-shoot of a commercial and political situation; or as purely an emigrant cinema of nostalgia for a lost China.

In its mobilization of traditional subject matter — its sources range from the great literary classics like The Water Margin, The Golden Lotus, The Dream o f the Red Chamber, Strange Stories from a Chinese Studio, to classic plays, to the popular and pulp literature derived from them — the Chinese cinema applies a strategy central to Chinese culture by co-opting the past in the service of the present.

To an extent, Hong Kong Chinese cinema is one of thwarted perfectionists. A cinema, too, indulging in a certain crisis of conscience. It is rare to talk to a director who will express satisfaction with his work or who will whole­ heartedly embrace the ambience of commercial cinema.

To some extent this is a product of an admittedly horrific production situation in which a director will have no final control over such intimate aspects of a film’s post-production as the Verina Glaessner is the former editor of the film page in Time Out and is a frequent contributor to Sight and Sound.

music track or post-dubbing, or in which he or she will be subject to studio pressure to insert unwanted action sequences, or to shoot back to back. * As Mizoguchi has said: “I’ve been making films for thirty years. If I look back on all I’ve done in that time I see nothing but a series of compromises with the capitalists, whom we nowadays call producers, in order to make a film in which I could take pleasure.”

In Hong Kong a small catalogue of films is widely admired as exemplars of a ‘true direction’ for Chinese cinema. These include a group of films made for Li Han-hsiang’s short-lived independent company Grand (Kuo Lieng), and Tang Shu-shuen’s The Arch. What they have in common can, I suppose, be characterized as an aspiration towards an art cinema with neo-realist echoes.

While deploring the narrow limits within which directors are forced to work, and the obvious scars which rigorous censorship (especially in Taiwan) and commercial pressures have left on innumerable films which remain near-masterpieces, and while longing to see Chinese cinema adopt the strategies, recast in its own terms, of a Wenders or a Syberberg, it is difficult for a Western critic to feel wholly at one with this verdict. One tends to espouse the achievements of a vital popular art in the hands of artists who turn limitations into generic strengths.

CHAS1G CHEH AHD CHE

ACilOn GEVRE It is the films of Chang Cheh, alongside those of Bruce Lee and King Hu, that have probably contributed most to the Western concept of Chinese cinema. Golden Swallow, Vengeance, The New One-Armed Swordsman, Due! of Fists, Blood Brothers, Heroes Two and others have all received international distribution. And for once the vagaries of commercial distribution have proved apt and revealing. For it is in his films that are distilled to a marked degree the central and vital generic components of the Chinese martial arts film, a genre that seems as important in its definition of certain parameters of the Chinese experience as the Western does in relation to the culture which spawned it.

Vast hiatuses prevent any definitive discussion of the genre’s development, although in its recent revivification, from the late 1950s-’60s through to the present, it has undergone a dramatic evolution. Leyda suggests a genesis in the films made in the shadow of Chiang Kai-shek’s 1927 coup. He sees the stringent censorship of the period as definitive: “Even cinema . . . found it possible to retreat further from ideas and real life .. . the classical subjects that had been in vogue in 1926 had been replaced and stayed replaced for the next four years by a Chinese version of the Western”. That is, by action films framed around “a synthesis of medieval knight-errant, Japanese samurai, the French Fantomas, and the old reliable Robin Hood” .

The films concentrated on “impetuous deathdefying exploits . .. continuous violence, usually

Verina Glaessner

*The cinema of Hong Kong is, however, not unique in this respect. For example, John Ford is quoted in V. F. Perkins’ Film as Film as saying that it was a “constant battle to do something fresh. First they want you to repeat your last picture . . . then they want you to continue whatever vein you succeeded in with the last picture . . . Another time they want you to knock out something another studio's gone and cleaned up with”.

Cinema Papers, October — 107

CHINESE CINEMA

swordplay, with intervals for romance and/or exposed flesh . . Leyda’s description, meant derogatorily, sounds distinctly interesting in the light of current trends.

The simultaneous development of chivalric literature at this time in the direction of an emphasis on physical strength, expertise in swordsmanship, boxing and wrestling, suggests a common root and that an understanding of the place of the ‘knight errant’ in Chinese history and literature might be pertinent.

James Y.J. Liu in his over-view of the subject, The Chinese Knight-Errant, traces the figure to its historical source in the wandering fighters operating during the Warring States (403 — 221 BC), essential disruptive forces in a feudal society.

Unlike the Western Knight they operated without religious sanction, and in literature were depicted as living by a code that involved individual freedom, the righting of wrongs, revenge and loyalty. In place of the feminine objects of courtly love of Western tradition, women appear as carnal figures or as female knights, “themselves brave, loyal and wise” as well as adept fighters.

The Chinese knight errant underwent various interpretations in a literary tradition that impresses with its sheer weight of continuity, extending through popular oral tradition to novels, the ‘high’ art of chivalric verse, theatre, pulp literature and comic strip. It is the knight errant as disruptive force and righter of wrongs that the cinematic genre has found to a degree its central and most crucial focus. Which is not to argue for generic purity, but simply to suggest that its cultural roots have enabled it to incorporate influences from diverse sources such | as the American Western, the Italian peplum,the European Western, the samurai film, the thriller, without disturbing its essential coherence.

Chang Cheh has directed around 60 films. In a sense, it is, of course, too many. But whether one regards Chang in something of a producer role v/5 a vis those of his films on which he works with co-directors, or as more of a conventional auteur, there is no doubting the assured stylistic unity. His work can be categorized according to the changing group of repertory players around which he frames his narratives — Wan Yu in his early films; Ti Lung and David Chiang, later joined by Chen Kuan-tai in the middle period (roughly 1969-1972/3); Fu Sheng, Chi Kuanchun, Chen Kuan-tai in his later series.

Chang uses his performers in a positive sense to define his theme. The dynamics and reverberations he establishes between the characters become, hand in hand with the frequently brilliant and sensitively attuned scripts written for him by Ni Kuan, a writer dedicated to knight-errant literature and a prolific author of novels and serials, the subject, and provides the films with a density and sensitivity of surface and a psychological resonance rarely essayed successfully elsewhere in Chinese cinema.

For parallels one reaches to the films of Peckinpah (for whom Chang has expressed his admiration), the Ray of Johnny Guitar, the ritualized circles of pain in Leone.

All of Chang’s really substantial work that I have seen has been set in the past — either the more or less recent past of the Republican era, of the twenties, thirties and forties China, or in the distant past (the Northern Sung Dynasty in the case of The Water Margin trilogy.) Usually Chang draws from the past a generalized situation (of corruption, moral dissolution, disorder) rather than pointing up a particular political moment.

The films of his Taiwan period (between 1973 and 1975 he produced films under the semi­ independent aegis of his own company in 108 — Cinema Papers, October

Taiwan) are a notable exception, framed specifically at the point of Manchu conquest in China and the collapse of the Ming dynasty, a point with very specific political resonances but one w hich is never tu rn e d to m erely propagandist use by the director.

Tiger Boy, made in 1964, was Chang’s fourth film as director. Shot in studio sets on a minuscule budget in black and white, the narrative proceeds chaotically, burdened down with set-piece farewells, and messy fight sequences shot without the benefit of anything like the thought-out choreography of the later films. What illuminates the film, however, is the character of the wandering avenger, described in the pre-credit sequence as a virtual force of nature, and crystallized in the performance of Wang Yu. It is through his scarred and malevolent gaze that the film achieves the force it does, providing a focus the script overtly acknowledges. Action is less relevant than the establishment of mono­ graphic images, emblems, motifs and there is even, waiting in the wings, the hero’s brotherly rival cast as the film’s evil genius.

It was not until two years later that Chang appeared to have begun to invest combat sequences with the thematic intensity that has latterly become something of a trademark. King Hu’s second film for Shaw Brothers, Come Drink With Me, is usually credited with this decisive role. Hu did bring in an action choreographer, with experience in Peking opera, to handle fight sequences and give them a degree of sophistication, if not quite the ‘abstractness’, of his later work, but it seems probable that Chinese cinema, inspired by the popularity of Japanese samurai films, emulated spectacular combat sequences from the innumerable filmed operas and action films made since the 1920s.

Chang’s The One-Armed Swordsman is a competent film, but unexciting in this direction.

It is notable only for the degree to which it touches generic bases faithfully blueprinted throughout the early 1970s: the martial arts school; the evil pupils who misuse their power; treachery, impotence and self-vindication.

Chang’s main preoccupation is with the pull of romantic fatality located in the hero’s (Wang Fu) relationship with the woman who has, symbolically, castrated him. Four years and one sequel la te r in The N ew O ne-A rm ed Swordsman, Chang is revealed masterfully exploiting a genre in order to yield a vision of coherently gothic dimensions. In Golden Swallow, Chang took the female character Hu had created — “the brave, loyal and wise, knight errant” — and amplified the element of fatal romanticism, seamlessly deploying his action sequences in a way that complemented and developed the exposition.

In the next few years, Chang developed further his ability to italicize aspects of- his performers’ personae. The real diegesis of the film therefore became less the narrative and more an almost sculptural interplay of character through a series of pregnant relationships which themselves translate effortlessly into the in­ creasingly epic dimensions and detailed choreo­ graphy of action. Golden Swallow is a con­ summate example with its ballad structure hinging around its three main characters — Swallow, Roc (played by Wang Ye as a wayward killer with some of the ‘wounded’ resonance of Brando of The Wild One) and Lo Lieh as Swallow’s faithful companion in her tussle against the forces of constriction, corruption and death. Where Hu locates heroism in the action — and carrying out of an intellectually conceived strategy — Chang locates it viscerally in the figures of his archetypally disruptive seekers of justice.

Many of his films admittedly accomplish little

CHINESE CINEMA

beyond performing more or less ambitious variations on a theme. A blood-soaked epic like Vengeance, however, conjures with notions of cosmic pessimism of Jacobean tragedy. While the Water Margin Trilogy (The W ater M argin,The Delightful Forest, AH Men are Brothers) builds massively from initial ‘softness’ to climax in a mosaic in which exposition takes the place of narrative, and plot, character, theme are all explored through combat sequences of extra­ ordinary power. in Blood B rothers, Chang turns in an impressive investigation of the knight errant personality under the aspect of romance in a tradition which treats love and heroism as antithetical.

In this director’s five main Taiwan films, which all focus on the adventures of disciples of the Shaolin temple displaced through treachery, the depiction of the martial arts becomes, under the direction of Liu Chia-liang, more literal (a legacy of Bruce Lee’s realistic precision) and also more histrionic, with the emblematic heroic gesture attached to a developed sequence of movements. Films like Heroes Two, Men from The Monastery and the wonderfully Hawksian Disciples of Shaolin, all explore the arts in relation to theory and practice in a way in which the genre’s peplum influences are left behind in favor of a specifically Chinese interpretation.

The series confronts its subject and the genre at its point of (historical) origin — the temple — and conflates this aspect with the h is­ torical /political theme with remarkable success.

Their distinctiveness didn’t go unnoticed by other production companies who swiftly took up the theme and Liu himself directed a series of films which mined areas similar to those explored by his mentor.

Golden Swallow (Chang Cheh), a film notable for its ballad like structure.

Use New One-Armed Swordsman, Chang Cheh’s gothic sequel to The One-Armed Swordsman.

cmnE^EcinEmA M E CHE ¿OPHBlICAl ED SEiOBILEI?

During the 1950s and early 1960s when Chang was an unsuccessful scriptwriter at Shaw Brothers, Hong Kong cinema switched to the M andarin language. And the spectacular opportunities this offered, including a new mine of classical, historical subjects, were largely at the hands of the studio’s golden boy, Li Hanhsaing. And it was very much his blend of statuesque sophistication that provided Shaw Brothers with the stylish money-spinners that made their reputation.

A graduate of the Peking Art Institute and actor whose attempts to enter the somewhat charmed circle of the Shanghai studios had foundered, Li’s eye was caught by Hong Kong’s fumbling attempts to rival the mainland’s output. His enormously prolific career spans some 30 years, beginning with a series of intriguing black and white, more or less socially-orientated films in the 1950s, and branching out to embrace more classic subjects to which he lent increasingly lavish dimensions.

Unlike Chang, Li has not confined himself to any single genre (although, in common with Chang, he has tended to work with the same informal ‘repertory company’, both in front of and behind the camera, for substantial periods of time). His work ranges from the epic, to the courtly romance, the period drama, satire and erotic compendiums of dramatic and comic tales.

Empress Wis, Li Han-hsiang’s reworking of a typically Shangai film

Li Han-hsiang’s The Kingdom and the Beauty.

Cinema Papers, October — 109

CHINESE CINEMA

The bitterly ironic satire, The Warlord (Li Han-hsiang), which is set in the aftermath of the Republican revolution.

In a way his oeuvre represents the yin to Chang’s yang. His films tend to centre on female characters sensually observed. In fact, one could hardly hope for a more appropriate director for a subject of epic scope than this genuine hedonist whose penchant tow ards the extravagant prevents his treatment of the genre from becoming mere exercises in the grandiose.

Any director working within the essentially collective arena of commercial cinema needs a certain determination and stylistic resilience to withstand its planing down effect and this is certainly true of the arrantly commercial and often low-budgeted Hong Kong industry. Many interesting directors like Chu Yuan, of Intimate Confessions of a Chinese Courtesan and the recent, brilliant The Magic Blade, or Sung Tsun-so, simply don’t have sufficient grit to sustain themselves, in these circumstances.

Li, on the other hand, and certainly up to his impressive two-part Ch’ing dynasty drama (1 9 7 5 /7 6 ), ex h ib its th e se q u a litie s par excellence. One has no difficulty in recognizing a powerful grasp in his mobilizing of mise-enscene and detail towards deliberately expressive ends. Innumerable sophisticated and sensual moments stick in the mind: the group of women ranged about the weeping Ti Ying (in the film of the same name) luxuriating in their abandonment to distress; an elegant and unexpected flurry of fabric and exposed flesh framed with a sequence of biting irony and wit in Scandal; the sense of physicality that makes Li’s ghost in Bliss, one episode in Four Moods (to which King Hu also contributed), disconcertingly more ‘real’ than his supposedly flesh and blood protagonist.

Between 1963 and 1970 Li produced and directed for his independent company in Taiwan, providing a refreshingly benevolent environment in which some of the Hong Kong cinema’s most interesting directors were able to make their debuts. His films ranged from the epic to the deliberately low-keyed and downbeat. The courtly romances and period dramas are handled with a finesse impossible within the tightly budgeted confines of the studio. One gropes for parallels and finds them perhaps in Ray’s King of Kings, perhaps in some of Huston, in the massive confidence of some of the more impressive Hollywood or peplum epics.

110 — Cinema Papers, October

Hsi SWk Beauty of Beauties mobilizes landscape with the expressiveness Li had previously lavished on the artificially palatial sets and costumes of the studio films and manages to embue the weighty deployments of the battle sequences and the moments of surprising intimacy with an enthusiasm that is constantly bracing.

Ti Ying: The Girl who saved her Father, despite being somewhat flawed by the attentions of the Taiwan censor,' wraps a tale of court corruption in a romantic dressing. The plotting and counter-plotting by the rival bands of medical specialists, for motives obscure, around the obese, drugged and increasingly senseless figure of the son of the royal household, manages to suggest the foreignness of a past age and the essence of a baleful corruption that is not finally exorcized by the romantic vision of filial piety and paternal benevolence on which the film ends.

The history of what has tended to be labelled, with a hint of superiority, “Shaw spectaculars”, and are in fact courtly romances cast in more or less lavish guise, is slightly less shrouded than that of the martial arts genre, primarily because of the genre’s obvious upfrontness about its cultural credentials.

Leyda, who treats the genre’s Hong Kong incarnation as lightly on the whole as he does that of the sword-stroke-action film, finds its roots in the Shanghai studios of the period of Japanese occupation when, again, to paraphrase, refuge in the past provided a ‘safe’ way of dealing with Japanese pressure. (True on a certain level, but is this all that there is to be said?)

As Leyda remarks, much of the Shaw Brothers’, and Li Han-hsiang’s, initial output consisted "of films which reworked subjects handled previously by Shanghai. Titles likeOiau Charm, Empress Wu, Street Angel, were all remade by Li. But again one is in the dark about the extent to which these developed or copied extant films, or simply reworked familiar sources.

The most interesting remake case is undoubtedly that of Li’s brilliant 1976 film, The Last T em p est, a film based in part on the play by Yao Ke and filmed in 1948 at Yung Hwa by Chu Shih-ling, for whom Li (and King Hu) made

several films in his pre-Shaw days. The Secret History of the Ch’ing Court, of course, gained a certain notoriety in 1967 by becoming a Cultural Revolution test case.

Reviewed today, many of the costume romances can yield unexpected riches, The Kingdom and the Beauty, the story of the love between a country girl and an emperor, sidesteps mere wishfulfilment to conjure, with some sense of grandeur, notions of a crushing social hierarchy. Yang Kwei Fei: The Magnificent Concubine (a story also filmed by Mizoguchi) may somewhat come to grief around the figure of The Emperor, too much a tabula rasa for the film’s own good, but nonetheless lays out the weighty rituals of court life and its concomitant in the abandonment to sensual self-indulgence in a way that defrays a certain theatrical stiffness.

At this point in his career, King Hu proved a perfect complement to Li. They co-operated on the film version of Eternal Love, a Huang Mei opera (with Hu as assistant director) about the thwarted but transcendental love between two young students, with the male role played, according to tradition, by a woman and the female role involving the heroine assuming the guise of a youth in order to partake of an educa­ tion denied to women.

Eternal Love achieves an amazing richness of effect, its persuasive feminist undercurrents, its innumerable surface charms, its knowing recasting of a theatrical form in cinematic terms, and its flowing lead performance all make it something of a landmark.

In Hong Kong, Li is chiefly prized for his patently sensitive and informed handling of Chinese culture and history. But certain critics find in the remarkably pared down and deliberate simplicity of The W inter, which he made for his own company, something of a pinnacle in Chinese cinema.

The Winter is an odd film, a gentle romance between a man and a woman filmed often on location in a street ambience, and a film that seems oddly peripheral to Li’s oeuvre. Tony Rayns has characterized it as notable for its narrative restraint (little happens) and its over­ wrought direction.

This tension between directorial activity and narrative passivity adheres to much of Li’s work.

It seems that it was not until the collapse of his company — something of a locus classicus for the industry’s crisis of conscience — and Li’s reluctant retrenchment at Shaws, that the director, honing his disillusionment to highly creative ends, revealed a more developed approach to narrative.

Two bitterly ironic satires, The Warlord and Scandal, reveal an icily satirical perspective on the nature of power. Both, centring on magnetic performances from Michael Hue, are set during the aftermath of the Republican revolution, and they reveal a society arrested in a state of odious and malignant corruption: a blackly moral vision that has hardly been bettered.

The concomitant of the admiration for Li’s historical approach has been a tendency to belittle what certainly appears, to a Westerner, his main strength: his sophisticated sensuality.

Hence, choruses of disdain as he tackles ‘yet another sex film’. While not decrying the tokenness of many of his post Empress Dowager and Last Tempest erotic works, it is worth noting a film like Golden Lotus. Drawn from the classic erotic Chinese novel, Golden Lotus recalls Pasolini in its careful marshalling of surfaces, narrative, textures and character to present a cocooned world dominated by an all­ embracing erotic consciousness.

It is worth noting, too, that films like this, like The W arlord, Scandal and Eternal Love, accessible, intriguing and entertaining as they are, cry out for international distribution. *

Leon S a unders (Sydney)

“ Greg” and “ Mick” both indicate that yon have am ability to coax information out of people „ ..

Yes, but I finally got sick of it because I couldn’t escape the potentially exploitative nature of what I was doing, though there was another reason for capturing those events on the screen. I was always trying to work out whether this educational use justified the revealing way in which I presented those people. So I eventually told Film Australia that I wouldn’t make any more behavior observation-type films.

Did yoe initially find Greg and Mick?

With Mick, the original brief was “find a sharpie” , but the people who made the briefs didn’t'realize that there weren’t any sharpies any more in Sydney. So I went out hanging around tattoo shops instead and I met this Mick in one at Blacktown. As for Greg, Jan Sharp, who was researching the series, found him.

How did both families feel about the films?

They said they liked them, but I think the films probably unnerved them a bit. If I was to make a film about you, or you about me, and in

Filli Noyce is probably the best-known of Australia’s non-mainstream directors, with two ©f tils films, “Castor and Pollux95 and “Backroads55, receiving consideratile critical praise. Botti films have also reached wide audiences despite the limitations of their very low budgets.

Noyce joined the Interim Training Scheme of the Film and Television School in 1973 (and there he directed “Caravan Park55, “That’s Showbiz55 and “Castor and Pollux55)» Noyce then worked as a freelancer on “The Golden Cage55 and “A Calendar off Breaming95 before being Invited to direct “God Knows Why, But It Works55 for Film Australia, under producer Richard Mason.

Noyce remained at Film Australia as second assistant on “Let the Balloon Go55, subsequently directing, among others, “Greg95 and “Mick59 for the highly-regarded “Why Can’t They Be Like We Were?55 series. These were followed by the controversial “Backroads95.

In the following interview, conducted by Mary Moody, Noyce discusses Ms previous films and his new project, “Newsfroiif5.

six months we were to look at it, you’d be terribly unnerved. It’s a jolt to the system, especially when the film is being made about your values and the way you live — not n e c e ssa rily condem ning your values, but just pointing them out.

Greg was actually made to illustrate to school kids of about 12 and 13 the structure of a middle-class Australian family and way in which the family helped and, at the sam e t i m e , h i n d e r e d th e development of the kid.

W h ere as “ M ic k ” is to ta lly different. . .

Yes, the idea of Mick was to illustrate the way in which peer group pressure affects a person’s behavior.

W hat’s happening w ith these films?

They are used as discussion starters in ^high schools around Australia although both films are not allowed to be shown without discussion because they could be read in the wrong way.

I wouldn’t mind Greg being .shown without discussion, but certainly Mick shouldn’t be. It could be taken up by a distributor and shown in the cinemas because of his bizarre behavior: covering him self with tattoos, bashing Cinema Papers, October — 111

PHIL NOYCE

■H

Shooting God Knows Why, But It Works, a film Noyce directed for Film Australia from an idea by Richard Mason.

homosexuals for sport on Saturday night, travelling in the car — all the sorts of things F.J. Holden might have been.

BACKROADS Where did you get the original idea for “Backroads”?

John Emery, who wrote Caravan Shooting Backroads. Director of photo­ Boyd, with camera (bottom); Park, sent me a short story he had graphy, Russell Noyce on car hood (top). written called First Day o f Spring.

We took one incident and the spirit The last shot was to be three or four from the short story, and drafted a miles of traffic stacked up behind treatment. John wrote the first this car. screenplay, and the actors and I We were actually going to stage a breakdown on the freeway and just changed that along the way.

The central character in the film it. Gary, however, felt that script we wrote was a young politically it was a cop-out. The Aboriginal of 26 to 30 who had journey these men undertake was been married to a white woman. He always seen as an allegory of the had been trying to make it in the journe y white men and the white society under the influence of Aboriginals took together over the his wife because that was the ideal past 200 years —■and that journey, as we know, has been ultimately presented to him. tragic for the Aboriginals. So, Gary What was the involvement of the felt the film should end tragically Aboriginal actors in the making and that his character should be killed. And that is the way we shot of the film? it.

I didn’t know many Aboriginal actors, and in fact there weren’t Are you happy with ihe ending? many at that time who were Not really. We didn’t have experienced in filmmaking. I didn’t want to get David Gulpilil because enough resources of money and our Aboriginal was more urban. manpower to do the sort of ending Anyway, I’d seen Gary Foley that we finally compromised on. around town for a couple of years, Also I had been planning the other so I asked him to play the part of ending for more than a year and we Noel. I also wanted him to have only changed it at the last minute. some creative control, as well as the ideological control of the black W hat would have happened if you to d Insisted ©n your ending? statement the film generated. w orking

Gary would probably have shot it though he said he wouldn’t.

Yes, although it was really an impossible relationship, the answer to which is that black people ought to film their own stories.

Your earlier films, “ Castor and Pollux” In particular, received very good press, but the reaction to “ Backroads” was very mixed.

How do you respond to criticism?

W as it a good relationship?

I believe changed. . .

the

e n d i n g was

Critics can be valuable to a filmmaker as a yard-stick. Certainly Originally, the people in the close friends seldom give honest stolen car — the two Aboriginals opinions on your work, and I and the white man — end up by r e c o g n i z e c e r t a i n flaws in causing a traffic jam on the Backroads myself.

Backroads is a very difficult approach to the Harbour Bridge.

They abandon the car, leaving it film for any viewer to come to grips among a mass of vehicles, and with. The characters are generally disappear into the concrete jungle. unattractive and it is a film where I 112 — Cinema Papers, October

Backroads, Noyce’s look at unmotivated crime. Bill Hunter as Jack and Zac Martin as Joe.

During a break on location. Actors Bill Hunter and Zac Martin, with Noyce in between.

have sought to investigate so-called “ unmotivated crime” . And this makes it additionally difficult for an audience to feel sympathy for the characters.

The realism and forcefulness of the characters have also tended to provoke personal prejudices in some viewers, reactions that have been confused by their attitudes to certain behavior.

You always bring your own prejudices to a film so you can’t really blame critics — you just have to find a way of pointing out to them how your film might appeal.

Pierre Rissient, the director of One Night Stand, who was once a publicist, used to make successes of films that looked like sleepers. And he did this by pointing out to critics the way in which the film might be important. He did this on an individual level.

You seem to be very involved in this side of filmmaking as well. . .

It is absolutely important. I was reading Ken Hall’s book last night and he points out that while you can

Gary Foley (as Gary) caught up in the ending he helped write. Backroads.

trust other people to look after your film, they are never going to put in the same amount of energy, or present the same outlook, as you can. Therefore, you have only yourself to blame if things go wrong.

In filmmaking there is a degree of departmentalizing, inasmuch as the art director and the cameraman have their own autonomy, but ultimately it is the d irec to r’s responsibility.

PHIL NOYCE

If you see filmmaking as an industrialized commodity, which you must when you are making films above a certain budget, you know you are making something to be sold — it’s not just an esoteric thing. That is why in a capitalist society a director will usually only make another film if his last film’s been a success — except in Australia.

There is another reason for pushing Backroads and that is, being an hour long it could die without anyone seeing it. I can’t sell it to television because of the subject matter and language, so I had to make the most out of the theatrical situation.

film like Newsfront you are playing with other people’s money, and you feel less inclined to experiment with style and content. I knew that Backroads, by its language and subject matter, would be offensive to a large section of the community.

But I could afford to take a risk be­ cause it was only $25,000 worth of basically non-repayable govern­ ment funds — as well as my own savings.

I understand the NSW Film Corporation is investigating a plan to make $200,000 films and I think this could be an answer. You could then make films that may have commercial potential but which you can afford to take risks with. There tends to be a certain repetitiveness about Australian features and this may help a break-away.

largely I think as a response to the success of Philippe Mora’s Brother Can You Spare a Dime and the American film, Let the' Good Times Roll. In fact, David initially had discussions with Philippe.

David wrote the story outline, with Andrew Fisher, then Bob Ellis came into it and he and Bob ampli­ fied it greatly.

With almost all my other films, I had the idea or else found one that caught my attention. But here I inherited a second draft screenplay which already has a certain number of characters and a plot line, some of which I agreed with and some I didn’t. It’s been a very difficult process arriving at a final draft. We produced seven new drafts in the past 12 months.

It went okay in Sydney, but great in M e l b o u r n e , t h o u g h in Melbourne it was released at a time NEWSFRONT when the Longford Cinema could not give me an indefinite season. I guess it was my fault in going to a cinema knowing I only had three Are you aiming to do something weeks, but I had to take' the different with “ Newsfroii!”? opportunity.

The film has an each way bet, Cam you see yourself making more inasmuch as it is appealing to a very films with the budget of wBack- wide audience while trying to do something different — i.e. to make a roads”? few different statements and to Yes. I’d like to do some feature adopt a revolutionary structure. At documentaries, films that might not the same time, we will be trying to necessarily be commercial but water the structure down so that which have a political or social people won’t feel threatened by it. nature.

How did you become involved in Do you feel you cam get more “ Newsfront”? social comment into this type of film?

About a year ago, David Elfick asked me to read a script Bob Ellis You can do things that you can’t had written. I thought the idea quite do in a $500,000 film, because on a extraordinary and told him I was interested in directing it.

The original idea was David’s,

What is “Newsfront” basically about?

How lias “ IlaekFoads” gome?

It’s a dramatic story of the newsreel cameramen who lived and worked in Australia during the golden era of the newsreel from 1948 to 1956. It uses actual docu­ mentary footage of the public events that shaped and influenced the nation, and these are set against the fictional private lives of the men who recorded that history, and the women with whom they had relationships.

It’s the story basically of one cameraman, Len McGuire, who works for a company called Cinetone News, which is based on Cinesound. And he works in opposition to his brother, Frank, who works for the rival company, Newsco. Cinetone is the all­ Australian company and Newsco is, as Movietone was, an Australian sub-branch of an international company.

Newsfront is also an examination of what happened to Australia during that time of great change.

Between the end of the war and 1956, a million new settlers came to Australia, and this greatly altered the make-up of our society. One result was a more international outlook being taken by Australians in general. Coupled with this is the Americanization of this country.

One of the early events of the film, and this typifies much of the fi l m ’s at titude , involves the launching of the first Holden. The Holden has always been seen as a symbol of nationalism, a reminder of a more naive time of peculiarly Australian symbols, like the kanga­ roo and the koala. But, in fact, since the first Holden was produced, General Motors has exported more than $300 million to the U.S. in profits from the sale of Australia’s national car.

The launching of the Holden was, therefore, really a nail in the coffin of Australian economic and, as it turns out, cultural independence. It was really just industrial imperial­ ism. And in a typically American trick, they gave locals what they thought was their own product, even though, as it turns out, it was

also what they gave the Germans as the Opel.

There bus been a lot of criticism lately about the number off period films that we are making in Australia and the way In which film m akers seem unw illing to come to terms with contemporary issues and events. How do you feel about this?

I believe Newsfront is quite different to most other period films because it’s attempting, by an examination of the social fabric and the public events of the near past, to make statements about the evolu­ tion of present day attitudes and constitutions within Australia.

For example, the Hungarian Uprising was an event which embellished a fear in a lot of Australians — that of communism.

The same goes for the Petrov affair, which though not directly treated in the film — we just hear something about it over the radio — is an event which led to the split in the Labor Party and the formation of the Democratic Labor Party.

I must add that these events are skilfully integrated into the narra­ tive, and the film is not, at least on the surface, about these events.

These events are treated subtexturally and the film is really a narrative — the story of a family and of two men.

Is it going to be a problem cutting th e news fo o tag e i n t o the narrative?

Only inasmuch as some of the newsreel stories were edited with a different aesthetic then. So the rhythm of the cutting is often quite dissimilar to the way in which you’d cut that same material into a dramatic story. But we think we can get round by using off-cuts and a story in a different way.

One must remember that tele­ vision didn’t exist until 1956, and that’s one reason the film ends then.

And television was, of course, a further nail in the coffin of socalled Australian independence, because it increased the brain­ washing. That’s why in the film.we show people watching The Mickey Mouse Club on television. After all, our cultural heroes generally have been American in origin, and Ginger Meggs is less known than Superman.

How- involved have you been.in fie casting?

Totally. We didn’t have a casting consultant on the film, which may have been a mistake, because I know that people like, say, Hilary Linstead, spend most of their time keeping abreast of the latest productions on the stage and in the cinema. Hilary is constantly aware of any emerging talent and of the wide cross-section of actors and types.

Concluded on P. 191 Cinema Papers, October — 113

BERLIN 1977 Mari Kuttna

“ Understanding that any ‘ useful’ act in a corrupt world serves only to reinforce the corruption, Charles continues his frightened pursuit of his own death." Robert Bresson’s Le Diabte Probabtement

Like all international film festivals, the Berlin festival held in July is a multi-ring circus, with five or six shows running at any time of day and most times at night.

But efficient organization helped to make it manageable.

The parallel events included the main competition, the International Forum of Young Films, a program of new West German films, the large market/information section, several major retrospectives — including an almost complete one of Marlene Dietrich’s films. There were even various fringe screenings arranged by the local association of art cinemas.

The festival’s only weakness was the standard of the main competition. The festival’s director, Dr Wolf Donner, plans to upgrade it by advancing the dates of next year’s festival from July to -early March — two months ahead of the Cannes festival. Dr Donner believes that the move would enable the Berlin festival to scoop better fMms, but the question remains: will there be enough new material, shot, edited and processed in time for the festival?

At this year’s festival there were 34 films in the main section, and 25 of these were eligible to compete for the Bears — a sign of the overall lack of quality that the same four or five were shortlisted by every jury (the critics, the Catholics, the Evangelicals, and so on) and argued by everyone on the street-corners, in the foyers and at parties.

Mari Kutna is a frequent contributor to Sight and Sound (London).

114 — Cinema Papers, October

Most of the arguments were focussed on Robert Bresson’s Le Diable Probable­ ment (Probably the Devil). It was finally awarded a special prize by a sadly split jury, because Bresson “ ... examines with profound seriousness and sincerity a world in which the choice of life and death should be treated with equal respect.” * Jan Dawson, in a dazzling thematic analysis of the film, says in the festival program note that it .. requires a spiritual progression on the part of the audience, from antipathy to compassion to awestruck admiration” . Though the audience forms part of an over­ populated, polluted and degraded world castigated by the film, the problem is not so much antipathy as an alienated pity for the characters: The hero is Charles, a teenage boy sickened by the world; “ .. . understand­ ing that any useful act in the corrupt world serves only to reinforce corruption, Charles continues his frightened pursuit of his own death.” However, like the similarly suicidal heroines of Bresson’s previous films, the people in Le Diable Probablement seem more like kittens with incurable spinal injuries than fellow humans.

Our self-projection into Bresson’s universe is hindered by this, as well as by the director’s insistence on amateur wooden acting by the non-professionals who show little except advanced symptoms of anorexia nervosa. Naturally the psychiatrist Charles is persuaded to consult is useless: what he needs is codliver oil.

And yet, no other director has ever

possibility of a man’s resistance to his inner destruction.”

Although it is a sensitively directed, moving film, it needed this political edge to give it the eclat needed for a first prize.

The increased honesty and wide frame of reference of Ascent postulated a moral refinement new to the Soviet film; under­ standably, the Golden Bear discomfited, rather than pleased, the Russian officials.

While one may argue (as all the Bressonists did) that aesthetically the award was misplaced, it was a necessary political gesture. In Berlin of all places, in this precarious island city trying to be the open market between the nihilism of sophisticates and the unthinking assump­ tions of loud ideologies, it is important to remember that the arts cannot be judged on aesthetic grounds alone.

Another illustration of the way fascism eats the soul, not in the over­ mythologized World War 2 but right now, came in Camada Negra (Black Litter) which gained the Silver Bear for the best director for Manuel Gutierrez Aragon, from Spain. Aragon helped to write Borau’s Poachers and Camino’s Long h o lid a y s o f ’ 36; in tu rn , Borau collaborated on the script of Black Litter, so the similarities of approach and treat­ ment are not surprising.

In both films there is a threat of violence from the beginning: the harsh lighting, hard closed faces, the family scenes in which resentments and anger burst into sudden fights, and love without tenderness. Borau and Aragon show people who are pugnacious rather than dignified, who communicate by inflicting pain or humiliation on each other, whose moral qualities were eroded first by poverty, then by fascism.

In Black Litter a family forms a small right-wing terrorist group under the guidance of their mother. They attack libraries and shops, and break up socialist meetings, while posing as a Catholic male choir. Fifteen-year-old Tatin wants to join his older brothers, against his mother’s prohibition. He resolves to show her that he can fulfil the conditions of membership — secrecy, revenge, and the willing sacrifice of his dearest and nearest for the cause. Tatin fails on secrecy, and bungles the revenge, but his final ritual sacrifice is all the more horrifying.

The film’s black-and-black characters are a tough challenge to performers, yet Black Litter was probably the best acted film of the competition, rivalled only by the Hungarian entry, Herkulesfurdoi Emtek (A Strange Role).

established such total subjectivity on film: the camera sees only and exactly what people within the film are seeing. In moments of emotional stress, we look A Strange Role, Pal Sandor’s fifth away from faces: we stare at the texture of a trouser-leg, the shape of a shoe, the feature film, was given a Silver Bear for glint of metal on a railing or a lift'door. The its “ atmosphere and outstanding camera follows the averted eye, and the aesthetic qualities’’, especially the soundtrack picks out sounds from the camerawork of Elemer Ragalyi. But the acting was equally good, despite the noise-polluted air.

Music is not used in passing, to under­ ' obvious difficulties for Endre Holman who line moods; it becomes an event, a station played a communist boy of about 18 in Charles’s calvary. The tension of the trying to escape, after the failure of the film — and probably its greatness — lies 1919 revolution, by dressing as a girl. He in this combination of alienation and sub­ replaces a young nurse who is executed jectivity, sharpening our self-disgust, or for being a contact, and tends the even our shame that in view of his meta­ female patients in a hospital for physical pretensions, man should be such rheumatic diseases. With rare assurance and dignity, he is never epicene; there is a failure. no ambiguity even in his affair with a The main prize, the Golden Bear for the beautiful patient, or in the scene where best film, went to Larissa Schepitko’s he resists rape by a White officer.

The story itself leaves some emotional Woshozdeny (Ascent) with its con­ tradictory message, offering redemption loose ends, but the mise-en-scene is masterly: even the lyrical beauty of the through courage.

Set in 1942, at the first glance Ascent changing seasons becomes an inexor­ looks like all Soviet war films, but it is the able dramatic force. first one to admit that there were Soviet Many of the competition films were quislings. As the story about the two captured partisans develops, Schepitko’s bedevilled by miscasting or uneasy, individual slant becomes clear. She mannered acting. This was all the more described the film as .. not about war, noticeable as some were filmed plays, a but the relationship of the inner self to the genre which most critics consider out of outside world. There are two central place at film festivals anyway. For this characters in the film. One is destroyed reason, Don’s Party seemed a very by fascism, the other is not. And for me, peculiar choice — surely, with all its this is a very contemporary theme, faults, Break of Day would have been because you can substitute other things more appropriate? for fascism. The same thing could happen The German films in competition, Die now, but now it is an invisible w ar. . . and the question that interests me is the Eroberung der Zifadelle (The Conquest

BERLIN FESTIVAL

of the Citadel), by Bernhard Wicki, and Die Vertreibung aus dam Paradise (The Expulsion from Paradise), by Nicklaus Schilling, though on the right track, were spoilt by self-indulgent scripts and self­ conscious acting.

The Silver Bear for the best actor went to Fernando Fernan Gomez in a Spanish film called El Anacoreta (Hie Anchorite) probably because his performance shone in contrast to everyone else in that static comedy of the absurd. Lily Tomlin was chosen as best actress for her portrait of a neurotic but tough, charmingly phoney all-American girl in The Late Show; but then, none of the other films had plum parts for women.

The Berlin festival’s real strength lies in the Forum of Young Films, established in filmpolitical opposition to the festival proper some seven years ago. By now, they complement one another amicably, owing to the forum’s eclectic policy of showing anything and everything liked by the organizers, even winners from other festivals, resulting in a miscellaneous collection of sleeping giants and under­ developed subjects.

The glitter was supplied by films like Padre Padrone by the Taviani brothers, which had been judged the best film at Cannes, Marta Meszaros’s Nine Months, Cassavetes’ The Killing of a Chinese Bookie, and Dennis Hopper’s The Last Movie. But the fprum also risked cinematic extremes, "like Godard’s Here and There, Chantal Akerman’s News from Home, James Benning’s 11x14, the Mulvey-Wollen Riddles of the Sphinx and Celestino Coronado’s Hamlet. I m issed R id d le s , not a lto g e th e r deliberately, though I have sat through their earlier work.

The American word “ underground” is as inaccurate as the French word “ avant garde” to describe these non-narrative, non-representational styles which have been around since the invention of the film. At best they are the poetry of the cinema, and as poems do not have to be long to make their impact, the short film is an ideal form for abstraction.

In Coronado’s Hamlet, Shakespeare’s epic play is reduced to 65 minutes, and much of that is mime. A small but skilled cast double up on the main roles, except for Hamlet, whose indecisions are split between a pair of identical twins. A rococo extravaganza of a film, inspired by the same impulse which makes models of cathedrals in strawberry ice-cream, I would still rather watch it than any other feature flying the British flag this year.

The forum even had its own retrospectives: Germaine Dulac, Dorothy Arzner and the Turkish director Yilmaz Guney who was, at the time of the festival, under arrest in Turkey. It may be too early to evaluate Guney, who is the first socially realistic and artistically ambitious director in Turkey, but film­ makers have enough troubles, even

Andras Fricsay and Antonia Reininghaus in Th© Conquest of the Citadel, an adaptation of the novel by Gunter Herburger.

w ithout arrest and imprisonment.

Accordingly, the festival participants sent petitions for Guney’s release to the Turks.

One of the forum ’s pleasurable surprises was The Perfumed Nightmare, produced, written, directed and acted by Kidlat Tahimik from the Philippines, and awarded the critic’s prize for the Best First Film. It is in the faux-naif tradition of Jacques Tati or even Buster Keaton, telling the cautionary tale of a Filipino boy who spent his early life dreaming about the U.S., and the marvels of technological progress. His dream comes true when a rich American buys his fancy-work taxi and flies him to Paris, with the promise of an eventual trip to the U.S. After getting used to Paris, and a quick trip to Germany (“ the birthplace of Wernher von Braun” ), Kidlat begins to question the ideals and achievements which had once enchanted him.

The film is stylistically sophisticated enough to hold together a perfectly organized pretence at un-sophistication.

It is to be seen whether Kidlat Tahimik will find another subject and style, before the seven-day wonder of The Perfumed Nightmare exhausts its international success.

Another circus-ring, introduced this year, was the series of about 40 recent German films — enough for a separate fe stival. Its h ighlights were Wim Wenders’s The American Friend, and Werner Herzog’s Stroszek, which both merit longer reviews. The surprise pleasures were Rosa von Praunheim’s

Pal Sandor’s A Strangs RoSs, the story of a communist boy who escapes the failure of the 1919 revolution by dressing as a girl.

t

■

Fernando Fernan (left) in The Anchorite, for which he was awarded the Silver Bear for best actor.

ISAm an Anti-Star, the disillusioned biography, cleverly presented as a m usical autobiography by Evelyn Kunneke, a very German combination of Vera Lynn and Billie Holiday; and Stunde Null (Zero Hour) by Edgar Reitz.

Reitz is little known outside Germany, although he has directed some eight or nine films, and collaborated on others with Alexander Kluge. Zero Hour has the same subject and title as a film finished just before his death by the Hungarian director Imre Feher; and both hark back to Rossellini’s Germany Year Zero.

The subject is survival during the suspended time between the German defeat in 1945 and occupation (or liberation, depending on the ideological and geographical location) by the Allies.

For Reitz, as for Feher, it is an autobiographical subject; and it is a matter of personal importance to confront what Reitz calls a national neurosis, taking the form of total amnesia about the events of 1945.

Reitz’s anti-hero, a boy of 14, has no concept of life before or without the war.

Treated well by the first Americans he meets, he forms an idea of the U.S. as Eldorado. His Nazi upbringing makes him totally opposed to any future as pro m ise d by the R ussians: like thousands of other, mostly older Nazis, he opts for the American Dream. The director’s detachment, and occasional irony, helps to avoid both the polemic and the sentimental; under his gentle satire, there is also the indomitable te n d e rn e s s of the d ise n ch a n te d humanist.

An impressive amount of care and subsidy went into this New German Cinema season, which aimed at showing a representative cross-section of the 1976-77 production. The National Film Production Board provided sub­ titled versions of 22 films; another 18 had earphone translations and the documentation was excellent. But, b e fo re one begins to envy the dynamism, energy and money which pours into the German film, it may be s a lu ta ry to note the fla m b oya nt withdrawal of Hans Jurgen Syberberg from it all.

In an open letter to the editors of four influ en tial newspapers, Syberberg explained why, after the German reception (or its absence; he complains mainly of a lack of receptivity) to his one-hour sample from a six-hour television film, Hitler, shown at Cannes, the director decided against showing a previously promised further sample at Berlin. He also forbade any screening of Hitler in West Germany.

While it is not impossible that

Syberberg’s anger was caused by one or two critics, he accuses the German press en masse of conniving to strangle artistic freedom and deadening cultural life. Judging by the flaccid German films chosen for the competition, Syberberg’s attack on the film establishment may have some point. And, about the same tim e, Fassbinder abandoned the filmmakers’ co-operative he had helped to found, the Filmverlag.

It is difficult to assess the true reasons behind these teacup storms, especially as in the case of Fassbinder the situation is complicated by the uneven quality of his work. His latest film, though advertised, did not turn up for the festival; and his penultimate, Chioesisches Roulette (Chinese Roul­ ette), is more than ever like self-parody: a ‘psychological thriller’ in which a crippled child terrorizes her very rich and very silly parents. The gruesome little girl forces two chic couples — Daddy-and-hismistress, Mummy-and-her-lover — to join with the live-in servants in an unnerving truth game. It is like a Shirley Temple film reversed in a black mirror: but why bother to send up a toy tricycle?

Especially as in the “ Information Screenings” there were another 80 films, assembled from 24 countries. One can only pick out a few from such a vast number, usually those by well-known directors, or one’s friends.

The Danish film was made by the British director, Peter Watkins; called AftenSand@t (Evening Land), it is a political thriller about a strike and a kid­ napping. It had been shown in the market at Cannes, as had been the far better received, charming Swedish film, Sven KSang’s Combo, about a semi-amateur Swedish jazz band in the 1950s.

Another rare treat was Caudillo, a newsreel compilation about the life of General Franco. The title , being Franco’s middle name, challenges comparison with Emile de Antonio’s Millhouse, the Nixon story. Caudillo, perhaps because it had a longer reign and a fu ll-s c a le d ic ta to rs h ip to commemorate, seemed more dramatic and altogether much stronger stuff.

The information section included its own retrospectives, too: there were the works of the East German director Konrad Wolf, and films about Lenin and the Revolution from the Soviet Union.

However, I was angry about the Czechs withdrawing Chytilova’s delightful Hra O Jabiko (Apples) from the competition, that for the first time I boycotted the Soviet, East German and Czech screen­ ings, in a one woman protest. I doubt whether anyone noticed, but, in the political atmosphere of the Berlin Festival, it made me feel a lot better.

Cinema Papers, October — 115

BeforeandAfter Stormiof

MAI

SIIMI W hat was the genesis of “Sunday Too Far Away5’?

Sunday was actually an accident.

John D ingw ell had been commissioned to write another screenplay, but when that deal fell through he was still on contract. So, we asked John if he had any ideas, and he said that he had always wanted to write about shearers.

Having been brought up in central NSW, where shearers had been a fantasy of mine, I thought the idea sounded bloody brilliant. So Sunday became the SAFC’s first feature.

I believe S u n d a y was an important film because it was the beginning of being able to tell a small but very important part of the beginnings of a nation. It has something to do with our nationality and is, at the same time, bound up with the ethos of the sheep shearer.

The other important film to be made, I think, is the story of Gallipoli.

W h at was your p o sitio n ©m “ Sunday”?

“Storm Boy” is one of A u str a lis great success stories» It lias already accrued a gross In excess of $1,000,000, the hook has sold more than 300,000 copies and the film is still running in Adelaide after 42 weeks» The film’s producer, Matt Carroll, began at the South Australian Film Corporation in 1973 as production co­ ordinator but was soon promoted to co-producer on “Sunday Too Far Away”, the corporation’s first feature.

“Sunday” was also the first Australian feature to be invited to the Directors Fortnight in Cannes and has been awarded favorable reviews here and abroad. Carroll was then associated with the ill-fated television drama “Stacey’s Gym”, and the feature film, “The Fourth Wish” (as associate producer).

In 1976, Matt Carroll became an executive producer and divided the production program with fellow producer, Jill Robb. It was then that Carroll initiated and produced “Storm Boy”.

Carroll’s position at the SAFC has undergone further changes after the appointment of John Morris as corporation director and the departures of Jill Robb and marketing manager, Peter Rose. Carroll is now executive producer in charge of feature and television production.

In the following interview, conducted by Australian Film Institute director David Roe, Matt Carroll discusses “Storm Boy”, “Sunday”, and the role of the SAFC.

Sunday Too Far Away. Jack Thompson as the gun shearer and Reg Lyle as Old Garth.

116 — Cinema Papers, October

I was co-producer with Gil Brealey though it didn’t begin that way. I started as production manager/associate manager, but the whole responsibility ultimately fell on me and I took the unit out to shoot it. It was a very intense period, because the shooting was tremendously hard work and very, very emotional.

Gil hadn’t been part of that, having had to run the corporation at the same time, arrd that was unfortunate. I think this was the beginning of all the problems you hear about — the cuts and so on.

How different was the released version from the director's cut?

It was shot very closely to the script, but there were problems in it.

As well, the director’s cut ran for two hours and it just didn’t work.

Gil and Ken agreed to disagree over it and Gil then instructed Rod Adamson to cut it.

Did you have a say in the final cut?

Two stills from the ill-fated Stacey’s Gym.

MATT CARROLL

Co-producers Matt Carrroll (left) and Gil Brealy, with first assistant director Malcolm Smith, on location for Sunday Too Far Away.

handled in the marketing branch and she in fact set up the deal with Roadshow and the Adelaide release. We sold it to the Seven Network and also did a deal with the local Seven station giving them a small part of the box-office for a lot of advertising time. Jill then went overseas leaving me to look after the domestic release.

Phillip Adams was another critic o f the release off “ Sunday55,, particularly over the choice off the Mivoll Cinema in Melbourne * . .

I certainly stand by the Rivoli release — it was the best thing that could have happened to it. In retrospect, however, I might have put Sunday into a city cinema in Sydney instead of the Double Bay. I don’t think the triple suburban release we did there was the best way to release it.

Yes, as co-producer, I was jointly involved with Gil and Rod. Do you think the final version the best possible?

Absolutely, but there never were two versions. Where people get that idea from is the scene where Jack Thompson breaks down after the death of Old Garth. Now, as it comes at the end of a roll, it is possible to cut the scene, and Gil wanted this done on one print. I don’t know how strongly Gil feels about this scene, but I feel very strongly that it should be there. It is an extremely important scene and the emotional heart of the story.

What about Foleys relationship with the girl?

That was removed after the director’s cut.

But as the girl is in the scene at the wood pile, confusion creeps i n . . .

The whole sub-plot of the girl was quite complicated and it was very

difficult to remove, but it had to be because it didn’t work dramatically.

the final cut would have been mine.

The SAFC has been criticized Does the SAFC retain the right off over its m arketing policy on cut on all the films it produces? “ Sunday55. What are your feelings about it now?

The standard agreement is that the director is entitled to a cut, but What one has to remember with not the final say. Obviously it relies Sunday is that when the film was on the relationship between the shown to the distributors — and this director and the producer. was at the time of Alvin Purple — they said “Yes, it is very interesting, And with regard to a film the b u t it is an e t h n o g r a p h i c SAFC only invests In, such as documentary. We don’t think it is “ Picnic55 . . . box-office.” In many ways, it was the best thing they could have done There was a very complicated to us, because it taught us a lesson, vote system on Picnic which could and that was to distribute the film have been used had there been any ourselves in Adelaide. rows over cuts, but there weren’t.

The thing went through the roof Frankly, I feel the producer has and all of a sudden there was a great the right to the final cut, especially deal of interest. Roadshow, in fact, if he is responsible for getting the did agree after some negotiation to whole thing together and for take it, and they certainly made sure marketing it. But it doesn’t always that it would do as well in the other have to end up that way. In the case states, even though they still of Storm Boy, the director’s cut was b e l i e v e d A d e l a i d e was no basically the final cut, though we indication of the other states. agreed to make several changes. It Actually, when the film was was a c o m p l e t e l y am ic a b l e finished it was handled by Jill arrangement, but if it hadn’t been, Robb. This was the first film she

Picnic a t Hanging Rock, one of the independently produced films the SAFC has invested in.

STORM BOY W hat prom pted the SAFC to produce “Storm Boy55?

Under the Act of the Film Corporation we are required to make films for children, and Storm Boy originally started after our television series for children, S t a c e y ’s Gy m, proved unsuccessful. We thought it must be possible to make c h i l d r e n ’s material, but outside of Disney there seemed to be very little, though a lot of people were campaigning about how few good films for children there were.

And you think this accounts for its enormous success__ I think so, though it is very hard to categorize. What we were trying to do was make a film for a very broad audience group; in other words from five to 100, rather than for the usual cinema audience of 18

The Fourth Wish, the feature spin-off of the four-part television drama.

Cinema Papers, October — 117

MATTCARROLL

to 28 year-olds. So the film had to be simple in concept, yet complex enough in its subtleties to please an adult audience. And when Storm Boy came to us, i read it and thought it would make a really good children’s feature.

So, in fact, you were the initiator I wasn’t the total initiator. At that time there was at the corporation an American, John Graves, and it was he who suggested I should look after it. Don Crombie was then working on contract for us, and he wrote a screenplay, but it didn’t work. But by the time Don’s draft came through, John Graves was no longer at the SAFC, so I took over the thing. I then started from scratch and tried to find a screenplay w riter who loved animals and knew something about children. I found Sonia Borg.

When you bought an option on the book, was it a set text?

Only in South Australian primary schools. We knew Storm Boy would be a difficult film to market, so we decided to use the education system of the various states to mobilize people into the theatres.

We did this on a trial basis in Adelaide, where we found there was a desire on behalf of the education department to involve their classrooms, not only in the process of going to see a film but also in a whole range of fringe educational activities. So, we put out pic-a-packs, video tapes, recorded interviews, as well as tying ourselves in with Rigby. And the reason for the delay in releasing the film outside Adelaide was that we had to get the book gazetted in the various states first.

In Victoria, it was fairly easy to mobilize the existing structure, but there were difficulties in New South Wales because it is very much a case of every school for itself. So we did a series of direct mailings.

The resources that had been produced in conjunction with the South Australian Education Department were eagerly snapped

up. It was so successful; the pic-apack class room study kit, for example, has sold more than 10,000 copies.

At the moment we are setting up Blue Fin on the lessons we have learnt from Storm Boy. We don’t have a screenplay, but.we are already working in all the states to have the book prescribed reading.

Rigby are also bringing out an edition, so that the book will be widely circulated throughout Australia. Hopefully, we won’t have to delay Blue Fin and we will be able to release it on a national basis.

Has a director been chosen?

No, everything is too early. All we know is how we are going to sell it.

Was your ad v ertisin g budget higher than that normally spent on a film?

It was actually lower because of our efficiency in marketing films.

Our main campaign was the school mailings, and a couple of those don’t cost as much as three or four prime time spots in Sydney.

We also knew exactly the sort of material that had to be produced, so when material was passed over to the distributors, it was material they could use.

One of the other things we learnt on Storm Boy was the importance of test marketing. That was why we opened the film first in Adelaide.

What we also do, and what the other distributors never do, is prepare a campaign especially for Adelaide.

Adelaide has a big potential box­ office, but no one has thought of tapping it — except us.

How good a test m ark et is Adelaide?

There is a definite parochial interest, but you can tell how an audience is reacting to a film. For example, we didn’t let on from our release of The Fourth Wish in Adelaide that it wasn’t working with audiences; but we knew what sort of audience it was attracting and had a good idea of what its fate would be.

With the advantages of hindsight, what would you say were the reasons for its limited success?

It was too realistic, and people didn’t want to .go through John Meillon’s agony of seeing his son die.

-\V .

Do you think it should have been sentimentalized more?

No, it just wasn’t a commercial idea at the time. As well, there has been too many Sunshines and films like t h a t . I t h i n k we also underestim ated the reputation Fourth Wish had on television.

Probably far more people had seen it, or knew about it, than we realized.

What about overseas sales?

There was a deal done with Columbia-Warner and the film was released in London where they mishandled it. For some reason the press previews were two weeks before it opened, and while iTgot terrific press it was just too early.

We also had problems with the F ren ch re le a se w here the distributor delayed. Finally, when it was released, no money was spent in promoting it. Once again it had terrific critical acclaim, but it was wasted, and the film was just used as a filler. It is very disappointing because it was a very good and a unique deal. We got no advance for it, but they paid a lot of the costs and we got a direct split of the box­ office. ' Do you feel if should have been released immediately after the Cannes screening?

Yes. You wouldn’t agree then with Ken H a ll’s c o m m e n t t h a t bei ng p rem iered in the D ire c to rs’ Fortnight is the kiss of death?

No, It did an enormous amount of help, because the announcement of being in the Directors’ Fortnight hit Australia just at the time of the film’s release and it did a lot to boost the film and make it work here.

The other thing about the Directors’ Fortnight is that for a particular film like Sunday, which has limited ability to perform in a lot of European markets, and certainly in the American market, it helps foreign sales tremendously. I don’t think we would have sold a foreign territory without the Directors’ Fortnight.

I think the Directors’ Fortnight would be the kiss of death for a very blatantly commercial film like Eliza Fraser, certainly not for Sunday.

It is in profit — we broke even earlier this year.

THE CORPORATIONS The SAFC appears to have the flexibility of a small Hollywood studio in that it can initiate its own projects as well as invest in other productions. Do you see this role continuing?

I think our intention is to continue existing as a twofold thing. We are very keen to encourage the expertise of the people who have moved to South Australia so that they will become involved in getting things off the ground.

There are signs of this happening.

One company to whom we have given assistance has started to do a television series, and one of our telly films has been written by a local writer.

Is the SAFC subject to the same public service restrictions as the Victorian and New South Wales film corporations?

N o, t h o u g h t h e r e is an a rra n g e m e n t w h ereb y the secretarial staff can be absorbed by the public service should we fold.

They are also engaged on terms and conditions similar to the public service. All those outside of the clerical staff, like myself, are on short-term contract.

What are your feelings about the proliferation of film corporalions?

I am very worried by it, though not so much by the direct competi­ tion as the industry’s political future. The Victorian corporation is a banking operation to help Victorian filmmakers, the NSW one likewise. Tasmania is very special because they already had a docu­ mentary film unit there and the c o r p o r a t i o n is v i r t u a l l y a rationalization of something that hadn’t been very efficient in the past.

The government funding thing is facing a crucial stage and I think there is danger of the federal government seeing the state corporations as an opportunity to pass off th e ir f in a n c ia l responsibilities; after all, it is right in line with Liberal Party policy.

But doesn’t this proliferation of film corporations lessen tie need of an AFC? In other words, isn’t it a question of centralization versus decentralization?

I think the strength of the SAFC is our entrepreneurial ability; our ability to blend production and How does the ftlm stand at this , marketing.

Storm Boy which Carroll initiated and produced for the SAFC. It has already grossed in point ©f time, financially? excess of $1,000,000.

Concluded on P. 191 118 — Cinema Papers, October

SPECIAL EFFECTS

w ars ' Dennis Way Nicholson

2©©1 — A Space Odyssey utilized 106 men in Director George Lucas, the Wookie and crew on the set of Star Wars. its production unit, Star Wars 900; 2001 had 35 basic special effects scenes, Star Wars 365; Stanley Kubrick spent $500,000 more putting his the newly-formed company, Industrial Light and film together. Or, at least, that is what the 33- Magic, became a self-contained special effects year-old writer-director of Star Wars, George warehouse in Van Nuys, California.

Lucas, is claiming.

The people involved in its various departments Ignoring the many critical comparisons that were now working en masse, some operating 24 can be made between the two films, Star Wars is hours a day to keep up the flow of production undoubtedly spectacular in its use of special necessary to have everything completed before effects. And the man largely responsible is John the May 1977 premiere date.

Dykstra.

Lucas’ script called for fast and complex battle Lucas first approached Dykstra in June 1976 sequences in outer space, and this meant an when he invited him to supervise the special extremely versatile camera system would be photographic effects for the $8 million space needed. So Dykstra created the “Dykstraflex”. A fantasy. At that stage Dykstra was not as well camera was converted to utilize an eightknown as, say, L. B. Abbott or Art Cruickshank, perforation, horizontal 35mm film format, but his reputation has quickly become similar to Vistavision. This gave the larger established. negative area required for optimum clarity.

During the pre-production of Star Wars it Several servo motors drove the camera, became obvious that a large number of mounted on a crane, along a straight 42 ft. length miniatures and other related effects shots needed of track, simultaneously raising or lowering, to be incorporated into the film. Dykstra decided panning and tilting, around a static miniature. against normal production methods, and instead The focus was adjusted by a built-in motorstarted to combine all the facilities he would driven follow focus mechanism. All this was then need for the project under one roof. controlled by a pre-programmed computer bank, All the technical personnel were chosen for a system so accurate that it could at any time their abilities in specialized fields, such as matte retrace its movements, to the frame, over a painting, optical printing, pyrotechnics, model previously plotted and filmed set-up. making, computer animation. And, after After each shot was completed, the film, spending more than $1,000,000 in eight months, together with the corresponding computer data, was forwarded to the control department where all the relevant information was catalogued for possible future reference.

Story boarding the final space clashes for the film became somewhat of a nightmare due to its very fast pace. The dogfight sequence between the rebel X-wing fighters and the enemy T.I.E. ships seems certain to become the science fiction equivalent of the Bullitt chase sequence. It was painstakingly plotted after viewing World War 2 air-to-air combat footage as it was this type of action that Dykstra wanted to portray on screen.

For one seemingly rapid three or four second scene of an X-Wing fighter being pursued by an enemy T.I.E. ship, the shot was compiled in eight An enemy T.I.E. ship fires at a rebel X-Wing fighter stages: during a dog fight.

Step 1: The X-Wing miniature, having been placed in front of a translucent blue screen, is attached in such a manner that it is able to rotate around its own centrepoint. This movement combined with the camera’s yaw and pitch gives the illusion of the camera tracking along behind the X-Wing as it manoeuvers back and forth across the screen.

Step 2: This element is photographed frame by frame on black and white film (because to film at 24 F.P.S. would necessitate very rapid camera movement), processed, checked for focus and logged with the control department.

Step 3: The camera is returned to the identical start-frame position and goes The full-size X-Wing fighters. Flying sequences were through the exact movements again, this time filmed using 18 in. scale models. with color negative stock.

The seven foot 100-year-old Wookie, Chewbacca, and two imperial stormtroopers.

The “Dykstraflex" build specially for Star Wars by special effects supervisor John Dykstra.

Step 4: Because the X-Wing fighter is being chased by the enemy ship, the red glow from its engines is seen, the camera again moves through the same shot, but this time the set is in darkness and only the lights in the miniature’s engine outlets are visible. These are slightly over-exposed to give a flare effect.

Steps 3 and 4 will later be matted together.

Three pieces of film have so far been exposed.

Step 5: The T.I.E. enemy ship replaces the X-Wing miniature in front of the blue screen set-up. Its movement, combined with the “Dykstraflex” movement, is manually plotted and placed electronically into the computer control.

Step 6: This is filmed in black and white and forwarded to control. There are now two black and white shots, one of the X-Wing and the other of the T.I.E. ship. The pieces are laid together and viewed to see if the two elements match movements at 24 F.P.S. Step 7 : The camera retraces its step around the T.I.E. ship with color negative being exposed. No engine glow is seen on this model.

Step 8: The background is filmed separately. Whether it be stars, explosions or other spacecraft, these will be matted in by the optical department at a later date. For this one quick chase scene six separate pieces of film have been exposed.

In many of the scenes, laser beams are being fired by either one or all of the space ships in rapid succession. These too required many matting processes. The length of laser fire, its point of origin and impact area had to be syn­ chronized to match the movements of the miniatures in each frame.

Concluded on P. 192 Cinema Papers, October— 119

JtittOtiSDf!

Tom Ryan Luke’s Kingdom was shot in the foothills of the Blue Mountains of New South Wales during 1974 and 1975. The conception for the series came from a former BBC documentary man, the late Tony Essex. Costing $2,000,000, the program is an Anglo-Australian co-production, financed by Trident (Britain), the Nine Network (Australia) and the Australian Film Develop­ central thrust of the series is towards romance — ment Corporation.

The cast and the crew are predominantly a conventional hero figure each week exercising Australian, some notable exceptions being his power and wisdom to provide the means of Oliver Tobias, in the role of Luke Firbeck, and resolution for the dramatic conflict. Only in one British television directors Peter Hammond, episode, The Great Eastern Bubble (written by Hugh David and Gareth Davies. The Australian Colin Free, directed by Rob Stewart), is there directors who worked on the series, Ken any suggestion that there were problems which Hannam and Peter Weir, have since made im­ could not be so resolved. Needless to say, the pressive films, Hannam directing Sunday Too issue of resolution need not be the defining one if Far Away, Break of Day, and SummerfSeld, one is concerned with critical estimations of and Weir The Cars That Ate Paris, Picnic At value, and qualities of visual and dramatic style can provide their own standard of excellence.

Hanging Rock and The Last Wave.

Unfortunately, none of the Australian series I The writers of the series, as far as I have been able to gather, are Australian, and include have mentioned (at least after a single viewing of novelist Tony Morphett, among whose television occasional episodes) has such quality, beyond the credits are Dynasty (from his own novel) and often intelligent working through of particular Certain Women, and Elizabeth Kata, who wrote motifs at the script-level. The standards of production, even making allowances for the A Patch ©f Bine. limited budgets, are generally poor, and are Luke’s Kingdom ought to be first seen in the severely restricted by the uneasy blend of context of what can be loosely described as videotape and film, of studio and location work.

Australian historical drama. Television series Luke’s Kimgdom, however, is shot completely like Ben Hall, Cash and Company, and on film and sustains an evenness of surface Tandarra are each concerned in their own way texture which seems to me to be essential to con­ with a particular era of Australian history, using ventional television drama. Set in the early part the background of the developing country to of the 19th century in New South Wales, it is locate their characters in problem situations. characterized by a harshness of tone (the human The best of these, Rush, initially an Australian drama) in constant tension with the romantic production and then a French, Scottish, conception of settling the new land (evocatively Australian co-production in its second series, conveyed by the music and the repeated visual followed the adventures of a police constable references to the challenging wilderness). And (John Waters) attempting to maintain order in a while there is a sense of the closure of a Victorian gold-mining settlement during the particular story at the end of each episode, this is latter part of the 19th century. rendered irrelevant in terms of the broader Despite occasional concessions to the presence context of the drama as a whole. of political corruption in the colony, and to the Beyond the collision between man and tensions between the miners, the local mine wilderness, the central conflict in Luke’s owners and the larger mining companies, the Kimgdom is between Luke and his father, Jason (James Condon). Luke’s father, a retired British Tom Ryan is a lecturer in film at the Melbourne State naval lieutenant, of genteel disposition, sees his College and has contributed to Movie and Film Comment. and his family’s future in terms of the past, as an 120 — Cinema Papers, October

extension of their life in Britain which they have left after the death of his wife. Luke, on the other hand, is better equipped to tackle the savagery of the colony, denying the relevance of the past and seeking to achieve his vision of the future — his “kingdom” — by whatever means he deems necessary.

The regular confrontations between the two men — between an ineffective dignity and a practical amorality — provide a background in which each of the dramas is placed, either directly or by implication, and serve to disorient a television audience accustomed to a less demanding and disturbing fiction.

To this point, I have referred to Luke’s Kingdom within the framework of television series, binding it together with anything from Leave It To Beaver to Bonanza. And while there are, for all their differences, a number of valid reasons for viewing these as relations, if not as members of the same amorphous family, it ought to be noted that Luke’s Kimgdom, arguably, has more in common with that species of “continuous dramas” * which seems to have been born in Britain, (Upstairs, Downstairs, The Search for the N ile, A Bouquet of Barbed Wire, The Forsyte Saga, The Pallisers, and all those other, so far, turgid adaptations from novels), but which has found its way more recently into the U.S. (Rich Mam, Poor Mam, Roots, The Rhimemann Exchange and so on) and elsewhere (Scenes from a Marriage, Moses the Lawgiver, Pialat’s and Fassbinder’s work in Germany).

These dramas, like the series,'are for obvious reasons centred on a particular group of people, * The current tendency is to note these dramas as “mini­ series", but the thrust of my argument demands an alternative description, as will become clear.

' Tv 1 Siiiiis*;' 1 : : I mm

m ¡8 1 T

LUKE’S KINGDOM

>W m èSSè MB a ® •S’ 'W I ¡n n

the dramas, the girl reads of the Firbecks’ voyage from Britain to the colony. A cut transfers us to the past, and an overhead shot of the family (Jason, his son, Samuel, and daughter Jassy) and a travelling companion, later to be depicted as the subject of the episode’s title, playing cards around a table.

The atmosphere in their cabin is a relaxed one, until a cut to eye-level sees Luke enter. He is slightly drunk and his abrasive manner disturbs B a n the tone of the gathering. Here, and throughout the subsequent episodes, Luke is ill at ease in the pursuit of civilized rituals, and often deliberately upsets the unity they embody.

The sighting of the Australian coast-line finds the family together on deck, eagerly straining for a sight of their future. Jason’s observation — “A new land! A new beginning!” — catches the communal, pioneering mood of the moment, and lays the foundation for an irony which is to be preserved throughout.

Though Jason sees himself as a pioneer, his vision on the future is firmly anchored in the past. Bound by the moral codes of the Mother Far left: The Firbeck Family glimpse Australia for the Country, the ethic of the ‘gentleman’, the course first time. Samuel (Gerard Maguire), Jason (James he endeavors to pursue is out of tune with the Condon), Luke (Oliver Tobias) and Jassy (Elizabeth Crosby). Centre: A river crossing. Above: Helen Morse as reality of the colony.

Kate Bell.

The Eden that he is envisaging across the waters of the bay has much more in common with the “kingdom” that has obsessed Luke; Riels Hell (Luke, in a later episode, describes it as Man, Poor Mans Book 1 ends after Rudy loses “Pandemonium: an abode of devils”) which has his family and finds that all he had aspired to and no room for moral niceties. Jason, of course, is achieved is finally irrelevant to him. Whether not alone in holding this view, and his either man has learned anything from his perspective is shared and echoed by Jassy (Eliza­ experiences is unresolved — as Luke and Kate beth Crosby) and Samuel (Gerard Maguire), to (Helen Morse) stand together and look beyond varying degrees, and by characters who appear in the ashes of the Firbeck property to the future; individual episodes.

On shore, the Firbeck refinement clashes with and as Rudy and Judy (Susan Blakely), hand in hand, stare backward at the waters that have the convicts laboring in the streets of Sydney, as taken brother Tom’s ashes, but implicitly Jassy finds herself the object of crude suggestive­ forward to their hope of being able to start again. ness, and of mockery for her lameness. The brutal response of a guard to the convicts is as often a family of filially unrelated individuals It is worth looking closely at the beginning of disturbing to the family as the initial outburst had forced together by social circumstances. Luke’s Kingdom, the episode entitled A Sort of been, their bewilderment and grouping within However, while each of the episodes of a series Gentleman (written by Keith Raine, directed by the frame isolating them from this alien place. starts again, as it were, taking no account of what Ken Hannam), for the way it introduces motifs, Even their departure from the oppressive happened in previous episodes, the individual which are to be sustained, and characters who atmosphere of the town offers little respite from the sense of a country divided into nobs and parts of a “continuous drama” need to be seen are to be developed. together as a developing and interlocking whole.

The opening is placed in the present: the scum, an environment for which Jason is illEpisodes of a series can be, and often_are, camera roams around a room littered with old equipped. shown in any order; those of a continuous drama photographs and furniture — remnants of an era En route to their “promised land” — Jason require a particular chronological order. The now past. A girl comes across and begins to read carries in his pocket an official document, writing of each part demands an overall concep­ the diary which is to provide the sub-title, and guaranteeing him possession of government land, tion and that the material of previous parts be framework, for the subsequent dramas: “Pages rich for grazing — Jason’s way is shown to be taken as a starting point — as Alfred From A Squatter’s Journal, New South Wales, inappropriate to the needs of the settlers. First Shaughnessy, script editor and writer for 1829-1836.” She is played by Helen Morse, who Luke, then Charlton (John Clayton), a Upstairs, Downstairs, observed in Movie 21: appears as Kate in episode eight, and is by Luke’s prospective ticket-of-leave employee being “What you are really doing is working out a line side as the final episode closes, the dual role interviewed by Jason, warn him of his error in of destiny for every character and what the suggesting that the girl is a descendant of Kate’s not anticipating that their journey overland resolution will be, and then you devise stories (and, perhaps, of Luke’s) and binds together the would ruin the fleece on the sheep bought in which will advance that in a sort of progression.” present and the past, which she, and we, are to Sydney.

A fair man,’ Jason realizes his mistake, and Luke’s Kingdom, like Rich Man, Poor Man discover in the pages that she is to read.

(Book 1), begins by establishing the characters The diary is Jason’s — “. .. I believe the hand recognizes what is to be gained from the advice and their context and moves towards its con­ of God to be with us . . .” — a fact which adds a of those who know better than he what is clusion. In both dramas the pattern is clear, and further complexity. God-fearing, a gentleman, required to settle the land. Brushing aside his remarkably similar —a recognisable period in and hostile to that which forces him towards an qualms about employing one who had been a history, a progression of years (Luke’s Kingdom awareness of the inadequacy of his principles in convict (“Well! What’s past is past.”), he decides spans seven years; Rich Man, Poor Man Book 1 this God-forsaken place —“.. . Only Luke finds to take Charlton, but not before Luke has voiced more than 20), a number of sub-plots which serve everything about him to his liking . . . ” — Jason his resentment of his father’s authority: “Does he to evoke the mood of the period as well as recalls a face of history which is moulded in his play whist, father?” In fact, as he witnesses provide a collage of reflections of the central own image, its features elsewhere providing the Jason’s generous offer of wages, he usurps that characters and the central conflicts, and a con­ substance of most text-books about Australia’s authority, interrupting the proceedings and clusion which offers a format ending but past. demanding that the amount be reduced to “the undercuts any traditional sense of resolution by A ploy of the dramas as they progress is to going rate”. pointing forward to an ambiguous future. visually rewrite, and contradict, Jason’s words By this point in the episode, the foundations Luke and Rudy (Peter Strauss), in their and the sort of history which conceals the for the power struggle between the two men have attempts to construct their “kingdoms”, have moments of brutality and anguish by submerging been laid. Jason, according to convention, stands been ruthless in their exploitation of those them within a broader historical movement. Of at the head of the family, directing the route it around them, whether friend or foe, and both course, Loke’s Kingdom is fiction, but the issue must take. His manner is such that, in a more men have been finally forced at least to a partial here is one of placing that fiction within a period civilized context, it might inspire confidence, but recognition of their own limitations as human of history. here it is at odds with the need to come to grips beings.

Amid the echoes of voices from the past, voices with a situation that demands more than Luke’s Kingdom closes with the destruction of that we are to recognize as we move further into etiquette, kindness and diplomacy (the mode of (® ®

;

X

Cinema Papers, October— 121

Luke laughs scornfully at Lieutenant Roberts (Edmund Pegge) after Roberts has been tricked into killing one of Luke's enemies.

behavior most likely to appeal to an audience of popular television).

Luke, on the other hand, while aware of his place in the family, is little concerned with it or with any other of the conventions on which a civilized community is built (and thus his behavior is hardly the sort which would attract this television audience).

Given this dramatic conflict, and the absence of any resolution to it, the placing of sympathies in A Sort Of Gentleman, and, as I mentioned earlier, in Luke’s Kingdom as a whole, becomes problematic for the viewer. Unlike the usual television series or dramas the narrative here does little to provide any comfortable escape route.

And while this conflict has gradually come to the fore, in the background parallel tensions serve to underline it. The threatening mystery of the landscape is nicely evoked by the recurrent references to the broad vistas of mountains and forests, a reading of these images being directed by the orchestral surge of the soundtrack music (a score which, by the way, is often far too emphatic and intrusive). But against this suggestion of a romantic adventure into the unknown, one has to set a more localized, and immediately hostile, sense of place.

This feeling is illustrated by a single camera movement, from left to right, across the trunk of a decayed tree, the Firbecks and their newlyacquired shepherds visible in the background as they move their flock along the road towards their new home. The implication of this image is a dwarfing of the individual, his boundless hopes for the future (this includes Luke as well) being situated within the confines of his immediate location within the landscape.

As the travellers settle down for the evening by the camp-fire, the conflict is further emphasized.

As Samuel reads Shelley to an attentive Jassy, a disinterested Luke casts a suspicious eye on the activities of the shepherds around the wagon which contains their supplies. He recognizes the nature of these activities too late — Charlton has robbed them.

The moment of rest, of distraction from the task demanding full and constant attention, is sufficient to sabotage their chance of success.

Luke alone seems capable of realizing the need for total commitment, and his pursuit and arrest of the thief demonstrate this. He beats infor­ mation out of the shepherd who has remained behind with the Firbecks (“Fve had enough! I want to stay with you.”), bribes it out of the occupants of the inn/brothel (its sign carries the temptation of “Bed and Bawd”) in the scanty township to which he has chased his quarry, and then plants evidence on his captive to have him punished appropriately by the local military authorities.

Charlton has made an occupation of robbing prospective settlers, disposing of his goods so that his guilt cannot be proven. The soldiery are aware that Luke’s capture has been based on information they have not been able to acquire: 122 — Cinema Papers, October

Trooper Evans (Roy Harries-Jones), director Peter Weir and Luke.

Below: Kate working at the Firbeck homestead.

Victoria Anoux as Rosie, one of the “girls” at the Border Inn.

Luke, uninhibited by his uniform or a belief in propriety, characterized by a ruthless pursuit of his own end, has been able to succeed by adapting a face more akin to the unchanging, threatening, silent, mysterious land around him than to the human family to which he belongs.

Side by side with the Firbeck saga in A Sort of Gemtlemam is the introduction of the first of a series of periphery characters whose stories direct attention, in terms of narrative, away from the central conflict of Jason and Luke, but serve to sharpen our focus on it in terms of the aesthetic structure of the particular episode.

Aloysius Fogg (Barry Hill), the Firbecks’ travelling companion on the journey from Britain, during which time he expressed his love for Jassy, arrives in Sydney to set himself up in a law firm, and finds that the banker to whom he had forwarded his money is now penniless and on the brink of suicide.

In desperate straits, he meets up again with the Firbecks on their way to their land, to find himself treated kindly by Jason, but rebuffed by Jassy and mistrusted by Luke. Jason sees him as a “gentleman” and Fogg’s public manner would seem to endorse this. However, his infatuation with Jassy and his financial plight result in an untoward advance upon her, which is rejected, and the removal of a sextant from the Firbecks’ equipment, which Luke discovers by chance in his pursuit of Charlton.

Fogg has begun the episode with dignity, a gentleman like Jason, but has been forced by his own impulses and the uncompromising circum­ stances of life in the colony, to a situation in which his actions have more in common with Charlton.

Luke, as if trying to validate his own moral

stance (or, more accurately, his amoral one) by invalidating that of the gentleman, forces Fogg to watch the whipping being meted out on Charlton for having been caught with the sextant. To Fogg’s distress, Luke responds by offering him the alternative of confessing and thus alleviating his stricken conscience.

The humiliation which would accompany the alternative is too much for Fogg, and he leaves, Luke remaining by the inn-keeper, Moll (Shirley Cameron), whose untold history — from the information we are to glean from later episodes — has perhaps followed the same progress as Fogg’s.

Moll recognizes in Luke one who has seen the way to the future: “You catch on quick, Luke Firbeck . . . You’ll do well. This is a bastard of a place; it’ll take a bastard to lick it.”

Luke turns from her to the land lying across the distance, the nowhere beyond the legal boundaries of the colony. As he asks, “Whose land is that?”, director Hannam places a group of convicts working in a chain gang in the middleforeground, while in the background the unconquered beauty of the Blue Mountain foothills invites the entry of those who dare. “A new world, an open page” will be converted into

LUKE’S KINGDOM

ting to the safety of a belief in “God’s will”.

For Jason, the situation becomes a crisis of conscience. He remains poised between his humanitarian impulses and his belief in the need for adherence to the law.

At Skelton’s trial, Jason stands with dignity against the cruel magistrate exercising the dictates of the law, but is persuaded to protect the escapee only by Jassy’s angry “Give to Caesar what is his, and . . . ” This confrontation with Jassy is one of several between the two in the episode. The others find Jassy reacting against his nostalgic recall of Britain and of her mother, accusing him of having failed to give her sufficient support to live.

Jason is thus linked with Skelton in terms of their response to the hardship of their present circumstances, both acting with dignity against the injustices of the colony, both aware of the humiliation that the destruction of their principles entails, and both seeking respite from that by “looking back” at what they had once held dear.

As the wounded Skelton rides off to die at the end of the episode, his departure witnessed by Elizabeth Crosby and director Ken Hannam during the shooting of the A Sort of Gentleman episode.

Jason and Jassy, both deeply moved, Jason’s diary notes that the man has at least been able to Firbecks have squatted. Announcing his face death with the comfort of having been intention to settle outside the legal boundaries of questing for freedom, rather than with the morti­ the colony, in what is now known as “No Man’s fication of being forever imprisoned “on the Land” (the name carries a colloquial meaning as island”. well as the local one here — that no man can The method of construction of Luke’s claim the land, legally, as his own), he echoes an Kimgd©m around the interruption of outsiders earlier Luke as he declares to the officer in into the life of the Firbecks is an intelligent one, charge of the local soldiery, “Liberty is riches in the way it, in line with the pattern of the with the space for a man to grow — and the law continuous drama, shifts the centre of interest in book yet to be writ.” each of the separate narratives, while at the same The subsequent sequence places Luke and time, heightening the conflicts which are implicit Jassy in an idyllic setting as they look out over in all the episodes. the land which the family has toiled. Jassy, The appearance of relative innocents, like expressing her admiration for what has been Fogg, Skelton, Cope (in The Man From Home), achieved, tells Luke, “You made it! Luke’s Elliott (The Surveyor), Kate (The King’s Luke explains to Jassy how he needs more land for his kingdom!”, to which Luke replies, to her dismay, Gentleman) and Charity (Devil’s Man and An kingdom in the A Man Worse Than Cormae episode. that he now needs “more land”, that their stock Enemy Too Many) brings to the fore the of sheep will have to be tripled in a year. presence of Britain and her values and the motif The connection of the two sequences in the of (in the words of Jason’s diary) “pygmy mortals the scriptures of Australian history by those convicts, by the unseen “Aboriginals, runaways prologue, the placing of the two men at the centre who violate a wilderness by our presence” who and squatters”, who Moll says occupy that land, of the drama in each, and the sentiments offered are then either destroyed or “corrupted by the by both, points to their similarities, even before savagery”. and by Luke and others like him.

Luke returns to his family and finds that the the title to the episode suggests its own The intrusion of the lawless, like Cormae land promised to them by royal signature has comparison of them.

Doyle, Corporal Bailey (in The K ing’s That Luke is ostensibly the hero and that Gentleman and The Hypocrites), Finch (The been granted to another. In a scene with echoes of the opening one, Luke re-enters the family Doyle is the villain (the later intrusion of his men Dam and The Damned), Frankie Wells (Devil’s circle, drunk with his dream of the way that lies into the Firbeck land can be likened to that of the Man) and the Reverend Willmott (Am Enemy ahead, intruding on their depression with his Cleff family into the Mormon wagon train in Too Many), underlines the impotence of those passionate outburst, urging them to follow him: Ford’s Wagois Master) does nothing to change who attempt to survive in the wilderness on the “I’ve seen the future, father: a million acres, ours the particular perspective we are invited to take basis of an alien morality. In Luke’s words, “We to take . . . shall we look backward or forward?” on them. are easily bored, sir, by men who fill their empty In episode six, A Womam Waiting (written by lives quoting the books of law. There are no laws Such a venture requires that they become squatters, their tenure of the land an illegal but Donald Bull, directed by Peter Hammond), a here.” condoned one, their statute that of stinking ticket-of-leave convict, Jack Skelton, has gained Any discussion of Luke’s Kingdom must commoners, their kingdom of Luke’s design, employment with the Firbecks. Expressing his rather than Jason’s. But it is the only way for resentment at the treatment of convicts by the finally focus on Luke, whose character lies at the them if their family pact that they shouldn’t look authorities (“like beasts for the knackers’ yard”), heart of this continuous drama. With his back is to be maintained. The episode ends with and thus presenting a metaphor for what the obsessional behavior he belongs somewhere in Jason’s hesitant assent and Jassy momentarily savagery of Australia has done to its inhabitants, that line of anguish-ridden figures found in the he finds a sympathetic Jassy willing to listen to John Wayne characters of Ford films; in the infected by Luke’s enthusiasm. his tale of woe and to understand his yearning to James Stewart characters of Anthony Mann’s westerns; in the gangsters who inhabited the I have suggested that one of the most return home to his wife.

As a result of an incident at the inn (an attempt 1920s and 1930s environments of Raoul Walsh’s interesting aspects of Luke’s Kingdom is the way in which each segment serves to illuminate the to defend an Aboriginal boy against the mistreat­ films; or in the tormented heroes of much of characters and relationship of Luke and his ment of one of the local ruffians), Skelton finds Nicholas Ray’s cinema.

As such, he is unique to television. Alter­ father. The pattern seems to be the introduction himself answering charges for disturbing the of a character linked by behavior or context with peace, and then, more seriously, for breaking the natively passionate and brooding, he is ruthless Luke or Jason, the resultant drama providing contract of his ticket-of-leave by working outside in satisfying his own desires, his methods of clarification or qualification of our perspective the legal boundaries of the colony. The corrupt achieving success throughout the dramas finally local magistrate sentences Skelton to return to bringing us to the recognition that the brutal on the two men, and intensifying it.

For example, in the prologue to episode 5, A prison, but he escapes custody and flees to the madness with which he pursues his goals has more to do with him as a man, than it does with Man Worse Than Cormae (written by Brian Firbeck property for refuge.

The result is a conflict within the family about finding the equipment necessary to conquer a Wright, directed by Peter Weir), Cormae Doyle, a belligerent and ruthless Irishman, arrives at the what is to be done, Luke defying Jassy’s humane savage land. inn in the border town, which is located about pleas on Skelton’s behalf (“I’ll not risk losing this Concluded on P. 189 32km (20 miles) from land on which the land, Jassy, not for anyone.”), his father retrea­ Cinema Papers, October — ] 23

;9 b

■ MHMI

mm W . ImëÊÊÊêëêë.È M

l

mmmm mmSSm

mmÈÊÈÊÈÊÊÊm WÊÊÈÊè SËè

Eric Rohmer Is one of the most uncompromising directors in France today: uncompromising in his choice of subjects, in the actors he works with, and in the narrative viewpoint that he chooses for the stories he relates. His interests are far-ranging apart from his activities as a director, Rohmer also lectured in film at the University of F a risl, and has made a number of programs for French educational television.

Rohmer’s film activity began in the 1950s but never really was a part of the explosion which was the New Wave.

Despite this, his early films involved working (often as an actor) with people such as Godard, Paul Gegauff, Jean­ Louis Comolli, Barbel Schroeder, Jacques Rivette — all of whom have now taken radically different directions since those early days. Rohmer also wrote many critical articles for the “ first period” of ‘Cahiers du Cinema’, and it is obvious that even then his interests were in art, music, architecture and literature, rather than specifically cinema.

His book on Hitchcock, co-written with Chabrol, is now a critical milestone.

Changing fads and fashions have not affected Eric Rohmer; he has remained faithful to his original project of the six uContes Moraux” (“Moral Tales”), begun in 1962 completed in 1972.

Since then, he has made (in German) “Die Marquise von O . . . ” (“The Marquise of O”) which is a rigorous, suggestive and beautiful staging of the Kleist tex t No small amount of credit for the pictorial accuracy and harmony of “The Marquise” must be given to Rohmer’s cameraman, Nestor Almendros, with whom he has worked since 1964.

At present Rohmer is preparing and researching a project based on the medieval text of ‘Percival’ by Chretien de Troyes.

The following interview, conducted in French by Inge Pruks, was recorded in Eric Rohmer’s office in Paris in May this year. .

Was “ The Marquise of O” a longrange project?

the office tomorrow.” That is what interested me in Kleist, and the only thing I kept in the way of narration were the inter-titles, which were very brief. For example, the listed dates, or titles such as “The next day”, three years later” , and soon.

In my next film I shall go even further, because there will be only direct speech, no indirect speech.

But it will be the actors who will narrate what they are doing; they will speak of themselves in the third person. For example, the actor will say, “He mounted his horse” , speaking about himself This is how The Marquise is formally — by its form — related to my other films.

As for its psychological and moral content, I think there must be similarities . . .

No, it was quite a recent project.

My intention was to make the film I am preparing now, which is Percival, and it was by chance that I found Kleist’s book. I thought it could be filmed, but as I could not read it, I had to take up learning German again.

At the moment there are two people in France who have made films in order to learn a language — myself with German, and Alain Resnais, who since childhood has wanted to speak English. He told me that the only way to do it was to make a film in English (Providence in 1976). I don’t know which language I shall learn now; I already have difficulties in speaking English.

Italian . . .?

Italian is easier, but the Italians have such a personal way of making their films that it is very difficult for Inge Pruks is a lecturer in literature at the Coburg State College and recently studied under Rohmer at the Sorbonne in Paris.

a foreigner to make a film in Italy.

However, I would like to make a film there and to make it in Latin.

What really appealed to you in “ The Marquise of 0 ”?

Everything. To begin with, the way it was narrated, which seemed to me half-way between what I had done in the Moral Tales and what I am going to do now in Percival.

That is to say, a certain way of integrating narration with the action; of allowing the dialogue to take over the narration, and vice versa.

In The Marquise, although there are a lot of things narrated by Kleist, I did not want to use a narrator, as in the Moral Tales.

Instead, I transformed everything that was in indirect speech * — and there is a lot of it — into direct speech. I also did this because in Moral Tales I had already used indirect speech in my narration. For example, Chloe doesn’t say, “I’ll drop in at the office tomorrow”, but “Chloe told me she would drop in at

Are you conscious of these?

No; that is to say, there are subjects which I like. A subject such as this one, where there is an ambiguity between good and evil and an absence of clear-cut judge­ ment, I like very much. I would never make a film where you see a *That is: “He says that” followed by the subjunctive in German. character who is good oppressed by

those who are evil. It’s very common; most film subjects are just that. I like characters who are on the limits of the diabolical and the angelic.

Like P ascal. . .

Yes; Pascal’s beast and angel.

Also, I do not like to treat subjects which are entirely tragic; nor those entirely comic. I like the fact that you don’t know in advance what will be comic or where there will be pathos. And with this film in particular, no one knows — public reactions are very different.

In certain countries people laugh a lot, more than in others. But I find you can laugh and not laugh. There are people who are shocked at the laughter, but I am not. Kleist, too, is someone who liked to introduce the comic element, even into his serious plays. Besides, he also wrote comedies, such as the Broken Pitcher, which is very funny, though it is constructed like a tragedy. In fact, it is constructed exactly like Oedipus Rex — a play about some­ one who, in looking for something, discovers his own culpability.

Cinema Papers, October— 125

ERIC ROHMER

Pie Marquise vora O “is theatrical in the type of acting called for, in its construction, but not n the way it is organized in space”. Bruno Ganz as the officer and Edith Clever as the Marquise

In your in tro d u c tio n to the t h a n a c i n e m a t o g r a p h i c written version of the “ Mora! process. . .

Tales” , you say there are no Yes, the text is acted. The text is original subjects in the cinema. Is that why you are now turning to not rendered through images; I did not try to find images which would literary adaptations? be equivalent to the text. I simply It is somewhat of a paradox. Even took the text, and had people say it. if you want to write for the cinema it can never be anything purely Do you feel that you would like to original. It is not like the theatre, stage a play? which has evolved its own form and Yes, indeed. I must say I used to which stands on its own: you can think that the theatre was something read it.

In the cinema, however, the script outmoded, and something which, is a hybrid; it is not a literary genre. once it had been performed, was That is what I wanted to say. This over. means, on the one hand, that even if you compose a work yourself it will Its ephemeral nature. . . never be completely original; on the other hand, a film which has been Yes, but this aspect is less made from an existing literary work important to me now. When I was can be as original as a film made young I was p erh ap s more from a script. So either way it’s not ambitious — it was the ambition of important. my generation to make something It is natural for a director to lasting. Now I realize that every­ propose his own subjects, but one thing is perishable, including films. also feels the need to show subjects Anyway, does it really matter? I which are not your own, because have already made films, and now I that allows you to renew your would like to make something universe. I find that directors who which is ephemeral, which only treat only their own subjects present lasts the length of the performance. a universe which is really very Also, I find that theatre the world closed, very narrow — even if it is over, in the past 10 to 15 years, has very beautiful and original, such as experienced a great renaissance, that of Bergman. I find that it is after a lull during the period sometimes a little oppressing, tiring; between the two wars. I think the one feels the need to see other cinema now has something to learn characters, other subjects, other from the theatre, whereas earlier it problems. That’s what I wanted was better for the cinema to turn its to say. back on theatre — to say something was theatrical was to say it was bad ¡si another interview you spoke of cinema. Now, cinema has created its “ The Marquise” as a performance own rules, its own cliches, and it of the Kleist text, rather than a would do well to see what is being transposition into images. This done in the theatre. seems to me a theatrical, rather That is why I have quite naturally 126 — Cinema Papers, October

become interested in research carried out in the theatre, and I would like to do some myself — if only from an experimental point of view. In any case, I don’t think I would become a director working only in the theatre, but from an experimental point of view I would certainly like to do something.

the theatre (in theatre, characters don’t act ‘in perspective’) — which disappears behind the door and which we pick up again behind the door. So my space is quite cinematographic, and not at all theatrical. Or at least if it is, it is despite myself, because I did not try to create a theatrical space.

You often say th a t you are Interested ' In the fourth wall.* Does this hold true for “ The Marquise of O”, which is very theatrical?

Why do you avoid using music in your films?

It is theatrical in the type of acting it called for, in its construction, but not in the way it is organized in space — there are four walls, since we have both the windows and the doors. It is not a lateral mise-enscene, as in .the theatre, but one which goes in all directions. The fourth wall is shown much more than in Renoir’s Le Carrosse d’Or (The Golden Coach) for example.

Renoir avoided showing the fourth wall on purpose, as though it were theatre.

In The Marquise there is no stage. There is no point of view which would be that of a theatre spectator; we are actually in the apartment, the four dimensions are always in play. I continually go from shot to counter shot, from the window to the door, from the fireplace to the mirror. There is an end-on view of a corridor — which is something that wouldn’t exist in *A reference to the fact that a theatrical set can have only three walls (the position of the fourth wall being taken by the audience), whereas a film set can have four and hence be complete.

In The Marquise, in particular, there is only one type of music used — the drum — and 1 played that. I wanted to include something which was a little ironic. Music always expresses a precise feeling — be ittragic, pathetic or ironic. Now, for most scenes I did not want to indicate what it should be. If I had added music, it would have been too definite. I wanted to remain absolutely indifferent. That is why music is not possible in this film, except at the beginning and end, where the drum brings this ironic element.

You say you want to remain indifferent, h u t. . .

I want to remain objective, impassive, like Kleist. That is what I like in Kleist. It has been said that he wrote his stories with his “back turned to the public”. I am like that — I don’t want to wink at the audience; I don’t want to say, “Here you should laugh, h ere you shouldn’t.” However, the public should not remain impassive; but the author does not lean one way or the other.

I believe you are about to publish

ERIC ROHMER — — ■

“In Claire’s î&ssee I wanted to divide the narration into two — the character of Jerome, who tells his story, and the novelist, who is going to try and write it.” Laurence de Monaghan as Claire and Jean-Claude Brily as Jerome.

your thesis on Murnau. Were you interested in M urnau from a visual or a moral point of view?

Well, what I studied in Murnau was a certain organization of space, and in particular the presence of certain motifs, such as the expan­ sion and contraction motif. I do not think my films function in the same way, but that is something a director is not aware of.

M urnau, how ever, has been important for me in the sense that he was the director with the greatest creative and plastic imagination. It was he who taught me to love the cinema, and no doubt inspired me, though I am not always absolutely conscious of this.

And Hitchcock . . .?

Yes, of course. Unlike some of my colleagues, I do not have a good memory. For example, Truffaut has said that when he does a shot he asks himself what Hitchcock would do in his place. This is not my case at all. This idea seems impossible to me. I forget Hitchcock, Murnau — absolutely everything. But it is certain that Hitchcock has also taught me a rigor in constructing images and editing.

1st y©ur “ Moral Tales” there is always ‘another woman5 that the Sier© encounters. Why do you disallow all possibility of this woman ever remaining with the hero?

But that is the theme, or the subject. There is no way of replying to that, since it is the starting point.

Bernard Verley as Frederic and Zouzou as Chloe in Rohmer’s sixth moral tale, Low ira the Afternoon.

Yes, but in “ L’Amuer, 1’Apresm idi” , for example, Frederic mentions a previous passionate affair with a Milena. Doesn’t this type of situation interest you?

divide the narrator into two. My point of view is not necessarily that of the narrator’s — I film someone who is telling a story. In this film there are two people who tell the story: the character of Jerome, who I don’t know. She is alluded to in tells his story, and the novelist, who order to show a certain richness of is going to try and write it. What life in all these characters, to show interested me was to film a subject that this is a given moment in their which was narrated, but without the lives. I like to show that these use of the voice-over of a narrator. characters have a life outside of the But A urora brings an ironic story. element to the film, a point of view which the spectator himself Do you think women are less provided before. . . morally suspect than men?

Yes, that’s true, because she I really don’t know. It so happens becomes the character in the film that in my Moral Tales the man is who is the spectator of the other, th e n a rra to r, but he is not who tells his story . . . necessarily the most interesting or the most mysterious character. In Are you able t© teach what The Marquise, the man is much less interests you at the university? important, he is seen less often and he is not the narrator. The woman is Personally, it is not cinema that I presented from a more interior would most like to teach, but one point of view. But it is evident that can only teach what one knows. I in all my films the woman is would like to teach art — painting (m orally) less criticized. She and architecture, for example — appears, if not as a model, at least as but I am not qualified. And the logical — she is logical with herself cinema is a part of other art forms. I — while the narrator is always in find that it is interesting to be contradiction with himself. And this involved in several things: so I make is true for The Marquise as well, films, I teach, and I also participate where the contradiction is much in educational television. more evident in the man than in the woman.

Do you often go to the cinema, or do you spend your time reading?

In “ Le Geuou de Claire” (“Claire’s K n e e ” ), d o e s A u r o r a ( th e novelist) represent your point of view? In your other tales there Is no equivalent character.

In Claire’s Knee I wanted to

I am not one to devour a lot of films. Sometimes I find it sufficient to see the films shown at the university during the week. I read much more, but this is conditioned by the films I might be making.

When I worked in educational television I widened my interests considerably. For exam ple, I happened to come upon Kleist, and Kleist led me to rediscover German literature. Now with Fercival, I am studying not only the literature of the Middle Ages, but also their art and so on. I am more often in front of a book than in a cinema.

When do you think you will finish “ Percival”?

I don’t know. But after that, what I would really like to do is work in the theatre. Although I do not know what at this stage. * . FILMOGRAPHY Shorts 1950 Journal d’un scélérat (16mm).

1951 Presentation (35mm, 12 mins). ' 1952 Les petites filles modèles (35mm, 60 mins, unfinished).

1954 Berenice (16mm, 15 mins).

1956 La Sonate a Kreutzer (16mm, 50 mins).

1958 Véronique et son cancre (35mm, 20 mins).

1964 Nadja a Paris (16mm, 13 mins).

1965 Place de l’Etoile (Sketch in Paris vu p a r . . . , 16mm, 15 mins).

1966 Une étudiante d’aujourd’hui (16mm, 13 mins), 1968 Fermiere a Montfaucon (16mm, 13 mins).

Six Mora! Tales 1962 I

La Boulangère de Monceau (16mm, 26 mins).

1963 11 La Carrière de Suzanne (16mm, 52 mins).

1967 IV La Collectionneuse (35mm, 90 mins).

1969-111 Ma nuit chez Maud (35mm, 110 mins).

1970 V Le Genou de Claire (35mm, 105 mins).

1972 VT L’A m ou r, l’ a p r è s -m id i (3 5 m m , 102 mins).

Features 1959 Le Signe du Lion (35mm, 100 mins).

1976 Die marquise von O . . . (35mm, 102 mins).

In preparation : Percival

Cinema Papers, October— 127

GUIDE FOR THE AUSTRALIAN FILM PRODUCER: FART 7 SERVICE AGREEMENTS In this seventh part of a 19-part series, Cinema Papers contributing editor Antony I. Ginnane, and Melbourne solicitors Leon Gorr and Ian Baillieu discuss another of the service agreements a producer must grapple with after he has secured finance to bring his property to the screen.

1. Introduction

A number of differing forms of service contracts for talent are discussed below as well as the Equity standard form of agreement which feature film producers within Australia have to enter into because of the union situation. The Equity Agreement sets out basic work conditions which are deemed to apply to all contracted per­ formers from lead to extras. “Long form star agreements”, “featured player agreements” and “extra agreements” have many basic features in common ; the main differences being the detail in which compensation clauses, default clauses, grant of rights clauses and general covenants clauses are drawn.

Australian talent contract forms differ from British and U.S. models in a number of ways.

Except for a few stars, local agents give little concern to billing provisions and are unlikely to argue greatly about the whole grant of rights clauses that their clients frequently sign.* Secondly, in Britain and the U.S., at least one week’s rehearsal time is normally provided free by the artist. This is generally not the case in Australia where artists demand payment for rehearsal work done. It is common practice, too, for artists overseas to promote films in which they appear in return for living expenses and accommodation and transport. Many local artists need payment for any promotional tours or the like.

The concept of free time is a negotiating ploy used by overseas agents, but rarely in Australia, which local producers should be aware of. An agent, after having agreed to a fee for say five weeks work for an artist, may request a contract be drawn setting out the fee negotiated as for three weeks work and two free weeks. Not only does this enable the agent to have a better negotiating position for the weekly rate on an artist’s next film, but it also means that if an overage situation occurs, the artist is paid on a weekly rate calculated at the amount of the total fee divided by themumber of working weeks.

Local artists are less likely to be concerned with other requirements that foreign performers may request: e.g. caravan on location/set, or solo dressing room, limousine to set/location; I6mm *The grant of rights clause outlines those rights in the actor’s performance that the performer chooses to give to the producer. The performer may argue that he ought to retain certain rights, e.g. merchandising rights or music rights.

128 — Cinema Papers, October

2

print of finished film for private use; first class feature film producers.

As it is, Equity representatives have individual air travel; first class living expenses (query what these may be in a given situation); personal producers in their thrall, and have been able to make-up man, hairdresser or stills photographer; develop a number of clauses and attitudes which limited contact with the press; specialized diet; are oppressive to the producer and militate against continuous production in a financially etc.

Some local artists may have a service company repressed industry situation.

Equity’s form of agreement (an example of which they will want to be the contracting party with the producer. The producer will want the which is set out in Precedent 10A) begins by artist’s company to warrant that it has the right to considering the ambit of its agreement and contract for the artist’s services and may want the unreasonably attempts to prevent Australian artist to make similar warranties guaranteeing the producers from the reality of exploiting their performance by the service company of its rights to video cassette, cable television and similar forms of distribution. The union’s ground obligations to cause the artist to perform.

In attempting to deal with foreign artists, in is that they are too difficult for them to control. addition to the requirements of Equity, discussed The form of the agreement contains many clauses below, the producer will need a clause in his that are adopted from the American Screen contract with the artist allowing him to deduct Actors’ Guild (SAG) standard contract.

In the U.S., however, the number of actresses any amount of withholding tax from the artist’s salary and/or share of profits as determined by and actors available have made it possible for a the Commissioner of Taxation. The producer thriving independent non-union feature industry will also note that he will need to submit the to develop on the coast, in New York and in the artist’s contract to the Reserve Bank for approval southern states, particularly in low budget areas if the salary, or part thereof, is to be paid of filmmaking.

Basic rates of pay are set out for various sets of overseas. Similarly, if a local artist wishes his salary to be paid overseas, Reserve Bank actors, divided into what the agreement calls approval will be needed. The producer may also “ p e rfo rm e rs ” , “ d o u b le s ” , “ s ta n d -in s ” , wish to consider the form of currency the com­ “ stuntm en/w om en” , “ crowd ex tra s” , and pensation should be paid in, e.g. U.S. dollars or “juveniles”.

The basic rates of pay set out in the agreement Australian dollars.

Overseas artists are more likely to want a apply only to Australian theatrical and 16mm salary package instead of a mere cash fee. This rights. Like the SAG agreement, extra loadings salary package may include an additional fee need to be negotiated for world cinema release: deferred out of first producer’s profits paid pari th e a tric a l and 16mm; w orld te lev isio n passu with (or sometimes ahead of) other defer­ (excluding U.S. network) and U.S. network. The ments as well as a piece of the producer’s net or total amount of these loadings have varied from gross. The salary package may need stepped film to film, but are presently between 110 per payments over a number of financial years or cent and 125 per cent, depending on the payments to a third party. Other general matters bargaining power of the producer. Query that a producer may encounter when attempting whether 16mm rights include non-theatrical to contract talent are special problems to be en­ rights.

Further loadings are to be paid for ancillary countered with juvenile performers (refer the Social Security Department) and Aboriginals rights such as cable and pay TV (Equity call them “supplemental rights”) but Equity refuse to (refer the Department of Aboriginal Affairs). approve the exploitation of ancillary rights 2. The Equity Agreement within Australia claiming they are too difficult In order to avoid trouble with various unions, for the union to control. the Australian film producer will need to execute Clause 36 of Precedent 10A sets out a form of a blanket production agreement with Actors and stepped loading for ancillary rights, similar in Announcers Equity Association of Australia, the rate to the current SAG agreement. The union to which all working actors and actresses producer is faced with the problem of either in Australia belong. However, small-scale, paying all (or most of) the loadings at once extremely low budget productions funded in without knowing whether he will need to exploit whole or part through the Experimental Film some of these rights, or waiting until there is need Fund, or to an extent through the Creative to license the right.

If he waits he will have to pay the loading Development branch of the AFC, have generally based on the prevailing basic rate, not the rate been exempted.

It is an unfortunate situation, and one that may prevailing at the time of entering the general hopefully be remedied, that there is no standard agreement, and he may need to withhold from form of equity agreement which each producer engaging in certain foreign sales while overseas autom atically signs and which contains until he has cleared Equity on his return.

Equity require all artists employed for the film provisions that have been agreed to after discussion by representatives of Equity and be paid up members, except for certain ‘real

GUIDE FOR THE FILM PRODUCER

people’ playing technical parts. Actors may be joined for the duration of a production only, if Equity agrees, but the joining fee may be more than the cost of the quarterly membership.

It is worth checking the agreement to see if holiday pay is included in the basic rate as this is frequently negotiable.

Producers may want to widen the grant of rights clause (clause 25 in Precedent 10A) to bring it into line with clause 4 of Precedent 10B: the long term “star” agreement, set out in the subscription service.

Whether the producer is required to pay first class or economy air travel for interstate artists can also be a negotiable point.

The clauses concerning alteration of calls; holds; overtime and Sunday rates should be care­ fully studied by the producer as there can be negotiable points and these clauses can frequently make or break a film’s budget.

If the producer is considering importing a foreign actor he will need to seek Equity’s approval (as well as making application to the Commonwealth Immigration Department for a work permit and visa) and Equity may need strong convincing that a local performer could not do the part.

There is a strong atmosphere of chauvinism prevalent in Equity which stands at loggerheads with the need to internationalize local production. The Equity agreement does not concern itself with intricacies of billing, but in the event of a foreign perform er being considered, Equity may endeavor to place restrictions on any attempt to bill the imported performer over local performers. Particularly, they object to a foreign performer getting 100 per cent of the above the title billing. Again the producer will find ways of negotiating here.

3. Long form ‘Star’ Agreement

provisions which have been previously discussed in Part 6 of the series: the Directors Agreement to which readers are accordingly referred. These provisions include a ‘morals’ clause; insurance clause, and union membership clause.

Detailed provisions, as to the effect of inter­ ruption or default, are set out. These clauses can be crucial to a producer and should be strongly negotiated. The need is to minimize the amount of time an artist may be disabled, disfigured, in default, or suspended; or the time the film may be interrupted by force majeure before the producer can terminate the agreement.

At the speed of schedules A ustralian producers work on, a period of more than two or three days may be enough to jeopardize the completion of the film. The question of the compensation payable to the artist, before termination, is also settled.

Billings clauses are only beginning to be of concern to Australian agents although they will be strongly argued for by agents for foreign artists. Different sorts of billing requirements reflect the supposed stature of the star. The form and size of the billing is generally related in size and positioning of the films title card, and there will be exclusion clauses for certain small size directory advertising; teaser ads; trailers and the like.

O ccasionally in “ all star productions” (A Bridge Too Far being a recent example) the clause may provide that no one star’s name or likeness can be used in advertising without the other stars’ names or likenesses being used in similar size and type.

The pay or play clause 7(ii)has been discussed in the previous part of this series. In an acting context this clause can give the producer an untrammelled right to reduce the size of the artist’s performance. “The face on the cutting room floor” can become a reality.

Various miscellaneous clauses include the producer’s right to assign the agreement, notices and law of contract clauses. There is also a savings clause which provides that in the event of any conflict between this agreement and the Equity agreement, the latter shall prevail. Query whether this clause need be included.

One concluding reality that a producer ought to bear in mind in considering the extent to which this agreement protects him in the event of breach, is when all is said and done an actor can cause a production extreme problems without really breaching his agreement by purposely forgetting his lines or otherwise failing to perform. No drafting can protect against this sort of behavior,

A form of such agreement is set out in Precedent 10B, which is contained in the sub­ scription service. This style of agreement will be used for the leading role or roles in the film. It is particularly important if the performer, either local or imported, is of some box-office value.

The agreement sets out the period of employ­ ment of the artist, which may or may not include a stop date by which, regardless of over schedul­ ing, the artist must be allowed to leave. The com­ pensation clause will differ in complexity depending on whether the artist is paid a flat fee or some salary package.

Clause 3 provides for the artist to make himself available for rehearsals, wardrobe tests, publicity stills, etc. one week before shooting begins and after shooting ends for retakes, publicity, etc. provided the dates do not conflict with other 4. Short form ‘Featured Players’ Agreement work.

The Short Form “ F eatu re d P la y e rs ” Clause 3(d) frequently slips into Australian agreement set out as Precedent 10C in the contracts modelled on American agreements. It subscription service is basically an abridged is of dubious merit. American law precludes version of the long form agreement 10B. Unlike specific performance of a contract for personal the long form agreement the compensation clause services, but there is a specific exception in provides for a breakdown of the salary total into Section 526 (5) California Code of Civil various component parts, including overtime, Procedure and Labour Code Section 2855 which basic fee, post sync fee, rehearsal and holding has similar words to that found in clause 3(d). fee.

Australian courts, of course, are loath to enforce This breakdown is to comply with the Equity by specific performance contracts for personal standard form agreement. A loadings clause sets out a breakdown of various loadings the service.

The grant of rights clause is extensive and production has agreed to with Equity. includes a basic performance release, likeness The grant of rights clause is a standard release clauses; merchandising rights, dubbing and coupled with a right to dub, cut and pay or play. doubling rights, full cutting rights (a reflexion of Holiday pay is deemed to be included. There is a the ‘pay or play’ clause, which may be partially simplified billings clause to comply with basic modified by artists approval clauses); publicity Equity requirements.

The producer is given the right to nominate the rights; ownership of any literary material provided by the artist for the film on or offset; artist in competitive cinema awards. Special film library rights and music, voice, instrumental stipulations include the vexed ‘no injunction by the artist’ clause which may or may not be upheld and the like rights.

The general covenants clause has a number of by Australian courts.

5. Extras Agreement

The extras agreement (the term ‘extra’ is defined in the Equity agreement — set out as Precedent 10D in the subscription service) is devised as both a salary voucher and receipt operation by the 2nd assistant director on set and a sufficiently comprehensive grant of rights and exclusion of liability for certain hazardous acts, damages and injury incurred by the extra while working for the production.

The extras agreement and the ‘short film’ featured players agreement are not normally drawn in each instance by legal practitioners; they are virtually standard forms.

Precedent 10A. Equity Agreement

AGREEM ENT

e n te r e d in to th is day of O ne th o u s a n d n in e h u n d re d and s e v e n ty BETWEEN ACTORS' AND ANNOUNCERS’ EQUITY ASSOCIATION OF AU STR ALIA of 72 S tanley Street, D a rlingh urst, New South W ales (hereinafter called "th e Union") of the One part AND of

(hereinafter called “ the Producer” ) of the Other part relating to the minimum fees, salary, wages, expenses, overtim e and any other remuneration to be paid to, and the conditions of engagement of artists engaged by the Producer to work (rehearsal, perform ance and all other work) in or for or incidental to the production of a feature film as hereinafter defined and as hereinafter set out, such being the feature film (hereinafter referred to as “ the film ") tentatively known as

1. APPLICATION OF AGREEMENT A.

The Producer agrees that notw ithstanding anything else herein contained no perform ance of an artist in connection with the said film may be recorded on or transferred to television video cassettes or cartridges or the like unless prior agreem ent as to remuneration to be paid to the artist for such recording or transferring has been reached with the Union PROVIDED THAT this sub clause A. shall not apply when such recording on or transference to video cassettes or the like is effected solely for the purpose of normal transm ission by a television station and w ill not be used for any other purpose or in any other manner or disposed of such as for but not in lim itation thereof retail sale.

B. The Producer agrees that any agreem ent of engagement between the Producer and any member of the Union or other person engaged by the Producer to visually appear in and/or speak dialogue in or for the film shall be on terms w hich are m onetarily not less than the monetary amounts hereinafter set out in this agreement and that the conditions of engagem ent of each artist shall never be more onerous than the terms hereinafter set out in this agreement. The Producer agrees that all of the term s of this agreement shall apply to all persons engaged for perform ance > (either visual or oral or both) in the film irrespective of the w eekly or daily salary, wage or fee paid to such person and the Producer may not make any agreement with any person whatsoever to appear in the film on monetary term s less than those set out herein or on any conditions other than those conditions set out herein. PROVIDED THAT it is distinctly agreed that all of the m onetary term s set out herein are minimum terms and all of the hours set out herein are maximum ordinary hours and that the number of days w ork per w eek set out herein is the maximum number of ordinary working days per week.

C. The Union agrees that it w ill not prevent any m ember or members from accepting an engagement w ith the Producer for the film during the currency of this agreement and that the Union w ill not call or order any stoppage of work by artists engaged by the Producer for work in accordance w ith the terms of this agreement. PROVIDED THAT the Union may order a stoppage of w ork by artists if it be reasonably established that the Producer is com m itting a breach or breaches of this agreement.

2. DURATION OF AGREEMENT This agreem ent shall commence on 1st August 1977 and continue for a period of one year or until the com pletion of the said film w hichever is the sooner.

3. BASIS OF MINIMUM RATES OF PAY, ETC. The minimum rates of pay set out in this agreement are based on the minimum rates -payable under the A ctors Television Programmes A w ard, 1973. In the event that the A u stra lia n C o nciliation and A rb itra tio n C om m ission should increase the m inim um rates payable under the A w ard refe rred to, then a pp rop riate adjustm ents shall be m ade to the m inim um rates set out in this agreem ent as from the date of operation of such A w ard increase.

4. FEES/WAGES — SCALE OF MINIMUMS PAYABLE The minimum fee, wage or salary to be paid to an artist for rehearsal, perform ance and w ork incidental to the production of the film shall be:

Basic Rates Total Minimum Rate A.

PERFORMER $196.50

(i) Engaged by the week Plus M inim um Loading

$235.80

( 120 % )

$66.03

(iii) Engaged by the hour for a minimum of 4 hours and not required to speak more than two lines of dialogue Plus M inim um Loading ( 120 % )

B.

■

$432.30 per week

$55.03

(ii) Engaged by the d ay Plus M inim um Loading ( 120 % )

$121.06 per day

$8.25 $9.90

$18.15 per hour

DOUBLE (A double is a person who “ Doubles" for an actor or actress and who is photographed in a manner which avoids recognition of the Double and who does not speak dialogue or perform any “ Stunt” .)

(i)

Engaged by the w eek Plus M inim um Loading (120% )

$125.37 $150.44

$275.77 per week

Cinema Papers, October — 129

GUIDE FOR THE FILM PRODUCER

8. OVERTIME — PENALTY RATES (ii)

C.

Engaged by the day Plus M inim um Loading

$31.34

( 120 % )

$37.61

$68.95 per day

STAND-IN (A Stand-In is a person who “ stand-in" tor another player and who does not act/o r be photographed) —

(i) Engaged by the w eek Plus M inim um Loading ( 120 % ) (ii) Engaged by the day Pius M inim um Loading ( 120 % )

D.

$86.41 $103.69 $21.60 $25.92

$190.10 per week $47.52 per day

STUNTMEN/WOMEN

s

Minimum term s of engagem ent as per sub-clause A. of this Clause 4.

E.

CROWD EXTRAS (An Extra is a person whether in costum e or not who is part of a crowd, mob, ensemble or atmospheric scene and who does not speak dialogue except in the mass or carry out any “ business", provided that the Producer may invite members of the public in modern civilian dress to join in a scene and such members of the public shall not be regarded as employees and shall not otherwise be covered by the terms of this agreement.) (i) Engaged by the hour for a minimum of four hours $5.97 per hour (ii) Engaged by the day and employed other than in a State C apital City $30.77 per day

F.

JUVENILES (A Juvenile is an artist who is less than sixteen (16) years of age.)

Juveniles shall be paid at rroriess than 50% of the applicable rates of pay set out in this agreement.

G. MINIMUM LOADING Excepting as to Crowd Extras’ rates the minimum rates of pay set out in this Clause 4 contain loadings totalling one hundred and twenty per centum (120%) in consideration of which the Producer is granted sole theatrical (cinema) and television rights in the film throughout the world.

PROVIDED THAT no more than four (4) screenings occur in any one^ television area in Australia and no more than seven (7) screenings' occur in each or any television area in the w orld prior to agreement being reached between the Producer and the Union as to further payment to the A rtists (Crowd Extras excepted).

H.

POST SYNCHRONISATION, RECORDING OF WILD LINES OR ADDITIONAL DIALOGUE (i) An artist post-synchronising his own voice shall be paid an hourly rate based on the negotiated w age (including the skill loading but excluding overseas allowance) originally agreed upon between the A rtist and the Producer w ith a minimum call period of 2’£ hours; other than during his normal call time. (ii) An artist post-synchronising another artist’s voice in one episode shall be paid at the rate of $12.37 per hour with a minimum call period of 2'£ hours for any one programme. (¡ii) The voice of an artist appearing in a programme may not be dubbed in English by another person -unless such artist signifies his consent in w riting to such dubbing. (iv) Payments as set out in paragraphs (i) and (ii) of this sub-clause shall be the full and only payments for that work. (v) W ild Lines (dialogue) recorded on location, in studio premises or location hotel room on com pletion of a day’s shooting; but not recorded to picture; are to be regarded as shooting time or extension thereof.

I.

ALTERATION OF CALLS If for any reason the Producer alters the date of any call or calls before or .during an engagement, such alteration may be made w ithout payment to the artist provided that not less than seven days notice of such alteration has been given to the artist prior to the tim e of the original call. Should less than seven days but more than forty-eight hours notice of such alteration be given, the artist shall be entitled to a fee of not less than sixteen and tw o-thirds per centum (16%%) of his negotiated fee for such altered call or calls.

Should less than forty-eight hours notice be given the artist shall be paid thirty-three and one-third per centum (33%%) of his negotiated fee for the altered or postponed call or calls. Calls substituted for altered calls shall be at the rate negotiated for the original engagement.

J.

HOLDS The Producer may not arrange with an artist-or with an artist's agent for the placing of a "h o ld ’’ upon the artist for a period exceeding thirty-six (36) hours from the time of the commencement of such hold and an artist or his agent may not agree to such “ hold” exceeding such period of thirty-six (36) hours.

K.

CLIMATIC ALLOWANCE WORK IN OTHER COUNTRIES (i) If an artist is required by the Producer to carry out any work whatsoever in: North Queensland, W estern Queensland, W estern N.S.W., Central Australia, Northern Territory, Eastern or Northern Zones of W estern Australia, W estern or Northern Zones of South Australia or in Papua/New Guinea, the artist shall be paid at a daily or weekly rate of pay for his ordinary hours of w ork a sum w hich is not less than a sum which is 10% in excess of the daily or weekly rates set out in this clause fpr all such work. (ii) WORK IN OTHER COUNTRIES If an artist is required by the Producer to carry out work anywhere in the world outside the territorial boundaries of the Commonwealth of Australia or its dependencies (excluding Antarctica) mandated territories or protectorates the artist shall be paid at a daily or weekly rate of pay for his ordinary hours of w ork a sum which is not less than a sum which is 10% in excess of the daily or weekly rates set out in this clause for all such work.

5. ANNUAL LEAVE The provisions of the New South W ales Annual Holidays A ct shall apply to all artists engaged for w ork irrthe film as though each engagement of an artist were made in the State of New South W ales and as though the entire engagem ent was carried out in that State. Payments in lieu of annual leave shall be calculated on the total minimum rate or total annual fee pursuant to clause 4 herein, w h icheve r is the greater.

6. ORDINARY HOURS OF WORK The Maximum ordinary hours of work shall — (i) For weekly engagem ents not exceed forty per w eek to be worked on any five days from M onday to Saturday both inclusive or nine consecutive hours (meal break excluded) on any one day. (ii) In the case of a per day engagem ent not exceed eight consecutive hours (meal break excluded) on each such day. (iii) Commence and be continuous (meal breaks excepted) as from the time the artist is called or reports for work, whichever is the later. (iv) W here the Producer requires the artist to make-up the artist’s w ork time shall include time for putting on make-up but taking off make-up shall be in the artist’s time.

7. NOTICE OF CALL TIMES The Producer shall notify an artist employed on a weekly basis at the end of each day's work in the studio or on location as the case may be of the artist's com mencing tim e for the next day's work. If the artist is engaged on a daily basis the Producer shall give the artist not less than twelve hours notice of starting time.

130 — Cinema Papers, October

The artist shall w ork such overtim e as the Producer may reasonably require.

O vertim e and Penalty Rates shall be calculated on the artist's Total Minimum Rate and paid for as follows:(i) For weekly engagements time worked in excess of nine hours on any one day shall be paid for at tim e-and-a-half for the first three hours and thereafter at double tim e provided that all overtime in any one week in excess of fifteen hours shall be paid for at double time. (ii) Should an artist engaged on a weekly basis be required to work on a sixth day in a w eek he shall be paid at the rate of tim e-and-ahalf for all ordinary tim e worked on that day with a minimum payment as for eight hours work. Any overtime worked on such a day shall be paid for at double time. (iii) For daily engagement tim e worked in excess of eight hours shall be paid for at tim e-and-a-half for the first three hours and thereafter at double time. (iv) Overtime shall not be paid tw ice for the same tim e worked and shall be calculated and paid to the nearest thirty minutes. (v) An artist required to work between m idnight and 6.00am as part of his ordinary hours of w ork shall be paid an additional 15% of the hourly rate to be calculated on the artist’s Basic Rate or Negotiated Fee w hichever is the greater. Such penalty to be paid for each hour or part thereof worked. ' (vi) W here an artist has not been given a break of ten clear hours b e tw e e n the c e s s a tio n o f w o rk on one day and the commencement of work on the next succeeding day he shall be paid at the rate of double time for all tim e worked during the said break of ten hours with a minimum payment as for one hour worked.

(ii)

(iii) .

(iv)

(v)

9. SUNDAYS AND PUBLIC HOLIDAYS (i) All work done on Sundays or Public Holidays shall be paid for at double time, calculated on the total minimum rate. (ii) If the Producer does not require an artist engaged by the week to work on any Public Holiday which occurs during the artist's period of engagement the artist shall be credited w ith eight hours w ork for each such holiday.

10. RATES ARE MINIMUM RATES

(vi)

(vii)

All rates set out in this agreem ent are minimum rates. It shall be allowable for an artist to negotiate for and receive rates in excess of the rates herein set out. A negotiated rate may include payment for a specified number of hours of overtim e (whether worked or not) provided that —(a) the details thereof are set out in writing (signed by or on behalf of the Producer and artist) prior to the commencement of the engagement; and (b) the amount of such negotiated rate shall not be less than the aggregate of all applicable rates herein set out.

11. MEAL AND OTHER BREAKS (i) An artist shall be provided with a meal break of a duration of not less than forty-five m inutes nor more than sixty minutes and the length of such duration shall be the prerogative of the Producer.

The time of such meal break shall commence between noon and 1.30pm in the case of lunch or between 5.00 p.m. and 6.30 p.m. in the case of dinner. PROVIDED however that in any event such meal break shall not be earlier than four hours nor later than five hours from the start of the actual w ork session involved. (ii) Should an artist be required to continue working for more than one hour after he has com pleted nine hours work on that day, the artist shall be provided with a second meal break to commence not later than ten hours from the commencement of the artist's w ork on that day and at the Producer’s option the artist shall be supplied with a satisfactory three-course meal or paid the sum of $3.00 in lieu thereof. (iii) The artist shall be allowed a tea or smoko break of ten m inutes’ -duration in the Producer's time during each session of w ork and not later than 2.5 hours from the beginning of the w ork session. (iv) All meal breaks other than tea (smoko) breaks shall be in the artist’s time. (v) An artist shall be entitled to a break of not less than ten clear hours between the tim e of cessation of w o rk on one day and the com m encem ent of w o rk on the next succeeding day.

12. TRAVELLING AND TRANSPORT — ACCOMMODATION — MEALS (i) S u ita b le firs t class return rail tra n s p o rt or firs t-c la s s return fa re and reserved seats or paym ent in lieu thereof, and any necessary accom m odation shall be provided by the Producer fo r any artis t w ho may be required by the Producer to trave l aw ay from the a rtis t's place of residence (tem porary or perm anent as the case may be) to the place of the P roducer's registered o ffic e fo r the perform ance of the a rtis t’s w ork. W hen such travel involves any artis t tra v e llin g overnight by rail, the artis t shall be provided w ith a sleeping berth at the expense of the P roducer if such berth is p rocurable and if not procurable the artist shall be paid the sum usually charged to the pub lic by the a pp rop riate railw ay departm ent fo r such sleeping berth. In the event of the Producer re q u irin g an artist to travel by air it is agreed that such tra n sp o rt may be on an F.O.C. and /or econom y class ticket basis and the Producer agrees that no o ff

(viii)

lo adin g of an a rtist w ill take place as a consequence of that artist holdin g an F.O.C. ticket. The P roducer also agrees that a ir trave l w ill take place on the scheduled flig h t unless such flig h t is cancelled.

If an a rtist is required by the P roducer to trave l m ore than th irty m iles from the G eneral Post O ffice in the place in w h ich he was re siding when he w as engaged by the Producer such artist shall be provided w ith suitab le m eals w h ilst absent or the P roducer shall pay to the a rtist a m eal allow ance of $1.50 fo r breakfast, $2.00 fo r lunch and $3.00 fo r dinner in lieu thereof.

If an artist is required to stay away overnight from his usual place of residence, the artist shall be provided with first class accom m odation or the Producer shall pay to the artist a sum of $15.00 per night for overnight accom m odation whilst the artist is so absent. In capital cities, first class accom m odation shall consist of an unshared room with bath or shower room and toilet facilities therein except in cases of emergency. The artist shall during such an emergency, be paid $15.00 per day by the Producer in lieu of such accommodation.

In any event if an artist is working on a location and facilities for obtaining proper meals are unavailable to the artist or the artist is by reason of wearing costume and/or make-up unable to proceed to a restaurant, etc. the Producer shall provide satisfactory meals or pay to the artist an amount of $2.00 for lunch and $3.00 for dinner.

• If an a rtist is required to travel in A u stra lia to o r from an engagem ent on any day on w hich he is not being paid fo r w o rk the a rtist shall trave l at a tim e w hich as fa r as possible shall be at a tim e to suit the a rtis t’s convenience and be paid the sum of $15.00 fo r each such day or part thereof. If the artist is required to travel beyond A u stra lia the a rtist shall be paid fo r each day or part thereof of such trave l at half his negotiated w age fo r each day o f such travel in cluding the days of dep arture and return. .

Travelling time other than that set out in the proceeding subclause shall be counted as working time in respect of all travel both ways between the pick-up point (referred to in subclause (vii) of this clause) and location, w ith a maximum travelling time of eight hours on any one day.

An artist is required to report to and present himself for each day’s w ork as follows (unless overnight on location) — (a) For transport to location (which transport, together with the return trip, shall be at the Producer’s expense and shall be by taxi, private car or chartered bus), at the place of tem porary residence of the Interstate artists engaged for that day's work (which shall be known as the “ pick-up” point) provided however that — (1) Any artist who prefers to do so may make his own way to location.

(2) Any artist called for a time later than the time for com mencem ent of w ork for the day may be required to use such public transport as is available and the use of which is reasonable in the circum stances. The Producer shall reimburse the artist the cost of fares paid for such public transport.

(3) Travelling time shall commence as from the general pick-up point. (b) For rehearsals, at such place w ithin a radius of five miles of the General Post O ffice as is nominated by the Producer.

Should an artist be required by the Producer to carry any baggage to a location or studio, private transport shall be provided by the P roducer to and from the a rtis t’s place of residence (tem porary or perm anent as the case may be).

13. PUBLICITY — WARDROBE — OTHER SPECIAL CALLS An artist if so required by the Producer shall be available during working hours for the taking of still photographs to be used by the Producer only for pub licity for the film. Publicity calls other than during an artist’s normal working hours shall be paid for at the minimum call rate set out in the A ctors etc. (Television) Award 1957 as varied. Any call for wardrobe or any other purpose made other than in an artist's normal working hours shall also be paid for at that rate.

14. ENGAGEMENT TO BE SET DOWN IN WRITING The engagem ent of an artist shall be properly set out in w riting and shall clearly set out full details of the engagem ent including the artist’s rate of pay and period of engagement. The Producer shall provide each artist with such w ritten agreement of engagem ent at a time which is: (i) Not later than 72 hours after the verbal or other confirm ation of an artist's engagement. (ii) Not later than 8 clear days prior to the com mencem ent of an artist’s engagement. (iii) In the case of the verbal or other confirm ation having been made at a time which does not allow the Producer to provide an artist with the said w ritten details of engagem ent as provided in (i) or (ii) of this clause an artist shall be given such w ritten details of his eng a g e m e n t p rio r to the a c tu a l co m m e n ce m e n t of the engagem ent. PROVIDED that in the case of an artist being required by the Producer to travel to an engagem ent the artist shall be provided w ith the said w ritten details prior to his com m encem ent of such travel.

SUBSCRIPTION SERVICE Orders are now being taken for the loose leaf subscription series of the “ Guide for the Australian Film Producer” by Antony I. Ginnane, Leon Gorr and Ian Baillieu, which is due to be published shortly.

Subscribers to the series will initially receive a hard-back loose leaf folder with all the material published to date (including corrections and addenda) and material not previously published due to space restrictions.

As the series progresses further material will be mailed to subscribers at regular intervals. The subscription service will be a useful aid for those involved in film business, including the producer trying to set up his first film; the writer about to sell his first script; the lawyer, accountant or distributor executive who finds himself confronted with new problems as the local production industry grows.

Teachers of film will also find the service a useful aid.

First mailing of the series will be in January 1978.

There will be an installation fee of $A75 and an annual subscription of $A75.

In most instances, subscriptions to the guide are tax deductible.

Those interested should fill in the order form below and mail it with a cheque for $150. The initial print run of the service will be limited and only paid orders received by December 21 will be guaranteed a January mailing of the binder and first material.

To Cinema Papers Pty Ltd, 143 Therry St., Melbourne □ Yes: Put my name down as a subscriber to “ Guide for the Australian Film Producer” . My cheque for $150 ($75 installation, $75 for 12 months subscription) is enclosed. I authorize you to continue the service until I countermand this order in writing.

Name: Address: Postcode:

Concluded on P. 192

Leon S aunders (Sydney)

It is being done, and a good film will play in three or four different theatres there before it finishes. The whole idea of the C entre is flexibility. However, it’s not quite as simple as it sounds, because it depends on the type of film you have coming in as openers. For instance, a film like 3 Women has to play in a small house. In addition, in one of the two small houses, Cousin Cousine was such a success that we didn’t want to shift it; and it ran 26 weeks.

I don’t think we will see much change during the next 12 to 18 months. I think the effects of the introduction of color television and the economy will still be with us.

We are in for a very tough Septem ber through Christm as period and next year is going to be tough also. I hope that the end of next year will see us come out of it — at least the color television side.

One of Hoyts’ major expansive activities im the exhibition area over the past 18 months or so is the E n te rta in m e n t C en tre in Sydney. How is that working?

It’s a great success — the figures bear that out. Unfortunately, it is also a very expensive centre, costing $14 million. That’s a lot of money on which to get an adequate return. However, the Centre is one of the few theatres in the world that really works for a film. It’s not so much that Rocky, for example, wouldn’t take money elsewhere, but at the Centre it will probably run an extra three or four weeks. No other theatre will work that way for a film.

One of the aims of the Entertain­ ment Centre, by virtue of the scale and size of the theatres, was that it would enable a film to move d o w n th r o u g h th e v a r io u s theatres to cope with a declining box-office. Now, th at doesn’t appear to have been done as often as it m ight. . .

There have been rumors that one off the theatres is going to be broken down into tw o. . .

Terry Jackman, managing director of Hoyts Theatres Ltd., is one of the new style executives now running some of the major exhibition and distribution Companies in Aus­ tralia. Like Graham Burke and Greg Coote at Roadshow/Village, Robert Ward at FIlmways/Bendy, Andrew Gaty at 7 Keys, Terry Jackman has indicated that he is willing to challenge previously-held assumptions in and about the conservative Him distribution-exhibition industry.

Jackman joined the industry as an office boy with the Greater Union Organisation’s Birch, Carroll and Coyle circuit — the largest theatre circuit in Queensland. In his 2©-year tenure Jackman handled just about every job within the company, and was finally appointed general manager prior to leaving to join Hoyts this year.

Terry Jackman talks to Cinema Papers' contributing editor, Antony I. Ginnane, about Hoyts, its recent invest­ ment im local production and the problems facing exhibi­ tion in Australia today. He begins by discussing exhibition trends.

-

It is something I have talked about. Basically, we have three big houses, two medium and two small. It seemed to me when I took this job that we may be stretching ourselves with three 900-odd seaters. So I think a better con­ figuration would be two large, three medium and three small, which we would achieve if we tw inned Cinema 7. But at this stage it’s only an idea.

In Melbourne you have two threecinema complexes. Are there any plans for further expansion in the immediate future?

I certainly want to refurnish the Cinema Centre. It’s almost 10 years old and has been a great investment for Hoyts, but it needs to be Cinema Papers, October — 131

TERRY JACKMAN

Ray Barrett as Farrell (left) and Tommy Lewis as Jimmie Blacksmith in Fred Schepisi's The Chant of Jimmie Blacksmith, the first Australian film that 20th Century-Fox has invested in.

updated. At the same time, we probably will twin two of the houses which will give us five in that building and three in the other, making Melbourne the same as Sydney if we twin one of the larger houses there. We have an additional problem with Melbourne because we have five fairly large houses and one very small; so the configuration isn’t good. ^ It’s a little more developed than the plans for Sydney and I may do it next year. We have to do such renovations in the SeptemberDecember period, when business is slowest.

Have file problem s over tie Regent 4-p!ex in Brisbane been solved?

What we have done with the National Trust is to agree to keep the foyer and the grand staircase.

Fortunately, it will be one of the few usable National Trust theatres, unlike the Plaza Theatre in Sydney.

We will build the four cinemas in the existing auditorium, and that will begin early next year. .

One of flse Ideas that was snooted by your predecessor -— at least so far as Melbourne suburban driveins were concerned — was the putting of selective hard-fops into drive-in fields in M elbourne. . .

Yes, there will be an increase, The three suburban houses we have at the moment are not in tune with the concept I have talked about, They are fairly old and in the wrong kind of areas.

What are your views on HoytsF o x ’s in v o lv e m e n t in lo c a l production, and why have Hoyts waited this long?'

I can only go by what I have been told because I wasn’t there then, Hoyts’ manpower and financial resources were very much involved during the past two years in the opening of the E ntertainm ent Centre. It was a gigantic project and I am not surprised that all their resources were placed behind it.

As to production, we have a lot of confidence in the standard of Austra lia n p ro d u ctio n s and are confident that we can now invest ' and make a profit. Naturally, we are not always going to make a profit, but we feel the time is right for us to enter into it. In addition, we have a lot of theatres and there is not enough box-office films from traditional suppliers, so we need these films.

I also believe that we can have a sm all and v iab le p ro d u ctio n industry in this country, and the directors of the company share this view.

No, that won’t proceed. I am a What attracted you to “ The Chant great believer in modern suburban of Jimmie Blacksmith”, the first outlets, but I feel they have to be in film Hoyts has Invested am? shopping centres where there is It was the first script that everyample parking and, if possible, adjacent to the service areas used by body here liked. Besides, we have people who do not normally go into terrific confidence in Fred Schepisi, the city. For example, Parramatta who I think is one of three or four where you are not affecting your top directors in the country. down-town house by playing day “ The Chant of Jimmie Blackand date. s m ith ” has, by A u s tr a lia n Does this indicate there may be am standards, a comparatively high in c re a s e in th e M e lb o u rn e budget Is there am inference to be drawn that Hoyts would prefer to suburban chain? ■ 132 — Cinema Papers, October

The new 7-cinema Hoyts Entertainment Centre in Sydney.

become involved in projects with b u d g e ta ry scale s A m e ric a n s would consider adequate for lowbudget filmmaking?

The Americans are not involved to any great extent in Hoyts’ decision to invest. It is felt that since these films are being made locally, primarily for local audiences, the best judges will therefore be locals, The fact that Jimmie Blacksmith has a $ 1.2 million budget frightened me more than attracted me. , H as th e re b een a s p e c ific b u d g etary a llo c a tio n w ith in Hoyts over the next 12 months or so for investment in Australian production?

Though there has been a lot of talk, there really isn’t a budget, There is, however, an amount of money we think about,-but there is no actual budget because as each project comes up, we look at it — we may like two at once, or we might not like one for six months.

How docs tie deal with “Jimmie B la ck sm ith ” work? H oyts, I assume, gets exhibition rights within Australia; Fox distributes it in Australia and Fox have an option on foreign territories. Is that basically correct?

No, Fox doesn’t have an option on foreign territories. We have an arrangement — you could hardly call it an option — where we can pick up the film for a territory by m atching any o ffer alread y received. I guess you could call it the first right of refusal, And if Fox decides to buy the film for,, say, B ritain and Canada, are they allowed to cross-collateralize the profits and losses between the , th re e or fo u r or w h a te v e r territo ries they buy, or is it territory by territory?

That hasn’t even been discussed.

As there is no deal outside of the Australia-New Zealand area, it would be discussed if and when we are negotiating for other territories, There have been a number of figures mentioned in the press about the exact amount of Hoyts’ investm ent in “ Jim m ie Blacksmith”. The consensus seems to be $25<0,©©0 . . .

It really amazes me the interest in how much we have invested in the film. We treat the thing as a business investment. After all, we don’t necessarily tell everybody how much we have invested in a theatre, .

What role does Sandy Lieberson have to play in Hoyts’ investment in Australian production?

Sandy’s role is rather interesting, I don’t know anything about making films; nor does anybody else in Hoyts. Therefore, I felt that it would be good for us, and also for the production people, to have somebody on our side who is an expert. Sandy fulfils that role as he is a producer. He reads the scripts

m THE PAST MEMBERS OF THE PANTHER FAMILY HAWEBEEN ASSOCIATE» W ITH MANY FAMOUS HISTORICAL INCIDENTS ...AMDMOW THE NEWEST,PINKEST PÄNTSfI IS HAPPY TO PM YÂN IM PO T IN THE OPENING OF

Koyrs EnTERTflinmim

BY APPEARING DAILY AT HOYTS ENTERTAINMENT CENTRE

Peter Sellers, Blake Eduvarc

THE PiNK PANTHERSTRIKES/I UNITED ARTISTS CONGRATULATE HOYTS THEAT nDPMIMft

TUC Air-t«/ rk.T-rn-r. ....

TERRY JACKMAN

A still from the Italian horror film,Suspira (Dario Argento), one of the independent films Hoyts has picked up for local release.

that we like, and gives an opinion, though it isn’t the final one — I suppose that really rests with a number of people.

Sandy has spent a lot of time with Fred talking over Jimmie Black­ smith, and I think Fred would agree that he was a big help in the pre­ production stage. So Sandy’s role is to help and guide us. He will come out about twice a year.

Peter Rose, formerly of the South Australian Film Corporation, has now joined Hoyts, Is this evidence of a desire to build up expertise in the production area?

Yes, certainly. We are not going to become a major production house, but I want to give everybody a fair go. I don’t have the time, nor have my other executives, so we need somebody who can deal with and read the submitted scripts.

Peter Rose will certainly be involved in that area.

that selected box-office receipts are about to be made available through American‘Variety’. Why has the Australian film industry been so secretive about these matters in the past?

I don’t know why. Through the years of watching the production industry grow, it always seemed to me that the problems between production and exhibition-distribu­ tion were magnified out of all proportion by a general refusal to talk.

I don’t mind talking figures — I’ll talk figures to anybody — and yes, we are going to publish our gross figures because I don’t think there is anything secret about them. In fact, it will probably give people in the production area some idea of our problems. When you work out what it costs us to run the Entertainment Centre, for instance, and when you see what we gross in bad weeks, then you can see how difficult it is.

Australia is probably the only Is there going to be an announce­ country in the western world with ment soon on further Hoyts invest­ an exhibition-distribution film ment? industry that hasn’t so far pub­ We are talking to the SAFC about lished ex h ib itio n b ox-office receipts. I understand, however, Dawn and I think we will be making a deal by providing up front money for exhibition and distribu­ tion rights. There are a couple of other interesting looking projects, but we really want to make certain IS FUN N Y & D IFFEREN TSortdoy *v ÿ Ï A i Æ t ÜI

JOHN WATERSi

of where we are going and with money you should spend on a film. I whom. We are not just investing for would love to see us come back to the sake of it — we’d like to get our national censorship,.

However, I don’t think we will money back. because censorship is such a If a producer brings a project to volatile issue and the states are Hoyts, is it automatic that Fox demanding more rights. I think we’ll always have this problem and would distribute in Australia?

I guess it’s only natural.

Yes. When the “ Story of O” was Two to three years ago it was banned in Queensland I under­ su g g este d that F o x bad a stand you sought legal opinion on privileged arrangement with the possibility of contesting the Hoyts, and the question o f ruling of the Queensland Board of r e s t r i c t i v e and e x c l u s i v e Review. . . franchises with Columbia and If I remember correctly, the United Artists was tossed around.

What percentage of Hoyts box­ general legal opinion was that we office receipts, say over the past had a chance — that was all. But 12 months, would 20th Century- what worried me more was that if we did win, we would only win Fox account for? once. What could then happen, and It all depends on the films I emphasize the word “could” , was released in the particular year. This that a win could "have resulted in year Fox had The Omen and Silent tougher censorship. It just didn’t Movie, which were good. Then seem worth the fight, bearing in again, United Artists have had mind the feelings of the Govern­ Rocky, Carrie, and A Bridge Too ment.

Far. I would say at a guess that Fox’s share would be about 30 per And yet, paradoxically, when an ‘R’ film does get through in cent.

Queensland, it scores very well at Hoyts has apparently decided to the box-office. How do you pick up major independent explain this disparity between products floating around overseas, what people are prepared to pay thereby putting itself into direct and see and the attitude of their competition with Roadshow, elected government?

GUO, 7 Keys and Filmways. Is I can’t explain the attitude of the that going to eventuate or is Hoyts going to continue to rely on Fox’s elected government. I used to talk at great length to all of them in the normal world-wide purchases? government and they felt that what No, we are actively seeking out they were doing was correct. It is product from independent sources true there are ‘R’ films in Queens­ land that were very good in the overseas for acquisition. drive-ins. I think this is brought Have there been any specific about in some way by the number of films that are banned, just as much acquisitions already? as I think that the soft-core porno Yes, there is an Italian horror films screened around Sydney in film, Suspiria, which we have commercial theatres are being bought, as well as three or four affected by these hard-core, non­ others which we are close to commercial theatres at Kings Cross. finalising.

Another recent censorship Do you have any views on the high problem has been that o f‘R’ films costs producers are asking in drive-ins, particularly those overseas for local distribution drive-ins which are visible from rights? the road and nearby residential areas. Do you see any way round It is becoming a major problem this problem? because prices are now completely out of context with what the market will stand. The prices asked are There is no easy way out of it. We based on the boom period of two or are going to need some form of self­ three years ago when everybody regulation within the industry. If was racing around the world buying not, I am convinced the govern­ films. I think we will have to talk to ments will legislate collectively. our competitors about it because There is no doubt this problem is you can’t keep paying $150,000 or becoming a big one, with a lot of thereabouts for films, sight unseen. pressure being put on governments to do something about it. The What is your attitude to state as industry is, therefore, going to have opposed to federal censorship? to take a very adult attitude. Some distributors are going to miss out I believe we should have only one and there is going to be the usual form of censorship. The Queens­ cries of “Why me, why not you?” land Board, of course, I grew to However, if we don’t do it, then we know very well, living four to five are going to kill the drive-in years with them. It’s a real problem industry in this country. because you are not certain about what’s going to last or how much Concluded on P. 189

TREVORHOWARD»

u za Fras

Cinema Papers, October — 133

MELBOURNE AND SYDNEY FILM FESTIVALS 1977

Scott IVIurray and Tom Ryan

home each day and climbing the stairs, for example, assumes by its repetition a greater meaning. Obviously it imposes a sense of, if not imprisonment, then an absence of space. But this is only the superficial meaning. The true sig­ nificance comes in the last sequence where the boy, having found his mother fellating a customer, rushes down the steps and sits distraught at the bottom.

Her voice echoes hollowly in the stair­ well as she calls from above. It is extremely moving.

Another example of emotion being generated by repetition is the opening of the film where Saless delineates the different time planes of mother and son.

The boy rises while she is asleep, tip-toes around so as not to wake her, then leaves for school where he spends a lonely day.

He returns to bed down before her return.

In this absence of sharing, their lives become like rituals, every action a mechanical gesture. And while Coming of Age does not pander to one’s sympathy, the bleakness of the situation, the visible damage it is doing, and the unlikelihood of anything being done to change things, certainly invokes it.

Saless’ films are better absorbed than analysed, yet their inherent slowness often prevents people from being responsive. And perhaps this is why Saless has not yet gained the stature he deserves.

The ‘ lovers’, Erich von Lhomond (Matthias Habich) and Sophie (Margarethe von Trotta), in Volker Schlondorff’s Coup de Grace.

While both festivals have historically tended to show the same films, this year it was those peculiar to a festival that were among the most interesting — Sydney with Mr K lein and C ria Cuervos, Melbourne with Irene, Irene. Ironically, the Losey and the Del Monte were last minute additions.

Volker Schlondorffs Der Fangschuss (Coup de Grace) comes very close to what can be assumed a realistic portrayal of war, though here the sporadic fighting only occasionally intrudes into the calm of a castle in Kratowice where several Prussian officers are stationed.

The central drama is a confrontation between the owner, Sophie, her brother, Konrad, and Konrad’s friend and fellow officer, von Lhomond. Sophie, despite finding her belief in the Prussian cause weakening, falls in love with von Lhomond. He, however, brought up solely in male company and disturbed by feelings of male love he has mostly contained, treats her passion with coldness.

The situation becomes tense, till Sophie, as much from spite as from a new found cause, leaves with a communist group. Events then propel the characters to the tragic conclusion where von Lhomond executes Sophie for being a subversive.

Impeccably photographed in blackand-white by Igo Luther, Coup de Grace is notable in two areas: Schlondorff’s delicate handling of the homo-erotic elements (perhaps here is the director I 34 — Cinema Papers, October

who could film E. M. Forster’s Maurice) and the narrative clarity. The interlinking dramas (war, frustrated passion, esprit de corps, Prussian nationalism, etc) all come together well.

What is lacking, however, is an avenue for the audience to become emotionally involved — the surface is too polished, the direction too formal to allow easy access.

The film also reflects the continuing pre-occupation of German filmmakers in coming to terms with Germany’s past.

Mostly this attention has focused on Hitler, opting, as it were, for an imaginary watershed to be drawn through history at this point in the hope that post-Hitler Germans can be described as a new generation.

Schlondorff, however, returns to 1919, a period when Prussian and German influences were again merging. But in this period he sees links with the Germany of today: “ The more the story unfolds, the more we can rediscover ourselves in it and recognize the traits of Prussian tradition and German history anchored in all of us.” A realistic sentiment, one not dissimilar to that expressed by Hans Jurgen Syberberg in Ludwig II: Requiem fu r ©inen ju n g frä u lic h e n K ö n ig (Ludwig SI: Requiem For A Virgin King) and W in ifre d W agner und di© Geschichte des Hauses Wahnfried 1914-1975 (The Confessions of Winifred Wagner).

Sohrab Shahid Saless’ R eifezeit (Coming of Age) is a deceptively simple story of a boy and his single mother in a decaying suburb of Berlin. Yet, while Saless’ long, static takes and carefully

controlled monotone images may appear, at times, unimaginative, they are not.

There is never a detail not intentionally placed; nor a shadow that does not impart a significance. Saless’ style is one of accumulation, a relentless obsession with the ordinary that finally yields the extraordinary.

The simple event of the boy returning

Marco Ferreri’s La Derniere Femme (The Last Woman) is, like his earlier La Grande Bouffe, ambivalent in attitude.

And this may account for the difficulty of resolving one’s emotional response with the contradictory nature of the film’s concerns.

Gerard (Gerard Depardieu), a poor worker living in a high-rise Paris slum, is left by his wife Gabrielle (Zouzou) but replaces her with Valerie (Ornella Muti).

This relationship soon breaks down — Valerie accusing him of being the patriarchal head of a family that no longer exists — and in desperation Gerard ablates his genitals with an electric carving knife.

Fuelled by this brutally realistic finale, the film is certainly powerful, but as in other

Ferreri

films the

shock tactics

A scene from Sohrab Shahid Saless’ deceptively simple, yet moving, Coming of Age.

MELBOURNE/SYDNEY FESTIVALS

bother by their insistence. But then, subtlety is not a Ferreri virtue.

Part of the film’s trouble is the muddleheadedness with which Ferreri presents his attack on society. He is suggesting the couple is an institution alien to natural man, an inhuman structure devised by society to keep man content and politically inactive. And to discourage any thoughts of abandoning the niceties of coupling, there is that dreaded fear of solitude.

Gerard’s move from Gabrielle to Valerie, therefore, is more the result of external forces on him than a decision of free w ill. As w ell, his e ffo rts to maternalize his relationship with his son are foiled because he, as a man, is taught to believe an erection and maternal feelings are incompatible. He therefore castrates himself to prove, as Ferreri says, he is “ a man and not a phallus” .

It is an intriguing thesis (and one which Pasolini would agree with given the se ntim en ts of his last recorded interview*) but is it convincing? Certainly not so in the context of the film.

• Earlier in the film Gerard offers to prove his love for Valerie by refusing to sleep with her, but though he tries, he soon succumbs to his “ masculinity” and attempts to seduce a friend. It is the act of a man enslaved by society’s notions of virility. Therefore to remove his own penis is to attack the wrong area — he should be venting disgust at society, as well as liberating himself from stereotypic patterns of behavior. But he cannot and hence the contradiction.

The film, despite this, is notable for its energy and the excellent performances of Depardieu and Ornella Muti.

Claude Sautet’s ftflado is a return to the territory of his earlier Vincent, Francois, Paul et les Autres.

Simon (Michel Piccoli), a middle-aged owner of a small construction firm, is fighting to avoid a take-over bid by a sinister competitor, Lepidon. But with his p rin cip le s already eroded by the pressurés of survival, Simon finally resorts to the tactics of his enemy — though with an increasing awareness.

The telling scene occurs early in the film where Simon and his assistant, Pierre, are driving home Mado, a prostitute Simon has been seeing.

Counter-attacking Pierre’s abuse at the stupidity of prostitution, Mado replies, “ We all sell ourselves in one way or another, don’t we?”

As Simon- is played by Piccoli one easily (and intentionally) sympathizes with him, especially in the very moving scene where he visits his ex-wife Helene (Romy Schneider), an echo of the scene between Audran and Montand in Vincent *Film Quarterly, Winter 1975-6, pp. 44.

Simon is definitely a man with few choices. And even when he discovers himself increasingly fond of Mado, he finds her drifting off with Pierre. This culmination of his descent comes when on returning from a celebration in the country, Simon’s group is caught in the mud of a construction site. It is, of course, highly symbolic, but then most things Sautet does are near the surface. And it conveys a sufficiently powerful sense of needless decay.

Mado is generally entertaining and Sautet directs with consistent pace. As usual, the accompanying score by Philippe Sarde is appropriate, and the acting good, particularly Ottavla Piccolo whose work, with the exceptions of Bubu and Metello, is rarely seen in Australia.

Hans W. Geissendorfer’s Die Wiidente (The Wild Duck) is an adaptation of Ibsen’s bitter attack on the puritan ethic.

The Ekdal family is happy though poor, yet when the disturbed Gregers comes to stay, it is attacked for being false.

Sublimating his own repressions, he shatters the father, Hjalmar, by accusing him of building a fantasy world where the ‘real’ is avoided. As well, he insinuates that the 14-year-old Hedwig is the child of an affair between his father and Hjalmar’s wife.

Hjalmar prepares to leave and this gives Gregers the chance to, with coldly inhuman logic, ‘restore’ the harmony.

Hedwig is urged to deny herself her great love — the wild duck in the attic — as proof of her love for Hjalmar. Hedwig then leaves to shoot it, but in sorrow kills herself.

G eissendorfer’s film is basically successful because it opts for finding its own form. With carefully composed and lengthy takes, sparse use of camera movement and claustrophobic, though never theatrical, sets, it manages to satisfy cinematically the restrictedness of Ibsen’s play. And in this sense it follows the tradition of the recent German films of Syberberg and Schmid.

However, G eissendorfer’s wisest decision was to concentrate his story on Hedwig. For despite the tragedy of the ending, her pure spirit is a positive force against the bleak poverty and calvanlstic repression of Gregers. It makes a potentially stagnant play very sad and moving.

It is 1975, seven years after May ’68 and by a series of accidents several former activists form a group. There is Max (Jean-Luc Bideau) the leftist turned gambler, Marco (Jacques Dennis) the history teacher with unusual methods, Marie (Miou-Miou) the cashier who believes in . discounts for the needy, Mathieu (Rufus) the farm laborer turned self-employed teacher of the young, and

A grouping typical of a Claude Sautet film. Ottavia Piccolo as the prostitute Mado (foreground) with her lover-to-be, Pierre (Jacques Dutronc). Sflado.

The extraordinary Ornella Muti as Valerie in La 0®mi©r® Femma, Marco Ferreri’s ambivalent look at “ the couple’’.

so on. It is a group typical of an Alain Tanner film; a number of people all with different reasons as to why the energy of ’68 dissipated.

Despite the inherent promise of the situation, however, Jonas Qui Aura 25 Ans en i’an 2000 (Jonas Wiii Be 25 in the Year 2000) is only a partially-realized film. In his efforts to construct a new narrative form, Tanner has allowed too many issues to be diffused. The characters are convincingly real, but their lack of purpose is often too much the result of narrative looseness than intent.

Balancing this weakness, however, is the vitality that is occasionally evident, the good-humored way in which problems are tackled. And this humor is apparent in the moments of seriousness, as when during a meaningful political discussion, a flood of tears is brought on by the . peeling of onions.

This deliberate inversion of the expected with the unpredictable is elsewhere seen in the film: old Chales dying, as it were, to balance Jonas’ birth; the developers wishing to rezone the organic farm, etc.

It is a mosaic approach with moments of significance — Max joking that the world is becoming fascist, or Marguerite, on hiring Marcel, asking, “ Does this make me a capitalist boss?” And this mosaic neatly dove-tails in the last scene where Mathieu argues the film’s sentiment, that the possibility of radical change must, at all costs, be kept alive.

In a letter to Cineaste,* Jonathan Wallace pinpoints the only two themes acceptable to leftist filmmakers: “ Either a * Cineaste, Voi. VII, No. 4, page 51.

group of workers are victorious in a lifeand-death struggle or one person fighting a lonely battle becomes a martyr, with both themes having a major change, or turnabout in attitudes, right before the climax” . At this year’s festival the first variation was represented by Cantata de Chile, the second by Mirt Sost Shi Amit (Harvest: 3000 years).

Cantata is a recreation of a strike in 1907 at a British-owned nitrate mine; 3600 w orkers were killed. D irected by Humberto Solas, Cantata is a classic example of political over-kill and excessive caricature. In one scene, for example, a worker delivers an emotional monologue on how all strikes are for the benefit of mankind, never for the individual strikers.

Another example is the final massacre where Solas concentrates his camera solely on the officers of the suppressing army. We never see the ordinary soldiers — the proletariat — use their rifles.

Repressive regimes of all persuasions need the support (either silent or active) of the majority of the proletariat to succeed. The fascist dictatorship in Chile was no exception. And to ignore this, as does Solas, is to blind oneself to a truth.

Haile Gerima’s Harvest: 3000 years, a depressingly realistic account of peasant life in Ethiopia, was significantly better.

Here, the political struggle is between an exploitative landlord and his tenant farmers. And the agent of potential for change is the village fool, Kebebe.

Ironically, he is the one who best under­ stands the forces at work, who makes the final stand by killing the landlord. Kebebe then hangs himself — the lone battler becomes the martyr.

Cinema Papers, October — 135

MELBOURNE/SYDNEY FESTIVALS

Harvest: 3000 years is of particular interest in its observation/recreation of Ethiopian peasant life. And the significance of the title — that life has continued there unchanged for 30 centuries — is easily grasped. A calm, effective film and one greatly aided by the monotone photography of Elliott Davis.

Fons Rademaker’s Max Havelaar, an adaptation of Dekker’s book on the Dutch East Indies in 1855, was the most successful political film. As a statement on colonialism, and the forces it engenders, Max Havelaar is remarkably lucid.

The Dutch colonialists are portrayed as stern, bureaucratic overlords, only too ready to course justice to the advantage of the East India Company. And into this situation comes Havelaar, an impulsive but gentle man who believes in justice for all. His efforts, naturally, fall foul of the Regent and he is removed.

The Indonesian nationals, likewise, are shown to foster the injustices of Dutch rule to suit their own, corrupt ends. In this respect, the Indonesian situation bears much resemblance to British India where considerable injustice was meted out by Indians, safe in their lower position.

Also interesting is the examination of the motivations of the Dutch, both in East India and at home. The Dutch can perhaps be divided into two groups: those who believed in Dutch rule for mercenary gain; and those who believed they were carrying out God’s will. This latter insensitivity — though at times used to justify the colonialist urge — was commonly held. Thus, the film’s last sequence has great resonance, all the more given the church’s deliberate promotion of colonial rule as a Christian act.

Beautifully photographed by Jan de Bont, and finely cut by Pieter Bergema, Max Havelaar is a very successful attempt at combining epic cinema with political insight.

audience to fully accept her madness. As well, her erotic fantasies (apart from one where Red Indians stand menacingly in a forest while she masturbates in a canoe filled with blood) are too reminiscent of similar scenes in other films; they are all insufficiently different to denote insanity.

Most of this miscalculation can be attributed to Carle’s screenplay, but I also suspect it is influenced by Carle’s then relationship with Laure. As in other cases where director and actress (or actor) are very close, an absence of critical distance can blur the ‘real’ character into something closer to the one playing it.

However, this possible lack of objectivity can have positive effects, as in the film’s moments of sexual imagery. The scene of intercourse between Normande and Boulaine, for instance, is refreshingly natural and extremely erotic — con­ siderably more so than the much remarked-on scenes in L’Empire des Sens.

The peripheral characters in La Tet® are also satisfying, adding a nice dimension of craziness which helps in part to offset the sketchiness of Normande’s descent. J. Leo Gagnon is particularly good as the sculptor moulding a caste of the naked Normande; as is Renee Girard as Normande's dubiously insane mother, Berthe.

Another Canadian film was Don Owen’s Partners. Interesting mainly as proof of the inadvisability of marginal film industries making pseudo-American films, Partners is an uninvolving piece of light-weight escapism. And where Owen tries to invest some strains of sig­ nificance (the diary extracts which parallel America’s imperialist expansion into Canada with the original invasion), they merely look superficial.

Max Havelaar, Fons Rademakers' lucid account of colonialism in the Dutch East Indies in 1855. Peter Faber as Havelaar (on horse).

language; a widespread distrust of foreigners; a fear that migrants are depriving Germans of work; etc. It is then, after a period of intense loneliness relieved only by shared sympathy at the hostel, Shirin begins a search for her fiance Mahmud.

Unfortunately, the film trails off at this point, trading carefully drawn realism for abrupt and unsatisfactory melodrama.

This loading of the dice is most evident in Sanders’ manipulation of Shirin’s descent into prostitution. Hearing of

Shirin’s search for -Mahmud, a girlfriend suggests she should'visit a local disco which Mahmud may frequent. And it is there that Shirin first makes contact with the pimp. However, as Shirin has a photo of Mahmud, why did she not show it to her friend and save herself the trip? The reason is clear: Sanders is using the search for Mahmud as a device to force her protagonist’s decline. It is artifice, not art.

Clearly, Sanders is concerned that a lone woman in a foreign country is at the

Agnes Varda’s Daguerreotypes is a delightful glance at the inhabitants of Rue Daguerre, a backwater street in the oldest part of Paris. It is full of rundown, overstocked shops, each with its peculiar style: the millinery where an old couple sit silently every day, their only sortie being to the butchers each evening. The haberdasher who makes his own per­ fumes, but whose greatest skill must be his ability to find anything in the engorging mass of cardboard boxes and bric-a-brac.

Varda is clearly fond of her subjects, and this helps her inject the film with an old-world charm, as in the sequence where each shopkeeper tells of meeting his wife. Rather than being dismissive of their evident simplicity, Varda records them with affection. Unavoidably, the audience responds to this warmth.

The success of Pierre Rissient’s One Night Stand lies in the realistic way it captures, and delineates, that sense of displacement one feels when stranded alone in a foreign city; that double feeling of refuge and loneliness one experiences in anonymous hotels; the lounge and bar areas where people attempt brief contact between flights — but even this is doom­ ed by the impermanence of one’s stay.

Rissient nicely counterpoints this barrenness with brief flashes of genuine, communication: the encounters between Paul (Richard Jordan) and the lift operatress; the visit to the artists’ shop with Anya (Ting Pei); the meeting with Sonya’s daughter in the restaurant.

The only difficulty in responding fully to these alternating moments of illumination Jin Menzel’s Na Samote u Lesa is an occasional stiltedness of dialogue. (Cottage Near a Wood), though at times The film abounds with cinematic and somewhat slight, is a comedy of manners literary references and these provide a about a city family who takes on the level of conversation once removed from realities of country life during a vacation. the everyday. But a tension seems to Some of Menzel’s observation is sharp — exist between this abstraction and one’s particularly the scenes where Zvon dusts expectations of the story. flour about to ‘authenticate’ his mill, or This tension is most apparent in the lights his long-stemmed pipe whenever scenes between Paul and the Countess visitors approach — and some gentle — (Marie Daems), with Daems’ heavily the old farmer, Komarek, blissful in his articulated English overloading the dia­ easy manipulation of his city tenants. logue with relevance.

At times the film is also broadly funny, Still, it is a rather minor weakness in a as when Lavicka struggles unsuccess­ film where images carry great reso­ fully with his camp stretcher. Perhaps the nance, where the cross-cutting between ending, where the Lavicka family return trams and flickering neon lights conveys expecting to find Komarek dead but a non-demesnial world through which discover him energetically sowing the Paul wanders — alone. fields, is a little sentimental; but it is a minor flaw in an otherwise amusing film.

Gilles Carle’s La Tote de NormamcJe S i Onge (The Head of Normande St. Onge) is an intriguing, though basically unconvincing, look at a girl’s descent into madness. The transition is too hurried, and the dramatic last shot, where Normande leans against an overflowing sink, her head draped in lace, comes as a shock — it has not been justified by the build-up.

Part of the problem is that Carole Laure’s Normande is too normal, her idio­ syncrasies too personable, for the 136 — Cinema Papers, October

Helmer Sanders’ Shinns Hochzeit (Shinn’s Wedding) begins well, Thomas Mauch’s crisp monotone images accen­ tuating the vast differences between rural Turkey and industrialized Germany. And as Shirin leaves her family home for Cologne, one senses it is for good.

Once in Germany, Shirin is bundled into a migrant worker’s camp. Here, Sanders economically delineates the forces of oppression: class con­ sciousness; a different, incomprehensible

Carole Laure as Normande during her descent into madness. Gilles Carle’s intriguing but unconvincing La Tele de Normande St. Onge

MELBOURNE/SYDNEY FESTIVALS

Inside the cottage, with its carnivorous camp stretchers, in Jin Menzel s The Cottage Near a Wood.

Shelley Duval as Bernice (second left) in Joan Micklin Silver’s Bernice Bobs Her Hair, a witty adaptation on the F. Scott Fitzgerald story.

mercy of any depraved and base men who confront her, but by overloading the case, the message is difused.

It is in the realm of the private that one can confront the forces of repression, that a socially circumscribed reality can be subverted. The boundaries of such rebellion are inevitably limited, and so it scarcely needs to be said that the confrontation between a private sexuality and the mores which it disregards is limited in its effectiveness. A personal consciousness is insufficient to change the course of history, though the particular dimension of its quest can provide a perspective on it. L’Empire des Sens ( In the Realm of the Senses Empire of the Senses) sets in sharp tension this private endeavor, the relationship between Sada (Eiko Matsuda) and Kichiz-o (Tatsuya F uji), and the Japanese society is which it occurs.

In a most useful article, Jan Dawson has already attempted to place the film in the context of director Nagisa O shim a’s other a vailab le w ork.* A c c e p tin g the v a lid ity of her commentary (I have only seen Gishiki (The Ceremony) and In The Realm of The Senses), it is clear that Oshima is constantly preoccupied with the question of Japan and her identity in history, though “ it is the spirit of the Japanese, rather than any text-book chronology, that is the rea l s u b je c t of O s h im a ’ s explorations” .

The period of In The Realm Of The Senses (1936) is barely decipherable, ----- :-------------------------------------------------

and the physical details of the Japan it depicts are conveyed more by Oshima’s concise stylization than by an attempt to recreate an historically accurate look, Japan’s imperialist ambitions are simply suggested in the scene in which the militia, supported by a line of flagwaving women, march past Kichizo as/ he moves in the opposite direction, en route back to Sada.

The social world is briefly evoked by the class structures (Sada, a geisha, reacts violently when her status is questioned by the accusation that she is a whore), by the hierarchical framework that defines women as waiting on the pleasure of their men, and by the austere nature of the dwellings, built on squares with their stringent formality and their suggestion of enclosure (cha ra cte ristics which have been exploited by Japanese directors with far less radical intentions than Oshima —~ Ozu being an obvious example), A tte n tio n is fo c u s e d a lm o st exclusively on the two lovers and their forbidden relationship. Nevertheless, it is a mistake, I think, to see them singly or together simply as romantic rebels,treading a different path from that which has been strictly laid down for them, Certainly, in their search for pleasure, both ultimately achieve a freedom from the social restraints which oppose them — Kichizo chooses the manner of his death, in search of a final pleasure,

* Cinema Papers (No 10, pp. 106-10).

w h ic h is c le a rly not in a cco rd w ith th e

Joan Micklin Silver’s Bernice Bobs her Hair — unquestionably the best of the shorts — is stunning. Based on a slight but charming short story of F. Scott Fitzgerald, Bernice shows remarkable flair, with witty direction by Micklin Silver and excellent performances by Bud Cort and Shelley Duval (even better than in 3 Women). Colorful, effervescent and above all pacy, Bernice is beautiful proof that Fitzgerald, if treated in the correct manner, can make great cinema.

Of the others, Fassbinder’s Chine­ sisches Roulette (Chinese Roulette) is a very minor work. The camerawork is irritating — almost narcissistic — and the final truth game, which promises much, is a very dull affair. Zaklete Rewiry (Hotel Pacific) has a certain charm in its depic­ tion of the downstairs world in a large hotel. Gori, Gori, Moja Zvezda (Burn Ever Bright, My Star), a labored piece of regressive Soviet propoganda, was en­ livened only occasionally by the catching performances of Oleg Tabokov and Yelena Proklova. And Ulli Lommel’s Adolf und Marlene, a silly parody of Adolf Hitler, was a late entry that proved not late enough. .

Scott Murray

The lovers — Sada, when she was still the maid, and her master, Kichizo. L’Empire des Sens. '

conventional nobility of the hara-kiri or the kamikaze; Sada finally acquires the penis she has treasured throughout.

However, Oshima’s insight demands a m ore c a u tio u s re s p o n s e , his characterization and his imagery creating a complex tension which invalidates any simple response to his film.

Both Sada and Kichizo are, for all their individuality and despite their selfimposed isolation from it, a part of the world in which they exist— their motiva­ tions and their actions suggesting an enormously complicated strain between personality and desire. Their drive for pleasure, for its own sake and the equality of their sexual relationship, contravenes the sexual and social taboos on which the society to which they belong is structured (the censors’ wrath denotes'the continuing relevance of Oshima’s observations), but must adopt its identity from the very existence of those taboos. The past constantly lays its shadow on the present.

Sada’s constant insecurity, one aspect of her drive to possess Kichizo and his sex, is born of her place in a socially inferior class — a place her a ctions have su bo rd ina ted . It is significant that she makes use of a knife to threaten the geisha who challenges

her social position, and then again to assert her possession of Kichizo, on both occasions defending what she sees as her contested security. The motif of the knife, and Sada’s use of it, thus enable Oshima to imply that her deepest drives are constantly interwoven with her social identity.

Similarly, Kichizo’s role as Sada’s lover (somehow the term seems no longer appropriate) also carries with it the social identity of adulterer, an identity which is condoned only as long as it remains a secret. The question of personal honor is dependent upon a public face, a point made explicitly by the elderly principal, who Sada visits, when he says of their relationship, “ If this were known, I’d have to kill myself.”

Sada and Kichizo’s retreat to the country to continue their affair inevitably makes public Kichizo’s shame, and though this is implied by the film rather than directly observed, the point con­ cerning Kichizo’s consciousness of his position is clear. The maid who brings word of the telephone call from his wife interrupts his shaving— he cutsTiimself, then, in his only outburst of violence, shatters the window through which the maid delivers the message.

This, combined with the threat of the knife wielded by a jealous Sada against him, again carrying weight of estab­ lished social meaning because of her use of it, serves to remind Kichizo of his obligations,if he is to sustain his honor — an honor which has its source in con­ vention, rather than in any personally developed need. Thus his eventual sub­ mission to death, an intended consum­ mation of his pleasure it is nonetheless in line with what he knows would be expected of him, is lent an extra dimension.

Oshima’s images are carefully con­ structed to visually convey this tension between Sada and Kichizo’s quest for pleasure and the right order whose stability is dependent upon the elimina­ tion of such individuality. Against a recurrent eye-level, symmetrical framing of the images (especially of those which present, portrait-like the scenes of copulation), he places images whose divergent angles and off-centre framing (again, often of copulation scenes, and also of the buildings through diagonal compositions which undermine the basic squares) set up an ‘argument’ in the form itself.

The absence of a resolution to that ‘argument’ is expressed as much by the almost symmetrical overhead shot of the prone figures of Sada and Kichizo, which ends the film, as it is by the qualifications we are directed to bring to the lovers’ victories.

Tom Ryan

Cinema Papers, October — 137

THE DIRECTOR AS ACTOR

Do you enjoy acting?

Yes, within limits. I think of myself as a director.

Does the director Huston watch the actor Huston?

I try not to, but I probably do. I saw myself in the rushes today and I wasn’t very good; but then I was looking at the screen as a director.

Many years ago you shot “ Asphalt Jungle” and “ The Red Badge of Courage” in these soundstages at MGM. How much has filmmaking changed over’these years?

W ell, it is still the same; techniques have improved, but that is of little importance. The studio system ended with the war, when the studios lost their theatres, lost their monopoly. Being a liberal at that time I was very much for it — not so much now, though.

The studios had to fill their theatres then, and many films were made. When they lost them it became quite different and the agents came in.

You started as a w riter at Warner Brothers, before directing your first film, “ The Maltese Falcon”.

W h a t m ad e you m ak e th e transition from w riter to director?

Directing had always been in the back of my mind. It was a natural thing to go from writing to directing.

I had written short stories, and I came to Hollywood exclusively to write for the screen. Then, after a while, I had it put into my contract that I was to direct my first film within a certain period.

Did you feel the scripts you wrote could have been rendered onto the screen in a better way?

Yes, I was not very happy with many of the films. Most of the directors at that time came out of the editorial department. There were a few cameramen, but they were mostly cutters. The only writer to become a director before me was Preston Sturges — unless you include Chaplin.

Was your father a big influence?

The following interview, conducted by Urs Egger, took place in a soundstage at Metro-Goldwvn-Mayer Studios in Culver City, California. John Huston was acting in a film there, “ Winter K ills” , an independent production directed by W illiam Richer! and also starring Jeff Bridges, Toshiro M ifune and Elizabeth Taylor. With H uston on the set was Gladys H ill, his collaborator and screenwriter for many years. At one point she took part in the interview. It was H uston’s last week of shooting, and a few days after the interview the two flew to Ireland and Italy to start pre-production on their next film , “ Across The River And Into The Trees” , w h ic h is scheduled to start film ing in Italy later this year.

Well, I learned a good deal about direction from seeing him act — the way he would approach a scene.

Was he already in films when you started at Warners?

Yes, but I learnt more from seeing him work in the theatre than at Warners. I would attend rehearsals of plays he was doing and I’d see what he would do with a scene. It was mostly his creation of a role, to see how he went at it, that was a lead into direction. There weren’t many great film directors whom he worked with at the time.

H ow d © you fe e l existentialism now?

about

I think I am existential in my views of things. I know Sartre and I worked with him. I think he made an enormous contribution. He’s out of vogue now though, isn’t he?

How does existentialism relate to your film, “ The Bible”?

Well, I look at the Bible as a collection of myths and legends, not from a religious standpoint at all.

How did the producer, Din© de Laiirentiis, feel about that?

In your very first film you worked with Mm „ ..

He just wanted a very successful film. I don’t think it was meant to be the word of God.

Oh, he just walked in. It was a good luck appearance, a token. He came into a room, took the furniture to pieces, broke a lamp and died.

The only true part that I ever d irected him in was in The Treasure of the Sierra M adre.

European critics, especially the French, have said that you are more interested in the pursuit of your heroes towards a goal rather than in the goal itself. It is the game, not the gain . . .

THE BIBLE AND EXISTENTIALISM

What makes you decide to do a certain film?

My interest in the material — just how fascinating it is. I’m not trying to propagate an idea or anything of that sort.

So when you did Jean-Paul Sartre’s ‘No Exit* on the stage, it was because that particular piece interested you, rather than the existentialism itself?

Yes, exactly.

It has been said to me so many times that I tend to believe it. But as I said earlier, I don’t look for certain themes. I don’t even read with the intention of finding material, I just read out of interest.

One day something might become a film. And unless there is a challenge in it, unless there is an element of e x p e rim e n t in it, I am not profoundly interested. But there are also those films I do for money, and not for any other reason.

THE SCREENPLAY

M iss H ill, you w ro te m any screenplays w ith M r Huston,

including “ Reflections in a Golden Eye”, “Fat City”, “The Man Who Would Be King”. How do the two of you work together?

Hill: If we are adapting a novel, I will first break the novel down, scene by scene. I then memorize the book, so when John and I are discussing a scene, action or sequence, I can say, “Remember, John, such and such happened” . He may say “Where is it?” and then I find it in the book and read it to him.

From there we talk about it and then I write it. I put in the description and the dialogue. Then I take it to Mr Huston to read. And if it has to be redone, it’s redone and we discuss it again. Then, Mr Huston will, if he wishes, change the dialogue.

It’s difficult to describe, because there is no formula. It’s so dull to say, but writing is rewriting. And sometimes you are so close to it but you can’t see what you’re doing.

Then one of you will set if in perspective . . .

Hill: Huston always, he is the maestro. But often nothing gets changed. After all these years of working together we think quite similarly.

How specific is the script? As M r Huston.is also the director, does it specify shots or angles?

Hill: Yes, but only generally. We might write “camera moves back”, but we don’t give any unnecessary camera directions. The screenplay we do is the shooting script, but when Mr Huston sets up a shot, he does it the way he wishes.

A novel is something descriptive where many things happen within people’s minds — memories and so on. How do you transfer these thoughts into a screenplay.

Hill: That’s not an easy question to answer. Sometimes you let a person say what she or he has been thinking about; in another case you might have to select a thought and express it in words. I suppose in the old days people used flashbacks to show their characters’ memories.

Each story has its own approach.

Huston: The dialogue and the scene itself should explain their thoughts. It’s up to the writer to visualize the underlying thought of Cinema Papers, October — 139

JOHN HUSTON

the scene. You try to explain through the behavior and the actions of people what their thoughts are.

I know a Bergman script was published, and he does go into the subconscious, and writes about the thoughts that are going through the minds of people. But Fve never had an occasion to do that, except where the thought is at variance with the action.

im p o rtan t to keep th e rig h t atmosphere. When you pan the camera you are making the space between important, and that implies suspense of some kind, or that something is happening out there that is worth my glimpsing as I go to you. Every time the camera moves there should be a real purpose to it.

As for going closer, if Gladys says something very im portant and confidential, I find myself leaning forward {He leans forward, and puts one hand to his ear like a person who has trouble hearing), so THE PHYSIOLOGY OF THE the camera will lean forward, and CAMERA so on. The camera is your mind and John Huston’s controversial The Med Badge John Huston sits between Humphrey Bogart your emotion. of Courage, with Audie Murphy (right). and his father Walter Huston.

Now you shoot up at something, you aggrandize it — that’s from In terms of style, you don’t pan being a child looking up at your your camera a lot, you jnst c u t Is parents or looking up at a heroic there a special reason for this? sculpture. By the same token, you wouldn’t shoot something like a Huston: A word that appears a lot comedy scene, looking up at in scripts is “masterscene”, which Charlie Chaplin or Buster Keaton. means to shoot the whole scene in You would see them at eye-level, if one shot with the camera in a fixed not looking down on them a bit. position. I never shoot a master scene and I think that word should So it’s psychology turned into be stricken from the vocabulary of behavior . . . films. I never do it, unless that’s the Exactly. way the scene is going to be in the film. After the first set-up I always know what the next shot is going to Do you have your shots figured out when you go onto the set? be: the size, how close, and so on.

I think the camera has many I usually have an idea what the things in common with our scene is going to be. I then bring the physiology. You look from one point to another, now look back to actors onto the set but I don’t tell me! {! look over to the door o f the them anything, I just say: “Play the wardrobe trailer we are sitting in, scene!” Usually they come around then back to him). Do it again. Do it to doing exactly what I had hoped again. Well, as a rule, when you they would do, but sometimes they know what’s over there, you know don’t and do it better than what I what the intervening space is. You had planned. But, as I said, the blink. You exclude the space in moment the first shot is made the between. And that’s a cut! {Laughs). rest is just following out the slack.

It would be dull and boring to our minds to take everything in all the Thai would Imply that the most Humphrey Bogart and Walter Huston in The Treasure of the Sierra Madre. way over here. I would see out there important part, as far as the {Huston looks at the wall)and so on, acting Is concerned, Is the casting and I don’t want to do that. I talk to Gladys {He turns his head toward Of course it is. If you have to her) and then I talk to you. {He turns his head towards me). And direct actors a lot, in my instance at Gladys again. And you. So that I am least, it means they aren’t all that cutting constantly. The size of a good, and you have to conceal their c h a r a c te r on th e s c re e n is weaknesses. Very often I use people determined not by the technique, who have never been before a but by distance. For instance, we camera, and they can be wonderful. w o u ld not be h av in g th is Just being professional doesn’t conversation and talking as we are make someone an actor, and being if I was standing over by the door. an actor doesn’t necessarily mean {He points to a door on the wall o f that the artist is professional. the set, about 40 metres away). I see Gladys, she is listening, and I am “ The African Queen” was enor­ not talking to her, but if I would be mously funny. Did that tuna out talking to her in this way, I would through casting, ©r was it in the probably get a little bit closer to her hook? even than I am {He frames her in a loose waist shot).

There was an element of humor in On the other hand, I would never the book though I don’t think it was tell a girl that I was in love with her as funny as the film. Of course they from the other side of the stage {He worked beautifully together; they points out to the far end o f the complemented each other and sound stage), unless I was calling to became the film. say goodbye or something of that kind.

There are certain kinds of It was also quite different front Sean Connery, as Dravot, and Michael conversation with a distance, and what Humphrey Bogart had done George C. Scott as Abraham in The Bible.

Caine, as Carneham, in Huston’s reworking the size on the screen is very before . . . of Kipling, The Man Who Would Be King.

140 — Cinema Papers, October

JOHN HUSTON

Yes, and he found the character. I remember him saying to me: “For God’s sake, John, don’t let me get out of it!” I was sure this was actually one part of Bogart, and it took him a little time getting into it — but he found it.

Another humorous film you made with Bogart was “ Beat the Devil” It was a bit of a travesty — we were making fun of ourselves.

Another actor in Beat the Devil was Peter Lorre. He was an extraordinary actor. He was always so much better on the screen than you imagined he’d been when you saw him do it. He did very subtle things and I have a great respect for him as an artist.

You tre a t your heroes very sympathetically, but often in a very detached way . . .

The heroes themselves have that same detachment when they are confronted with their final destiny.

They are alone there and they look at it objectively without undue sympathy for themselves or too great an emotion, but a kind of overall sense of the fitness of what’s happening to them. They rise to the occasion and they become a little bit greater than themselves, even. And that’s what makes them heroes.

Can heroes mot fail?

They always do, at least in my films.

Do you think films have an influence?

On the set of TM® Misfits. Clockwise from Marilyn Monroe are Clark Gable, John Huston, Arthur Miller, Eli Wallach, Frank Taylor and Montgomery Clift. (Still by Elliot Erwitt and from Marilyn by Norman Mailer.)

In a superficial sense, of course.

Look at the enormous success of Roots, which I thought was very bad artistically. About 80 million people saw the last episode and that’s the biggest audience that has ever seen anything. Certainly it has a moral, ethical and political significance.

B ut isn’t it p erh ap s ju s t a manifestation of a change that has already happened?

Undoubtedly it’s timely. Roots is not introducing a new idea, and how deep it goes is something else. If it effects any psychological change in the attitudes of the very people that watch it, well . . . but I’m sure it doesn’t.

Do you think it could?

I doubt it.

On the set of The Mackintosh Man — Huston with Paul Newman.

Huston's return to form, Fat City. Stacey Keatch as the battler (right).

So film is not really p o litic al. . .

Concluded on P. 185 Cinema Papers, October — 141

W

Q

'®

WËMËÊÈÈÊÊÊÈ

HIMPniODICUS - AHISTORICALSURVB Basil Gilbert This is the first of a series of four articles surveying the history of film periodicals in the U.S., Britain, Europe and Australia, from 1900 until the present day. The emphasis is on film publications dealing with the history, sociology and aesthetics of the film medium, with little regard for amateur filmmaking journals, trade publications, or fan magazines.

Film Periodicals (1930-1971) for the main English-language periodicals.

The AFI has also incorporated microfilm facilities into their library and these include the British Film Institute’s Film Title Index 1908-1974, from which a comprehensive film bibliography can be printed, and the BFI’s Per­ sonality and General Subject Index, 1935-1974, for articles on filmmakers, stars and production personnel.

In Australia, a number of specialized libraries PART I: THE UNITED STATES offer a wide range of film periodical literature ■■■■■■■■■ for study. A comprehensive list of film periodicals held in the National Library, American Cinematographer, the journal of the Canberra, was published last year by the American Society of Cinematographers, was Australian Film Institute, and this list, Film established in 1920 and it soon commanded a Periodicals in the National Library o f Australia, reading public much wider than its professional catalogues the 604 film periodicals — ranging cameramen members. from Melbourne’s Dandenong High Film Society For the film student its value lies in revealing Newsletter to Moscow’s authoritative Iskussto the ingenuity and skills of the cameramen, set Kino — that are available for study purposes. designers and special-effects men in the creation A second list, Master Index o f Current Inter­ of technically-complex films such as The national Film Periodical Holdings in Australian Towering Inferno, King Kong or Star Wars.

Specialist Libraries, has been issued by the AFI Frequently a whole issue is devoted to an as a reprint of the appendix to its Dawson individual film. .

Report; this list gives an indication of the In interviews with members of the society, a distribution of film periodical literature in regular feature of the magazine, the creative role libraries such as the National Library in of the cameraman is emphasized. This is a Canberra, the State Film Centre, George Lugg healthy corrective to a fashionable auteur theory and AFI libraries in Melbourne, and the which places creativity exclusively in the hands recently-established Film and Television School of the director.

Library in Sydney.

Early issues of American Cinematographer are Access to this material has been greatly most useful in tracing the evolution of film facilitated by the National Library in Canberra cameras and allied equipment, particularly and the AFI in Melbourne both subscribing to during the exciting years of the transition from the International Federation of Film Archives silent to sound production.

(FIAF) Periodical Index Project. This card index is updated weekly, and later published in Experimental Cinema, one of the early book form as the International Index to Film polemical film journals, appeared in 1930 but Periodicals. It has concerned itself with 97 inter­ ceased publication in 1934. These were the years nationally-recognized film periodicals from 24 of the Great Depression in the U.S., and the countries since 1972. For the earlier years, one journal’s editors, David Platt and Lewis Jacobs, can consult Linda Batty’s Retrospective Index to declared that the journal had a “proletarian” basis, and that it sought to establish the Basil Gilbert is a lecturer in cinema studies at Melbourne “ideological and organizational foundations of an University and has done post-graduate work in film history American working-class cinema”. The journal is and production.

142 — Cinema Papers, October

valuable for its concentration on the work of early Russian directors: Eisenstein’s articles on “The Cinematographic Principle and Japanese Culture”, “The Principles of Film Form” and Que Viva Mexico! ; Pudovkin’s writings on film direction and scenario writing; and the dis­ cussions on the work of Dziga Vertov. This rare journal has recently been reprinted by the Amo Press, New York, as a single volume.

Hollywood Quarterly appeared immediately after World War 2, became Quarterly o f Film, Radio and Television in 1951, and continues today as Film Quarterly. This important journal was jointly sponsored by the University of C alifornia and The Hollywood W riters’ Mobilization, a community service agency of “writers, educators, producers, actors, directors and technicians concerned with co-operative research and production in the fields of radio, motion pictures and television”.

According to the editors, Hollywood Quarterly was aimed at three groups: workers in the industry; scholars and students of the arts and social sciences; and “members of the general public whose interest goes beyond the passive receptivity of the darkened theater or the halfheard program to a recognition that film and radio perform a creative and social function which demands public consideration”. These high ideals were matched by the quality and range of the contributions: Hans Richter looking at the avant-garde film; Henri Langois on the Cinematheque Française; Eric Goldschmidt on the development of Australian films.

The journal did not carry illustrations but contained impressive film and book reviews and critical bibliographies. First edition single copies are rare in Australia, but several libraries carry the reprint edition.

Films in Review began as the National Board o f Review Magazine, which in turn was an amalgam of three earlier journals, Exceptional Photoplays (1920-25), Film Progress (1917-26) and Photoplay Guide to Better Pictures (1924-26). The National Board of Review was a watchdog organization set up in 1909 to “represent the interests of the motion picture

FILM PERIODICALS

public” by reviewing and classifying films.

A remarkable feature of Films in Review is its long biographical career studies of Hollywood stars, especially women (ratio to male stars is 2:1). This journal has been called “a superior fan magazine . . . with intriguing correspondence columns” (Peter Cowie) but the biographical information it contains is rarely obtainable else­ where. The journal also prints short reviews of current films and film literature, and is illustrated.

When Variety first appeared on newsstands in 1905 it called itself “a variety paper for variety people” and this newspaper-format weekly soon became compulsory reading for those connected with the production side of the American film industry. In a recent interview, Billy Wilder said that he and I. A. L. Diamond begin each creative writing session by reading Variety and Hollywood Reporter.

Despite its quaint language (“black man at WPTG does a KKA blurb . . . Star Wars only anchor among sleepers and flops”), Variety's film reviews are trenchant and unbiased, and are useful indicators of the tastes of the time. The AFI in Melbourne is to acquire a full run of Variety on 16mm microfilm for study purposes.

Film Culture, begun by Jonas Mekas in the mid-1950s, is essential reading for the student of independent cinema. Mekas was responsible for the fo rm atio n of the New Y o rk -b ased Filmmakers Co-operative in 1962 and is a leading underground filmmaker (Grand Street 1953; Tlse Secret Passions of Salvador Dali 1961, etc.). The early issues of Film Culture are erudite and conventional, featuring lengthy articles by scholarly writers such as Kracauer, Leyda and Arnheim. By the ’60s this scholarly tone had changed. Stan Brakhage’s contributions, such as his typographically unreadable “Script for Film with Actor”, and pieces like Parker

Tyler’s “Soundtrack for a Film Poem ending with a Close-up of a Human Navel” gave an avant-garde note and heralded a neo-Dada per­ missiveness.

The recent special issue, “A Guide To Independent Film and Video” (no. 62, 1976), is a welcome addition to film literature.

Film Facts covers all feature films released in the U.S. in a similar manner to the Monthly Film Bulletin in Britain. Both journals provide full credits for the films under review, followed by a brief synopsis of the plot and a critical Film Comment, which began as Vision in evaluation.

1962, has survived several financial crises and However, Film Facts takes its ‘critiques’ not has emerged as one of the leading American film from its own team of writers but from 17 daily magazines. Published by The Film Society of and weekly reviews that have appeared in U.S. Lincoln Center, New York, it has a high standard newspapers and popular journals. Thus one finds of graphic design in the arrangement and extracts from reviews which have appeared in presentation of visual material. Its contributors The Los Angeles Times, The New Yorker, include some of the world’s leading film critics: Time, The Village Voice, Cue Magazine and notably, Raymond Durgnat, Richard Roud, so on. In recent years the selected review Andrew Sarris and Robin Wood. extracts have been preceded by an additional The scope of the reviews and articles is inter­ summary of nationwide opinion, followed by a national and the tone conservative in comparison “critical consensus” (eg. “five favorable, six with some of the younger, more radical mixed, five negative”). Film Facts was for a magazines. Last year, the journal issued a useful while published by the American Film Institute, cumulative contents list of back issues (Jan/Feb but in 1972 was taken over by the Cinema 1976).

Division of the U niversity of Southern California. The current issues are several years When the Beverly Hills firm of Spectator in arrears.

International introduced Cinema in 1963 it was more an experiment in graphic design than a During the ’60s there was a great upsurge in forum for argument and discussion. Many of the new film periodicals in the U.S. One of the first covers and the photographs were overtly sexist in of the new breed of scholarly publications was their exploitation of the female face and figure, Cinema Journal which was launched with a but gradually the staff of Cinema — “photo­ double-number in Winter 1961/62. graphers, art directors, writers and illustrators” Cinema Journal is perhaps the most academic — put their talents to better use. Today the of current American film journals. Its con­ photographs and graphics are well integrated tributors are neither filmmakers nor professional with lengthy, intelligent texts. A good example is critics; they are selected from university Gerald Peary’s captivating study of Dorothy professors, candidates for doctorates and out­ Arzner (The Bride Wore Red) in issue 34, 1974. standing students and teachers from American Concluded on P. 187

Current Periodicals Consulted:

ACTION

CINEMA (BEVERLY HILLS)

Directors’ Guild of America, 7950 Sunset Boulevard, Hollywood, CA 90046.

Bi-monthly, $15 p.a.

Circulation: 8,200.

Indexed: Int Ind Film Per.

Spectator International Inc., 9667 Wilshire Boulevard, Beverly Hills, CA 90212. $5 p.a.

Indexed: Int. Ind. Film Per., Retrospective Ind., Hum. Ind.

AMERICAN CINEMATOGRAPHER

CINEMA JOURNAL

ASC Holding Corporation, 1782 North Orange Drive, Los Angeles, CA 90028.

Monthly, $9 p.a.

Indexed: Int. Ind. Film Per., Chemical Abstracts.

Society for Cinema Studies, c/o Gerald Noxon, Dept. RadioTV-Film, Temple University, Philadelphia, PA 19122.

2/yr, $4 p.a. Circulation: 200.

Indexed: Int. Ind. Film Per., Retrospective Ind.

A M E R IC A N FILM American Film Institute, The John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts, Washington, DC 20566.

Monthly, except for combined Dec/Jan and July/Aug issues. $15 p.a.

Indexed: Int. Ind. Film Per. (also as Dialogue on Film).

j

FILMC u MMENI Film Society of Lincoln Center, 1865 Broadway, New York, NY 10023.

Bi-monthly, $9 p.a.

Circulation: 10,000.

Indexed: Int. Ind. Film Per., Retrospective Ind., Hum. Ind.

CINEASTE

FILM CRITIC

333 Sixth Avenue, New York, NY 10014.

Quarterly, $4 p.a.

Circulation: 4,500.

Indexed: Int. Ind. Film Per., Retrospective Ind.

American Federation of Film Societies, 333 Avenue of the Americas, New York, NY 10014.

Bi-monthly, $5 p.a.

Indexed: Int. Ind. Film Per.

CINEFÄNTÄSTIQUE

Film Culture Non-Profit Corporation, Box 1499, G.P.O. New York, NY 10001.

Quarterly, $4 p.a.

FILM CULTURE

P.O. Box 270, Oak Park, IL 60303.

Quarterly, $8 p.a.

Indexed: Int. Ind. Film Per., Retrospective Ind., Art Index

_

- ................................... - —

-

-

and Canadian universities. Chapters of forth­ coming books are sometimes floated as trial balloons in its pages.

Peter H arcourt’s valuable Six European Directors: Essays in the Meaning o f Film Style (Penguin, 1974), for example, had drafts of several of its chapters in Cinema Journal and Film Quarterly. There are no illustrations or film reviews in Cinema Journal, but the articles are well documented and the book reviews are notable for a high standard of critical appraisal.

FILM FACTS

JUMP CUT

The Division of Cinema, University of Southern California, Box 69610, West Station, Los Angeles, CA 90069.

Bi-monthly, $40 p.a.

Indexed: Int. Ind. Film Per.

Jump Cut Associates, Box 865 Berkeley, CA 94701.

Bi-monthly, $3 p.a.

Circulation. 1,000.

Indexed: Int. Ind. Film Per., Alternative Press Index.

FILM HERITAGE

UTERATURE/FILM QUARTERLY

University of Dayton, Dayton, OH 45431.

Quarterly, $3 p.a.

Indexed: Int. Ind. Film Per., Retrospective Ind., Film Lit. Ind., Multi-Media Rev. Ind.

Salisbury State College, Salisbury, MD 21801.

Quarterly, $6 p.a.

Circulation: 1,000.

Indexed: Int. Ind. Film Per., Modern Language Abstracts.

FILM QUARTERLY

TAKE ONE-

University of California Press, Berkeley, CA 94720.

Quarterly, $6 p.a. Circulation 8,500.

Indexed:7nf. Ind. Film Per., Retrospective Ind., Art Index, Hum. Ind.

Unicorn Publishing Corporation, Box 1778, Station B, Montreal H38 3L3, Quebec, Canada.

Bi-monthly, $5 Can. for 12 nos.

Circulation: 25,000.

Indexed: Int. Ind. Film Per., Retrospective Ind., Multi-Media Rev. Ind.

FILMS IN REVIEW National Board of Review of Motion Pictures Inc., 210 East 68th Street, New York, NY 10021.

Monthly (Oct-May), bi-monthly (June/July; Aug/Sept), $10.50 p.a.

Circulation: 6,400.

Indexed: Int. Ind. Film Per., Retrospective Ind., Art Index.

JOURNAL OF POPULAR FILM Center for the Study of Popular Culture, Bowling Green State University, 101 University Hall, Bowling Green, ■ OH 43403.

Quarterly, $5 p.a.

Circulation: 1,800.

Indexed: Int. Ind. Film Per., Film Literature Index, Historical Abstracts, American History and Life.

VARIETY Variety Inc., 154 West 46th Street, New York, NY 10036.

Weekly, $25 p.a.

Indexed: Int. Ind. Film Per., Music Index.

i

ij

VELVET LIGHT TRAP Old Hope Schoolhouse, Cottage Grove, Wisconsin 53527.

Quarterly, $4 p.a.

Circulation: 3,000.

Indexed: Int. Ind. Film Per.

I

Abbreviations used: Int. Ind. Film Per.: International Index to Film Periodicals; Retrospective Ind.: Retrospective Index to Film Periodicals; Hum. Ind.: Humanities Index; Film Lit. Ind.: Film Literature Index; Multi-Media Rev. Ind.: Multi-Media Reviews Index.

1

Cinema Papers, October — 143

IN T E R N A T IO N A L

PRODUCTION ROUND-UP

Verina Glaessner

Sam Fuller's project The Big Red On® has been delayed again, and is now expected to roll this October. The film will star Lee Marvin as a sergeant in the First U.S. Infantry, known as the Big Red One, and Peter Bogdanovich will appear as a m em ber of the p la to o n . P eter Bogdanovich is producing for Lorimar.

Massive Superman budget and logistic contortions will yield simultaneously the film and the inevitable Superman II. This was done previously by the producers with The Three Musketeers and The Four Musketeers.

Jeannot Szwarc, whose last film was Bug for William Castle, has replaced John Hancock on the Jaws sequel, Jaws II, for Universal. The film stars Roy Scheider, Lorraine Gary and Murray Hamilton.

Brian de Palma, after his dazzling assault on teenage mores in Carrie, turns to a thriller, The Fury, which he is directing for 20th Century-Fox. It stars Kirk Douglas, John Cassavetes and Carrie Snodgrass.

Robert Mulligan and Alan J, Pakula are both involved in productions. Mulligan’s film is Blood Brothers which was shot in New York and Los Angeles (for Warners); Pakula’s the Chartoff-Winkler production Comes A Horseman from a script by Dennis Clark. The film centres on one of the last great cattle kings and stars Jane Fonda ?and James Caan.

John Milius and Paul Schrader are both directing from their own scripts. Big Wednesday is Milius’ first film since The Wind and The Lion. The film is being shot in El Paso and stars Jan-Michael Vincent.

Paul Schrader’s Blue Collar with Richard Pryor, Harvey Keitel and Yaphet Kotto is on location in Detroit.

Michael Cimino, whose first feature was the Eastwood project Thunderbolt and Lightfoot, has shot The Deer Hunter with Robert de Niro for EMI. The film is one of EMI’s slightly controversial U.S. investment packages.

Jack Nicholson’s first film as a director since Drive He Said is Goin’ South, which he is filming in Durango. Nicholson also stars in the film.

Warren Beatty is directing Heaven Can Wait from an Elaine May script. Beatty stars with Jack Warden, Julie Christie, James Mason and Dyan Cannon. The film is being made for Paramount.

Other new film s include: John Avildsen’s Slow Dancing in the Big City (United Artists), Mel Brooks’ High Anxiety (20th Century), and Norman Jewison’s F.I.S.T., which stars Sylvester Stallone.

Gene Corman is executive producer on the latter and the script was co-written by Joe Esztehas and Stallone.

Barbara Peters, highly rated in some quarters as a feminist director in the Stephanie Rothman mold, replaces Rothman on Starhops, which Rothman herself scripted (First American Films).

Robert Kaylor, whose memorable semi­ documentary on the roller derby is little seen, is shooting For More Than Money, a feature for Hawkeye Films.

Karen Arthur, whose Legacy drew much critical praise, is making a film with Lee Grant and Carol Kane. Called Clouds, it is produced by Diana Young.

Roger Corman is producing Steve .

Carver’s The Moon Beam Rider for Universal, with David Carradine and Brenda Vaccaro.

Gus Trikonis, who has proved himself in a number of Z-budgeted features, is shooting Cry Demon. Michael Crichton’s Coma, with Genevieve Bujold, Michael Douglas, and Richard Widmark, is about

144 — Cinema Papers, October

Director Rainer Werner Fassbinder on location for Despair.

an illegal traffic in human organs for surgical transplant.

In post-production are Daniel Petrie’s film of the Harold Robbins novel The Betsy (United Artists), Karel Reisz’ Dog Soldiers (United Artists) and Robert Moore’s The Cheap Detective, which has a Neil Simon script. It stars Peter Falk and Ann-Margret.

ITALY New projects include Federico Fellini’s Voyage of G. Mastornofor Penthouse, in which Marcello Mastroianni is eager to play the title role, and Alverto Sordi’s An Italian in America. Marco Bellocchio is working with Silvano' Agosti, Sandro Petrallia and Stefano Ruli on The Film Machine, an inquest into the Italian Cinema. The film is produced by R.A.I. and the Hundred Flowers Co-op. Mauro Bolognini’s. Pot Luck (La Saponificatrice di Correggio), about a woman convicted of multiple murder who died in a lunatic asylum, is being shot partly in Bologna and partly in the studio. It stars Shelley Winters and Laura Antonelli.

Sergio Leone is producing Luigi Comencini’s The Cat for Rafran. Sergio Sollima, who will be remembered for a number of key Italian westerns and who had a m ajor su c c e s s w ith the s w a s h b u c k lin g te le v is io n se rie s Sandokan, is making a spin-off, Sandokars — the Tiger of Malatta, which is being shot in the East.

Sergio Corbucci, whose work also includes some memorable contributions to the Italian western, is making Scoop in Milan, one of a string of films he has directed recently.

Giuseppe Squittieri’s new film is Prefetto di Ferro or I Am The Law. Starring Giuliano Gemma, it is about a police commissioner in the last years of Mussolini’s dictatorship who attempts to wipe out the Mafia in Sicily.

Recently, the much esteemed Ermanno Olmi completed L’AShergo degli Zoccoia with a cast of non-professionals. It is about the life of peasants at the end of the last century. Sergio Citti, collaborator on Pasolini’s last few films, recently c o m p le te d C a s o tto fo r Parva Cinematografica.

Walerian Borowczyk is making Within The Convent, a film based on Stendhal’s Promenades, in Rome. It is about the lives of a group of young nuns, and has Borowczyk’s regular actress, Ligia Branice, in the main role. Lu Leone is producing a feminist feature film, I Belong to Me (Donna in Guerra). Francesco Rosi is working on a script for a film about Naples, his first since Hands Over The City.

FRANCE The exiled Chilean director, Miguel Littin, is directing The Recourse to the Method, for which he has collaborated on the script with Regis Debray. From a novel by Alejo Carpentier, the film, about a South American dictator, is set in the years 1900 to 1920.

It stars Alain Cuny, Nelson Villagra, Maria-Adelina Vera and Katy Jurado, and is being shot in Mexico, Paris and Cuba.

Critic Jean-Louis Comolli is making a film about the Paris Commune in 1871 c a lle d The Com m une.

More c o m m e rc ia lly -o rie n ta te d is Andre Cayatte’s For State Reasons, a thriller about arms dealing. Liliana Cavani, meanwhile, has filmed the Wedekind play Lulu, with Romy Schneider in the title role.

Another noveau roman author, Claude Simon, has turned to filmmaking with his The Road To Flanders. Andre Techine is to make a film on the Bronte family with Isabelle Adjani as Emily. Joseph Losey’s new film, Roads of the South (from a screenplay by Jorge Semprun), is now shooting. Philippe Labro is returning to directing with three films: Le Passage de Lido; Still Burning Embers (based on his own novel on the Algerian war); and one based on an as yet unpublished novel.

BR3TAIN The trend for remakes is under way: Don Sharp is directing The Four Feathers, starring Beau Bridges, Robert Powell, Jane Seymour and Simon Ward and the Peter Sellers’ Prisoner of Zenda is in the offing. Michael Winner is re­ making Howard Hawks’ 1946 version of Chandler’s The Big Sleep. Winner has cast Robert Mitchum as Marlowe and James Stewart as General Sternwood.

The film is being produced by ITC.

Blood R@latlv@s. Director Claude Chabrol (right), Donald Sutherland and Laurent Malet.

Yet another remake is Paul Morrissey’s comedy version of Hound of the Baskerviiles, which is co-scripted by and also stars, Peter Cook and Dudley Moore.

The project sounds like Morrissey’s personal homage to the Carry On series.

Marlon Brando stars in Terence Young’s Opium which will be shot in the East, in a location based on Hong Kong.

The Polish director Jerzy Skolimowski, whose last film in Britain was Deep End, has shot The Shout in Devon. Based on a short story by Robert Graves about a mental asylum inmate who believes he can kill with a shout, the film is produced

by Jerem y Thomas (whose firs t production was Mad Dog). It is a Recorded Picture Company production for Rank and the NFFC. The cast includes Alan Bates, in the title role, Susannah York, John Hurt, Robert Stephens and ice skating champion Tim Curry.

P eter B ro o k ’ s M e e tin g s w i t h Remarkable Men returned to the studio after seven weeks on location in Afghanistan. The film is co-directed with Jeanne de Salzmann and marks Terence Stamp’s return to acting. Jack Gold has completed The Medusa Touch, a thriller with sci-fi overtones, for Elliott Castner, who has announced he has acquired the rights to Golden Girl, the Peter Lear novel about the p s y c h o l o gi c a l manipulation of a young girl competing in the 1980 Olympics.

Mark Forstater, whose Monty Python films have had considerable success, is planning a film on New Wave or Punk Rock provisionally entitled Punk Rules O.K.? Harry Bromley Davenport has written the screenplay.

HONG KONG King Hu is shooting two films back to back on location in Korea: Legend in the Mountains and Raining in the Mountains, both deal with aspects of Buddhism: The first is a ghost story, the second about the relation of power and Buddhism.

It appears studio reluctance about finance has been overcome and that Li Han-hsiang (of The Last Tempest) will be able to make his version of the classic novel Dream of the Red Chamber for Shaw Brothers. Anne Hui, a London Film School-trained television director, is to make her first feature with Tang Shushuen producing.

GENERAL Toho are to remake H.G. Wells’ The Time Machine in association with Georrge Pal who directed the original. Nagisa Oshima is planning a ghost story, his first film since The Empire of the Senses.

Claude Chabrol is directing Blood Relatives from the Ed MacBain novel, as a British-Canadian co-production in Canada. The film stars Donald Sutherland and Stephane Audran and is being produced by Denis Heroux, Eugene Lepicier and Michael Klinger.

David Cronenburg is to start work on The Brood for Dick Schouten. Billy Wilder has filmed Fedora in Corfu, Greece, Munich and Paris. An NF Geria II film, it has a Wilder, I.A.L. Diamond script from the Tom Tyron novel Crowned Heads.

Also in Germany, Curt Raab and Udo Keir appear in Belcanto, which is directed

by Robert van Acherns from the Heinrich Mann novel Empfang bei der Welt. And Fassbinder’s latest film, the $2,000,000 Despair (based on the novel by Nabokov), has been completed. It stars Dirk Bogarde as the chocolate manufacturer.

K O D A K (A ustralasia) P T Y . L T D .

M o tio n P ic tu re & A u d io v isu al M a rk e ts D ivision

VOLUME 3 AVAILABLE NOW BOUND VOLUMES ORDER VOLUME 3 NOW! (numbers 9-12) 1976,-1977 Handsomely bound in black with gold embossed lettering.

Each Volume contains 400 lavishly illustrated pages of ® Exclusive interviews with producers, directors, actors and technicians. ® Valuable historical material on Australian film production. ® Film and book reviews. ® Production surveys and reports from the sets of local and international production.

• Box Office reports and guides to film producers and investors.

EASY BINDER Cinema Papers is pleased to announce that a loose binder is now available in black with gold embossed lettering.

Individual numbers can be added to the binder independently — or detached if desired. This new binder will accommodate 12 copies (3 years).

Please send me D copies of C i n e m a P a p e r s ' easy binder at $10 per copy.

Enclosed cheque/postal order for $-----------(available Australia only)

BINDING SERVICE Please have the enclosed copies bound in black with gold embossed lettering at $13 per volume.

Enclosed cheque/postal order for $-----------(available Australia only) ADDRESS. Postcode Total amount enclosed NOTE: Remittances in Australian dollars only.

PLEASE NOTE BOUND VOLUMES OF

Cinema Papers Pty. Ltd. 143 Therry St., Melbourne, Victoria, '.Australia 3000.

numbers 1-4 (Volume 1land numbers 5-8 (Volume 2)

ARE NOW UNAVAILABLE

(New Zealand, Niugini): Surface — SA11.20; air — SA19.20.

Zone 2 (Malaysia. Singapore. Fiji, Indonesia etc): Surface — SA11.20: air — SA22.00. Zone 3 (Hong Kong. India, Japan.

Philippines, China etc): Surface — SA11.20; air — SA24.80.

Zone 4 (North America, Middle East): S u rfa c e — SA11.20: air

0

NAME.

TO PLACE AN ORDER FILL IN THE FORM

(A) Subscriptions and gift subscriptions (per year). Zone 1

BOUND VOLUMES Please send me D copies of Volume 3 (numbers 9-12) at $21 per volume.

Enclosed cheque/postal order for $_______ (for overseas rates see below)

STRICTLY LIMITED EDITION ORDER NOW!

OVERSEAS RATES (including postage)

ORDER FORM

EASY BINDER

— SA27.60. Zone 5 (U.K.. Europe. Africa. South America): Surface — $A11.20; air — SA29.00.

(B) Bound Volumes (per volume). Zone 1: Surface — SA24.20; air — SA27.00. Zone 2: Surface — SA24.00; air — SA29.00. Zone 3: Surface — SA24.40; air — SA30.80. Zone 4: Surface — SA24.80; air — SA34.40. Zone 5: Surface — SA24.80; air — SA36.20.

(C) Back issues. To the price of each copy add the following:

Surface (all zones) — $A0.80. Air: Zone 1 — SA2.80; Zone 2 — SA3.50; Zone 3 — SA4.20; Zone 4 — SA4.90; Zone 5 — SA5.25.

NB (1) All remittances in Australian dollars only.

(2 )-Surface Air Lifted available to U.K., German Federal Republic, Greece. Italy and U.S.: (a) Subscriptions — SA18.40 (per year); (b) per bound volume — SA26.80. (c) Back issues — add SA2.60 per copy.

1 2

BACK ISSUES □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □

Copy(ies) of Number Copy(ies) of Number Copy(ies) of Number Copy(ies) of Number Copy(ies) of Number Copy(ies) of Number Copy(ies) of Number Copy(ies)of Number Copy(ies)of Number Copy(ies) of Number

1 at $3.50* 2at$3.00* 3 at $2.75* 5 at $2.75* 9 at $2.50* 10 at $2.50* 11 at $2.50* 12 at $2.50* 13 at $2.50* 14 at $2.50 *

UNAVAILABLE: numbers 4, 6, 7 and 8 *Australia only. For overseas rates see overleaf.

NAME..........................................................................

ADDRESS. .................................................................. .............................................................. Postcode . . . .

Total amount enclosed $_________ Cinema Papers Pty. Ltd. 143 Therry Street, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia 3000 Please allow up to four weeks for processing.

13

Robin Copping, Director of Photography on‘Eliza Frazer/ talks about Eastman color film* “It w as E a s tm a n 5 2 4 7 C olor N e g a tiv e all th e w a y th ro u g h . . .

W e w e re d e a lin g w ith th e 1830 p e rio d a n d it h a d to look to ta lly g en u in e, so w e w e re using lots o f lam p s, fires, m o o n lig h t a n d la n te rn s .

O v erall, w e w e re try in g v e ry h a rd to g e t th e a c tu a l lig h t th a t w o u ld h a v e e x isted a t th a t tim e. T h is is w h e re th e c o m b in a tio n o f v e ry m o d e rn len ses a n d th e n ew 5 2 4 7 re a lly p a id off.

W e w e re a b le to w o rk to v e ry v e ry low lig h t lev els, in fa c t lo w er th a n I ’ve e v e r w o rk e d a t b efo re. I f I h a d n ’t p re -te s te d for th is p a rtic u la r te c h n iq u e , I d o n ’t th in k I w o u ld h a v e b e lie v e d w h a t so rt o f se n sitiv ity th e film sto ck h a d .”

“W e c a rrie d o u t fa irly e x te n siv e te sts fo r a b o u t a w e e k or te n d ay s b e fo re w e a c tu a lly s ta rte d shooting, a n d w e fo u n d th a t th e se n s itiv ity o f th e e m u lsio n to th is k in d o f lig h tin g w as q u ite re m a rk a b le , so w e u s e d it th ro u g h o u t th e film . O v erall, I w o u ld say th a t it w as th e m o st d ifficu lt th in g I h a v e h a d to p h o to g ra p h . . .

I ’m v e ry h a p p y w ith th e e n d re s u lt.”

Eastman 5247 Color Negative* a remarkably sensitive film*

K O D A K (A ustralasia) P T Y . L T D .

M o tio n P ic tu re & A u d io v isu al M a rk e ts D ivision K7/9345

K O D A K (A u stralasia) P T Y . L T D M o tio n P ic tu re & A u d io v isu al M a rk e ts D ivision

Box-Office Grosses* THIS QUARTER 2.4.77 to 1.7.77

0(1) TITLE

£r £ o

(2) SYD.

SVILO.

PTH.

 D L.

BRI.

MCA

(3)(S) 13,927

(13)* 210,072

(5) 14,992

(5) 21,059

—

260,050

Picture Show Man

RS

(8)* 80,890

(8)* 43,642

—

—

—

Devil’s Playground

RS

(1) 5,176

(3) 13,462

(10)* 69,460

—

F.J. Holden

GUO

(5) 33,067

(6) 42,655

—

Storm Boy

SAFC

—

—

Break of Day

GUO

(4) 15,220

Eliza Fraser

RS

Caddie

TOTAL $ TO DATE

SYD.

MLB.

PTH.

ÂDL.

BRI.

$

33 o> 3 XT

1

(13)* 124,875

—

(10)* 83,284

—

—

208,159

4

124,532

2

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

88,098

3

(13)* 65,808

(13)* 113,600

—

—

—

179,408

(2) 4,210

(2) 6,800

86,732

4

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

(13)* 66,963

—

66,963

5

—

—

(13)* — ■ 127,634

—

127,634

6

(4) 22,988

(2) 5,063

—

(1) 3,221

46,492

6

(7)* 43,922

(13)* 151,422

(6)* 4,853

(6)* 27,421

(5)* 27,346

254,964

2

(3) 10,455

(7) 26,034

(3) 4,936

—

—

41,425

7

(13)* 190,103

(13)* 186,271

(13)* 130,075

(10) 77,472

(7) 68,762

652,683

1

RS

(5) 16,199

—

(1) 3,316

NA

—

19,515

8

(13)* 119,977

(9) 121,769

—

—

—

241,746

3

Raw Deal

GUO

—

—

(1) 11,510

—

—

11,510

9

(2) 4,640

(6) 32,952

—

—

6,779

44,371

9

Singer and the Dancer

COL

—

(2) 7,857

—

—

—

7,857

10

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

Summer of Secrets

GUO

—

(2) 3,092

—

NA

4,763

7,855

11

(2) 6,799

—

—

(2) 4,562

—

11,361

12

Fantasm

FW

—

NA

(1) 2,918

—

—

2,918

12

(13) NA

(1) 5,375

—

—

5,375

14

Deathcheaters

RS

—

—

—

(1) 1,068

—

1,068

13

(4) 33,528

—

—

(1) 1,217

56,639

8

14,784

765,015

Don’s Party

i |

L A S T QUARTER 2.1.77 to 1.4.77

112,195

93,300

2,953,745 3,060,181 1,376,696

914,725

174,934

369,802

3,128,679 3,429,983 1,488,891 1,008,025

$

664,454

104,104

1,908,277

884,353 9,189,700

3,545,014 2,899,803 1,633,493

868,855

841,499

9,788,664

899,137

4,219,787 3,564,257 1,908,277 1,108,089

9,954,715

B o x-office grosses of in dividual film s have been supplied to Cinema Papers by the A u s tra lia n Film Comm ission.

This fig u re represents the to ta l box -o ffic e gross of all fore ign film s show n d urin g the perio d in the area s pecified,

'

(4) 53,339

239,234

*

Not Available. =C ontinuing into next period. =F igure for one of 3 w eeks in perio d only.

— ’

Total

225,712

» t

33 m 3

674,773

MSW

VIC

WÂ

SÂ

Q LD

All States

— 5 —

945,603 11,696,941

(1) A u stralian th e a trica l d is trib u to r only. R S — - Roadshow; GUO — G reater Union O rga nizatio n Film D istributo rs; FOX — 20th C e ntury Fox; U A — United A rtists; C IC — Cinem a International C o rpo ratio n; F W — Film ways A u strala sian D istributo rs; 7 K — 7 Keys Film D istributo rs; C O L — C olum bia Pictures; R E G — R egent Film D istributo rs; C C G — Cinem a Centre G roup; A F C — A u stralian Film Com m ission; SAFC — South A u stralian Film C o rpo ratio n; M C A — M usic C o rpo ratio n of A m erica; S — S harm ill Films. (2) Figures are draw n from ca p ita l c ity and inner subu rba n firs t release hardtops only. (3) Playing period in w e eks for given city. (4) New Season.

1

BOX OFFICE GROSSES

Cinema Papers, October — 145

Australian Total Foreign0 Total Grand Total

Total

GROUP

MOTION PICTURE EQUIPMENT SALES • RENTAL • SERVICE

If you shoot handheld, you

Because with STEADiCAM, Cinema Products’ revolution­ ary film/video camera stabilizing system, the h a n d h e ld m ovin g c a m e ra finally comes into its own — recording dolly-smooth, jitter-free, handheld moving shots with a steadiness of image never before achieved on the screen.

On location or in the studio, no matter what you’re shooting — 35mm, 16mm, or video — you’ll find that STEADICAM greatly enhances the creative latitude of the director and cinematographer while effectively reducing production costs.

105 Reserve Road, Artarmon Sydney, N.S.W. 2064 Telephone: 439-6955 Telex: 24482 All correspondence: P.O. Box 199 Artarmon, N.S.W. 2064 Australia

SAMUELSONS ANNOUNCE THEIR NEW SALES DIVISION

SAMCINE SALES This new service will not only extend the existing production stores with many new items and accessories but will also market a very wide range of motion picture equipment.

SAMCINE CASES • ELEMACK • FULL PRODUCTION STORES CONTACT DAVID BALLANTINE or CHRISTINE WOLFORD

SAMCINE SALES 27 SIRIUS ROAD, LANE COVE, N.S.W. 2066. Phone : (02) 428 5300

PRODUCTION REPORT 1

THS LUST WAVE “The Last Wave59 Is the latest film by Peter Weir, director of “Homesdale”, “The Cars That Ate Paris” and “Picnic at Hanging Rock”. Returning to the pre­ occupations of Weises earlier films, “The Last Wave” is a psychic thriller about a lawyer’s premonitions of the future.

The cast includes Richard Chamberlain, Olivia Hamnett, Gulpili! and Nandjiwarra Asnagala. Budgeted at $810,000, the film is set for a December release.

Wmà felli

David Burton (Richard Chamberlain) watches in horror as the roof of his house collapses during a ferocious storm.

Cinema Papers, October — 147

HAL a n d ,J U K iS H©EL^f5!f . P rod u cers Jim: Peter began working on the idea just after the Cannes Festival in 1974. It was in quite a different form then and has since been transferred from an adventure to a mystery.

Was if always Intended th at M cElroy and M cElroy would produce the film?

• Hal: No, it wasn’t until June or July last year when Peter showed us a script he had written with Tony Morphett. We liked it very much and agreed to produce it. We started full-time in August, and by October had seriously begun to raise money.

Jim then went to London and Los Angeles with Peter and met Petru Popescu.

Jim: Petru was asked to introduce a little more structure into the script —- to make it more commercially accessible. Perhaps one of the weaknesses of Peter and Tony’s draft was that it was too Australian and didn’t quite have international appeal. So Petru introduced that.

This meant, for example, the film would have been just as valid if it had been transplanted to the U.S. and involved American Indians instead of Aboriginals.

Peter then did another rewrite with Petru, because he felt Petru had taken his brief a little too literally. The script had lost a little of its mystery — it had become too accessible, too linear.

“The Last Wave” is the third feature James and Hal McElroy have produced for director Peter Weir. It follows “The Cars That Ate Paris5’ and, the extremely successful “Picnic at Hanging Mock”, ' which they produced in association with Patricia Lovell.

Australian films have till now feeem mostly domestically orientated. However, with a cost-push spiral developing In the local Industry, the meed for foreign sales has greatly increased. “The Last Wave” is an important film in this regard because of the McEIroys5 breakthrough in pre~ selling the film to the U.S. major, United Artists.

In the following interview, conducted by Scott Murray, Jim and Hal McElroy talk about the UA deal, producing features in Australia and the role of the independent producer. They begin by discussing their involvement with “The Last Wave”.

Ily re-adjust, do you mean the UA investment was substantia! enough t© allow you to lower the amount requested from the AFC?

“ The Last Wave” is, I believe, the first Australian film to use the package concept. . .

Jim: We had come to the conclusion that a project of this size needed a package. The four elements we had were a screenplay

by Peter, Petru and Tony; a director in Peter Weir; a star in Richard C h a m b e r l a i n ; a n d u s , th e producers. That is how we decided to sell it.

Co-producer Hal McElroy and Gulpilil (Chris'Lee) beside a wind machine.

Who did you then approach for money?

Hal: The South Australian Film Corporation were the first people to make a commitment. They did this on an earlier draft, possibly because the SAFC are producers themselves and are very sensitive to the package concept. While they may have had some reservations about the first script they didn’t voice them — they just trusted our collective judgment.

Jim: Jeanine Seawell, our agent in Europe, introduced us to Klaus Helwig of Janus Films who had bought Picnic A t Hanging Rock and Cars That Ate Paris. He read 148 — Cinema Papers, October

the script in October and on the basis of that committed $50,000 on paper. He in turn had a friendly relationship with Ernst Goldsmidt of United Artists and mentioned the project to Ernst. Jeanine followed up the conversation and asked me, while I was in the U.S., to contact Ernst, which I did, giving him the script revised by Petru and Peter.

On January 1, UA gave us a positive response to our proposed pack ag e. D erek P ow er, our American agent, then took over from where Jeanine left off and worked out the numbers. We then decided to ask the AFC to re-adjust its investment, and at the meeting in February they voted to do so.

Co-producer Jim McElroy chats with Penny Leach (the schoolteacher) following a storm sequence filmed at the desert school in Hammond.

Jim: Correct. It has always been our aim that eventually we would work solely on private finance — I guess everyone wants to do that.

Although the AFC is only an investment body, you really tend to want your own independence, and we tried to structure The Last Wave without AFC involvement.

But we really didn’t have enough time to get it together.

The UA deal involved all English-speaking territories, except the U.S. and Canada, being bought in advance — i.e. Australia, New Zealand, Britain and South Africa.

Germany, Austria, Switzerland, and parts of Scandinavia had also been sold to Janus. So we weren’t really able to sell any more territories without jeopardising the number of territories from which we had to recoup our investment. We had to leave the structure as it was.

The territories we sold off amount to approximately $400,000, the balance of $300,000-odd being put up by the SAFC and AFC. We have gone over budget, but the AFC and S A F C , as jo in t c o m p le tio n guarantors, came up with the overage.

Hal: Another point that should be m e n tio n e d a b o u t th e A FC involvement was that they made, at our re q u e st, two in n o v ativ e decisions. One was that they discounted the Janus advance. The system under which Klaus agreed to buy the distribution rights was that he would issue a credit note for the agreed sum and that would be cashed in on delivery of the film. In effect, we pre-sold the film, but instead of receiving money we got a credit note. Then, for the first time in Australia, though it has been done for many years in international film financing, we borrowed 85 per cent of the money using the credit

c Leon S aunders (Sydney)

THE LAST WAVE

note as collateral.

The other 15 per cent being taken up in interest. . .

Hal: No, that was Jeanine’s commission, though effectively she doesn’t get it until the credit note is cashed in. The interest we are paying becom es p a rt of the production costs.

The second thing we asked the AFC was to guarantee an overdraft to cover the third payment from U nited A rtists. The deal we negotiated with UAhad a three-step payment: one on a signature of contract; the other on completion of photography; and the third on delivery. Obviously there is a gap in the post-production stage where you have spent the money, although you haven’t actually got it. So the AFC guaranteed an overdraft at the bank on the strength of our contract with United Artists.

Jim: The breakthrough in that regard is that the film is partly bank financed. The Commonwealth Bank have put in over $100,000.

How ready were the banks to become involved?

Jim: They were very reticent. In fact, it could not have been done

Producers Hal and Jim McElroy.

without the guarantee from the AFC. How did yon feel about selling away territories like Australia?

Hal: Looking at in simple terms, United Artists have offered us the largest sum ever offered to an Australian producer — in advance — for the distribution rights. Given theatrical attendances being the way they are at the moment, it could be said we were bloody lucky to get the amount we did because, as we all know, box-office grosses aren’t very good at the moment.

Yet we have virtually half our budget up front and we only have to recover approximately $400,000.

Any producer placed in our position, I believe, would have grabbed the money and run — it is as simple as that.

It is easy for a critic to stand on the outside and say: “Oh, how could you give away Australia?” But what we have done is cut down the risk of the money involved by 50 per cent — we are only risking $400,000, not the $800,000 it cost to make.

Besides, costs have risen by about 30 per cent and certainly the The

Last Wave cost nearly twice as much as Picnic.

Over the same period, box-office has fallen about 30 per cent, while house-costs (ie. the house “nut”), has gone up. The exhibitor’s return has remained fairly static, but the distributor is sharing from a smaller film hire and we, as producers, inevitably are sharing even less. So you are facing a squeeze situation where you can’t cover your production costs in Australia. And the UA deal wasn’t a matter of selling our soul, giving up to the Americans or anything like that because no one has any creative control apart from Peter, Jim and I. Fortunately our relationship with UA has allowed for an exchange of dialogue in all areas, including the film itself.

Given Ibis cost squeeze, is if possible for an Australian film, made purely for an Australian audience, to succeed?

Hal: It can, but it has to do smash business. But why should we ignore other markets when these markets are ready for our films? Picnic sold well, and was exhibited well in

many territories overseas.

The Italians, the French and the British have all literally made fortunes out of Picnic, and they are eager to see more Australian films because one of them might be the next Picnic.

An obvious question is why use Richard Chamberlain for the role of David Burton and not an Aust­ ralian actor?

Hal: Firstly, we believe that the choice of Chamberlain was valid.

Burton is a happily married solicitor living in Sydney who has, by necessity, South American parents.

And Richard has managed to play the role in a convincing and sympathetic manner — he sounds and looks right and he doesn’t look like an American in Paris.

Secondly, we are facing a costpush situation in the industry here and if we are going to try for outside markets, one naturally looks toward foreign actors. We actually looked at a dozen name actors and only three of them were American, the other nine were British.

Our first reaction was to get a British actor because we thought he would be more palatable to an Aust­ ralian audience. But Richard’s name kept coming up again and Cinema Papers, October — 149

THE LAST WAVE

s§ p i *

■■MMMIKi V H M É M

Shooting the sequence where David Burton tries to convince Chris Lee that he must tell the truth about the murder he is on trial for.

Director Peter Weir rehearsing a scene with Richard Chamberlain and Olivia Hamnett.

again. We also found it very difficult to come up with the name of any Australian actor who would have been as good for the role as Richard was.

David Burton is very much the everyman — he is Mr Normality — yet he is subjected to terrifying dreams and nightmares. So it is important the audience sympathizes strongly with him, otherwise he would be just a looney or a neurotic.

Richard has a terribly pleasant demeanor and appearance, and this helps greatly. Of course, the important thing is that he is a great actor and great in the film.

Jim: One should also remember that Olivia Hamment gets co-billing with Richard. She will get a lot of exposure in the territories where the film will be sold and 1 think she is going to do very well from it, mainly because she is such a fine actress.

coffee and discuss common problems. After all, it is time we were all working together. It really is a great feeling to know that you are not all alone, that someone else is going through the same hassles as you are.

The other important thing is that all of a sudden the AFC has an entity it can deal with on a one-toone basis. We intend to get a permanent staff who will be able to provide legal precedents on distri­ bution contracts, offer financial advice or hire somebody to give advice, for example, on taxation incentives. We could become a lobby to the government to ensure that budgets aren’t cut, tariffs aren’t unnecessarily imposed and so on.

The association has put a case to th e A FC t ha t i n d e p e n d e n t producers are underpaid, given that it takes as much as two years to produce a feature-length 35mm t heat r i cal rel ease film. For example, it takes you a year to get the script and package together, and certainly another year or two to market the film. So to pay a producer only $9000-odd is just ridiculous. It is also counter­ productive.

The association has proposed that the salaries scale be significantly increased, and instead of some producers rushing off to make another film just to make some money, we hope they will be able to stay on and responsibly market their films.

Concluded on P. 183

David Burton, shaken by his terrifying nightmares, is comforted by his wife Annie (Olivia Hamnett).

for Australian actors. That is important.

Did you find any union resistance to y o u r d e c i s i o n t o use Chamberlain?

Both of you are actively involved in the newly-formed association of independent producers. How did the group form?

Hal: Not really: Equity has made its position known to us — ie. we should be using Australian actors — and I understand their position. But we came to an amicable and perfectly satisfactory arrangement with Olivia receiving co-billing, and Gulpilil and Nandjiwarra Amagula just after the title.

Jim: Equity, by embracing this film, is in fact helping their membership, because the film will get exposure outside this country

Hal: Originally, it was a looselyformed organization which didn’t have any legal status. It has now amalgamated with the Film and Television Producers’ of Australia Association and has become a division of it. Therefore, in future we will be known as “ The I n d e p e n d e n t F e a t u r e Fi l m Producers, a division of the F and T P A”.

We have been meeting on a fairly loose basis and producers have

150 — Cinema Papers, October

a g r e e d to c o n t r i b u t e f ai r l y substantial sums of money to become members. We hope the organi zat i on will become a respons i bl e force within the industry by being co-ordinating and supportive.

Jinr. The first aim, as I see it, is to give more rational thought to production here. The second is communication, and that is one of the things most lacking in our industry to date.

Hal: All the fighting that has gone on among themselves was just insane. So it is really great to be able to sit and meet with fellow producers. Frankly, I don’t like some of their films and I am equally sure some don't like ours, but now we can all sit down over a cup of

THE LAST WAVE

PRODUCTION REPORT

T&e Last Wave, by the nature of its theme, relies heavily on the use of special effects. For as the film progresses, David Burton (Richard Chamberlain) is harassed more and more by nature, the elements in fact crushing in on him.

This manifests itself in torrential downpours, hail in areas where it hasn’t rained for many years, visions of a city underwater, black rain, falling stones and frogs.

Those chosen to create these special effects were Monty Fieguth and Bob Hilditch. The following is their version of how they did it. *

.

Monty Fieguth attends to a monitor. Note the above­ ground swimming pool in the background.

rain In most scenes there is rain, though in varying degrees. So obviously it was paramount that an adequate method of producing it was found.

We went first to check out the gear used by fire departments and to a lot of pump companies. Out of these discussions came the decision to take all our own gear, rather than rely on fire departments which could be on call at any moment.

We had a pump built which could handle 3000 litres a minute, as well as machines called monitors which enabled one person to handle a hose at a time (photo 1).

The basic procedure we adopted on location was to build a rostrum for the spreader which could cover the whole area with rain. Then, by shooting the water a hundred or so metres in the air, we could control the angle of fall to almost vertical (photos 2 and 3). * Adapted from an interview recorded with Fieguth and Hilditch in Sydney by Scott Murray.

2 and 3. Shooting street scenes in Adelaide (top) and Sydney.

We would then work out the crucial areas that needed to be filled from one side. This would be handled by a monitor on the ground.

You can’t notice it coming from the side because the fog nozzle we used could spread the water in any way you needed it.

We also would shake the monitor to give the effect of gusts. Then, if needed, we would put another monitor in the background pointed towards the camera. Obviously, you can have a situation where if you produce six metres of solid rain you can’t tell it is raining beyond that.

So in some situations we devised a system of filling in foreground areas and letting the back­ ground take care of itself.

The only difficulty we faced was wind because you could have the whole thing perfected and a burst of wind would appear and blow the rain 30 metres off course.

Fortunately this didn’t happen often. We were also lucky, in that it didn’t rain once. So none of the rain you see in The Last Wave is natural.

From cameraman Russell Boyd’s point of view it was essential the rain was back-lit. So Russell’s lights had to coincide with the position of our monitors. It wasn’t really a problem because the fog nozzles were so good we could control where the rain would fall to within a metre.

The electricians also built an aluminium frame which protected the camera. This enabled us to pour in the rain to within a few inches of the lens. Coupled with a drip runner across the top, the effect is so good one feels right in among the rain.

The largest area we had to cover was a street in Adelaide. Peter’s shot called for the camera to track nearly 500 metres, which meant we had

Cinema Papers, October — 151

THE LAST WAVE

PRODUCTION REPORT

6. Creating the freak-rainstorm at Hammond. (See also photo 9 for the making of the hailstorm.)

sitting in his car while the rain falls very heavily about him. He turns on the radio, then looks up and finds the entire street underwater with peo­ ple floating about.

We thought of back projection, but felt it wouldn’t be convincing enough. So the only alternative was to build a set underwater — which we did in conjunction with the art department.

A large enough swimming pool was found and a street was constructed in it. For Richard’s car, a front-half was assembled from new parts obtained from Volvo, and this was then lowered into the pool. There was also a section of a bus (photo 7).

As the interior of the car is supposed to be dry, we felt we would have to use still water inside it to create the illusion. However, the 4. Rail freighting the water to Hammond in the South Australian desert. distance of less than a metre to the perspex windscreen was negligible enough for us to use to keep the hoses mobile as well. We used four storm in the film (photos 5 and 6.) the pool water. hoses in that shot — one big one aimed from an Rostrums were also built for the actors to extension jib arm, two from the side and one for dive from. The crew who were supplied with support. There must have been hundreds of wet suits then jumped in. Monty worked the UNDERWATER STREET metres of hose and the streets looked as if they windscreen and Bob shook a plant around. were covered in spaghetti.

The set was six metres deep and was lit from There were two wind machines also blowing One dream sequence called for an above, utilizing natural light. It is only a short and water was going everywhere — a virtual underwater street. Richard Chamberlain is sequence, but it looks extremely realistic. flood. And all you could see in the shot were two single spots of light as the car appeared at the end of the street. The rest was just blotted out by rain.

As there were several dream sequences in the film, not all the rain was to be of the everyday type. In one scene it rained from the ground up, a spiral spurting up hundreds of metres.

The biggest single problem we had was to produce rain and hail for the opening scenes.

As these were set in a little town near Port Augusta, where there is no waterr for nearly 100km, we had to have 340,000 litres shipped by rail and 68,000 odd by road (photo 4).

Storage was a problem, so we built some above-ground swimming pools and had a shut­ tle service to the railroad.

For the scene where rain fell on the schoolhouse we used two pumps which j produced 5000 litres a minute. It is the heaviest

5. Children run for shelter as a freak rain- and hailstorm hits their desert school.

152 — Cinema Papers, October

7. The set for the underwater street being constructed in the Ryde diving pool. Construction Manager, Greg Brown, and Art Director, Neil Angwin. .

1

1 | |

PRODUCTION REPORT

THE LAST WAVE

HAIL Several scenes in the film needed hail, so we had to find a way of economically producing it, and one which was feasible for the area in which we were shooting. One scene, for example, called for a hail storm in the middle of the desert.

One method was to toss ice into the air with compressed gas, but though it was physically feasible it proved too expensive. Another suggestion was polystyrene mothballs, but they tended to bounce.

We found no reference to hail in any of the special effects books that have been published here and abroad. There was no one who could tell us the solution.

Finally, we decided on a three-way plan.

Firstly, we had a nozzle built which could break water up under low pressure into enormous globules. Then we covered the mid­ ground with 11 tons of ice, the foreground with these big globules, and the background with fill-in rain.

We also used several tons of rock salt which was cheap (photo 8). The only disadvantage, of course, was that it tended to dissolve in the amount of water being sprayed over it. We really won by the sheer weight of numbers, with every spare crew member tossing in hunks of rock salt and ice during the take (photo 9).

I

bounces, leaving an oily deposit behind. Crew members were also asked to flick oil to intensify the overall effect.

This scene also required black rain. The problem here was that while most dyes made the water look black in volume, once it was 1 falling as drops it looked transparent. We were 1 also hampered by shooting on locations in 1 Sydney where there was polished marble and a sandstone, so we couldn’t keep increasing the 1 amount of dye.

Fortunately, a balance was found when a 1 head chemist at ICI developed a detergent for us which we mixed in with the water. This allowed us to shoot the rain which still read black in the camera on to stone surfaces without leaving a trace.

Another special effect we had was of a roof being blown away in a storm, the ceiling collapsing and the door bursting open. The problem here was that the only access was the door and the camera had to track through it. So, there was virtually no space to introduce wind or rain.

Finally we used three nozzles pointing almost perpendicularly which sent the water up 300odd ft. It then came down like a waterfall. A windmachine was also mounted to the scaffold 12ft. off the ground and this helped blast the rain in around the camera crew. It must have been terribly uncomfortable for them, but then I guess the whole film probably was. &

OTHER SPECIAL EFFECTS One interesting situation is where we had to make it rain rocks and black sludge. The problem was to make sure the stones fell vertically over an area of 2,500 sq. ft. This was solved by building a grid of chicken-wire over the entire area, the idea being that once a rock stopped bouncing on the wire it would fall straight down.

We actually used coke which looks very evil.

Being coated in oil, once a piece lands it

A load of coarse rock salt which was used to simulate hail.

9. Wardrobe Assistant, Daro Gunzburg (right), and crew members throwing ice for the hailstorm sequence.

THE LAST WAVE CAST: David Burton........

Annie Burton'........

Chris Lee................

Rev. Burton............

Dr Whitburn..........

Charlie..................

Gerry Lee..............

Larry................. . .

Lindsey..................

Jacko ......................

Michael Zeadler . .

Billy Corm an........

Judge ....................

Andrew Potter .. . .

Morgue Doctor . ..

Babysitter............

Policeman............

Zeadler’s Secretary Prosecutor..............

Schoolteacher........

Publican................

Morgue Clerk........

G u id o ....................

Don Fishburn........

Carl . . ....................

Sophie Burton........

Grace Burton........

..........Richard Chamberlain . ....................Olivia Hamnett ................................. Gulpilil ................Frederick Parslow ......................... Vivean Gray Nandjiwarra Amagula, MBE ..................Walter Amagula ............................... Roy Bara ....................Cedrick Lalara ................... . Morris Lalara ......................... Peter Carroll ..................... Athol Compton ......................Hedley Cullen ..................Michael Duffield ......................... Wallas Eaton .............................Jo England ...................... . John Frawley ..........Jennifer de Greenlaw ..............Richard Henderson ........................ Penny Leach ........................... Merv Lilley .......................John Meagher ..................... Guido Rametta ............Malcolm Robertson .............................Greg Rowe ................Katrina Sedgwick ........................... Ingrid Weir

CREW: D irector.................

Peter Weir, Producers......................................... Hal and James McElroy Screen/Scriptwriters................Peter Weir, Tony Morphett, Petru Popescu Director of Photography................................... Russell Boyd Sound Recordist................................................................. DonConnolly Production M anager......................................Ross Matthews Camera Operator...............................................................JohnSeale Art D irector....................................................... Neil Angwin Special Effects................................................. Monty Fieguth Special Effects................................................. .. Bob Hilditch Assistant Special Effects..................................... Dennis Smith Producers' Secretary........................................................FionaGosse Production Secretary....................................... Su Armstrong Location Manager (SA)................................... Bev Davidson Production Assistant (NSW)..........................Rod McMorran Production Assistant (NSW)......................Philip Hearnshaw Unit Runner (SA)........................................... Mark Patterson Production Accountant........................................Penny Carl First Assistant Director..................................John Robertson Second Assistant Director................................................... IanJamieson Third Assistant D irector............................... Penny Chapman Continuity....................................................... Gilda Baracchi Focus Puller................................................David Williamson Clapper Loader............................................. David Foreman Boom Operator................................................................ DavidCooper Sound E ditor.........................................................Greg Bell Assistant Sound Editor................................................... HelenBrown Assistant Editor............................................... Peter Fletcher Assistant Editor.................................................... Justin Milne Make-up and Hairdresser.......................................Jose Perez Assistant Make-up Artist..................................... Lloyd James Wardrobe Designer....................................... Annie Bleakley Standby Wardrobe......................................... Daro Gunzburg Construction Manager (NSW).........................................GregBrown Construction Manager (SA)............................. Herbert Pinter Property Buyer (NSW)................................. . . . John Carroll Property Buyer (SA)....................................................... ClarkMunro Property Buyer (S A )...................................................... KevinBrewer Standby Propsman..................................................Ken James Set Decorator.................................................... Bill Malcolm Set Maker.......................................................................... PhilWorth C arpenter..................................................... Ken Hazelwood Stage Hand......................................................

RonFletcher Gaffer..................................................................... Tony Tegg Best B o y ........................................................................... AlanDunstan Electrician.......................................................................KeithJohnson Electrician......................................................................... MickMorris Electrician.........................................................................PaulMoyes Key G rip ................................................... Merv McLaughlin Assistant G rip...................................................Michael White Advisor on Tribal Aboriginal Matters............. Lance Bennett Additional Photography.................................................... RonTaylor, George Greenough, Klaus Jaritz Publicity........................................... Brian Trenchard-Smith Stills............................................................. David Kynoch Casting Consultants . .................................. M & L Casting Catering.......................................................................... FrankManley Lighting................................................................. Tony Tegg Lenses and Panaflex Cam era................................ Panavision Optical Effects..................................... Optical and Graphics Sound M ix .................................................................ATLAB Color Consultants...........................................................JamesParsons Color....................................... •...................................ATLAB Cinema Papers, October — 153

LOVE LETTERS FROM TERALBA ROAD. . .

THE SINGER AND THE DANCER. . . LISTEN TO THE LION. . .

QUEENSLAND. , . BACKROADS. . . JOURNEY AMONG WOMEN. . .

PURE S . . . OUT OF I T . . .

All made with assistance from the funds operated by the CREATIVE DEVELOPMENT BRANCH of the Australian Film Commission . . . All reaching enthusiastic audiences around Australia.

Brian Brown and Kris McQuade in LOVE LETTERS FROM TERALBA ROAD. Directed by Stephen Wallace.

(Made with assistance from the Film Production Fund.)

FUNDS FOR FILMMAKING HOW TO APPLY for assistance from the Creative Development Branch of the Australian Film Commission: .

Applications to the FILM PRODUCTION FUND, SCRIPT DEVELOPMENT FUND and EXPERIMENTAL FILM AN D TELEVISION FUND w ill now be assessed throughout the year. There are no longer any closing dates for submission.

Applications can be sent in at any time and w ill be evaluated soon after they are received.

Intending applicants must discuss their proposal w ith a Project Officer from the Creative Development Branch before submitting an application, to ensure that the appropriate information is provided for a proper evaluation of their project.

To arrange an appointment contact Curtis Levy (Film Production Fund), Richard Keys (Script Development Fund) or Albie Thoms (Experimental Film and Television Fund) at Sydney (02) 922 6855. M elbourne applicants for all funds should contact Greg Tepper at the Australian Film Commission Office, 8th Floor, 140 Bourke Street, M elbourne (03) 663 4795. Project Officers w ill be available for consultation in all states on a regular basis.

Application forms and guidelines for the funds are available from: The Chairman Australian Film Commission GPO Box 3984 Sydney, NSW 2001 FILM PRODUCTION FUND provides assistance for small-budget projects ranging up to around $35,000. Only experienced film­ makers are eligible to apply to this fund.

Projects should be innovative and should have the potential to further the applicant's develop­ ment as a filmmaker. This fund is open to all

filmmakers, whether employed in government/commerdal production or independents.

SCRIPT DEVELOPMENT FUND provides assistance to experienced and promising writers and directors who wish to devote their full time to develop a film or television script over a specific period of time at an approved

rate of payment.

EXPERIMENTAL FILM AND TELEVISION FUND provides assistance up to $7,000 to filmmakers with lots of promise but limited experience. The fund favours projects which are innovative in form, content or technique and supports experimental work.

PRODUCTION SURVEY 35mm PRE-PRODUCTION THE BATTLE OF BROKEN HILL

Synopsis: A g irl adv e rtis e s th a t she is w e a lth y and w a n ts to m a rry a doctor. A Post O ffic e em plo yee poses as a do cto r and both play th e ir gam e of pretend until they are unm asked. (T his pro d u ctio n w ill be shot in Italian.)

Prod D esigner................................. Lissa Coote S crip t Editor.....................................................PhilNoyce C ostum e/W ardrobe............ Norma M oriceau Sound R e c o rd is t. ........................... Tim Lloyd Sound E ditor........ ...............................Greg Bell Asst D irectors........................... Erroll Sullivan, Chris Maudson, Steve A ndrews Camera O perator........................................ Louis Irving Focus P u lle r................................. David Brostoff Camera A sst......................... Stephen Dobson Boom O perator............................................. Jack Friedman G affer...................................... Brian Bansgrove Continuity.................................. Adrienne Read Asst Art D irector..................... Sally C am pbell G rip................................................................. RayBrown Asst Editors..................... Franz Vanden Berg, Helen Brown Technical A d visor........................................... Sid W ood Prod A cco u n ta n t............................... Penny Carl Best Boy........................................Paul G antner C onstruction M anager................................. BillHowe C a rpenter.................................................... Danny Burnett Runner.......................................... Sandy Beach B udget.................................................. $505,000 Length.............. A pprox 110 min C olor Process...................................... Eastman Progress............................................................... InProduction Release Date................................................. A p ril 1978 Cast: Bill Hunter, W endy Hughes, G erard Kennedy, C hris Haywood, John Howard, Bryan Brown, Lorna Leslie, John Dease, M ark Holden.

Synopsis: Newsfront is the story of tw o brothers who are cam eram en during the golden era of the A u s tra lia n n ew sre el between 1948-1956. It is a unique feature film concept containing a fictiona l story-line played out against the backdrop of the real events that shaped a nation — the Redex Trial, the M aitland Floods, the birth of rocka n d -ro ll and th e M e lb o u rn e O ly m p ic s .

Passing through are Prime M inisters Chifley, Curtin and Menzies, Vice President Nixon, the Yellow Peril, the first Holden, Queen Elizabeth II, Dr H.V. Evatt, Donald Bradman and Damien Parer. Also various firefighters m arauding locusts, hot dog sellers, tram conductors, aldermen, and M acD ougall the Singing Dog.

Prod C om pany........ The Independent A rtists GALLIPOLI Dist C om pany..................... GUO Film D istrib­ utors Pty Ltd Prod Com pany..................... South Australian D irector....................................Donald Crom bie Film Corporation S creen play............................. Ayten Kuyululu, D irector..............................................Peter W eir Ralph Peterson S creen play........................... David W illiam son P rodu cer..................................... Ayten Kuyululu from a story o utline by Peter W eir Exec P roducer.............................................. Ilhan Kuyululu Producers.................................................... Matt Carroll, P hotography................................. Peter James John M orris Prod M anager................................ Pom O liver P rogress......................................Pre-Production Art D ire cto r................................. Owen W illiam s Synopsis: The epic story of the Anzac Asst D irector............................... M ark Turnbull landing at G allipoli.

B u d g e t . . . : .......................................... $700,000 Len gth.................................................... 120 min THE LAST RUN OF THE KAMERUKA Progress......................................Pre-Production (W orking title) Cast: M ichael Craig, Hakan Balamir.

Prod C om pany...................E.C.V. Productions Synopsis: A feature about a real historical Pty. Ltd. event. It actually happened in 1915 at Broken S c re e n p la y ................................. John O rcsik, H ill. Tw o T u rks d e cla re w a r on A u s tra lia .

John Erichsen, D avid H annay BLUE FIN P rodu cers................................. John Erichsen, David Hannay Prod C o m p a n y................... S outh A u s tra lia n Exec Producer........................... C hris Newark Film C o rp o ra tio n Len gth...................................................... 95 min S c re e n p la y ......................................S o n ia Borg C olor Process...................................... Eastman B u dget....................................................$500,000 The Chant of Jimmie Blacksmith P rogress......................................Pre-Production P ro g re ss.................................. P re-P roductio n Synopsis: A feature length drama that takes Synopsis: The adventures of a 15-year-old place between the hours of 4.30pm and boy in the tuna fishing town of Port Lincoln.

TIM Synopsis: The story of a young half-blood m idnight one Friday night. Most of the action aborigine, who is made conscious of his is on board a Sydney Harbour ferry and Prod Com pany........ Pisces Productions P/L CROCODILE w h ite com ponent by a m issionary. He leaves in volves eight people who, because of their D irector.......................................... M ichael Pate his tribe to find a place in the w hite m an’s c o n d itio n in g and b a c k g ro u n d , tu rn a S creenplay....................................M ichael Pate Prod C om pany.............Jenbur Film s presents w o rld w here he seeks acceptance because from the novel by Colleen M cC ullough relative ly m inor incident into a catastrophe. a Samurai Production he lives by white standards. He fails through Length.................................................... Feature D istribution.................Nippon Herald (Japan), no fault of his own and explodes in a fateful Progress................................... Pre-Production C ontinental Films (Hong Kong), “ declaration of w a r" — the w hite m an's way, THE MONEY MOVERS Reisa Corp. (South Am erica) as he has learnt, of acquiring a licence for D irector..........................................................T erry Bourke Prod C o m p a n y ................... S outh A u s tra lia n revenge and violence.

Screenplay and S tory.................................Terry Bourke Film C o rp o ra tio n 35mm IN PRODUCTION P rodu cer....................................................... Terry Bourke D ire c to r................................. B ruce B e resford Exec P rodu cers................... Jam es G. Jenner S creen play.............................Bruce Beresford (Jenbur), Des Dawson (Samurai) DAWN! from a novel by Devon M inchin P ro d u c e r.......................................■ M att C a rro ll M usic................................................ Bob Young Prod Com pany.........................Aquataurus Film THE CHANT OF JIMMIE P h otography....................... Alan G rice A.C.S. B u dget....................................................$400,000 .

Productions Pty Ltd, BLACKSMITH P ro g re s s .................................. P re-P roductio n U nderw ater Photography.......... Ralph W hite South Australian Film C orporation Synopsis: A m odern day th rille r set in an E d itor...................................................... Rod Hay Prod C om pany..................... Film House A u st­ D irector............................................................ Ken Hannam WEEKEND OF SHADOWS a rm o ure d s e c u rity van com pany.

A rt D irectors................................... Barry A dler ralia Pty Ltd S creenplay....................................................... Joy C avill (location), Dist Com pany.............................................. Hoyts Producer...........................................................Joy Cavill Prod C om pany............ Samson Film S ervices Richard Harrison D irector.......................................... FredS chepisi Exec Producer..................................................J ill Robb Pty Ltd, S.A.F.C. PALMER STREET (studio) S creen play.................................. FredS chepisi Assoc Producer.............. Sandra M cKenzie D ire cto r..............................................Tom Jeffrey Location M anager........................................ IanGoddard Prod C o m p a n y .. .. Chapel Lane Productions Based on the novel by S creen play................................ Peter Yeldham Prod A sso ciate...........................................G loria Payten Prod S e cretary........................ Penelope W ells Dist Com pany...............GUO Film D istributors Thomas Keneally From novel The Reckoning Photography............................... Russell Boyd Sound M ixe r........................................ Phil Judd Pty Ltd P roducer........................................ FredS chepisi Editor.............................................. Max Lemon P rodu cers..................................................... Tom Jeffrey, D irector............................................Keith Salvat S p ecial E ffe cts............................... Tohl Narita, A ssoc Producer.................... Richard Brennan M att C arroll Prod M anager........................... Ross M atthew s Producer........................... M ichael Robertson A kira Mimura, Kenyi Kaneta, M us ic......................................................... Bruce Smeaton Prod Designer................................... Ross M ajor Assoc Producer........................................... Sue M illiken Photography............................... David G ribble Photography................................... .... Ian Baker M asachi Kurosawa Prod Secretary......................................... Jenny Tosolini M usic................................. Charles M arawood Editor.............................................Colin W addy (Japan), Les Conley E d ito r...................................... B rian K avanagh P ro d A s s ts......................... Graham M cKinney, Photography........................... Richard W allace Prod M anager.................Stephanie W iessner (Australia) Prod M anager................................................. RoyStevens E ditor................................................................ Rod Adamson Jack Zalkans B udget............................................) . . $450,000 C o n tin u ity...................M argaret-Rose Dunphy Unit M anager................................................. PaulSetoCostume D e s ig n e r................Judith Dorsman Prod M a n a g e r................................. Sue M illiken C a sting...................M itch M atthew s (Sydney), Length.................................................... 100 min Prod Supervisor........................................... Roy Stevens Property M aster....................... M artin M cAdoo A rt D ir e c to r .. . . . . . . . C h ris to p h e r W ebster Brian M uir (Brisbane), Reg Prod D esigner...........................W endy Dickson Progress................................... Pre-Production Sound R ecordist.............................................Ken Hammond Prod A c c o u n ta n t.....................' T reisha Ghent S tocker (Cairns), Helen Synopsis: A dventure story about the Sydney Asst Prod Designer..................................... Igor Lazareff Dubbing Editor............................................ Bob C ogger Prod S e cretary......................... Cathy Flannery underw orld in 1953.

Thom pson (Mareeba) Prod C o-ordinator....................................Andrea W ayAsst D irectors........................... M ark Egerton, C o stum e/W ardrobe.................................... Anna Senior Still Photography....................... C hic Stringer Prod S e cretary............................. Andrea W ay Penny Chapman, S cott Hicks Sound R e cordist...................... Ken Hammond T ech nical A d visor...............Dr Graham W ebb Prod A c c o u n ta n t........................... Lyn B a rker Camera O perator........................... John Seale Sound E d ito r....................................... Greg Bell PATRICK M akeup.................................. Deryk De Niesse, A cco unta nt A s s is t.. C arolynne Cunningham Focus P uller........................ David W illiam son Asst. S ound E d ito r.......... ..

Helen B row n Rena Hoffmanis W ardrobe S u pervisor............. Bruce Finlayson Boom O perator............................................ Joe Spinelli Asst. D irectors............................. M ichael Lake, Prod Com pany.................Patrick Productions S ce nic A r tis t....................... W a lte r S ta c k p o o l Standby W ardrobe.................................... Daro Gunzberg Tovio Lember, C lappe r/Loade r...............................................Jan Kenny for Australian International S tu n ts ....................................Peter A rm s tro n g , Sound R ecordist.......................................... Bob AllenG affer................................................ T o n yT egg Ralph Storey Film Corporation Pty Ltd F ra n k Lennon, H erb Nelson Asst. D irectors................................................Ken Ambrose, Camera O perator......................... John Seale C o ntinuity...................................................... Lyn M cEncroe Dist Com pany....................................... Film ways T itle s...................................... W alter Stackpool Greg Allen Focus P u lle r....................... David W illiam son Set Dresser.................................................. Annie Bleakley D irector....................................Richard Franklin B u dget.............................................. S1.8 m illion Focus P uller................................................ John Sw affield C hief G rip........................................R ossE rikson C lappe r/Loade r.............................................. Jan Kenny S creen play........................... Everett de Roche Len g th .................................................... 120 min Camera A s s t......................................Ellery Ryan Asst G rip...................................... Dennis Smith Boom O perator............................................. Jack Friedman Producers........................... A ntony I. Ginnane, C olor Process...................................... Eastman Boom O perator........................ Chris Goldsm ith Asst Editor.....................................................Zsolt Kallanyi G affer................................................ T o n yT e g g Richard Franklin P rogress....................................P re-Production C lappe r/Loade r............................................ Alan ColeAsst D ubbing Editor............. Shirley Kennard C o ntinuity................................. Lyn M cEncroe Exec Producer............................... BiilFaym an G affer............................................ Brian Adams (Shooting 31 O ctober 1977) Edge Num berer..............................................Guy Hodson Location C a sting..................... Hitary Linstead P h otog rap hy...........................Vincent Monton Release D ate...................................... July 1978 C o ntinuity.........................................................Jan Tyrrell Still Photography........................................ David Kynoch Second Unit P h o to g ra p h y.. . . Bill Grimm ond Prod M anager............................... Barbi Taylor C ast: G eorge Kennedy, Diane C ilen to, C asting D irector...................Rhonda Schepisi Technical A d v is o r................................... Dawn Fraser Prop B uyer............................................... Harry Z ette ll Still Photography......................... David Parker M ichael Craig. Ray Barrett, V icto ria Shaw, Prop M aster............................

M ark Rochford Research..........................................................Sue W ildStandby P rops......................................... Bruce Barber B udget................................ $330,000 W illiam Smith. Roy Kinnear, Joseph Furst, Prop B uyer........................................................ Jill EdenH airdresser................................. Jenny Brown G rip ........................................... Graham M ardell Len gth.................................................... 100 min C o rn e lia F ra n c is , G o rd o n M a c D o u g a ll, Standby P rops............................................ Nick Hepworth Asst. G rip ........................................ Dennis Smith Best Boy..................................................... C raig Bryant Progress......................................P re-Production Rowena W allace, Alfred Sandor, Robert G rip s........................................... Joel W itherden, M akeup........................................ Peggy C arter C o n stru ctio n M a n a g e r.......... H e rbe rt P inter (Shooting November 21) Q ullter, Gus M ercurio, Tom Richards, Reg Tony Sprague Standby W ardro be................................... Fiona N icholls A sst. E d ito r.......... , ............. A n d re w Prow se Release Date................................. Easter 1978 Gorman, Roger W ard, Kit Taylor, Lionel Chief W ra n g le r .............................................Ken Grant Asst W ardrobe........................... Joyce Stokes Still Photography....................... David Kynock S yn o p s is : W hat was P a trick’s secret? W hat Long, Sandra Lee-Paterson, Barry Eaton, W ra ngle r..................................... Mike W illiam s Standby Props................................................ Ken James Dog T ra in e r................................. Ray W inslade was the strange influence he possessed? A M ark Edwards, Tom O liver, John Nash, Barry Asst.

Editors....................................................Ken Sallows, Asst P rops.................................................... Ann BrowHning airdresser.............................................. Jenny Brown hospital, a relationship, a sense of the usual Barkla, Ken Goodlet, M ark Hashfield, Peter M ark Norfolk Prod A cco unta nt....................................... Jean Findlay are turned upside down in a thrillin g em otion Thompson. Peter Cummins, Frank Malet, Still Photography......................... John Pollard E lectrician........ , ...................................... Ralph Storey charged experience.

G raham Bicker. G arry O rd and introducing C hief A boriginal A d visor..............................Bob Maza Runner.............................................. M ark Piper Lois Cook.

A b origin al A d visors............ Howard Cream er C aterers....................... John and Lisa Faithfull RUSTY BUGLES S y n o p s is : A 2 0 -fo o t ro g u e c r o c o d ile (Kem psey/Arm idale) Ray KellyB udget.................................................. $762,391 terrorizes an outback town in far northern Hairdresser...................... . . Cheryl W illiam s Prod Co........................... M ariner Films Pty Ltd Length.................................................... 115 min A u stralia; shooting on lo cation in C hillagoe, Best Boy..................

P a ulG antner D irector..................................... David Stevens C olor P rocess...................................... Eastman C airns and Brisbane.

M akeup................................... Deryck De Niese Progress.............................................. Shooting S creenplay............................. M ichael Jenkins Transport M anager......................................John Chase Producer................................. Henry C raw ford Release Date.................................................April 1978 C onstruction M anager............................... RayPattison DOCTOR WANTED B udget.................................................. S400.000 C a s t: B ro n w y n M a c k a y - P a y n e , Tom Asst. C onstruction............ G eoff Richardson Len gth.................................................... Feature Richards, Bunney Brooke, Ron Haddrick, Prod C om pany.................Pigalle Productions E lectrics/G enny O p................. TedN ordsvan Progress................................... P re-production G abrielle Hartley, John Diedrich, Ivar Kants, D ire cto r....................................O svaldo Maione M echanic................................... B arry Hogarth S yn opsis: Based on the highly successful David Cameron, John Clayton, Bill Charlton, M usic........................................ Enzo M arciano Unit R unner................................. David Tayles stage play of the same title by Sumner Lyndall Barbour, Kevin W ilson, Reg Gillam, P h otog rap hy.....................Bruce M cNaughton Runner................................. Steve Greenaway Locke-Elliot. Set in an army supply cam p in Stuart Finch, Diana Davidson, Judy Farr, E d itor............................................ David H ipkins C a terin g........................................................

Frank M anley 1942, it concerns a group of men in an John Arm strong.

Prod M a n a g e r............................. Lynne Helms Laundry M an............................... M ichael Davis is o lated and hostile enviro n m e n t. T h e ir S y n o p s is : Drama based on the personal life Sound R e cord ist....................... John M ulligan Publicity D irector........................................G eoff Freeman enemy is their own insanity. sto ry of A u s tra lia n s w im m ing cham pion Sound and Post P roduction......................... Film P roducer's Secretary...............Sylvia Van W yk Dawn Fraser.

S oundtrack Australia Include your current and future B udget.......... ................................... $1.2 m illion B udget................................................... $200,000 projects in our production Len g th ......................................................

Feature THE SIMMONDS AND NEWCOMBE Len gth..................................................... Feature NEWSFRONT survey listings. Forward details P rogress.............................................. Shooting P rogress...................................... Pre-Production STORY and stills to; C a st: Tommy Lewis, Freddie Reynolds, Ray Prod C om pany............ Palm Beach Prod P/L (Shooting November, 1977) Prod Com pany.......... Verite Film Productions Barrett, Jack Thompson. Julie Dawson, Don Dist Com pany....................................Roadshow Cast: A n to n io C iacci, Igli V iila n i, local M & L P ty Ltd C r o s b y , R u th C r a c k n e l! , E liz a b e th D irector.............................................Phil Noyce Italian cast.

D irector..............................................Phil Noyce Production Survey, Alexander, Peter Sumner, Peter Carroll, S creenplay.......................................... Bob Ellis Assoc Producer.......................Ross M atthew s Robyn Nevin, Tim Robertson, Jane Harders, P roducer..........................................David Elfick Cinema Papers, S creen play................................ Ken Cameron Ray M eagher, Brian Anderson, M arshall Exec Producer...................... Richard Brennan 143 Therry St., in association with Crosby, M atthew Crosby, Rosie Lilley, Katie Assoc Producer..............................Lynn Gailey Les Newcom be Melbourne 3000.

Cinema Papers cannot and does not accept L ille y , A n g e la Punch, Rob S teele, Bill P hotography........................... Vincent Monton Photography...............................

Russell Boyd any responsibility for inaccuracies resulting C harlton, John Jarrett, B arbara W yndon, Editor.................................................John Scott Telephone: (03) 329 5983 P rogress................................... Pre-Production fro m w r o n g ly c o m p le te d o r u n ty p e d Kevin Myles, Ken Grant, Richard Ussher, Prod M anager......................... Richard Brennan production survey details.

A lan Hardy, John Bowman, M ichael Carmen, Art D irector........ ...................... Larry Eastwood

PRODUCERS, DIRECTORS

and

PRODUCTION COMPANIES

Cinema Papers, October — i 55

PRODUCTION SURVEY Best Boy............................. G eorge Harrington M akeup....................................... Peggy Carter C a te re rs............................... M ovie M unchies 2nd Un[t Asst. D ir e c to r y ..... S teve C onnard E lectricia n ........................... Roland McManus T itle s..............................................Kevin Brooks B udget.................................................. $500.000 Length...................................................... 95 min C olor P rocess........................... Eastm ancolor Progress.............................................. Shooting Cast: John W aters, M elissa Jaffer, Wyn Roberts, Graham Rouse, Keith Lee, Bill Hunter, Les Foxcroft, Graeme Blundell, Kit Taylor, Barbara West.

Synopsis: An action dram a involving a hunt for a m urder suspect by a group of men in a sm all country town. The central character, “ R abbit", an aw kw ard introverted man who has been inadvertently in cluded in the hunt, com es to identify w ith the suspect, an itinerant Polish farm w orker. This brings out the central theme: the readiness of any com m unity to reject or dom inate people who are strange or foreign.

Jonathon Hardy, Maggie M iller, Tony Bonner.

T o n y B a r r y , K u rt L e d e s c h e r , T e r r y McDerm ott, Jonathon Atherton, Gary Day, Joy Verity, W ilson Irving, Frank Geary, Betty R oss, P a tr ic ia N o rm an, Leo W o c k n e r, S a lly a n n e W illia m s , K e v in B a lla n ty n e .

M aurice Hughes.

Synopsis: From the M iles Franklin Aw ard w inning novel by Ronald McKie. The period is 1917-1919— a young man experiences life and death and his first love-affair in a Q ueensland coastal town.

P hotography..................................... J o h n B lic k M ixer........................................... Studio T racks E le ctricia n ..................................... Bill Edwards E ditor................................... ...... . Tony W illiam s Sound Editor............................. Tony Patterson Runners......................................... Scott Hicks, Executive in charge Asst. D irector...................Tom Jacobson (LA) M ark Patterson of P roduction......................................... Pat Cox Camera O perators.................. Stuart Dell (LA).

T itle s.......................................... Adrienne Rolfe Prod M anager.......... Steve Locker Lampson Luis Brown (Melb) B udget.................................................. $700,000 Art D irector.................................................... PaulCarvel G affers............................... Frank Silveira (LA).

Length.................................................... 110 min Prod C o-ordinator..........................................Sue May John Brennan (Melb) C olor P rocess...........................G evacolor680 M usic D irector......................... Peter J. Martin C ontinuity............................... Julie Hines (LA) Progress............................... A w aiting Release C ostum e/W ardrobe........ C hristine Reynolds Asst. Art D irector...................... Cheri Paul (LA) Release Date................................. March, 1978 Location Sound M ixer...................Robert Allen G rips.................................... John M urphy (LA).

Cast: M ichael Craig, Robyn Nevin, Simon M ix e r.................................................... Phil Judd Burke, Lou Brown, Gerard Kennedy, Tony Terry Jacklin (Melb) Still P hotography.................Ron Batzdorf (LA). for Atlab Sound Barry, V incent Ball, Bryan Brown, Roberta Sound Editor....................................... Dell King Grant.

Earl Mante (Melb) Producer's A sst.......... . . . . . . Jan Tyrell Best Boy................................. Ron Batzdorf (LA) Synopsis: The irishman is basically a story MOUTH TO MOUTH Asst D irector.................................................. Bob Barton M akeup......................... Debbie M axwell (LA). of people during a time of change and the Prod C o m p a n y . ......................... Vega Film Focus Puller..................... M ichael Hardcastle Nan Dunne (Melb) effect of that change on the lives of one Productions Pty Ltd Boom O perator......................... Don Reynolds C a terin g..................................... Robyn Preston fam ily in particular. It is also the story of one D irector........................................................ John Duigan G affers....................................... Norman Elder, man w ho would not accept the change and C a sting.................. REB Sunset International S creenplay................................... John Duigan Prod A ssistants.............................Hunt Lowry.

Chick McDonald who decided to exit at the same moment as C o-P roducers............................................... John Duigan C o ntinuity...................................................... Jan Tyrell, the times he had known and lo v e d . . .

Sindy Hawke. Judy Friend.

Jon Sainken Therese O 'Leary Dave Degeus M usic................................................................ RoyRitchie Director of Prod S e cretary............ C hristine Knapp (LA).

LONG WEEKEND P h o to g ra p h y .............................................. Tom Cowan Aerial P h otog rap hy.. Steve Locker Lampson Marlane Pearce (Melb) Editor........................................................... Tony Paterson C o nstruction............................... Russell Collins T itle s......................................... Howard Pearce Prod Com pany............ Dugong Films Pty Ltd Prod M anager...............................................Vicki Molloy Key G rip ................................. Joseph Bleakley Budget.................................................... S80.000 D irector................................... Colin Eggleston A rt D irector..................................... Tracy W att Length...................................................... 94 min Asst Editors.................................................. Jan Gillette, S creenplay........................... Everett De Roche Prod S e cretary..................... Laurel Crampton Progress............................... Aw aiting Release Annie Collins, P roducer............................... Richard Brennan Sound R ecordist........................... Lloyd Carrick Rod Prosser 35mm POST-PRODUCTION C a st: Rick Cassidy. Mary Gavin. Con Covert.

M usic........................................... M ichael Carlos Asst D irector................................................. Alex Rappel Still P hotography......................... Sal Criscillo Bill Margold. Uschi Digart. Serena. Dee Dee Photography...........................Vincent Monton Camera A s s t.................................................NigelBuesst Levitt. Rainbeaux Smith. Clive Hearne. John Technical A d visor...........................................BillDittmer Editor....................................... Brian Kavanagh Boom O perator...............................................PhilStirling Hairdressers...................... Jillian Lawrence, C. Holm es. A n gela M en zie s-W ills. Tom Prod M anager............................. Julie Monton BEST EACH WAY G affer............................................ Terry Jacklin Thumb. Liz Wolfe. Rosemarie Bern. Unas S. Ellen W ishart Art D irector............................. Larry Eastwood Lighting & Grip C o ntinuity................................... Anne M cLeod Cambridge. Peter Kurzon, Lois Owens. Mike Prod S e cretary................................. Lyn Gailey Prod C om pany..................... Andrew Vial Film S ta p p . M ic h a e l B a rto n . S u zy A. Star.

W ardro be/M ake up............ C hristina M ackay Equipm ent........................................... Film obile C ostum es/W ardrobe............... Kevin Reagan Productions Pty Ltd Set Dresser.......... Nicholas van Roosendael Am anda Smith. Herb Layne.

M akeup............................. Christine Reynolds Sound R ecordist........................ John Phillips Dist C om pany...................Seven Keys Pty Ltd G rip.......................................... Paul Am m itzboll Post Production S yn o p s is : A cub reporter is assigned to a Asst D irectors............................. T om B urstall, D irector.......................................... Andrew Vial S till Photography....................................... RobMadden, S upervisor............................................. Pat Cox sexual advice column. She answers ten Chris Maudson, Ross Hamilton S creen play................................... Andrew Vial letters with differing results.

Nigel Buesst A erial S tunts................................................. BillDitmer, Camera O perator...........................Louis Irving P roducer........................................ A ndrew Vial C a terin g.............................Anna-M ary Catering John Nurse, Focus Puller............................... David Brostoff A ssoc Producer............................. Ann Folland B udget.................................................. $129,000 Mark Malone, Camera A sst............................. Robert Powell Len gth...................................................... 12 min INSIDE LOOKING OUT Len gth...................................................... 96 min Ken M cCraken Boom O perator............................................ PhilSterling Progress................................. Post-production C olor P rocess..................................... Eastman Car S tu n ts ...................................... Colin Taylor Prod Com pany....................... Illumination Films G affer......................................... Robbie Young S yn o p sis: The deflow ering of a myth — a P rogress.................................................. Editing Editing F acilities.......... Film Editing Services D irector........................................................ PaulCoxC ontinuity.........................................................Jan Tyrrell history of Australian sport interwoven in a C a st: Kim Krejus, Sonia Peat, Ian Gilmour, E lectricians................................................ John Nurse, Screenplay.....................................................PaulCox.Asst A rt D irector............................................IvanDurrant fictiona l way w ith the grow ing tendency for S e rg e F razzetto, W a lte r Pym, M ichael David M ulholland Set Decorator................................... Tony Hunt A ustralians to opt tow ard spectatorship. The Susan Holly-Jones Carman, Janis Hayes, Roz de W inter, Neil Runners.......................................

Gary Dittmer, Producers................ Paul Cox. Bernard Eddy G rip .................................................................NoelMudie build up of the myth — and a look at the M cColl, Peter Finlay, Robyn Bourne, Lorraine Jane Usher, Second G rip ......................................... Ian Park Assoc Producer.......... Tony Llewellyn-Jones reality.

W est, Jack Brown, Shirley Lester, Joan David Dittmer, P hotography................................................ PaulCoxW ra ngle rs......................... Brian Beaverstock, Letch, M ary Charleston, Peter Felmingham, David Blythe Editor............................................................ PaulCox June Doggett Tom Broadbridge.

THE MANGO TREE T itle s............................................................... Gart Jackson Art D irector.........................Alan Stubenrauch Asst Editor....................................... Ken Sallows S y n o p s is : Two girls escape from a social Consultant...............................

James Parsons Prod C o-ordinator...............................

Bernard Eddy S till P hotography...........................David Parker Prod Com pany........ Pisces Productions P/L w e lfare institution. They meet up with two Len gth..................................................... 95 min Sound R ecordist......................... Russell Hurley Phillip Morris Dist C om pany................... GUO Film Dist. P/L young country guys and together the four C olor Process.....................................

Eastman Asst.

D irector.......................................

Bernard Eddy Best Boy.......................................

Ian Dewhurst D ire cto r......................................... Kevin Dobson struggle to set up home in an old deserted Progress................................. Post-Production Camera O perators..................Peter Tammer.

M akeup................................... Derek De Niese S creen play................................... M ichael Pate warehouse. But their options are limited; it is Release Date............................... February 1978 Bryan G racey Transpo rt.................................................... John Chase P rodu cer....................................... M ichael Pate C a s t: V in c e n t Gil, Lisa Peers, M artyn Focus Puller................ ................ W illiam Kerr Runner....................................... M ark W illiam s A ssoc P roducer.......................... M ichael Lake a question of survival more than choice.

Sanderson, Davina W hitehouse, Maxwell Camera A s s t.................................. John Twegg B udget.................................................. $270,000 M u sic........................................................... M arc W ilkinson Fernie, Perry Arm strong, Frances Edmund, Boom O perator.......................Bruce Lamshed Length.................................................... 100 min P h otog rap hy................................ Brian Probyn " U n c le '’ Roy Stark, G illian Hope, Val Murphy, IN SEARCH OF ANNA C lapper L o a d e r................................... Sandra Irvine G auge................................... 35mm Panavision E d itor.............................................................. John Scott V eronica Lawrence.

G affer.............................................................

Ross Lander C olor P rocess..................................... Eastman Prod M anage r................................. Tom B inns Prod Com pany................... Storm Productions S y n opsis: A film about four people who lead C o ntinuity............ .................... Julie M illow ick P ro g re ss,. .........................Aw aiting Release A rt D irector................................................... Les Binns Pty Ltd solo lives.

Asst.

Unit M anager..........

Darrelyn Gunzburg Release Date...........................November 1977 Prod S u pervisor.......................................... Geoff G ardiner D irector..........................................Esben Storm Set Decorator..................... Alan Stubenrauch C a st: John Hargreaves, Briony Behets.

Prod C o -ordinator........................................Irene Korol S creen play....................................Esben Storm G rip ............ ■............................. Paddy Reardon S yn opsis: A couple whose m arriage has Prod S e cretary..................

Irene Korol Producer........................................Esben Storm Still Photography............................ Wim Cox. deteriorated decide to get away from it all THE TREE P roducer's A sst........................... FelippaPate Assoc Producer......................... Natalie M iller Heinz Lambertin over a long weekend. They travel to a M us ic ..............................................John Martyn,.

Prod A c co u n ta n t....................................... Vivian Falloon D ire c to r........................................................... IanStocks Script A ssts................................ Bernard Eddy.

Allan Stlvell secluded spot and realize too late that nature C o stum e/W ardrobe....................................... PatForster, S creen play..................................................... IanStocks Tony Llewellyn-Jones has decided to get her own back on them.

Terry Ryan, Photography............................. M ichael Edols P rodu cer......................................................... IanStocks M akeup........................................................

Trudy Simms Heather M cLaren E ditor.......................................... Dusan W erner Exec P roducer.........................O liver Streeton C a tering..................

Gus Eddy.

Kate H alliwell Sound R e cord ist..........................Barry Brown Prod M anager................................... Jane Scott Photography.....................Geoff Burton A.C.S. Personnel Physician............ Dr James Khong M ixe r.............................................. Peter Brown Art Director.....................................................Sally Campbell C ostum es/W ardrobe.......................Jane Oehr Titles................................................ Julian Eddy Dubbing Editor....................... Andrew Steuart Prod S e cretary........................................ Robyn Bucknall SUMMER CITY Sound Recordist......................................... Carlo Tarchi Length...................................................... 92 min Asst D irectors........................... M ichael Lake, Location M anager........................................Kate Grenville Camera O perator....................... Geoff Burton Prod Com pany........................... Avalon Films, Color P rocess........................... Eastmancolor Tovio Lember, Prod A s s t............................ Zelda Rosenbaum Camera A s s t.........................Peter Lipscom be Summer City Productions Progress............................... Aw aiting Release John Hipweli Sound R ecordist........................................Laurie Fitzgerald Boom O perator.......... Richard Arnold (FTVS) D irector............................. C hristopher Fraser C ast: Briony Behets. Tony Llewellyn-Jones.

Camera O perator............................. Peter Moss Sound Editor............................. M ichaelNorton C lapper/Loader. . Shayiah M cCarthy (FTVS) S creen play...............................................

Phillip Avalon Dam Eddy. Juliet Bacskai. Norman Kaye.

Focus P u lle r................................................ PaulMurphy Asst D irectors................................... IlianTiano, C o ntinuity........ '.............................. Jenny Taylor P roducer................................................... Phillip Avalon Elke Neidhart.

Cam era A ssista nt..................... Steve Neuman George M iller Set D ecorator....................................... Bob Hill Assoc Producers...............................

Fontana.

S y n opsis: In many m arriages a state of truce Boom O perator...... M arkW asiutak Focus P u lle r................................. Paul Murphy Horse Handler...................... John Hollingdale Happy Investments and vacuum develops. Such is the case with C lappe r/Loade r....................... Harry Glynatsis C lappe r/Loade r.............................. Grant Fenn T ech nical A d visor...................................... Bert Carlon M usic................................................................ PhilButkis the m arriage of E lizab eth and Robert.

G a ffe r.............................................Alan W alker G affer..................................... Brian Bansgrove M akeup.................... Cherie Rawson-Harris P hotography.................................

Jerry Marek Elizabeth's realization of unfulfilm ent in her C o n tin u ity.............................. Barbara Burleigh C o ntinuity...........................................................Jo W eeks E le c tric ia n ..............................John Cummines Editor............................................. David Stiven relationship w ith Robert brings her closer to C asting C onsultants................. M ichael Pate, A dditional P h o to g ra p h y .. M alcolm Richards Runner.....................C a the rine M illa r (FTVS) Prod M anager...........................Lionel Slutzkin her daughter Dani but offers her no practical and A ssociates P/L G rip..................................................................NoelMcDonald B udget.................................................... $25,000 Art D irector................................................... Jann Harris solution. This film makes an attem pt at Second Unit P h otog rap hy... Ron Johannsen Stunt C o-ordinator.......... Graham Matherick Len gth...................................................... 25 min Prod Designer.............................

Karmen Doran penetrating the contradictions of personal A ssistant A rt D irector.................James Parker Asst E ditor......................................... Hugh Piper C olor process............................ Eastm ancolor Prod C o-ordinator.......................................... A.Mascord m otivation.

Set D e cora tor............................. Peter Kendall Still Photography..................................... CarolJerems Progress....................................Post-Production Unit M anager............................................... RonSwanson Standby P rops........................................... John Powditch Best Boy......................................................... PaulGantner Release Date...............................O ctober 1977 M usic D irector.............................................. PhilButkis G rip ......................................... Grahame Mardell M akeup......................................................... Anne Pospichil •FTVS — Film School Attachm ent C ostum es/W ardrobe........................... Karen C o n stru ctio n ............................... G regS proule Len gth.................................................... 110 min THE IRISHMAN C a st: John Jarratt, Ralph Cotterill, Hugh Vaughan-W illiam s Asst E d itors.................................. Emile Prebe, Color Process..................................... Eastman K e a y s - B y r n e , P r a b h u B o d a , J u s t in e Prod Com pany.................. Forest Home Films Sound R ecordist................................... Bill Pitt Sue Scott P rogress................................. Post-Production Saunders, Peter Thompson.

Pty. Ltd. M ixer.................................................... Phil Judd Foreign Language S y n o p s is : A y o u n g la n d -h u n te r g e ts C a st: Richard Moir, Judy M orris, Gerda Dist Com pany.......... ...................... G.U.O. Film Sound Editor................................................Klaus Jaritz C o nsultant/C oach...................... Moni Dobson Nicholson, C hris Haywood, Gary Waddell, s e p a ra te d from his c om panions and is D istributors Special Photographic .

Still Photography.........................George M iller c a p tu re d by a m ad tra p p e r. S tra n g e Bill Hunter, Ian Nimmo, Alex Taifer, Richard D irector...................................................... Donald Crombie E ffe cts.......................................................... Klaus Jaritz H airdresser....................

Lolly Perez o c c u r r e n c e s in the bush in th e late M urphett, M aurie Fields, Lou Brown, Shuvus, S creenplay................................................ Donald Crom bie D irector........................................... M ichaelCarlton Asst Best Boy.................................. John Cummings nineteenth century.

M artin Sharp, V irginia Mort.

Producer................................ Anthony Buckley Camera O perator......................... Jerry Marek M akeup............................................ Jose Perez M usic................................. Charles M arawood Camera A ssistant............... George Kopacka Flying Sequence S yn o p s is : In Search of A nna is a story P hotography.....................Peter James A.C.S. G affer.......................................................... Peter Stadler S u pervisio n/P ilot.........................Alan Peterson about com ing to term s w ith one's past and Editor........................................... T im W ellburn C o ntinuity............................... Christina Mackay Flying Sequence then w ith the present, accepting the here Prod M anager............................................ Ross Matthews C asting C onsultants.................................. M itch M athews 35mm AWAITING RELEASE C o-ordinators......................... Charles Deane, and now, and moving into the future w ith a Art D irector.............................. Graham W alker Second Unit P hotography.......... Klaus Jaritz Bob Schuh, positive attitude tow ards life.

Prod Designer.......................................... Owen W illiam Assts Art D ire c to r.. Karen Vaughan-W illiam s Neil Hartman Unit M anager.......................Beverley Davidson Key G rip......................................... Paul Nevan Ken Peterson Prod S ecretary................................................. SuArmAsst strong Editors.................................................Derek Catterall, FANTASM COMES AGAIN SOLO S tunts............................................... Grant Page, C ostum es/W ardrobe...............Judith Dorsman Alan Trott (form erly “ Fantasm 99“ ) John Baird, Prod Com pany............................. David Hannay Sound Recordist......................... Gary W ilkins Still P hotography........................................ MaiKearney, E lectricia n ..................................Peter M oloney Tony W illiam s Prod Com pany................................... First Film M ixer........................*..................... Peter Fenton Lionel Slutzkin Runners............................. ..

M artin Flannery, Productions Pty Ltd Finance Pty Ltd for Sound E ditor................................. Bob Cogger S crip t A sst.................................................. Peta Alexiou Bruce Arm strong D irector.......................................................... Tony W illiam sAustralian International Film Corporation Asst. D irectors............................................. M ark Egerton, H airdresser................................................... Rosa Miano T itle s ......................... Peter & Am anda Newton S creen play................................. Tony W illiams, Dist Com pany..................................... Filmways M ark T urnbull, Penny Chapman Best Boy...................................................... Alex W atson B udget.................................................. $650,000 Martyn Sanderson D irector................................... Colin Eggleston Camera O perator...........................John Seale M akeup................................... Bromwyn Jones Len gth.................................................... 110 min P roducers................................... David Hannay, S creenplay................................... Ross Dimsey Focus Puller........ ................. David W illiamson G raphic A rtist.......................................... Phillip M ortlock C olor Process..................................... Eastman Tony W illiam s Producer............................. Antony I. Ginnane Boom O perator................ Julian M cSweeney Scenic A rtist.............................................. Brian Maloney P rogress.................................................. Editing Exec Producers............................... Bill Sheat, Exec Producers..................... Robert F. Ward.

C lappe r/Loade r.......................................... David Foreman Neg M atch ing............................................ Ellen O 'Brien Release Date........................... November 1977 John Sturzaker M ark Josem G affer.......................................................... M iles Moulson E lectrician................................................. Peter Stadler C a s t: G era ld in e F itzge rald, C h ris to p h e r Assoc P roducer............................. T on yTro ke Assoc Producer............................... Leon Gorr C ontinuity..................................................... LynM cEncroe Runners..........................................................John Edman Pate, Robert Helpmann, Gerard Kennedy, M us ic .......................................... Robbie Laven, M usic...................................................... Jon Mol Casting Consultants.......... M and L Casting T itle s........................................................... David Denean G loria Dawn, Dianne Craig, Barrie Pierce, Marion Arts, P hotography...........................Vincent Monton G rip.................................................................RossErickson Budget.................................................. $200,000 Carol Burns, Gerry Duggan, Ben Gabriel, Dave Fraser Editor..........................................Tony Patterson Stunt C o-ordinator...................... Heath Harris Length...................................................... 90 min Prod M anager...................Tom Jacobson (LA) Asst. Editor............................................... Jam ie Robertson C olor process..................................... Eastman Art D irector...................Antony Brockliss (LA) H airdresser................................. Jenny Brown.

P rogress.................................Aw aiting Release C ostum es/W ardrobe......... Anye Coffey (LA) Best Boy....................................... Eddy Hendel Release Date............................. Christm as 1977 THE LAST WAVE BLUE FIRE LADY Sound R ecordists.......... Neil Rozensky (LA).

M akeup....................................... Peggy Carter C a st: John Jarrat, Phil Avalon, Steve Bisley, See Production Report, pages 147-153.

See Production Report, pages 163-168, Don Boardman (Melb) Scenic A rtis t............................... Ned McCann M el Gibson, James Elliot, Abigail, Debbie

BHBBBBi

156 — Cinema Papers, October

PRODUCTION SURVEY Forman, Judith W oodroofe, W ard Austin.

V icki Hekimian, Ross Bailey, Hank T ick, Carl . Rorke. Guest appearance: M arshall Bros ».

Band, Peter M cGovern. ;<!

Synopsis: A period psycho-dram a set in a S’ sm all co a s ta l to w n in c lu d in g suspense, m urder and m ystery. v

P h o to g ra p h y .'.................. D avid Sanderson Best Boy................................... Sam Bienstock E d ito r..................................... G. T urney-S m ith M akeup. .............................Josy Knowland U nit M anage r.......................Penny Chapm an B udget.................................................. $120,000 ’ A rt D ire c to r................................................ David C opping Length...................................................... 90 min Mai Prod S e c re ta ry ......................... B a rba ra Ring P rogress.............................................. Shooting W a rd ro b e ................................... Helen Dyson Release date................................................. 1978 *| Sound R e c o rd is t.............................Tim Lloyd C a st: Cathey Paine, Cheryl W aters, Tony Sound T ra n s fe rs ....................... Rod Pascoe B onner, M ark P ierce, S h eila Helpm ann, Sound E d ito r.............................................. K erry Regan Penne H a ckforth-Jo nes, Leon G regory, Sound A s s t.................................................. Jim C urrie Q u e e n ie A s h to n , M ax M e ld ru m , B a rry 35mm IN RELEASE S p ecial E ffe c ts ............................................ Ian Jam ieson Creyton.

A s s t D ire c to rs ..................... John Robertson, S yn o p sis: Yvonne A rthur is a m ixture of S cott Hicks, charm and humour, spontaneity and spunk C h ris W illiam s . .. but she's also amoral and an acute For details of the following 35mm film s in Focus P u lle r.............................David Forem an opportunist accustom ed to living by her w its release see the previous issue.

C am era A s s t.......................... D avid Forem an and other people's money. W hat starts as an C la p p e r/L o a d e r.............................................KajLindstrom in nocent reunion with an old schoolm ate, Cosy Cool G a ffe r...........................................................C raig Bryant who is heiress to millions, gradually builds to The Getting of Wisdom C o n tin u ity ....................................................Moya Iceton where Yvonne grabs at the opportunity of a .. .

High Rolling C asting C o n s u lta n t.....................L iz M ulllnar life of leisure.

Journey Among Women S tandb y P rops........................... C lark M unro Summerfield Props A s s t................................... Ian Jamieson THE IMPORTANCE OF KEEPING The Green Machine Key G rip ..................................................... NoelM cDonald PERFECTLY STILL Hot To Trot A s s t E d ito r.......................... M ichael A tkinson form erly “ A Flash in the Pan’’ N u m be ring A s s t.........................N igel G ooden Still photography........................ Corrie Ancone Prod C o m pa ny................ K o o ka b u rra Prods.

Best B o y .......................................Keith Johnson D ire cto r................................................. M ichaelPattinson M akeup..........................................................LloydJames S creen play........................................... M ichaelPattinson G ra p h ic A rtis t........................

Ann B row ning P roducer............................................ M ark Ruse For details of the follow ing 35mm film s C a rp e n te r................................. J o h n T ra ffo rd consult the previous issue: M u sic..................................... The Third M ilitary B o ok-ke eper...............................

Betite Vivian D istrict Band, Body Count A cco unts S u p e rv is io n ............................... Stan Green Additional Arrangem ents: The Beat Goes On The Importance of Keeping Perfectly Still Location C a te rin g .................................... M ovie M unchies John Clifford W hite.

M ark II Photography................................................ Chris Batson highly in dividual ways. It is a sad, happy — Territory. Ted has w ritten songs about the B u dget................................................... $150,000 E ditor...................................................... M ichaelPattinson som etim es hilarious — look at basic human characters and places in the N.T., so his Len g th ......................................................75 min Prod M anager................................. M ark Ruse 16mm PRODUCTION SURVEY dilemma. m usic provides the links in the journey and G a u g e ..........................................................16mm A rt D irector............................. M ichael Rogers introduces many of the unique people they P ro g re s s................................................... Editing M usic D irector.................Captain B.H. Bignell meet.

Csat: K ris M cQuade, Dennis G rosvenor, C ostum e/W ardrobe.................................... Jutta Goetze BLUEPRINT FOR SURVIVAL Leon C o sak, M ic h a e l A itk e n s , M oyse Sound R ecordist..............................................B illBaxter APOSTASY (Working Title) Kedem , John O rcsik, Richard M eikle.

Asst. D irector.......................................... Roger Bayley EARTH PATROL Synopsis: A young couple are captured by Prod C om pany............................... Ukiyo Films Prod C om pany...............Mantis W ildlife Films Camera O perator........................................Chris Batson te rro ris ts tra in in g in the desert.

D ire cto r............................... Zbigniew Freidrich D irector............................ v. . . Densey Clyne Cam era Asst.s...........................Jam ie Gordon, Prod Company................................... Earthfilm David Collyer S creen play.......................... Zbigniew Freidrich S c rip t................................. ..........Densey Clyne Productions P/L Boom O perators.............................. Paul Elliott, Exec Producers........................Don McLennon, P ro d u c e rs ............................................... Densey Clyne, D irector............................................................CarlSchultz Beamish Elliott HEYDAYS David Thomas Jim Frazier Screenplay..................................................... Bob Casvell G rip ............................................................... David G ornall Photography...................... Zbigniew Freidrich M usic......................................................... Derek Strahan Producer........................................... John Leah Prod C o m pa ny.. •................................... P.l.F.T. Stunt C o-ordinator................. M ichael Rogers E d ito r.................................. Zbigniew Freidrich Photography................................................. Jim Frazier Production House.......... M artin W illiam s P/L D jrector............................................. Eva Lothar S till Photography........................... Jack W olfs Sound R ecordist.........................Lloyd C arrick E ditor.............................................................. Jim Frazier Sound R ecordist............................. Paul Clark S creen play......................

Eva Lothar, Post Prod S viso r.............. I .......... Alan Doble Camera A ssists...............................Phil Cross, S p ecial Photography N arrator..................................... Spike M illigan David Rapsey S crip t Consultant.................. Brian Robinson V irginia Brook E ffe cts........................................................ Jim Frazier Budget.................................................... $39,434 Producer................................. Judith Prindiville M akeup............................................. Sandra Olin Boom O perator........................... Tim Isaacson N a rrator.....................................................Densey Clyne Len gth...................................................... 35 min A ssoc Producer..........................................Steve Jodrell T itle s ......................................................... Sheila Loh C o ntinuity....................................... Vivian Mehs Length...................................................... 20 min (plus 20 min video) M usic........................................,_Paul Dickinson Len gth.............................................................. 20 min Props........................................Brom wyn Evans C olor P rocess............................... Ektachrome C olor P rocess..................................... Eastman Photography.............................................. Tony W ilson C olor Process..................................... Eastman C hief G rip ....................................... Gerry Lock Progress........................................................... InRelease P rogress....................................... In Production Editors............................................................ EvaLothar, Progress................................. Post-Production Budget......................................................S50.000 Release Date....................................Septem ber, 1977 Cast: Spike M illigan, Frank Thring, Marty Kirsten Hill Release Date...........................November 1977 Length................................... : ................ 90 min Rhone, Eric Summons, Kim Durant.

Cast: Insects of many kinds.

Prod M anager............................. Helen Coffey C a st: Liddy Clark, Janet Lord, Frederick P rogress................................. Post-Production Synopsis: Professor Plum and his assistant Synopsis: Follows on from Every Care But Sound R ecordist..................... Tony Patterson Parslow, Peter Sardi, Frank Thring, Frank C a s t:J u lie t Bacskai, Roderick M cNicol, Phil Garth are assigned by mastermind animal No Responsibility. A film about the way M ix e r........................................................... Peter Fenton W ilson, Debbie Beckefeld, Susan Cameron, M otherw ell, Alan Money. sm uggler Caldeoni to acquire a bulk order of insects grow and develop. The straight­ Asst. D irector............................. David Rapsey Bob Hicks, M ichelle Kidd, Harry Lister, Jason Synopsis: A cla ustrophobic chronicle, a few forw ard developm ent of some young insects the rare Queensland Hairy Nosed Wombat.

Camera O perator................................. Phil Bull P a rs lo w , A lv in R e n d e ll, Rod S p ra g u e , days during the summer of 1975. Against the (nymphs) is contrasted with the dram atic In this endeavor they are thwarted by Camera A sst................................................ PhilMurray Presbyterian Ladies College School Choir, backd rop of prem ature elections, tw o people members of the Earth Patrol, with com ic change that must take place before other Boom O perator................................... Nye.Smith The Third M ilitary D istrict Band. meet and system atically talk them selves into young insects (larvae) are able to look and results. (Pilot for projected TV series.)

C lappe r/Loade r.......................Benoit Beckers a separation. Helplessly bound by verbosity S y n o p s is : C h a r le s is a y o u n g m an behave as their parents did, (Part of a series C o ntinuity.................................................... Helen Coffey of the educated, unable to match each of short film s on the behavior and life app ren ticed to a high society pho tograph er Still P hotography......................................... PhilMurray EVERY CARE BUT NO o th e r 's p a s s io n a te e m o tio n s , th e y are histories of invertebrate animals.) around the turn of the last century. When B udget.................................................... $28,000 his boss receives a vice regal app ointm ent doomed to c yclic revolts and betrayals, w hile RESPONSIBILITY Len gth..................................................... 26 min to p h o to g ra p h the g o v e rn o r's fa m ily , the outside w orld eats, dreams and m urders DREAMS Color: P rocess................................... Eastman Prod Com pany.............. M antis W ildlife Films in spite of them. One day they must decide.

C h arles c a n 't qu ite handle the strain of this Release Date.................................August 1977 D ire cto r....................................... Densey Clyne Prod C o m p a n y .....................Andrew Vial Film and a love a ffa ir at the sam e tim e. Having C a st: M ark Sargent, David Dwyer.

S c rip t........................................... Densey Clyne Productions P/L dou b ts in her m ind, his la dy frie n d Nora S yn o p sis: Mark, a city boy, goes to live in P roducers............................................. Densey Clyne, D irector.......................................... Andrew Vial in sists that she m ust have a ‘ s ig n ’ from the country. He feels out of place, doesn't AUSTRALIA’S OWN BEEF BREED Jim Frazier P roducer....................................... Andrew Vial heaven befo re a m arriage m ay take place. like the w ork or the people. His only apparent M usic......................................................... Derek Strahan A ssoc P roducer.........................Roland Probst Prod C om pany......................................Austral love, a horse, takes him to adventure and Photography................................................. Jim Frazier Andrew Vial P acific Productions Photography........................ recognition by his country friends.

E ditor.............................................................

Jim Frazier Length............................................................

11 min D irector............................................................ Eric Fullilove KNOW YOUR BEEF Special Photographic G a u g e ..............................16mm (for blow-up S c rip t................................................................ Eric Fullilove E ffects....................................................... Jim Frazier to 35mm) Prod Com pany......................... Austral P acific P rodu cer................................... A. J. Helgeson HOLIDAY AT SEA N a rrator.....................................................Densey Clyne Progress.................................................. Editing Productions P h otography....................................................PhilDority Length...................................................... 20 min Prod Com pany......................... Austral Pacific of Hollywood. Shot D irector......................................... Eric Fullilove E d itor............................................ Paul Maxwell Synopsis: The m agic C olor Process............................... Ektachrome Productions during Filmex 77 with the stars of today S c rip t............................................. Eric Fullilove Sound R ecordist.......... Berry Van Bronkhurst D irector..................................... A. J. Helgeson Progress........................................................... InRelease against a backdrop of the stars of yesterday.

Producer................................... A. J. Helgesori T itle s................................................................FranBurke Release Date....................................September, 1977 Producer................................... A. J. Helgeson P hotography.....................................Phil Dority N arrator.......................................... Barry Eaton Photography............................. HansH eidrich Cast: Insects of many kinds.

E ditor........................................... Roy Christian Len gth...................................................... 26 min DREAM DOORS Editor.......................................

Gregory Ropert Synopsis: A film about the astonishing egg­ Sound R ecordist.......... Berry Van Bronkhurst C olor P rocess..................................... Eastman laying habits of female insects, and of their Sound Recordist...................... Roy Christian T itle s ................................................. Fran Burke Prod Com pany.............. Fotofilm Productions Release Date..................................... July 1977 relationship with their offspring.

It starts with T itle s ................................................................Fran Burke Narrators.......................

Barry Eaton, Ron Day S p onsor..........................................M urray Grey D ire c to r..................................... Gaytana Adorna' the sim ple dropping of eggs on the forest Length...................................................... 18 min Length...................................................... 25 min S creen play...............................G aytana Adorna , Beef Cattle Society floor, as by phasmids, and runs through C olor Process.....................................

Eastman C olor Process..................................... Eastman Synopsis: The history and general story of P roducer.................... Rob M cCubbin behavior of increasing com plexity, as the Release Date..................................... July 1977 Release Date.................................. July 1977 Photography.............................Rob M cCubbin M u rra y G re y B e e f C a ttle B re e d th a t m other prepares food and shelter for the S ponsor...................................................... Sitm ar Cruise Sponsor......................................... M urray Grey E ditor.......................... Rob M cCubbin flourishes throughout Australia. offspring she w ill never see. (Part of a series Lines A ustralia Beef Cattle Society Sound R ecordist............ G abriella Batchelor Synopsis: A story of a 16-day cruise to the of short film s on the behavior and life Prod S e cretary...............................Sandra Potts Pacific Islands on Sitm ar’s Fairstar. histories of invertebrate animals.)

Synopsis: Explanation of the cuts of beef G rap hics.......................................................... DesBunyon BALANCE w ith M aster Butcher, Ron Day. B udget.......................................................... $2500 (W orking Title) Len gth...................................................... 15 min Prod C om pany.......................V iew finder Films C olor Process..................................... Eastman FIRST THINGS FIRST IMAGE OF DEATH D irector................................... M icha Nussinov Progress.................... Pre-Production THE LAST TASMANIAN Prod C o m pa ny.. Gemini Productions Pty Ltd Co-authors.......... Jenny and M icha Nussinov Release Date............................................... July 1978D ire c to r......................................... Paul Jansen D irector.........................................................Kevin Dobson S creen play................................... Paul Jansen Prod C o m p a n y .. . . ARTIS Film P rodu ctions C o -p ro d u c e rs ... Jenny and M icha Nussinov Cast: John Crowley, Sandra Potts.

P rodu cer......................... Aphrodite K. Jansen S creenplay........................... Bruce A. W ishart Pty Ltd in a ssociation w ith Tasm anian P hotography........................... M icha Nussinov Synopsis: A lfred can't cope in his job or his P roducer................................... Robert Bruning Photography................................... Ivan Hexter D epartm ent of Film P rodu ction and S ociété E ditor........................................ David Huggett lonely life, so he changes it and it changes Exec P roducer.........................Stephan Kibler E d itor................................ ....

Louis F. Anivitti F rançaise de P roduction Sound R ecordist............ Nicholas_Alexander him .. . but into what?

A rt D irector................................. John Morgan M usic................................... Sloggett and Clark D ist C o m p a n y .. . . ARTIS Film P rodu ctions Camera O perator............ .... . M icha Nussinov W ardro be....................................... Jane Howat Photography............................... Gary Hansen Pty Ltd Camera A sst........................................M ike Roll A DROP OF ROUGH TED Sound R ecordist......................... Lloyd Carrick Editor............................................... Trevor Ellis D ire cto r......................................... Tom Haydon B u d g e t.. ' .............................................. $25,000 Cam era A s s t............................. Robert Powell Prod M anager.......................................... Terrie Vincent S creen play...................................Tom Haydon, Len g th .................................................... 50 min Prod Com pany................. Nomad Enterprises G affer............................................Tony Holtham A rt D irector................................... John Carroll Rhys Jones G auge......................................................... 16mm D irector........................................ David Roberts C o ntinuity...........................- . . Anne McCleod Prod C o-ordinator.......................................CarolW illiam s cer....................................... Tom Haydon C olor P rocess........ Eastm ancolor Neg. 4727 P rodu S creenplay............ .................. David Roberts, B udget........................................................$4852 Prod S e cretary.....................................

Ann Hall Progress.................................................. Editing Assoc Producers........................................

RayBarnes, Ted Egan (to double-head) Unit M anager.............................................. David Bowden Roger Fauriat Release Date.................................... Early 1978 Producers................................. David Roberts, Len gth...................................................... 30 min C ostum e/W ardrobe....................... Carol Berry Photography................................................Geoff Burton C ast: M aggie F itzg ib b o n , B rid g e t Pluis, Sandra Richardson C olor P rocess..................................... Eastman Sound Recordist............................... C liff Curll E d itor............................................. Charles Rees S e rg e M a rtic h -O s te rm a n ^ G is e lle and M usic....................................................Ted Egan P rogress.......................................In Production Asst D irector........................... Peter Appleton Prod C o-ordinator.......................................... RozBerrystone M icheline Arnauld, stars of Edgley Inter­ Photography................................................ Geoff Burton C ast: T ony Bonner, Carm en Duncan.

Camera A sst............................... ,. Bob Hughes TASM ANIA n a tio n a l C ircus, p a tie n ts of G la d e s v ille Prod M anager.................. Sandra Richardson S y n o p s is : A study in infatuation.

Boom O perator........ •...........Julian M cSwiney Location M anager............ Graham M cKinney M ental Hospital.

Sound R ecordist.................................... Robert W ells G affer............................................. M ick Morris Prod A sst...................................... G illian Leahy Synopsis: Balance is that elusive, intangible Budget.................................................... $80,000 C ontinuity.................................................... Jenny Q uigley Prod S e cretaries.................. Adrienne Elliott, “ som ething" we are all striving for. Those Len gth....................................... approx. 50 min HARVEST OF HATE Props Buyer...............................Robert Flaherty Rosanne Andres-Baxter who have crossed the very thin line between C olor Process............................. Eastman 7247 Standby P rops............................................. Keith Heygate Sound Recordist......................... Robert W ells balance and im balance are fighting to get Prod C o m pa ny................... South A u stralian P rogress.................................................. Editing G rip .................................................................Ross Erickson Camera O perators.....................G eoff Burton, back over it. O thers spend their entire lives Film C orporation Synopsis: A m usic special shot prim arily in Asst Editor.....................................................Vicki Ambrose Gert Kirchner trying to make sure they stay firm ly on the D ire c to r............................... M ichael T h o rnh ill docum entary style. The film follow s the Still P hotography............................. L uisN igro C am era A s s ts .....................Russell G allow ay, right side of it. This film looks at ordinary and P ro d u c e r......................................... Jane Scott journey of Ted Egan and his 18 year old son H airdresser........................... George Gaudron G illia n Leahy extra ord inary people seeking balance in Exec P ro d u c e r.............................M att C a rro ll M ark in their travels around the Northern

Si

■

■ I

■ K m

BH B |¡ ¡ i |

Ed

B P S p;miM l àIki: W£Âf

-c...

fit

ÊÊÊÈËèSë ? m m W w m m mÈÈÈtÈÈÌ:, mmBÊmw *'****ri^lnv wBÊÊm liB llC if1 1 |®

\j

Mi

t:« ;l ■ M W i :mÊÈËÈÊàÊISÈm^ËÊ^WBÊmm U U

Cinema Papers, October — 157

LIGHTING FOR ENTERTAINMENT

NEWS FLASH

HIRE SALES & T E C H N IC A L SERVICE

®

FRESNELS

I kW

©

SOFTLIGHTS

©

H.M.I. DAYLIGHT SPOTLIGHTS

2 kW

For All M otion Picture P ro d u c e rs CINEVEX FILM LABORATORIES PTY LTD.

5 kW

o f 15 -17 G ordon ST E ls te rn w ic k . VIC.

575 W 120 0 W 2500 W

A n n o u n ce s 7247 & 5247 E.C.N. P rocessing C o m in g S oon • This L a b o ra to ry P hone

528 6188

R.G. FILM SERVICES

(Processing 16mm color and black and white.) and

JOHN PHILLIPS SOUND (16/35mm sound recording, 8 track Rock and Roll mixing and transfers.)

STRAND

E LE C T R IC

A D IV IS IO N OF RANK INDUSTRIES AUSTRALIA

PTY. LTD.

HEAD OFFICE M ELBO URNE

19 T R E N T S T R E E T B U R W O O D V IC T O R IA 3 1 2 5

SYDNEY

SALES

29 3724

HIRE

2 9 2 213

SALES

4 39 7508

HIRE

439 1962

AREA REPRESENTATIVES BRISBANE

262 4622

ADELAIDE

337 7000

LAUNCESTON

2 5322

P E RT H

28 1 6 0 8

are both at 482c Glenhuntly Rd., Elsternwick.

For top quality at the right price ________ phone, (03) 528 2011

PRODUCTION SURVEY Prod S ecretary........................

Linda DrakeS yn opsis: A study of refracted and reflected C ontinuity................................. Roz Berrystone M ixer..................................... M urray Film sound Runner...................................Andrew M arshall C ostum e/W ardrobe....................................CarolBerry Second Unit P hotography........ Gert Kirchner Still Photography............................. Keith Cox B ook-keeper................................. Betite Vivian light above and below the surface of the sea Sound Recordist............................... C liff Curll e n v iro n m e n t. L ig h t ta k e s on a th re e ­ Still Photography............................. W ilfE lv e y Budget........................................................$2530 A cco unts Supervisor...................Stan Green Asst D irector........................... Peter Appleton dim ensional character like a natural form of G rip ............................................ Gary Clements Length...................................................... 10 min Location C a tering.................Movie M unchies Camera A sst................................................... Jan Kenny E lectrician................................... Lem bit Laats B/W S tock............................... Plus-X Negative Budget.................................................. $150,000 moving colored holography.

Boom O perator.........................Jack Friedman FRANCE Progress........................................... In Release Length...................................................... 75 min G affer............................................. M ick M orris Prod M anager.............................................Pierre Robin C a st: Des Mulcahy, M ichael M ulcahy, Jan G auge..................................................... 16mm Continuity.........................................Jo Weeks Photography..................................... G uyM acou Pratt, M ichael Cottor, Charmaine Bird, Robin P rogress....................................... In Production RED DOG Props Buyer..................................... Harry Zettel Sound R ecordist........................... M ario Vinck McKenzie.

Cast: Celia De Burgh, John Jarrett, John D ire c to r;....................................... Ivan Durrant Standby Props............................................ Harry Zettel Camera A sst............................................ Adrien Fortis S yn opsis: A "serio-com edy” of a m otivation W alters, Jack Higham, M arie Darcy, Zev G rip................................... ... Merv M cLaughlan S creenplay.................................................. IvanDurrant C o ntinuity.................................Roz Berrystone for m urder induced through the oppression E le fth e r io o , A n d re w M a rk w e ll, S tu a r t Still Photography.............................Jean More Asst Editor.................................V icki Am brose Producer....................................... Ivan Durrant of a persistent nightmare.

Leggett, David Hursthouse, Rob George, E le ctricia n ................................... Jean Mouton Still P hotography......................... M ikeG iddens M us ic................................................. Asher Bilu Isbael Kirk, Glenys Sazez, Tony Allison, Best Boy................................... Sam Bienstock Photography................................... Louis Irving UNITED KINGDOM M ichael Shead, W ayne Anthony, Renfrey MORTIMER Photography....................................... M ike Fox M akeup..................................... Josy Knowland Editors..............................................................IvanDurrant, Ansell, Anthony Serradura. .Prod C o m pa ny.................. U nderw ood Film s Budget................................... $105,000 Robert Gibson Sound R ecordist...........................Edward Tise Synopsis: A young car m echanic deafened D irector............................. Theo van Leeuwen Length...................................................... 75 min A rt D irector.................................................. IvanDurrant Camera A sst.............................. Steve Haskett in an accident, falls in love.

S creen play....................... Theo van Leeuwen Still Photography.................. Eileen Tw eedie Progress.................................................. M ixing Prod Secretary............................................. Judy Durrant Producer........................... Peter N. C. H. Rose G raphics Designer................ Bernard Lodge Release Date.............................................. 1978 Music D irector................................. Asher Bilu TAKE IT OR LEAVE IT Exec Producer............................ Paul P. Manos Rostrum Camera O perator.......... Ken Morse C a st: Davina W hitehouse, Kay Taylor, Kate Sound R ecordist...........................Lloyd C arrick Prod C o m p a n y................. Nomad Enterprises M us ic........................................... M ichael Carlos M ixer............................................. Bob Gardiner Sound Editor................................. M ic k A u d le y Fitzpatrick, G ary Day. Photography................................................G eoff Burton D irector.............................. Sandra Richardson Asst. Editors............................. Kate G renville, S yn opsis: W hen Prue Simpson answ ers an Sound Editor................................................ IvanDurrant Editors....................................... Douglas Craig, Screenplay........................ Sandra Richardson advertisem ent for a position as a night nurse Special E ffe cts............................................ IvanDurrant Anna A m brose Frank Heimans P roducer............................ Sandra Richardson to an aging but once highly successful opera Boom O perator............................. Lloyd Carrick B udget.................................................. $104,850 A rt D irector............................................. W endy Adnam Photography................... M atthew Flannagan star, she becom es involved in gam es of B udget........................................................$7000 Len gth...................................................... 60 min M usic D irector......................... M ichael Carlos m a k e b e lie v e w h ic h h a v e h o r r if y in g C olor Process........................... Eastman 7247 Length...................................................... 23 min Budget...................................................... $7,000 Sound R ecordist..................... Robert P. Wells P rogress................................. Post Production Color Process..................................... Eastman Length...................................................... 40 min dimensions.

M ixe r.................................................... Phil Judd Color P rocess........................... Eastman Neg. C a s t: A n th r o p o lo g is t D r R h ys J o n e s P rogress........................................... In Release Special E ffe cts.......................

Lachlan W ilson Progress........................................In Production supported by past and present natives of C a st: Bing Crosby.

Focus Puller......................... John lllingsw orth Cast: Marg McRae, Julie M cGregor.

Tasm ania, with some French and English S yn o p s is : A llow s the audience to w itness OUR LIVING PAST Synopsis: A psychological th rille r about Camera A s s t......................... Peter Lipscom be the Alpine Dingo from an harm onious w ild appearances.

Prod Company.......................... Austral Pacific state w ith nature up to the. present almost G affer........................................... M iles Moulson what happens to a young woman when Synopsis: The exte rm in a tio n of the T as­ Productions extinct stage. reality clashes w ith idealism.

C ontinuity..................................... Helen Banks m anian A b o rig in e s is the only case in D irector................................... Peter Thompson Asst Art D irector................... Tony W ellington recent tim es of a gen ocide so s w ift and Screenplay................................. Susan W oolfe Best Boy.................................................. Buddy W right total. A search to re d isco ve r these unique THE THIN EDGE Producer................................... A. J. Helgeson THE RESTLESS YEARS M akeup..........................................................

Joan Mostyn people.

Prod Com pany........ Kookaburra Productions M usic....................................... M ike M cLennan Prod C o m p a n y.. . . The Grundy O rganisation M akeup A sst...............................Linda Leftw ich D ire cto r.......................................

Roger Bayley Photography................................................

Peter Leyden, D istC om pany.......... : ............

O /T en N etw ork Prod Secretary..................

Barbara Elmslie Hans Heidrich D irectors................................. Peter Benardos, S creen play................................. Roger Bayley T itle s ............................................. Film G raphics THE LEGEND OF YOWIE Producer........................................................M ark Ruse Editor........................................... Paul M axwell Ian Coughlan B u dget..................................................... $35,000 Prod Com pany........................... Dead Set Films Photography....................... M ichael Pattinson Screenplay................................... Reg W atson Sound Recordist.......................Kevin Kearney Length...................................................... 52 min D irector....................................Gerard Tacovsky E ditor............................................................. Chris Batson P roducer................................. Peter Benardos Titles..................................................Fran Burke C olor process..................................... Eastman Screenplay............................. Gerard Tacovsky Prod M anager............................................ M ark Ruse Exec P roducer............................. Reg W atson N arrator................................................Tim Eliott Release date......................... Septem ber 1977 Producer........................................................Colin M cHugh A rt D irector................................................... Jutta Goetze Length...................................................... 33 min M usic........................................... M ike Perjanik C a st: Neil Fitzpatrick, Delilah, Alexander Exec Producer....................... Gerard Tacovsky A rt D irector..............................

M ike Robinson Sound Recordist.................................Bill Baxter Color Process.....................................

Eastman Hay, Pat Bishop, Peter Collingw ood, Mary M usic..............................................................John Leachman Asst D irector............................. M ichael Rogers Release Date.................................August 1977 Casting Consultant.................. Kerry Spence A n n e S e v e rn e , T om F a rle y , M ic h a e l Photography...........................M ichael Donnelly Script A ssts..............

G illian Blanfield-Brown, C am era A s s ts ............................................ C h ris Batson, Sponsor...........................................................

B.P. Australia Ferguson, A s trid W inston, Paul G ilb ert, Editor..............................................................Colin McHugh D avid C o llye r Limited N ichola M oors Frank Curtain.

Art D irector................................................ Peter Oakman Boom O perator............................... Paul Elliott Synopsis: Story of today's people enjoying Length...................................................... 50 min S y n o p s is : An allegory of death in the form of Prod Designer..............................................Peter Oakman Progress.....................................

In-Production G affer..........................................Beamish Elliott the history and things of yesterday. a m ystery thriller.

M ortim er is the man to M usic D irector........................................... John Leachman C o ntinuity............................. Andrew De G root C a st: June Salter, Tina G renville, Sonny whom John Salvador must deliver the aerial C ostum e/W ardrobe....................................Lydia Tacovsky Key G rip ........................................................David Gornall B la k e , D e b b ie C o u lls , N ic k H e d stro m , photographs for w hich he went through Sound R ecordist.................... Stephen Murphy M alcolm Thomson, Brian W enzel, Julianne Prod A s s t..............................

Jutta G oetze im prisonm ent and torture. But when he M ixe r......................................... Stephen Murphy PLUNGE INTO DARKNESS Length......................................................

15 min New bould, S tanley W alsh, Donna Lee. arrives back home, exhausted and sick, Sound Editor........................... Stephen M urphy Color Process..................................... Eastman M ortim er does not seem to want him or his Prod C o m pa ny.. Gemini Productions Pty Ltd Graham Thorburn.

Asst D irector.............................................. Colin McHugh Progress........................................In Production S yn o p sis: A group of young people have just photographs anymore .. .

D irector.........................................................Peter M axwell Camera O perator............... M ichael Donnelly left school and are about to make their way Release Date.......................................November 1977 S creenplay...........................

Bruce A. W ishart Focus P u lle r........................ M ichael Donnelly Cast: Juliet Bacskai, Trevor Hunter, Janet Producer............................

Robert Bruning in the world.

Camera A sst............................................... PaulW ebb Lord.

David M itchell. M ark Timson, Len Exec P roducer.........................Stephan Kibler THE MURRAY GREY BREED Boom O p e ra to r............................ James Love "N o d d y" Littlechild, Brian LittlechiId. M usic................................... Sloggett and Clark G affer............................................................... Rob Clark Prod Com pany..................................... Austral Synopsis: The relationships w ithin a family, P hotography........ ......................

Russell Boyd THE SCALP MERCHANT Set Decorator........................................... Peter Oakman Pacific Productions trying to make ends meet on a small dairy Prod C o m pany. . . . The Grundy O rganisation Editor............................................. Ron W illiam s G rip ............................................................M ichaelDonnely D irector......................................... Eric Fullllove farm in G ippsland.

R elationships com e to a Prod M anager............................ Terrie Vincent Dist Com pany............................................TVW-7 Perth Asst Editor........................... G erard Tacovsky S c rip t............................................. Eric Fullilove head as each one reaches out.

Art D irector................................. David C opping D irector......................................... Howard Rubie Still Photography...................Gerard Tacovsky P roducer................................... A. J. Helgeson Prod C o-ordinator....................................... CarolW illiam Screenplay................................. s Ian Coughlan S cript A sst.................................................. Colin McHugh Photography................................................... PhilDority Unit M anager................................................Keith Heygate Producer....................................... Roger Mirams Best Boy............................................Steve Feher Editor........................................... Paul M axwell THREE LOVERS Prod Secretary............................. Linda Drake P hotography......................... Richard W allace Sound Recordist.......... Berry Van Bronkhurst M akeup.......................................... Jil Robinson D irector..................................... Barbara Creed Editor.......................................... T im W ellburn C ostum e/W ardrobe....................................CarolBerry Special E ffe cts....................... Andrew M ercer T itles................................................................FranBurke S creenplay............................... Barbara Creed Sound Recordist............................................ Tim Lloyd Prod C o-ordinator.................................... Keith Spice T itle s...............................................................Colin M cHugh N arrator......................................... Barry Eaton Asst D irector..........................John Robertson Prod Secretary............................................... DixiBettsPhotography........................... M artin Bartfield Length...................................................... 45 min Length...................................................... 30 min Editor......................................... Barbara Creed C ostum e/W ardrobe..........

C ornelia Volaman Camera A sst...................................................

Jan Kenny C olor P rocess...................................... Eastman C olor P rocess..................................... Eastman Sound Recordist.....................Annette Blonski Boom O perator.........................Jack Friedman Sound Recordist........................................Bobby Hayes P rogress..................................... Sound Editing Release Date.................................August 1977 Budget........................................................ $5000 Asst D irectors................................................Tom Burstill, G affer..........................................................

M ick M orris Release Date..................................................Late November Sponsor..........................................M urray Grey John Easton Length...................................................... 35 min C ontinuity.................................................... Jenny Q uigley C a s t: C o lin M cH ugh, G era rd Taco vsky, Beef C attle Society Camera O perator.........................................

Ian M cLean Progress.................................

Post-Production Props Buyer..................................................

John C arroll Peter Oakman, Julie Baker, J il Robinson, Synopsis: A story of the evolution and Cast; Pauline Clemens, M argaret Johnson, Stand-by props............................. Harry Zettel Camera Asst...........................O wen Patterson Kevin Colligan, Andrew M ercer, Steve Feher, breeding of the M urray Grey Beef Cattle.

Tim Robertson.

G rip....................................... Merv M cLaughlan Boom O perator.............................Tim Thunder Trever Spicer.

This film is more suited to cattle breeders Synopsis: A conflict between husband and Still Photography....................... Phillip M orris G affer............................................. Alan W alker than the general public.

S yn o p sis: A V icto rian railroad com pany wife, w hich dram atizes the situation of a w ife Best Boy................................... Sam Bienstock Asst G affer................................................. Perry Sandow builds their tracks on old Aboriginal tribal and mother who realizes she is a lesbian and M akeup.....................................

Josy K nowland C ontinuity.....................................................

Moya Iceton land and pay the penalty when Yeagan calls w ishes to return to her form er lover.

Budget.................................................. $105,000 G rips...................................

Charlie W illiams, on Yowie to protect the land, in 1877.

THE NEWMAN SHAME Length...................................................... 75 min Peter Cardnell Prod C o m p a n y.. . . The Grundy O rganisation Progress.......................................... Editing M akeup.............................................. D anJenks Dist Company............................... STW-9 Perth WAYS OF SEEING Release Date.............................................. 1978 Stunts............................................. Peter W est LOVE D irector............ .......................... Julian Pringle C a st: O livia Hamnett, Bruce Barry, Ashley Runner....................................................... Peter Leidim ier Com pany....................... Illumination Films Prod Prod C om pany..........................................Ansata Productions S creenplay...................................Bruce W ishart Grenville, John Jarratt, Tom Richards.

Length.......................-............................ 100 min D irector................................................ Paul Cox D irector....................................................... Alan Ingram Producer..................................... Robert Bruning S y n opsis: Pat and Gary Keating set out for a Progress................................... Pre-Production Producer..................................................... Paddy Reardon S creen play........................... M ark Stow Smith P hotography......................................... Richard W allace quiet holiday in the country w hich slowly Photography................................. Nigel Clarke P roducer............................... M ark Stow Smith Editor............................... Ron W illia m s — FPS turns into a nightm are of terror.

Editor............................................................ PaulCox P hotography.............................................. Peter Smith, Prod M anager............................... M ichael Lake Prod M anager................................... Ann Sterk SOUND OF LOVE Gus Howard A rt D irector..................................... Les Binns Sound Recordist. . . .’...................M ike W right E ditor.......................................... James Roberts Prod C o-ordinator....................................... Irene Korol Prod Com pany..................... South Australian M ixer............................................. John P h illips QUARTET W ardro be...................................................C ecilia Cm ielewski Prod Secretary............................... Irene Korol Film C orporation Camera O perator......................... Robert Gale Sound R e cord ists.........................Rod Pascoe, Asst D irector.................................M ichael Lake Prod Com pany...........................Abraxas Films D irector.......................................................... John Power Camera A sst....................... Stephen Kennedy Peter Barker C ontinuity....................................... Moya Iceton Pty Ltd P roducer............................................ Jane S cott Boom O perator......................................... Chris Cain Camera A sst................................. Ray Bartram Stunt C o-ordinator................................... Peter W est Exec Producer...............................................Matt C arroll D ire c to r................................ Jam es R icketson C lapper/Loader....................... Carole Phillips C o ntinuity....................... M adelaine Blackw ell Special E ffe cts......................................... Peter W est P hotography................................................G eoff Burton S c re e n p la y.......................... Jam es R icketson G affer......................................... Greg Hughson Second Unit P h otog rap hy.. Robert Campbell Length...................................................... 93 min Editor....................................... G. Turriey-Sm ith Prod C o -o rd in a to rs .............. G reg Ricketson, C ontinuity.................................... Stella Sallm an G rips.......................................... Ian McDerm ott, G auge........................................................ 16mm Unit M anager................................................. Nick Cockram G ill Eatherley G rip................

Sev Steinlauf Jerry Elder, John Sullivan Color P rocess....................... Eastman negative A rt D irector.................................................. David Copping E d ito r ..'................... C h ris to p h e r C o rde aux Length..................." . . ............................ 30 min Still Photography..................... Corrie Ancone Progress................................... Pre-Production B udget.................................................... $35,600 Prod Secretary.................................... Barbara Ring Color P rocess..................................... Eastman H a irstyles.................................................. Rifmik Release Date....................... M a rch /A pril 1978 Length...................................................... 90 min W ardrobe.....................................Barbara G ibbs Progress................................. Post-Production M akeup......................................................... Lloyd Jones C a st: To be determined.

B/W S tock.................... Kodak Tri-X Reversal Sound Recordist.............................................Leo Sullivan Release Date.............................. O ctober, 1977 B udget.......................................................... $5000 S y n opsis: A respectable bank manager Progress................................... Pre-Production Sound T ransfers.......................................... RodPascoe C ast: Mrs P. Gration and people from the Length...................................................... 25 min com m its suicide after being framed by a vice S y n o p s is : A s e m i-d o c u m e n ta ry , s e m i­ Sound A sst........................................ Jim C urrie "Lad y Nell seeing eye dog " school.

C olor Process............................. Eastman 7247 syndicate. Ex-Hong Kong police inspector, narrative feature exploring the relationships Asst D irectors............................................... PatClayton, S yn opsis: D ocum entary on Mrs P. Gration Progress................................. Post-Production between four people — two men and two John Brandy is called in to assist by the bank Toivo Lember, who is the only blind director of “ seeing eye Release Date................. New Year's Eve 1977 women. m anager's widow.

Ruth De La Lande dogs” in the world.

C a st: Alan Andrews, Basia Bonkowski, Mort Focus Puller..........................

David Foreman Clark, Tony Strachan, G illian Hunter, Jean­ Camera A sst................................................David Foreman Claude Villian, Donald Barker.

C lappe r/Loade r............................................John Foster S yn o p sis: An anti-romance.

THE NIGHT NURSE RAINBOW WAY G affer..................................... C hick M cDonald C ontinuity..................................................... Moya Iceton Prod C o m pa ny.. Gemini Productions Pty Ltd D irector..................................................... George Gittoes For details of the follow ing 16mm film s see Casting C o n s u lta n ts................................ Hilary Linstead, D irector........................................... IgorA uzins Screenplay............................................... George Gittoes MIND the previous issue: Anne Peters Screenplay.............................

Ron M cLean Photography........................... George Gittoes Props B uyer/D resser................... N e ilA ngw in Four TV Specials D irector..........................................W ayne Moore Producer................................... Robert Bruning Editor......................................................... G eorge Gittoes Standby Props.......................................... C lark M unro Maidens S creenplay................................... W ayne M oore Exec P roducer.........................Stephan Kibler Soundtrack.....................M artin W esley Smith P roducer....................................... W ayne M oore The Reef M usic................................... Soggett and Clark Sound (H ydraphone).. . . . . . . . Jenny Ingram Key G rip....................................................... NoelM cDonald Stunt C o-orindator.......................................

Ian Jamieson M usic.............................................. Karl de Laat Rodeo P hotography............................... R ussellBoyd G eorge Gittoes Asst Editor........................... M ichael Atkinson Photography............................... I. T. Normella Editor................................................ Trevor Ellis Roses Bloom Twice Camera A sst............................................. Claude Gittoes Numbering A sst........................................ NigelGooden E ditor..............................................I. T. Normella Shadow Sister Prod M anager........................... Terrie V incent Budget....................................................... $2000 Prod A ssts....................................... G reg Flynn, Sounds Like Niugini A rt D irector.........................

David Copping Length...................................................... 11 min Still Photography.................................... C orrie Ancone M ichael M ulcahy Prod C o-ordinator.................... Carol W illiam s Tracks Color P rocess........................... Eastman 7247 H airdresser......................................Judy Lovell Best Boy.................................

Graeme Shelton C ostum e/W ardrobe......................... Jan Pratt Unit M anagers............... Ande Evan-Maddox, Progress.............................................................. Inrelease Sound R ecordist............................. Harold Nill Keith Heygate C a st: Ruth Lusty, Rod Burton, Jenny Ingram. M akeup........................................... Judy Lovell

Cinema Papers, O ctober— 159

Mike R eed’s Post Production Company Pty Ltd 274 Ferrars S treet South Melbourne 3 2 0 5 Phone 6 9 9 1 3 9 3 or 6 9 9 1395

VICTORIAN FILM CORPORATION

J€FF N0LD STILLS PHOTOGRAPHER

ON JOB TRAINII WRITERS

F

-

The V.F.C. has created a production-attach­ ment scheme for aspiring script w riters interested in gaining experience in film and television. W riters resident in V ictoria are invited to contact the V.F.C. for details.

The scheme w ill allow candidates to observe professional productions in the making for a period of up to four weeks and w ill provide an allowance for those persons who are selected.

It is envisaged that the scheme w ill operate on a continuing basis and w ill take into account the needs and circum stances of each candidate.

If you are interested in participating, call, phone or w rite to the V.F.C. setting out details of your background and w riting experience.

Contact: Paul Manos, Victorian Film Corporation, 140 Bourke Street, Melbourne. Phone (03) 663 3981.

S ideca r Racers ® Ride a W ild Pony C ad die • H arness Fever ® B arney Land ©! the M o rning Calm (Korea) Complete range of equipment, any format.

Can offer processing facilities.

Available in B/W and color.

168 PACIFIC HIGHWAY, NORTH SYDNEY 2060. PC BOX 885. PHONE: (02) 929 4848

PRODUCTION SURVEY SCHAEFFER ‘N’ SLADE

Asst D irector....................... M ichael Rubetzki P roducer..................................... Alan Coleman M ixe r..................................... Julian Ellingworth G auge........................................................ 16mm Exec Producer............................................ RegW atson Prod Com pany.............. The Picture and Play Asst Editor.....................................M artin Cohen C olor Process........................... Eastm ancolor Company in association Assoc P roducer........................................... M ike Murphy Set C o nstruction.......................... John Denton Progress......................................... In Release with G lensig Productions M usic................................................. Brian King E lectrician.................................... Bruce Gailey Release Date.........................Septem ber 1977 D irector..........................................Vince M artin Floor M anager................ Charles Rotherham G auge........................................................ 16mm Producers of television series and film s are S c rip t..................................... Law rence Boswell Synopsis: W ays and techniques to prom ote Art D irector......................................... J im Jope C olor P rocess........................... Eastm ancolor requested to forw ard com plete details of P roducer......................................... Jack Strom Prod S ecretary............ .............. Penny Fraser perception in children.

Progress................................. Shooting productions to: Production Survey, Cinema Cam era........................................... Phil Lomas, Costum e/W ardrobe.............. Robey Buckley Release Date..................................... Late 1977 Papers, 143 Therry St., M elbourne, 3000.

John Bunch Casting Consultant................................. Kerry Spence Cast: Dal Myles. Joan Evatt, Ron Crews, FRONTIERS DOWNUNDER Lighting..................................... Paul G ilfeather W endy Scammell, Don Blake.

Script A sst............................... Jill McGlasham Prod Com pany............................................ Film Australia Video Tape Editor............................... Tim Fox H airdresser.................................Gail Edmonds S y n o p s is : A c o m p r e h e n s iv e film on Dist C om pany.................................................Film Australia CHOPPER SQUAD Prod M anager.............. M ichael L. Schweiger M akeup..................................... PatH utchence Australia.

P roducer..................................... Peter Johnson Length...................................................... 25 min Prod C o m pa ny,. . . The G rundy O rganisation Art D irector................................. Richard Kent E ditor/C om piler...........................Colin W addy Release Date..................... Now in 10th month Technical D irector...................... Noel Francis Dist Com pany.......... ................0/Ten Network M ixer..................................... Julian Ellingworth AUSTRALIAN WAR MEMORIAL on air D irectors........................................... IgorA uzins, Floor M anager................................. Chris King T itles............................................. Film G raphics Cast: M ichael Beecher, Cornelia, Francis, Prod C o m pa ny....................... M otion P icture Graham Arthur, A udio...............................) . . . . Ian M cKenzie Length........ ............................................. 30 min John Dommett, Tim Page, Judy Lynne, Alfred Simon W incer Boom O perator.................. Vladim yr Lozinsky Associates G auge........................................................ 16mm Sandor, Gwen Plumb, Chris King, Lyn James, S creenplay............................... Bruce W ishart, Casting............................... M itch Consultancy Dist C o m p a n y .............................................. Film Australia Release Date......................... Septem ber 1977 Judi Connelli, Pieta Toppano, Tony Alvarez, Tom McLelland, M ake-up..................................... Debbie Pippin D irector...............................

Bob W alker Synopsis: A com pilation of five film s to re­ Bartholom ew John, Andrew Sharp.

M ichael Cole G raphics........................................Susan Young, S creen play........ .......................... Pat Burgess introduce Australia to overseas television Synopsis: The lives and loves of the young Richmond Young P roducer........................................... DonBattye Producer................................... Peter Johnson audiences. staff in a big city hospital.

M usic........................................... M ikeP erjanik Technical Facilities.....................T.P.F. Sydney P hotography.......................John Leake A.C.S. Length..................., ................................. 30 min Photography.................................................. PaulOnorato, Editor................................................................Bob W alker Phil Pike Progress................ ................ Post-production M ixer........................................... Les M cKenzie G’DAY SPORT! Editor................................................................FPS C a st: James Kemsley, Patrick Ward, Frank E lectrician............................... W arren Mearnes Prod Com pany..............................Film Australia Garfield, Ray Ainsworth, Paul Chubb, Vince Prod M anager............................... M ike Midlam AVEC FILM UNIT T itle s............................................................. Film G raphics Dist Company...............................

Film Australia Gill, Doug Hull, Narelle Johnson, Debbie Art D irector................................................... M ike Beckett, Len gth...................................................... 30 min D irector......................................... David Roberts lo rr ie Floyd Coulls, John Farndale, JohnV elte, Robert G auge........................................................ 16mm S c rip t.........................................

David Roberts, Mercer.

Prod Designer........................John N orthcott P ro g re s s ..............................................................InRelease Peter Johnson S y n opsis: Television pilot. Schaeffer and Prod S e cretary..............................................Dale Price COMMUNITY LIBRARIES Release Date........ ........................O ctober 1977 P roducer...................................

Peter Johnson Slade are a seldom w orked club act always (W orking Title) C ostum e/W ardrobe............ Beverley Powers Synopsis: A film aimed at explaining to P hotography.............................Andrew Frazer dream ing of m aking the big tim e, but Sound R ecordist.......................................... John M cPhail Prod Company.........................AVEC Film Unit secondary school students the meaning and E ditors..................................... W ayne Le Clos, M ixer.........................................

APA somehow fate always thw arts their clim b to Dist C o m pa ny....................... AVEC Film U nit background of the Australian W ar M emorial Alan Lake F.P.S. the top.

Asst D irectors........................... David Bowden, D ire c to r....................................... Peter Dodds in Canberra.

M ixer..................................... Julian Ellingworth Tony Bowman S c rip tw rite r................................. M ary W right Asst. E ditor...................................Peter Fletcher Camera A sst............................................ Steve Mason P rodu cer..................................... Peter D odds N arrator..................................... Paul Ricketts THIS RUGGED COAST Boom O perator............................... Grant Fenn Exec P rodu cer.................... Ross R. C am pb ell BUSHFIRES T itle s........................................... Film G raphics C lappe r/Loade r............................... Rod Hind Prod M anager.............. G a b rie lla B a tchelor Prod Company........ Ben Cropp Productions Prod Com pany........................... Film Australia Length...................................................... 30 min G affer.............................................. Derek Jones Len gth......................................................20 m in Dist Com pany.......... Ben Cropp Productions, Gauge. . . .................................................. 16mm Dist Com pany.................................................Film Australia C o ntinuity.................................. Jenny Quigley, G auge......................................................... 16mm Perin Film Enterprises (New York) P rogress............................................ In Release D ire cto r................................. Debby Kingsland Barbara Burleigh C olor P rocess................................... Eastm an D irector............................................................Ben Cropp Producer.............................................. M alcolm OttonRelease D ate......................... Septem ber 1977 Casting C onsultants................. Kerry Spence P rogress................................. P re-P roduction Producer..........................................................Ben Cropp P hotography............................................ Andrew Frazer S yn opsis: A docum entary w hich takes a Set Decorator............................. M ike Beckett S y n o p s is : T h is f ilm e x p lo r e s th e P hotography................................................ BenCropp E ditor.......................................................... Denise Hunter close look at some of Australia's sporting G rip ...............................................M aurie Rogers developm ent of com m unity lib ra rie s , w here E ditor............................................. John O akley life.

Prod M anager................................. Roy Bissell Stunt C o-ordinator........................... Grant Page m u n ic ip a l c o u n c ils and the V ic to ria n Prod M anager...........................Roger Baldwin Len gth...................................................... 14 min Technical A d visor.................... Alan Edwards, Sound R ecordist..................... Lynn Patterson E d u c a tio n D e p a rtm e n t c o m b in e lib ra ry G auge........................................................ 16mm A GOOD THING GOING Lannie Dalziel, fa c ilitie s w ith in a school to p rovid e greater Sound Editor................................. John O akley Color P ro c e s s ............ Reversal Ektachrom e Bob Mundle s e r v ic e to th e lo c a l c o m m u n ity and Camera O perator........................................ BenCropp Prod Com pany.............................Film Australia, P ro g re s s ...............................

Editing Best Boy............................... Peter Ledgeway students alike.

■ Still Photography........................................ Ben Cropp, National Nine Network Release D ate...................................... November 1977 M akeup...................................................... Lloyd James Eva Cropp Dist Com pany............................... Film Australia S y n opsis: A film on the awareness to Runner..................................R ichard Merryman N arrator......................................... M ichaelCole D irector.....................................

Arch Nicholson M A R G A R E T BARR — J U D l f H prevent bushfires.

T itle s............................................................. Film G raphics T itles............................................................ Atlab S c rip t................................................Don Harley, WRIGHT Length...................................................... 47 min B udget.................................................. $200,000 Judy Colquhourn G auge........................................................ 16mm (W o rking Title) Length............................................Ten x 49 min P roducer......................................... Don Harley CANUNGRA Progress..................... 6 episodes com pleted, TV specials Exec Producers..................... Richard Mason.

Prod Company............................. Audio-visual Prod Com pany............ K ingcroft Productions Progress....................................... In Production Ep 7 currently Lynton Taylor Education Centre Pty Ltd being shot (four episodes film ed) P hotography...................................Dean Semler Dist Com pany................................. Audio-visual Dist Company.................................................Film Australia Release Date........................

1978 Release Date............................................. 1978 Editor.........................................

David Huggett Education Centre D irector.........................................................Terry Ohlsson C a st: Robert Coleby, Graham Rouse, Eric Cast: Ben Cropp, Eva Cropp, W ally Gibbins, D ire c to r.........................................................Ross C am pbell Prod M anager...............................Damien Parer Producer.....................................

Peter Johnson O ldfield, Denis Grosvenor, Jeanie Drynan.

Lynn Patterson.

P ro d u c e r.......................................................Ross C a m pb ell Art D irector...........................

Derrick Chetwyn P hotography.............................. John M ounsey Synopsis: Air-sea rescue action adventure S yn o p sis: A s e rie s o f te n a d v e n tu re P h otog rap hy....................................... Iv a n G a a l Prod C o-ordinator..................Rod Freedman E ditor................................................................. BillStacey along Sydney's northern beaches. docum entaries film ed on a circum navigation E d ito r....................................... Robert Francis Prod Secretary........................................... Jenny Day M ixer................................................. John Marsh of Australia in C ropp’s boat “ Beva", showing Prod M anager.............. G a b rie lla Batchelor Unit M anager............................... W illis Davies Asst Editor........................................... Liz Irwin the remote corners of Australia, the w ild life Prod C o -o rd in a to r..................................

Ross Lukeis Sound Recordist......................... Howard Spry N arrator.................................................... Richard M iekle GLENVIEW HIGH and adventures underwater, Sound R e cord ist..................... David Hughes Asst Editor......................... Frans Vandenburg Length...................................................... 10 min Prod C o m p a n y.. . . The Grundy O rganisation C am era A s s t.....................Tom Psom atragos Asst D irector................................... Gerry Letts G auge........................................................ 16mm Dist Com pany......................................... Seven Network C o n tin u ity .........................

R osalind G ille s p ie Camera A sst................................. Andre Fleurin Progress...............................................................InRelease TRUCKIES D irectors........................................... M axV arnel, S till P h otog rap hy..................... A b ram o C onti Boom O perator........................... Steven M iller Release Date........................... Septem ber 1977 Rod Hardy Prod Com pany.............. .................. Australian Technical A d v is o rs ....................... John Ellis, G affer...........................................

Bruce Gailey S y n o p s is : An in tro d u c tio n to the Land Broadcasting Commission S creenplay................................... Ron M cLean, Lois Ellis C ontinuity................................. Adrienne Read W arfare Centre at Canungra being made for Exec P roducer.................... O scar W hitbread Tony M orphett, N a rra to r....................................................... Peter C a rro ll G rip .................................................

Ron Loebel Arm y Training Command.

Script Editor...............................Howard G riffith Bob Caswell Len gth................................................................30 min Length...................................................... 72 min P roducer.......................................Ron M cLean P hotography............................. Ian W arburton G auge..........................................................16mm G auge........................................................ 16mm Prod M anager............................................. Frank Brown Assoc P rodu cer............................... M axV arnel Color Process..................................... Eastman Color Process........................... Eastm ancolor COMMONWEALTH S E RUM M usic........................................... M ikeP erjanik Sound Recordist............................... Bill Doyle Progress............................................. Shooting Progress................................................. Editing Prod M anager................................... Ian W hite Camera O perator.......................................... RonHagen LABORATORIES S yn opsis: A docum entary w hich links the Release Date................................................. Late 1977 C asting....................................... Barbara C risp Prod S e cretary...................... Shelley Bamford Prod Company.........................Bob Talbot and w ork of two Australian women, poet Judith C a st:Jo h n Hargraves. Veronica Lang. Chris Main Cast: John Wood, M ichael Aitken, C ostum e/W ardrobe.................Graham Purcell A ssociates W rig h t, a n d d a n c e -d ra m a e x p o n e n t, H e y w o o d . S im o n e B u c h a n a n M i l e s Colleen Hewitt, John Ewart.

Casting Consultant.................................. Kerry Spence Dist Com pany.............................Film Australia M a rg a re t B a rr. The film in c o rp o ra te s Buchanan Synopsis: An ABC television drama series of dances perform ed to the spoken poetry of D irector.......................................... Bob Talbot Set Decorator.........................Peter G lencross S y n o p s is : A su b u rb a n w ife fin d s th e S crip t A sst................................................. RachelCohen, twelve 50-minute episodes.

S c rip t..........................................................Harvey Spencer Jud ith W right. p re s s u re s of a p la y b o y h u s b a n d and Valerie Unwin P roducer.................................................... Peter Johnson unalleviated m otherhood too much to bear.

Length...................................................... 47 min P hotography.............................................Gordon Bennett She departs, leaving her husband w ith the P r o g r e s s ............................................................ Inproduction E ditor...............................................M ike Reed two children and many problems, not the YOUNG RAMSAY and in release FILM AUSTRALIA..

Prod C o-ordinator.......................

Mandy Q uint least of which is himself.

Cast: G rigor Taylor, Elaine Lee, Ken James, Prod Com pany............ C raw ford Productions Sound Recordist....................... lanJenkinson Pty Ltd for The Seven Network Bill Kerr, R ebecca Gilling, Brandon Burke, M ixer.............................................

Peter Fenton P roducer................................. Henry Crawford Cam illia Rowntree.

MARCH THE FOURTH Length...................................................... 30 min S ynopsis: D aily lives of the s ta ff and D irectors.................'.....................Rod Stevens, G auge........................................................ 16mm Prod Com pany............ Kingcroft Productions ARMY COLLEGE Rod Hardy, Graeme A rthur, Simon students in a suburban high school.

Progress...............................................................InRelease Pty Ltd W incer, George Miller, Gary Conway Prod Com pany................A.P.A. Leisure Time Release Date............................... O ctober 1977 Dist Company.................................................Film Australia Dist Com pany.................................................Film Australia S crip tw rite rs...............................Tom H egarty, S yn o p s is : A film on the operations and the D irector.......................Brian Trenchard-Sm ith NATURAL HISTORY Vince Moran, John Graham, D irector..............................................Brian Faull extent of the work of the Comm onwealth S creenplay................................................... Chris M cGill, Sarah Darling, Denise Morgan, S c rip t..................................................Brian Faull Prod C om pany................................. Australian Serum Laboratories in Melbourne.

Ann Brooksbank Phil Freedman, David Stevens P rroducer..................................................... Peter Johnson Broadcasting Commission Exec Producer........................... Peter Johnson S cript Editor.............................Denise Morgan P hotography......................... Frank Hammond P roducer........................................... M ike Vance FAMILY DAY CARE Photography..................................................Ross N icholls E ditor..................................... David W alterson Regular Cast: John H a rgreave s, Serge Exec P roducer............................ Robert Horne Editor..................................................Bill Stacey Prod Company.............................................

Film Australia Prod M anager..............................................

Neil M atthews Lazareff, Barbara Llewellyn.

P roducer's A sst.......................................... CoralHigson Prod M anager............................. Patricia Blunt Dist Company.................................................Film Australia Synopsis: A ll film "fa m ily " series set in a Sound Recordist......................................... Max Hensser Photography................................. Clive Taylor Sound Recordist......................................... Kevin Kearney D irectorr.......................................................

Karl M cPhee Victorian coastal town near the NSW border, M ix e r................................................................. LesM cKenzie Sound R ecoridst....................... Paul Freeman M ixer................................................John M arsh S c rip t............................................................... KarlMcPhee featuring a young veterinarian.

Technical Advisor........ M ajor G eorge Chinn Asst Cameram an............................Rod Coats Asst D irector.....................................................

Jill N icholas P roducer................................... : Robin Hughes E lectrician......................... G eorge Harrington Synopsis: An untitled series of four 30 Camera O perator........................ Peter Rogers Photography................................................. John Hosking Length...................................................... 15 min m inute p rogram s lo oking at in d iv id u a ls Camera A s s is ta n t....................

John M ounsey E ditor......................................... Karl Sodersten G auge........................................................ 16mm involved in w ildlife and nature ventures.

THE YOUNG DOCTORS C ontinuity............................. Barbara B urleigh Sound R ecordist......................................... Max Henser Progress............................................. Shooting Prod C o m pa ny.. . . The Grundy O rganisation Length.............................................................. 18min G rip ....................................................Ray Brown Release Date.............................December 1977 Dist Company.............................Nine Network Stunt C o-ordinator........................... G rant Page G auge........................................................

1 6 mm S y n opsis: A recruiting film for the Australian PIG IN A POKE D irectors................................... Alan Coleman, Asst Editor..................................................... Liz Irwin Color P rocess........................... Eastm ancolor Army, aimed at students wishing to become M ike M urphy Prod C om pany................................. Australian Technical A dvisor......................... Geoff Crain Progress..............................................................

In Release officers.

Broadcasting Commission Screenplay................................. Peter Connah, Release Date............................................ August 1977 M akeup............................................. L iz M ic h ie Betty Quin, D irector................................................Brian Bell Special E ffects...........................

M onty Fieguth, S y n opsis: The setting up of a fam ily day THE AUSTRALIA GAME Ian Bradley, S crip tw rite rs................................... Marg Kelly, Robert Jones care program.

Prod C om pany............................................ Film Australia Reg Watson, John D ingw all S tunts................................................. G rant Page Dist Company.................................................Film Australia Ian Coughlan, Exec P roducer................................... Brian Bell E lectricians........................... Frank Heffernan, FROM BIRTH TO WALKING — D irector...................................................... Brian Hannant M ichael Laurence Length................................................ 5 x 50 min Buddy W right THE DEVELOPING CHILD Screenplay........................... Pamela Williams, P rogress........................................... In Release Length...................................................... 30 min Brian Hannant Prod Com pany............................................. Film Australia Cast: Paul Mason, Justine Saunders, Julie G auge........................................................ 16mm P roducer.............................................. M alcolm Otton Dist Com pany.................................................Film Australia Dawson, Samantha Cox, Maree D'Arcy, J ill Progress...................................Post-Production The follow ing ABC-TV productions have D irector................................... Antonio Colacino Howard, Elizabeth Chance, V icki Battese, Release date........................... November 1977 been held over until the next issue: Nolan at Asst Producer............................................. RonHannam S c rip t.......................................Antonio Colacino G eorge P latras, A ria n th e G alani, T essa S yn opsis: A dram atised docum entary on the Sixty, Run From The Morning Because Photography.................................Kerry Brown Editor..................................................................IanW alker Producer..................................... M alcolm Otton Mallos, Phillipa Baker, Carol Burns, Brian outbreak of a fire and the subsequent He’s My Friend, Kirbys’ Company, The Prod M anager..................... M ichael Rubetzki P hotography............ M ike Bornemann A.C.S. Syron, John Hargreaves, Reg Gillam, Gordon evacuation of a high rise hospital.

Cakeman.

A rt D irector..................................... DarrellLass G lenw right, Neil Fitzpatric, Holly Brown, Eve E d ito r.......................................................... Brian W oods Pro C o-ordinator.............................................. SuDoring Sound Recordist............................................ DonConnolly Sunners, Athol Compton, Max Osbiston, Sound Recordist........................... Ross Linton M ixe r...................................................... George Hart M uriel Hopkins, David Goddard, Keith Lee.

TELEVISION SERIES

Continued on P. 179

Cinema Papers, October — 161

|§ |§ p | N B

A SPECIAL K i© OF PERSONALIZED SERVICE COLORFILM PTY. LTD., 35 MISSENDEN ROAD, Telephone: (02) 516 1066.

It pays to buy from anginieux

10-150mm, T2.3, close focusing to 2 feet in a package less than seven inches long. Now available.in mounts for Arriflex, Cinema Products, Eclair and other professional 16mm cameras.

angenieux A u s t r a l i a

p ty . ltd.

33 Higginbotham Rd., Gladesville, NSW, 2111.

Phone: (02) 807 1444.

Telex: AA25629. Cables; ‘Meopta Gladesville.’

CAMPERDOWN, N.S.W. 2050 Telex: AA24545

' t >DUCTION REPORT 2

BLUE FIRE LADY “Blue Fire Lady” Is a heart-warming family story about 18-year-old Jenny Grey and the horse she falls in love with, Jenny is played by British actress Cafhryn Harrison and Barry, her boyfriend, by Mark Holden. The cast also includes Peter Cummins, Marion Edward, Gary Waddell and John Ewart “Blue Fire Lady59 is the fourth feature to be produced by Antony I. Ginnane.

His first, “Sympathy in Summer” (which Ginnane also directed), was released in 1971 and was followed by “Fantasns” (Richard Franklin) and “Fantasm Comes Again” (Colin Eggleston).

“Blue Fire Lady” is directed by Ross Dimsey, photographed by Vincent Monton and is from a screenplay by Bob MaumilL The budget is $300,000 and the film is expected to have a Christmas release.

Cathryn Harrison as Jenny and Mark Holden as Barry in Mess Fire Lady.

Cinema Papers, October —

ROSS DIMSEY Director How would you describe the appeal of the film?

It is no secret that we are making what is euphemistically known as a family film — which means intended for children accompanied by adults. While I am optimistic that we may have something with a slightly broader appeal, having got the brief from the producers, I have been at pains to conform as much as I can with the classical parameters of children’s films. I have fairly clearly painted the white and black hats — though the bad guys have been defused by making them appear a little foolish. Basically, the film is pantomime, but I happen to think that pantomime is a perfectly acceptable entertainment form.

Ross.Dimsey has been active In the Melbourne Industry for over ten years. He was the first assistant/production manager on most of the Hexagon features, and is a freelance director of commercials. His documentary, “I f s Time . . .

The Gough and Bob Show”, won the Shell Award in 1973.

Dimsey has also written, produced and directed two half­ hour shorts — “The Girl on the R oof’, an award winner at the 1971 AFI Awards, and “The Runner”, which is soon to be released through Roadshow.

“Bine Fire Lady” is the third feature on which Dimsey has worked with Tony Ginnane, having previously written the two sexploitation films, “Fantasm” and “Fantasm Comes Again”. His next projects are “Body Count” (co­ written with Forrest Redlich) and another Bob Maemill screenplay.

The following interview, conducted by Scott Murray, was recorded while Dimsey was supervising the editing of the film with editor Tony Patterson*

What market age group are you looking at?

A ustralian International are probably looking at what I would call the “ABBA market”, and we all know how enormous that is. It is for kids from about five up to 12 or 13.

It then comes in again at the accompanying adult level, so that you have a five-year-old kid and a 30-year-old mum. This then holds pretty strongly right through to the grandmother end of the scale.

Well, my nickname for the film was A Minute Before Morning Tea, because we were shooting four minutes of cut film a day and that is moving along on 35mm with the sort of production value we were trying to obtain. We had a very limited budget and therefore a fairly low shooting ratio — I think it ended up at nine-to-one — so if I wanted a fairly classical coverage, I had to be aiming to print about every second take. Pre-production rehearsals, therefore, become a matter of necessity. I spent a full week with the entire cast.

I think it has a considerable effect and it operates in a couple of ways.

Firstly, it prevents new and untried actors getting work, because when you have limited time the question you ask yourself is: “Who do I know that can deliver the goods, can get it right rapidly and who is absolutely trustworthy in terms of technicals like hitting marks etc.?” So you find yourself looking at perhaps only two or three actors for a particular p a r t. G iven m ore le is u re ly schedules, however, you might be more inclined.to give someone new a chance.

Another way schedules can limit performances is in coverage. You tend to play scenes in toto without a lot of insert cutting, which means you have to use actors who can inter-relate easily within a frame.

There are quite a few actors who are better playing insert close-ups (often with just the continuity person playing them feed-lines) than say an extended three-shot with a dolly movement. Perhaps it is the influence of television series.

You had better talk to Ginnane about risking a children’s film as a subject. However, once given the job these films were only a marginal influence.

I haven’t seen Let the Balloon Go, but I have seen Barney and Ride a Wild Pony. They seemed to lack an intrinsic honesty. Part of this is because I think they played down to their audience — Barney in particular — and kids could see through it.

As for Wild Pony, the ingredients were too pat, right from the crippled kid to the court case over the ponies, to the wild little bugger that liked to race the steam train and the steam train driver who said: “Gee whiz that kid is going to get himself hurt one day”.

By the same token, “ Blue Fire Lady” has a lot of ingredients the horse that no one but the girl can fame; the boyfriend come Prince Charming, How do you stop these appearing as ingredients?

164 — Cinema Papers, October

How did you find the tight shooting schedule?

Acting is something that has rarely reached great heights in Australia. How much do you feel this is a result of tough schedules?

“Barney”, “Let the Balloon Go” and “Ride A Wild Pony” were not exactly financial successes. How has this history of failed children’s films influenced you?

The way I hope I’ve stopped it is by making the story of Jenny the core of the film and by making the

other things merely parts of her life.

I like to think Blue Fire Lady is the story of a 16-year-old undeveloped pre-adolescent who becomes a wiser and more mature 18-year-old young woman. If I can have the audience fall in love with this girl, then these ingredients will just be the icing on the cake. In the case of Barney and Ride a Wild Pony, the ingredients were very much the replacements for the substance. I could be wrong.

How did you find working with Cathryn?

Lead actress,.Cathryn Harrison, and director, Ross Dimsey.

Rewarding. She is an intelligent actress, a hard worker and very

BLUE FIRE LADY

quick. I often found her a jump ahead of me. You must remember that the part she was playing was largely against type for her.

The big problem with the character of Jenny was to make it non-soppy, because she could easily have appeared a petulant, horseloving and spoilt brat. It was important to give her some sort of roundness, or charm.

I don’t think children are necessarily entranced by kids winning over adults, but I think they are entranced by other kids, or figures to which they aspire, showing a glimpse of themselves.

And I think part of the success of ABBA is that they are ordinary, right down to their gauche costumes and basically simple music.

Kids can see a part of themselves, though they know they are watching 30-year-old people. They are not so glossy that they are unreachable.

So, one of the things I had to try and do with the Jenny character was to scrub a bit of the gloss off her and make her a bit more ordinary.

The Barry character has been very useful in doing this. There is a scene which was written precisely for this reason. It is a little night out in town where Jenny appears slightly ordinary and ill at ease in her pretty clothes; whereas he is the young gay blade around town, equally nervous, but in charge of the situation — that sounds a bit like ingredients.

After working with Mark on Blue Fire Lady, however, I have found there is a lot more to him as a composer and lyricist than ends up on record.

H o w m u c h has M a r k ’ s con sciou sn ess o f his im age influenced his performance in the film?

You must remember that Mark is a very intelligent, 23-year-old businessman. This was a limitation in the early days of rehearsal but after that it certainly wasn’t. He is a very quick learner. Also don’t forget that he hasn’t really acted before because he is the first to admit that The Young Doctors was really “walk-up-and-say-it” stuff.

Like several other directors, you make commerc i al s bet ween projects. Do you find there is a tension between the two?

I don’t believe it is a problem if you are able to keep your distance.

If you get totally absorbed into the advertising world, you spend most of your time selling yourself, convincing people that your work is good and very little of your time actually making films. What I try and do is keep the emphasis on filmmaking.

What has been interesting is coming from commercials to a feature film. I have had to do a lot of hard thinking and homework on this film to stop myself going with a commercial style. It has some advantages, though. Because of the influence of television, kids have developed fairly short attention spans. They need to be visually encouraged and, therefore, the film must have pace. So it was intriguing to reta in th is asp ect of my commercial training, while at the same time ridding myself of an obsession for going in too tight.

Vince’s feature experience helped with this, particularly early on.

Instead of going for a cut-around style, I have been saying: “Right, let’s see how we can do it in a dolly”. I have been focusing on a piece of action by theatrically directing attention to it, rather than by cutting. This is something you just don’t often get the opportunity to do in commercials, and it has been great fun to design sequences of two to two-and-a-half minutes which have been encompassed in a single take. Stylistically it is something I would like to pursue further.

C a t h r y n H a r r i s o n is a sophisticated young actress* How difficult was it for her to conceal this worldliness?

Cathryn is a very complex person, but just because an actress has had a sophisticated background, it doesn’t necessarily mean that their “real-age” personality is not part of their ammunition. I believe that it is still part of Cathryn’s am m unition and she uses it b rillia n tly , particu larly when dealing with the press. She is also a highly professional actress and quite capable of convincing age changes. In fact, during a lot of the sequences where she was 16 I had to pull her up out of it a bit because she had become a little knockkneed and wide-eyed.

Cathryn is also a technician. She can hit her mark, find the lights and, more importantly, knows how to play to a lens.

Asi interesting thing about Mark H o ld en is th a t he has such tremendous popularity, yet his songs are quite a d u lt. . .

Mark’s songs I personally find unappealing and I think I may have perceived the reason for this during the making of the film. I feel they are designed to be performed live and are too closely tailored to the image he believes he should market.

I believe they lack a certain vitality in terms of coloration and style.

The last question should be on horses. . .

Top: Peter Cummins as the cruel trainer. 2nd top: Cathryn Harrison and Mark Holden. 3rd top: Ross Dimsey and Cathryn Harrison. Bottom: Cathryn Harrison and Gary Waddell in the “night on the town” sequence.

Right now, I never want to do a horse film again — not racehorses anyway. They are the most difficult animals I have ever encountered. So if anybody is interested in making a film with racehorses, all I can say is: “Beware”. They lean, bite, kick and sometimes stand on your feet. it Cinema Papers, October — 165

CATHRYN HARRISON Actress When were yon first approached for the role of Jenny?

Tony Ginnane, the producer, was in London inquiring about British actresses and he got in touch with my agent, William Morriss, who phoned me at my home in Devon.

Did Ginnane say why he had chosen yon?

No. He had seen me in Black Moon, which is very different from this but it wasn’t really a recom­ mendation because it didn’t show that I could play this kind of girl.

“Blue Fire Lady” is actress Cattiryn Harrison’s fourth feature since starting at the age of 11 in Jacques Demy’s magical “The Pied Piper”. This was followed by Robert Altman’s “Images” and the controversial “Black Moon”, directed by Louis Malle.

Harrison has also performed in three television dramas— “The Intruders” (AngIia~ITV)9 “The Witches of Pendle” (BBC) and “Moths” (BBC). “Moths” was directed fey Warns Hussein whose series, “The Glittering Prises”, was recently shown on the ABC. Harrison, who plays the lead role of Jenny, was interviewed on location by Gordon Glenn and Scott Murray.

And what kind of girl is Jenny?

film lost its strength by sweetening up the script.

How soon after did “ Images” come? The “ Pied Piper” attracted no c r i t i c a l r e s p o n s e , a n d , presumably, little publicity for you . . .

There was no critical attention at all. I got the part in Images quite by chance. I was in Spain swimming at the hotel when Altman came up and talked to me. “Oh, but I have already done a film”, I stuttered.

How do you feel the film turned out?

I find it very hard to be objective, especially of a film like that. I know what Altman wanted to say and all the different ideas that went into making it. And when you know all these things, it is difficult to see w h eth er som ething has been overdone or not. I can only visually judge those films I have been involved in.

She is quite realistic and the things that happen to her are those that affect us in our day-to-day living.

Coming out t© Australia, after working with Louis Malle, is a big change. W hat had you heard about our industry?

How was your relationship with Altman? Of late he has come under much attack for being an autocrat. . .

It is regarded as an industry on the rise; i.e., a developing industry.

So I wanted to come out and see what it was like and how people over here felt about films.

Which films do you think have c re a te d th is im p re s s io n in Britain?

I think it is important for a director to have a certain amount of power — though it can be very subtle. But if the director can get all the actors and the crew fascinated by what he is doing, then he has it made. Altman managed to do that; he made the actors really work, even on something fairly simple. He also made you feel like you were doing most of it yourself, which was nice.

Picnic at Hanging Rock is the main one.

Had you seen it before Ginnane approached you?

Sadly enough, I haven’t seen any Cathryn Harrison and equine friend.

Australian films. I don’t go to the cinema very much, and, living in the however, there was less a sense of There are a lot of things that interest Did you have rehearsals? country, I don’t get the chance to team-work and people stuck much me besides acting, though when i go ' We had a couple of readsee many films of interest. Most of more to their own jobs. Actors back to Britain I want to go into throughs. And then on the set we those shown are sensationalist films didn’t carry equipment on location theatre. or that sort of thing, and that is had time to discuss things. like Towering Inferno. something which is really nice here. Do you feel you have been trapped What did your agent have to say There is a sense of helping each in any way by starting your career W hat about your relationship so young? other. with Malle — about coming out to Australia?

She encouraged me, and this helped me make the final decision.

Originally it was going to be my long summer holiday at home — swimming and riding. I did not want to start work again until the autumn, which was rather lazy of me. I changed my mind.

How different is it working in an Australian situation to that on a film by Malle or Altman?

Well, on Images and Black Moon the director was working with a group of people that was his team; you acted as part of that team.

On British television productions, 166 — Cinema Papers, October

The three features you have so far done were all made by top directors. How much was this the result of choice?

Very much so. Till now I have been at school as well as working, so I have tried to be careful about what I do.

When you were approached by Demy for “The Pied Piper” at the age of II, had you considered an acting career?

Certainly not, I was waiting till I had some other qualifications, and this meant going to university.

Not really, and that is one of the advantages of having worked with good directors yet not having had a real success. In the public eye I am not really known

I really love him. He was very quiet, and he let me get on with whatever I needed to do. He is a very sympathetic director.

How large a production was “The Pied Piper”?

Malle has said that he regards working with actors the most interesting part of filmmaking. . .

Fairly large. We did some studio work, but mostly it was done on location in Rotterdam. The film had a very big crew and cast — Diana Dors, Donald Pleasance, Donovan, Jack Wild.

Originally, the script was very realistic, and I love period films that really smell of the time. I think this

Malle chooses to work with actors he has an affinity with. It is im p o rta n t, e s p e c ia lly w ith something like Black Moon, which is a very difficult film to do, to feel that there is someone working with you who is validating what you are doing and who has an under­ standing of you in a personal way.

BLUE FIRE LADY

What I have always tried to do is respond to any given situation as an individual situation, rather than analyze it overall. It is important to understand why a character reacts the way they do obviously, but once you have decided why, more analysis isn’t necessary, unless it is difficult to put it over. I like to take acting step by step, scene by scene, How definite was Malle about the situation by situation. story?

And that Is why you like a We followed the original script director to vindicate what you are more or less, but because it was a doing while you are doing i t . . . dream, or like a dream, it was something that had to find its own Yes, exactly. pace. It was a very orchestral sort of thing where you had to slow down This also seems to necessitate a at times, then pick up again — period of time before doing a take much, I suppose, like any film, it when you can work things out wasn’t something that was clear-cut Now this must be difficult on the at all. There were so many ideas tight schedule of an Australian and different angles put into it. film?

One of the basic concepts of Black Moon was that there would Yes, but all the things that Jenny be no story line message. It was just feels in this film are fairly simple; visuals and mucking about with they are things that I have felt. ^motions. A lot of it is very funny, Something which was much more though I have sat with people who difficult was the Witches of Pendle, don’t know whether they ought to a television play I did for the BBC. be laughing or not. So there is a sort It was very well written, but it was a situation of which I had no under­ of giggle, then an apology. standing — that of being an Do you think this could be adolescent epileptic in the early partially a response to the 17th century who is having an extraordinary flux in Malle’s incestuous affair with her brother.

There were very few parts of me career. . . that I could draw on. Basically I’m a I think it may, but Malle is a very middle-class English girl of the intelligent man and very sensitive. 20th century.

He has an enormous interest in life and doesn’t want to stagnate, so he Are you using much the same tries not to get stuck on one thing. technique with Dimsey as with You can do things in two ways. Malle, whereby you go through a You can take one subject and dig number of interpretations of how deeper and deeper into it, or you you think you should play a can cover a wide range, doing the scene? best you can with each. Like Malle, I always like to have at least two I prefer to cover a wide range — I would hate to be stuck with one different ways of looking at a given situation — when we have time, that type of character all my life.

I must say, however, that when I is.

I think Ross knows exactly what watched Black Moon it did make me uncomfortable. But then I think he wants and he realizes there is a side of my personality which is it was meant to. totally wrong for the part — I have Malle claims children understand a more aggressive side than Jenny ever shows — and that is something it more easily than adults. . . he has to control. Jenny is not a Yes, I think that is true. It is so defensive person, but if you spend a full of symbols that don’t tie lot of your time travelling around together, that if you try and analyze, and trying to make friends at nine it becomes totally confusing. But different schools, you build up a children can follow it sequence by certain way of dealing with people. sequence. They don’t try to make it It is not exactly being on guard, but all fit, they just sit back and watch making sure you are not vulnerable.

And Jenny is a v u ln e ra b le the pretty pictures. character; though with an inner The symbolism of She film is strength — like in all those e s s e n t i a l l y e m o t i o n a l . It Victorian novels. therefore seems unlikely there is What happens to her in the end? an intellectual thread running through i t . . .

Mark Holden drives off to daddy and Jenny gets her horse.

Oh, I think there is an intellectual justification for all of it. But then I J e n n y d o e s n ’ t g e t M a r k can’t really say as I wasn’t with Holden. . .

Malle when he edited it.

The changing face of Cathryn Harrison. Top Well he is at the gymkhana at the to bottom: The Pied Piper, Images, Black Moon (two stills), Blue Fire Lady.

How specific was Malle in trying end, so I suppose she does — in the nicest way. -k to get you to do something?

That doesn’t mean they have to be your best friend, it is just a very su b tle th in g . I d o n ’t really understand it, but I would love to.

Malle never blamed me for anything that went wrong. He takes, I think, an awful lot ,of strain up on himself and that makes it easy sailing for his actors.

The equine lead — Blue Fire Lady.

Producer Antony I. Ginnane.

CREW: Director.............................................RossDimsey Producer.................. Antony I. Ginnane Associate Producer . . . . . . . Bill Fayman Screenplay........................................ BobMaumill Director of Photography . Vince Monton Production M anager........Barbi Taylor Production Secretary..........Jenny Barty Art Director......................John Powditch 1st Assistant Director. . . Geoff Morrow 2nd Assistant Director . . . James Parker Racing Co-ordinator.........................RonGreen Focus Puller................... Jack Endacott Clapper/Loader..............Robert Powell Sound R ecordist............................. GaryWilkins Boom O p erato r............. Mark Wasuitak Gaffer............................

RobYoung Best Boy......................... Peter Moloney Key Grip............................. Noel Mudie Grip........................................... Ian Park Props Buyer...................... Tina Mortimer Continuity......................... Fran Haarsma Make-up...................Annie Pospischil W ardrobe.......................................TerryRyan Stills Photography............. David Parker Catering............................................ RonGreen Unit Doctor.........................Dr. Callister Unit V e t.............................Jack Sewell Editor...............................Tony Patterson Unit Runner........................ Paul Hallam

CAST: Jenny .................. . . . . Cathryn Harrison Barry................... ............Mark Holden McIntyre.'......................Peter Cummins Mrs Gianini........ ........Marion Edward Mr G rey.............. . . . Lloyd Cunnington Mrs Bartlett........ . . . . Anne Sutherland C h arlie................ ..........Gary Waddell G us..................... ................John Wood Mr Peters............ ................John Ewart Reporter.............. ........Rollo Roylance Vet....................... ............John Murphy Chief Steward . . . ........Telford Jackson Receptionist........ ............Katie Brinson Old B a g .............. ..............Leila Hayes Steward............... ................. Ken Webb Broadcaster........ ................Bill Collins Postman............... ............... Jack Mobbs Girl No. 1 .......... ..........Danee Lindsay Girl No. 2 ........... ............Joanne Moore

Cinema Papers, October — 167

VINCE MONTON Director of Photography Originally the film was going to be shot on 16mm American Eastmancolor, processed by Colorfilm and blown up by Colorfilm. This was a purely economic decision.

Then we did some shooting tests which we projected onto a very big screen and found we weren’t getting the clarity the film needed.

There is a large difference between shooting on 16mm and on 35mm, but it isn’t much in terms of the percentage of the budget. And considering the budget of the film was around $300,000, it was felt the percentage saved was not enough to justify the possible risks of out-of­ focus footage.

“Blue Fire Lady” is the third feature Vince Monton has shot for producer Antony I. Ginnane.

After leaving Crawford Productions, where he worked on “Homicide” and “Matlock Police”, Moisten photographed “Eskimo Nell”, “Fantasm”, “The Trespassers”, “Raw Deal”, “Fantasm Comes Again”, and “The Long Weekend”.

He is also shooting “Newsfront” for director Phil Noyce.

In the following interview, conducted by Gordon Glenn, Monton begins by discussing the change from 16mm to 35mm on “Blue Fire Lady”.

How would you compare the effect of using a light fog om 35 mm with a 16 mm Eastmaneolor blow­ up?

Was this largely dee to poor blow­ up results?

We didn’t actually do any blow­ ups, we made the decision purely on the 16mm tests we shot. It was basically a question of sharpness on a very large screen. Now sometimes when you blow 16mm to 35mm the image becomes sharper, but we were concerned about wide shots and the usual problem there is that after the blow-up the greens aren’t as lush and there is an increase in grain.

This is with the Eastmaneolor modified type 2 . . .

Yes. We tried several zoom lenses and even swung over to doing tests with fixed lenses, but it still wasn’t satisfactory.

Having made the decision to go 35mm, what motivated you to choose British Eastmaneolor as opposed to American?

Director of Photography, Vince Monton, with Cathryn Harrison.

Eastmaneolor that you like?

They are only very subtle differences and it isn’t a question of one stock being better than another.

It really depends on what sort of film you are making.

We are shooting a film at the end of winter, so there are a lot of cloudy, slate-grey skies. We are also making a film about horses on farms, so there are a lot of greens.

Now the British stock seems to handle this situation better. British Eastman doesn’t produce the very chocolate-box greens that the American stock comes up with. It is truer and more pleasing to the eye, e s p e c ia lly u n d e r o v e rc a st conditions where greens usually clog up and go khaki.

with color temperature. However, it seems to handle flesh tones better under certain lighting conditions, as when shooting very late in the day with that orange light.

The other thing I found with the British stock is that it doesn’t appear to be as sensitive as the American stock. When we originally got rushes back from Colorfilm, they looked a little down. They had been printed on the lights recommended by the lab for American negative, so we had them re-adjust the printer lights slightly. Then it started to look all right.

During shooting I gave the British stock a quarter to a third of a stop more exposure. Part of this could be due to the processing here being based on American chemicals. It’s not a problem of course; it’s just something to be aware of.

We had three options open to us: to use Agfa, Kodak from Britain via S am uelsons, or K odak from Rochester via the Kodak agent. I was willing to shoot the film on Agfacolor just to see what results I could get. However, the final decision was solely a practical one — who could supply us with 30,000 m of film stock of the one batch num ber in three days?

Samuelsons was the only one.

I am very glad we ended up What about the skim tomes? getting the British stock because I I have not had the usual problem Have you been using clear lenses like the look of it. It wasn’t a conscious artistic decision, or one where flesh tones swing towards ©n this film? based on tests, but I would like to magenta. But a lot of it would have to do with the fact that we are using No, I hardly ever use a naked shoot my next film on it. the new Rosco reflector materials. lens. I suppose it is one of those We have also been very careful habits we have swung into since the What are the' things about British 168 — Cinema Papers, October

introduction of Kodak stock which gives such a crisp, clear image.

Sometimes you find it is a little too crisp, so I use anything from light fogs to low contrast filters to nets.

The only naked lens I have used was a zoom, which I didn’t think was up to the standard of the fixed lenses. I felt that if I introduced diffusion, the quality would drop too much.

Strangely enough I feel it is more important to use low contrast and fog filters on 16mm, which is due to be blown-up, than on 35mm. You may well say that since it has to be blown up, sharpness is of great im­ portance. But I find that colors tend to pick-up saturation in the blow-up process and it is, therefore, im­ portant to introduce some form of diffusion to keep the colors realistic. And generally that is why I use a fog or a low contrast on 16mm due to be blown-up.

Generally I would use one stage more on 16mm than on 35mm. For example, if I was going to use a No. 1 fog on 35mm I might use a No. 2 on the same scene to get the same look on 16mm. But it is just a matter of preference and I don’t really bust my guts to get the crisp, clear images that are so easy to do these days. It is much more important to give a nice look and feel to a film.

What is the look you are trying to achieve on “Blue Fire Lady”?

Well, though the film is primarily for children, I haven’t tried to over­ soften it with diffusion. Everything I have been doing with low-contrast and fog filters, nets and so on has been very, very gentle.

There are a lot of exteriors in the film, so the lighting for a location is generally what you start with, because there is very little you can do except choose a different angle or reduce or increase the fill-light.

You are at the mercy of the elements to a degree.

We are also trying to achieve a look more by the locations we choose than the angles used. The movements of the camera are also being made as inconspicuously as possible, is

TELEVISION AND URANIUM John O’Hara Television coverage of the uranium issue has been intermittent, haphazard and fragmentary — no different from the news and current affairs coverage of any issue. But television has also been used to mount an expensive and sustained advertising program, disguised as a series of “public service announcements”, to present one side of the case about uranium.

The advertisem ents, for the Uranium Producers’ Forum, in a series of questions and answers with Bob Sanders, have attempted to persuade the public that the subject of uranium is simple, clean, and basically none of their business. The audience has had to rest content with the assurances of a procession of experts, from scientists to a doctor with 50 years in the trade. They have repeated to their viewers that the process of mining uranium is routine and safe, that Australia needs the money from the sale of uranium, and that atomic fission is simple and easily understood.

This message has been reinforced in a massive advertising campaign across all the media, costed for television alone in excess of $500,000, and sustained from the release of the second Fox report to the present. Curiously, the news reporting techniques of press and television have often mirrored the effects of the advertising campaign itself.

The information made available to the public through this process consists, for the most part, in a series of half-truths; statements that may be true in themselves, but which tell only part of the story, and by ignoring implications, falsify the overall picture. This has been the style of commentary on the uranium issue by the miners, the Government and the media as well.

For example, this question-and-answer from an advertisement by the Uranium Producers’ Forum, in The Australian on September 2: What can be done with high-level waste from the reprocessing of nuclear fuel?

Fuse it in a special form of glass, encase it in steel and concrete and bury deep underground in geologically stable structures. A large demonstration plant using the glass method is being constructed in France, and other countries are well advanced in similar techniques. Scientists believe that safe and permanent disposal of nuclear waste is achievable.

The form of this sharing-out of information is rather like a cookery recipe; the result is never in doubt if you follow the instructions. But what is said is more ambiguous than the neat formula might indicate. It is implied, although not stated, that all scientists share the belief stated about the disposal of atomic waste. And what they believe is also ambiguous, that disposal of nuclear waste “is achievable”.

There is no time suggested for the achievement of this disposal of waste, although it is implied that once the demonstration plant is built, visitors will be able to see for themselves.

Against this misleading kind of assurance John O'Hara is a lecturer in media at the Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology and was a media commentator for the ABC.

might be set the conclusion from the first Fox report: “There is at present no generally accepted means by which high level waste can be permanently isolated from the environment and remain safe for very long periods.”

What concerns us here is not the pros and cons of the uranium issue, but the ways in which information has been disseminated, particularly on television. The television coverage becomes even more important, granted the biased and inadequate coverage given the issue by the press.

In general, the press coverage has reduced the complex issues involving uranium to a question of political and economic priorities; and corre­ spondingly, information has been channelled from authorities in these areas. So, politicians and businessmen have been the sources of many stories about uranium, and the style of the stories has been determined by the style of the sources.

Information has also been restricted to a small and specific audience. The Financial Review, which has had by far the best coverage of the uranium issue, has a circulation of only about 45,000. The mass circulation papers, say in Melbourne, The Sun and The Herald, have said relatively little about the issue, and their combined circulation is well over a million CHerald: 437,000; Sun: 624,000).

Where these papers have taken up the story, they have tended to treat it in ways that minimize its importance. For example, on one occasion when demonstrators gathered in Canberra, The Sun ran a story about a bonfire prepared by the protesters.

O r, m ore im p o rta n tly , the kinds of uncertainties people might feel about the uranium issue are mercilessly (and no doubt unconsciously) parodied in a kind of rapid-fire journalism. So a journalist wrote in The Herald on May 12: “For most people, it conjures visions of mushroom clouds, of genetic accidents producing monsters among humans, animals and even plants or of people fried to a crisp by some­ thing they don’t even understand.”

If these lurid fantasies are what “most people” imagine, it is because they are fed to them in the media.

The Age library file on uranium for this year contains a total of 127 press stories, from the beginning of January to the time of the release of the second Fox report. This total covers the five daily newspapers available in Melbourne.

During this period, when the public was debating the issue, 57 of these stories appeared in The Age, 28 in The Financial Review, 27 in The Australian, seven in The Herald and six in The Sun. Across all these papers, the stories about uranium clustered into five groups: the visit of a Japanese trade delegation to Australia; overseas trips by Australian government leaders; divisions in ALP policy on uranium; the release of a book called Uranium on Trial (described in The Age as “a book of timeliness and significance”); and U.S. policy on uranium.

Granted these focal points, the process of gathering and selecting news appears seriously deficient. It appears inflexibly bound to official statements, and official news sources; and pre­ occupied with the novelty value of today’s story, irrespective of whatever has gone before.

Perhaps the most obvious example of ignoring the past was the brief mention given to a confession by an Israeli agent that in 1968 he had directed the disappearance of 200 tonnes of uranium bound by ship from Antwerp to Genoa.

There has been no further mention of that startling incident, and the press has continued to consolidate the impression put out by the Government about the adequacy of control m easures. The single exception to this generalization about the treatment given to the story in the daily press is again The Financial Review.

In general, the public has been prepared by the media to see the issues in a particular light. And the constraints of the news gathering process have favored the industrial and political interests that together wish to see uranium mined.

The media has done very little on the other side of the fence. For instance, accidents at nuclear installations overseas have gone almost entirely unreported. One of them occurred in March last year, when an electrician was checking for possible leaks at the Browns Ferry Number One Reactor in Alabama. He was holding a lit candle near the point where electric cables penetrated the wall and where any leaks in the seals would cause the flame to flicker. The sealant caught fire and the fire spread. The electrical cables that provided power for several different safety systems were simultaneously knocked out by the fire. Before the fire was brought under control, two huge reactors were shut down. The total cost to the Tennessee Valley Authority exceeded $100 million.

In the same way with the media, protest demonstrations against nuclear energy have been unreported. And there has been no discussion at all, except in The Financial Review, of overseas inquiries into uranium processing, reports such as the Flowers Royal Commission into environ­ mental pollution in Britain.

At the same time as they have largely ignored news from overseas about uranium, the media have provided ample opportunities for the pro­ uranium lobby to argue their case. Take the media reaction to the release of the first Fox report. This was received as an endorsement of mining uranium. Posters for The Sydney Morning Herald read: “The Way Open to Uranium” ; The Sun: “Yes to Uranium” ; and The Australian: “ Yes, But?” The press hardly mentioned subsequently that the members of the Fox commission wrote to the Government protesting about the media coverage.

The commission had pointed out quite major and unsolved problems — on nuclear waste, as we have seen. Or on terrorist attack: “ft seems doubtful,” said the report, “whether, as the number of facilities increases, it will be possible to provide sufficient defences to render every installation safe against attack by even small numbers of well-armed, trained men.” Or on nuclear blackmail: “There is a very real risk that the opportunity and the motive for nuclear blackmail will develop with time . . . the evidence indicates that the risks are presently real and will tend to increase with the further spread of nuclear technology.”

Concluded on P. 185

DIRECTORS AND WRITERS American Television Comedy Series Introduction by John C. Murray Checklists compiled by John C* Murray and Tons Ryan.

If, as they say in showbiz, it’s not funny being a comedian, the same- is true of writing about comedy. There are few things harder than trying to convince someone that he ought to have found a certain performance or program as amusing as the writer did, or, indeed, few experiences more deadly than being on the receiving end of arguments of that sort. Despite the risks, I think the claim should be made that many of the television comedy series listed below — all American and predominantly in the liveaudience format — have a unique character, one which accords with Stuart Hall’s thesis (Sight and Sound, Autumn 1976)that “a truly authentic television language” is to be found in the popular series, rather than in self-consciously devised ‘art’ television.

As I see them, these series, more than any other form of current television, are conceived, produced and performed within a rich and complex body of understanding shared between creators and audiences. And the high level of wit which, more times than not, individual episodes of the series achieve is the consequence of the writers’ intelligent grasp of what these mutual understandings enable them to do with plots, situations and characters.

Although it is obvious that any given series will generate different sorts of humor, frequently it is the sharpness with which an expectation held by the audience is confirmed, that gives the episodes their comic edge. In a loose sense, we know what’s coming up (and the writers know that we know), but the pleasure comes from having our anticipations met in this, rather than that, way.

Two examples from Phyllis might make the point clear. In this series, most of the plots develop from Phyllis Lindstrom’s gushing sentimentalism. She wants the world to be a place of adorable children, kindly old folks, great loves and grand passions, and behaves accordingly. Balancing the excesses of Phyllis’ theatricalities are the self-effacing commonsense of her father-in-law, Jonathan (Henry Jones), and especially the irascible toughness of Jonathan’s mother, Mother Dexter (Judith Lowrey).

We know that the dippier Phyllis’ plans and aspirations become, the more severe are Mother Dexter’s objections. In one episode, Phyllis (Cloris Leachman) was intent on dragooning her daughter Bess, Jonathan, his wife Audrey, and old Ma D ex ter into a p icn ic ou tin g .

Characteristically, Phyllis anticipated the day as an idyll: warm sunshine, dappled shadows, softly singing birds, good fresh food, fine wine and companionable conversation. Everyone was reluctantly prepared to play along with the vision, except Mother Dexter. From the hardwon wisdom bred of more than 70 years on this earth, she refused to have any part of picnics “because the sandwiches are full of ants and the trees are full of perverts . ..”

Of course we knew that Ma Dexter would find some iron-clad reason to scotch Phyllis’ technicolor scheme (the old harridan’s dream of a good time is a night on the tiles with Telly Savalas), but that single deflating line reminded 170 — Cinema Papers, October

A tense moment for Phyllis (Cloris Leachman). Phyllis.

The boys from Happy Days.

us of the depths of her scepticism. The humor, I am claiming, comes from our recognition that that is just what Mother Dexter would find to say, and that Phyllis’ romanticism would inevit­ ably give her the chance to say it. A type of comic logic, understood mutually by writers and audiences, had not only been sustained, but had been brought into sharp focus.

The second example also involves what might be labelled the comedy of confirmation. One fact about Phyllis’ lack of realism that an audience quickly picks up is its self-destructive nature — it can create just the personal and social embarrassments it is intended to deny. Having invited the parents of Bess’ new boy friend over for dinner and a formal let’s-get-to-know-eachother, Phyllis is shocked to find that they are midgets. She tries to reduce the awkwardness of the occasion by playing The Perfect Hostess with all stops out, passes a tray of savories over to the four-foot tall father, and smilingly asks, “ Shrim p?” . Realizing her gaffe, Phyllis inadvertently plunges the knife a few inches deeper into the fast-dying situation by then solicitously inquiring whether the two wee folk would like to stretch their legs.

Again the humor is marked by a kind of inevitability: we, and the writers who created her, are conscious that Phyllis’ nature is one which makes disasters like this pretty well Unavoidable.

The striking thing about the comedy in the series, particularly (and perhaps uniquely) in the live-audience forms, is the degree to which appeals are continually being made to what can be called a sense of community binding the creators, audiences and fictional characters

together . . . a mood of companionability. It exists in its most obvious form in the way in which certain characters are greeted by the live audience as old friends — the cheers and applause which signal the Fonz’s arrival stage in Happy Days, or Vinnie Barbarino’s more dim-witted observations in Welcome Back Kotter.

We see it, too, in the deliberately planted exit lines which remove other characters from the scene and invite an applauding reaction. SueAnne Nivens in The Mary Tyler Moore Show, Mr Woodman in Welcome Back K otter, and Lionel in All in the Family, regularly play their parts, add their flavor to proceedings, and then leave the stage on some high verbal or visual note. There is little of that feeling of distance which necessarily affects our responses to the characters in, say, M*A*S*H (familiar with them though we are), where there is no audience present to offer its immediate reactions to the players.

In the live-audience series (for example, The Mary Tyler Moore Show, Rhoda, Phyllis, The Odd Couple, The Tony Randall Show, The Practice, The New Dick Van Dyke Show, Laverne and Shirley, Friends and Lovers, The Bob Newhart Show and the later episodes of Happy Days), the audience seems to emerge as an integral element in the construction. The episodes are not so much presented to an audience as created along with an audience, and we, the indirect viewers, are brought into that community — we are made companions — through the live audience.* But the familiarities on which these series feed go beyond just those generated by the constant reappearance of characters and situations. The companionability I have mentioned includes other features as well. We can note, for instance, the quite warm re-creations of the details and ambience of the 1950s in Happy Days and Laverne and Shirley. One episode of Laverne and Shirley wound up its plot and then finished with a final scene showing Laverne, Shirley, Lennie, Squiggy, Carmine and the gang dancing The Stroll to a juke-box replay of Darling, You Send Me. The people, their dress and hairstyles, their movements, the song, were presented with uncondescending affection.

Moreover, my impression was that the writers knew they could indulge themselves (the scene had no connection with anything that had happened in the story) because they were confident that what they were recalling with nostalgic pleasure would also be pleasurable to the live and indirect audiences. All of the participants — writers and audiences alike — knew those times and experiences: they were familiar, a part of our communality.

The reference arrows run out frdm the series in a variety of other directions too, including on occasions links with our mutual experiences of the media world. A police inspector visiting the precinct in Barney Miller rues the declining image of the police force, and remarks: “Years ago we used to be Pat O’Brien and George Murphy; now we’re A1 Pacino and Richard Rowntree. No wonder we’re getting ambushed.”

Sue-Anne Nivens (Betty White) in The Mary *Rather like older radio series of the I.T.M.A., Burns and Allen Show and Goon Show kind.

TELEVISION

Tyler Moore Show is the quintessence of every media home-economist we have ever heard, read or seen, and I am waiting for the day when The Women’s Weekly picks up Sue-Anne’s idea of an annual salute to fruit.

In The New Dick Van Dyke Show, Dick Preston performs in a television medical drama called “For Those Who Care”. He plays Dr Brad Fairmont, a gifted surgeon suffering from the fatal and incurable Felspar’s Disease (The Big ‘F’).

An episode of The Tony Randall Show centred on a court case involving pornographic films, one of which rejoiced in the title Crazed Housewives on the Make. Even the episode titles of a number of The Odd Couple series called this media awareness into play — The Flight of the Felix; They Serve Horse Radish, Don’t They?; Bunny’s Missing And She’s Down By the Lake . . .

• So, to repeat the point, the television comedies, especially the live-audience series, bring us into a complex of familiarities, some intrinsic to the formulae of the series, some extrinsic to them and part of a wider circle of common experience.

When they work well (and one concedes straight off the variations in quality from episode to episode), they do so because of a sharpness of observation o r’ insight into these familiar, communal elements, and the success tightens the bonds of companionship which appear to me to be the most singular characteristic of the comedies.

The insights may be very small — the deathrattle of a failed dinner party in Friends and Lovers being signalled when the men present start to swap accounts of the petrol mileages they are getting from their cars; or a prisoner in Barney Miller telling Harris that his brother was

Alan A ld a ......................................................................... M ASH H y A v e rb a c k ......................................... M ASH; (C olum bo) D e siA rn a z.................................................. M oth ers-in -La w Don Adam s...................................................... The P artners Jack A rn o ld ................ The Danny Thom as Show; (A lia s Sm ith & Jones; M cC loud; M o v in ’ On; A rcher) M ark Baldw in....................................... C hico and the Man M ark Baldw in............................... The Bob N e w hart Show A llen Banon............... Barney M iller; (The N ight Stalker) Jerry Belson..............................................................

Rhoda Richard B e n e d ic t................ The Partners; (Police Story; H a w aii Five-O ; The Bold Ones; A lia s Sm ith & Jones; M arcu s W elby M.D.; Police W om an; The Rookies; The Blue Knight) Lee B ernhardi..................................................Barney M ille r Bruce B ils o n .......... Get Sm art; (SW AT; H aw aii Five-O; C hopper One) Peter B o n e r z .......................................F riends and Lovers; The Bob N ew hart Show M arc B reaux................... The New D ick Van Dyke Show Jam es Burrows . . Phyllis; The M ary T yler M oore Show; Laverne and S h irley Don Butany................................. The Bob N e w hart Show Frank B u xton.................................................... Happy Days David C a m pb ell................. The M ary Tyler M oore Show Bob C laver............................................F riends and Lovers M artin Cohan............................... The Bob N e w hart Show Hal C ooper................................................................... M aude Herschell Daugherty. The Sm ith Fam ily; (W agon Train) Joan D a rlin g .. Phyllis; (M ary H a rtm an, M ary Hartman) Bill Davis.......................................................... Barney M ille r Fred De Cordova............................................My Three Sons Jack Donohue..............................................The Odd Couple Mel Ferber.......................................................... Happy Days A rt Fisher............................................................Happy Days Jim Fritzell.................................................................... M ASH Jam es Frawley................................................. Paper M oon Larry G elbart.................................................................. M ASH Larry Hagman............................................... The G ood Lite B illH o b in ......................................... W elcom e Back Kotter Jerry H opper...................................................... Get Sm art W illia m Ju rg e n se n .............................................

M ASH H. W esley Kenny.......................................A ll in the Fam ily H erbert K e nw ith............................... G ood Tim es; M aude M ichael K idd..................................... LaV erne and S hirley Richard K inon................................................. The Practice Tim K iley............................................. F riends and Lovers Dennis K lein..................................... LaV erne and S hirley Bob L a h e n d ro ___ W elcom e Back K otter; G ood Times; T ha t's My M am a Stan Lathan................................................... Barney M ille r John T. Lennox................................. LaV erne and S hirley

Publicity shot of the cast of Welcome Back Kotter.

trying to invent a frozen chop-suey pizza: a dish, he remarked, that would combine the worst of three cultures; or Gabe’s comment in Welcome Back Kotter that the reason New Yorkers like war films is seeing all those guys with guns who aren’t in your neighborhood; or the stutteringly intense intellectual at a literary gathering in The D ick Van Dyke Show smugly informing everyone within earshot that he chose not to own “a television machine”. As I say, small insights, but neat ones nonetheless.

Jerry London . The Bob N e w hart Show; (Joe Forrester; Police W om an; Kojak; The R o ckford Files) Stuart M a rg o lin .. . . Phyllis; (Sara; The R o ckford Files) Sherman M arks............................. The G host & M rs M uir Gerry M arshall................................. LaV erne and S hirley Leslie M artinson . . Batm an; The C hicago Teddy Bears; (M annix; B a rna by Jones) Harvin M edunsky....................... The T ony Randall Show Allan M eyerson.................................LaV erne and S h irley Bud M olln.................................New D ick Van Dyke Show M ary Tyler M oore.............. The M ary T y le r M oore Show Robert M oore.............. Rhoda; The Bob N e w hart Show M arjory M ullin..................... The M ary T yler M oore Show Ed Nelson................................... The G host and M rs M uir Gary Nelson.......................................................... G et Sm art C hristian N yby................ The New A n d ry G riffith Show; (W agon Train; FBI; Adam 12) Jerry Paris. LaV erne and Shirley; Happy Days; Phyllis; New D ick Van D yke Show Bill P e rs k y .. . The P ractice; New D ick Van D yke Show Lee P h illip s .,. The Practice; G host & M rs M uir; (Nakia) Noam P itlik.............................Barney M iller; The P ractice Allan R a fk ln .........................Rhoda; Frien ds and Lovers; The Bob N e w hart Show; The New D ick Van Dyke Show; M ASH Carl Reiner................................................... G ood H eavens Gene Reynolds............................................................ M ASH Don Richardson................................................... Get Sm art O scar Rudolph.............. Batm an; Tem perature’s Rising Jay S a n d ric h ................................... LaVerne and Shirley; The M ary T yler M oore Show; The New D ick Van Dyke Show; Rhoda; P h yllis The Bob N ew hart Show; G et Sm art; The G overnor and J J .

Mel Shapiro.................................................................. P h yllis Dennis Steinm etz........................................... Barney M ille r Howard Storm ...................................LaV erne and S hirley G eorge T y n e ................ The New D ick Van Dyke Show; The Bob N e w hart Show M ichael Tyne..........................._....................... Happy Days Herb W allerstein. Barney M iller; Happy Days; (M annix; Petrocelli) Don W e is .................. Happy Days; (S tarsky and Hutch; The Danny Thom as Hour; The Im m ortals; Barnaby Coast; M annix; ironside; The N ight Stalker)

Alan A lda...................................................

M ASH Danny A rnold................................................. Barney M ille r Nick A rnold..................................... W elcom e Back K otter G loria Banta................................................................ Rhoda Sybil Adelm an.........................New D ick Van Dyke Show Norman B arasch........................................................ Rhoda

But one final point needs to be made. There are times when, in their different ways, these series impinge on our experiences of the world at large in a manner which is (to put it a little strongly) more tragi-comic than comic. ^ One thinks, for instance, of Sergeant Fish (Abe Vigoda) in Barney Miller. The morose Fish is a fictional creation, of course, and provides the voice of cynicism which so many of the series contain. Yet, he is uncomfortably like a lot of people in the society we inhabit beyond the television set. He’s dutiful, conscientious and even kind, but convinced beyond recall that he is at the end of the line. Plagued with piles and aching joints, he has been sunk by the ultimate futility of his job and the dreariness of his marriage. When he accuses Wojo (Max Gail) of being vicious for reminding him that he has a steady income and a wife who’ll always be with him, or warns Chano (Gregory Sierra) that “you can’t go round shooting everything that frustrates you: you’d end up alone . . .” , it is more than a fictional figure speaking in a fictional context.

In him, and through him, we are brought to recognize that the things we have in common with the ‘people’ in the stories, the people who make the stories, and the people in direct audience contact with the stories also include the twin blights of failure and loneliness.

These recognitions may be slight and transitory, but they are not infrequent. And though the moments of individual bleakness are healed by the communality within the stories (Lou Grant in The Mary Tyler Moore Show, bitter and alone in a bar after his divorced wife’s remarriage, is joined by his colleagues and induced to join in an increasingly up-tempo rendition of “The Darktown Strutters’ Ball”), we have had moments of dark reminder.

G erry M a y e r............................... The Bob N ew hart Show; ___ G reen A cres The M ary T yler M oore Show The Sm ith Fam ily Peter M a ye rso n .........................The Bob N e w hart Show; ___ Happy Days W elcom e Back Kotter ........ Happy Days Harvey M ille r............................... The Bob N e w hart Show Tem perature’s Rising; M arilyn M ille r.............................................................. Rhoda (A p p le ’s Way) Phil M ishkin........................................................ Happy Days J o h n B o n i.......................................................... The P ractice Coleman M itch e ll.......................................................... Rhoda Bobby Bosw ell................................................. Happy D ays Eric M onte.........................................................................G ood Tim es M ichael Brenson............................................. Happy Days Carol M oore.......................................................

Rhoda C harlotte Brow n.......... The Bob N e w hart Show; Rhoda M ichael M orris......................................... A ll in the Fam ily Bob Brunner............ Happy Days; LaV erne and S h irley Lorenzo M u s ic .. . : .................................................... Rhoda Frank Buxton................................................... Happy Days M arty N adler............ Happy Days; LaV erne and S h irley Pamela Herbert C h a is ............ Phyllis; M aude; The New Pat Nardo........................................................................ Rhoda D ick Van D yke Show Geoffrey Neigher........................................................ Rhoda Glen and Les C harles................................. Phyllis; MASH Gail Parent.................................................................. Rhoda M artin Cohan...............................The Bob N e w hart Show Tomy Patchett..................................................Bob N e w hart Eric C o h e n ..................................... W elcom e Back K otter; Norman Paul.....................................................................G ood Tim es LaV erne and S h irley Bob Peete....................................................................... G ood Tim es Stan D aniels.............................M ary T yler M oore; P h yllis M ary Kay P laice............................................................ P h yllis Elias Davis.......................The New D ick Van Dyke Show David P ollock......................... New D ick Van Dyke Show David D uclon....................................... LaV erne and S h irley Earl Pom erantz......................... ................................. P h yllis M ichael Elias.......................The M ary T yler M oore Show Steve P ritzker................................... Frien ds and Love rs Jack Ellinson.................................................... G ood Tim es Pat P roft........................................... W elcom e Back K otter Peggy E lliott....................................... G host and M rs M u ir Barry Rubinowitz . . Happy Days; LaV erne and S h irle y Bob Ellison.......... The M ary T yler M oore Show; P h yllis Jerry & Jewell Rannow................ W elcom e Back K otter Fred Fox................................................LaV erne and S h irley Tom Reeder..................................................... Barney M ille r Ron Freeman................................................. Barney M ille r W einhold R eigge............................................. Barney M ille r Seth Freeman.............................................................. P h yllis Carl Reiner. The D ick Van D yke Show; G ood Heavens Jim Fritzell.................................................................... M ASH Rob Reiner....................... Happy Days; A ll In the F am ily Barbara G allagher..................... The Bob N e w hart Show Low ell G anz................................................................. Happy DaysJames Ritz............................... Happy Days; The P ractice Jim R ogers........................................................ The P ractice Lloyd G arver............................... The T ony R a ndall Show Jerry Ross....................................... W elcom e Back K otter Larry G elbart.............. , ................................................M ASH Ann G ib b s .. The M ary T yler M oore Show; The Practice Mark Rothman.................................................. Happy Days Joe G lauberg............................................................... Happy DaysO scar Rudolph............................... T e m perature’s Rising Pamela Russell...................The M ary T yler M oore Show Steve G ordon.................The New D ick Van D yke Show; Bob Sand............................................ LaV erne and S h irle y The P ractice; Friends and Lovers Alvin Sargent.................................................... Paper M oon Hal G oldm an............................................. T h a t’s My M ama Perry G rant................................................................... Happy DaysBob S ch iller................................................................ M aude Ed S chaulach..................................... G host and M rs M uir Everett G reenbaum .................................................... M ASH Tony Sheehan................................................ Barney M ille r Gig Hendry...........................The M ary T yler M oore Show Gary Shim akawa.............................. LaV erne and S h irley Charles Hoffm an...................................................... Batm an Jean H ollow ay........................... The G host and M rs M uir Larry Siegel..................... G ood Tim es; T h a t’s My M am a Arthur S ilver...................................... LaV erne and S h irle y Chris Haywood..................................................Barney M ille r Susan S ilver................................. The Bob N e w hart S how Bill Idelson................................... The Bob N e w hart Show Treva Silverm an................ The M ary T yler M oore S how David Isaacs................................................................ M ASH Ray J essell................................... The Bob N e w hart Show Ed Simm ons......................................................The P a rtners M onica and Andrew J o h n s o n ........ F riends and Lovers; Ziggy S teinberg................ The M ary T yle r M oore Show LaV erne and S h irley Norman S tiles.................................................. The P ractice Bo Kaprall W elcom e Back K otter; LaV erne and S h irley Arne Sultan......................................................Barney M ille r David K etchum ...............................................................H appy DaysJay T a r s e s .................................The Bob N e w hart Show; The Tony R a ndall Show Joel Kimmel The M ary T yler M oore Show; The Practice G eorge T ibbie s........................................... My Three Sons Dennis K lein................... The New D ick Van Dyke Show M ichael W arren___ Happy Days; LaV erne and S h irle y Karl K leinschm itt........................... W elcom e Back K otter Paul W ayne................................. The G host and M rs M u ir Arnie Kogen.................................The Bob N e w hart Show Tony W ebster.............................................................. P h yllis Charles Lee.........................The M ary T yler M oore Show Ed W e in b e rg e r... P hyllis; The M ary T yle r M oore S how M ichael L e e s o n .. The M ary T yler M oore Show; P hyllis M ichael W ein berger....................................... Happy D ays Deborah Leschin.............................. LaV erne and S hirley Bob W eiskopf.............................................................. M aude Ken Levine...................................................................... M ASH Norman Liebm ann............................... C hico and the Man Jack W in t e r .......................The M ary T yler M oore Show; David Lloyd......................... The M ary T yler M oore Show LaV erne and Shirley; H appy Days Dale M cRaven......................................LaV erne and S hirley Roland W olp ert................................................ G ood T im es Allan M arcus................... M ary H artm an, M ary Hartm an G eorge Yanok................................. W elcom e Back K otter Regis M arkow itz........................................................ P hyllis Tiffany York........................................................Happy D ays Law rence M arks............................................................M ASH Steve Zachavias.............................................. Happy D ays Holly M ascott.................................... LaV erne and S hirley M ichael T. Z in d b e rg ........ The M ary T yler M oore Show; The Tony R a ndall Show

Richard L. Bare.

Sidney Baum Dick Bensfield W illiam Bickley Joseph Bonadace

Cinema Papers, October — 171

%J O U R N E Y . . . [n Jun£i

19 7 6 ,

a group o f actresses and film m akers

%

j

went into the forests of the H awkesbury River district and spent

JJ

^

six w eeks shooting an extraordinary film .

§

Nine women convicts escape from a prison hell-hole and dare to create a savage world free of man.

«nam P li

k A R IE J i says "Performances are generally smashing. . . moves swiftly.. sound is excellent... music, too, is superb in underlining and ■JLa point-making...

• v.T j any eroticism is in the eye of th e ^ m g M H K beholder.” ..

Pwfllp

Among Women

EDGE NUMBERING SERVICE PRINTED ONTO ACETATE OR POLYESTER BASE

D educed by JOHN WE1LEY Directed by TOM COWAN W ith JEUNE PRITCHARD (, and MARTIN P H U A N %'S

F STOP PRODUCTIONS P/L COMPLETE POST PRODUCTION FACILITIES E D IT IN G R O O M S A N D E Q U IP M E N T , P R O D U C T IO N O F F IC E

PHONE MELBOURNE 690 2420

4th Floor, 45 Macquarie Street Sydney, N.S.W. Telephone 27 5575

y ^ ú /y ío f* a /¿ o /¿

Box 1744 G.P.O. Sydney 2001 Telegraphic Address: Filmcorp Sydney, Australia

We are pleased to inform the Film Industry that the New South W ales Film Corporation Act was assented to on June 27, 1977 and becam e effective from July 1, 1977.

BO ARD OF DIRECTORS Paul H. Riomfalvy

(Chairman)

Damien Stapleton and

Directors

Michael Thornhill

CORPORATION EXECUTIVES Jenny Woods (Senior Project Officer)

Lloyd Hart (Financial Controller — Production and Legal Officer)

R ichard Davis (Executive O fficer — D epartm ental Filmmaking)

N eville Aarons (A ccountant)

JOURNEY AMONG WOMEN Susan Oermody I suspect that every piece of critical writing constructs an imaginary object that can, in the extreme, bear only coincidental relationship to the original film. Piaget has pointed out the common root of the words “discover” and “invent” ; certainly the two processes converge here. If you like the film, you discover/invent a film that you like. If you feel you like what the fdm is “trying to do”, then your discovery/invention is going to be even further removed from the original.

My rationalization for this process in the case of Journey Among Women is that I consider the film an “essay” , in the literal sense of the word. It is an attempt (and, therefore, incomplete, not exhaustive of the possibilities)to do something worth doing. It “essays” a female sentience (rather than epistemology). It attempts to be heroic, visionary, and even ambiguously utopian, in its exploration of a society of women in touch with nature. It hints at archetypes that go back to the heroic militancy of the Amazons, the dionysiac ‘madness’ of the Bacchae.

It is also firmly in the tradition of seeing women as “close to nature” , closer to it than men, bound, up more intimately with the primal natural forces of birth and death, which gives them a mysterious potency on one hand, but which limits their access to the rational, creative and administrative realms of men, on the other.

The identification of women (and blacks) with natural forces gives them power, in the world of imagination, but severely handicaps them in the real world. I think it also handicaps the potential of the film — quite profoundly.

The film is also interesting for the way it tries to steer a course between plot construction and myth-making. Although it has a recountable plot, Journey attempts to be mythopoeic rather than discursive, poetic rather than logical, in its essay into the strange terrain of a world determined wholly by female values and interests. .

The handling of narrative structure is a critical problem in mythopoeic film. Move too far away from the story, from a thread of events, and you lose the capacity to generate rich ambivalences of meaning. Move too close to classic film narrative, and you lose the mythic dimension and end up with a poorly developed story, with inadequately motivated characters and plot, and bizarre continuity.

Journey Among Women makes some interesting attempts to break out of the constraints of plot, of cause and effect, of a chronologically ordered and explainable world. .

The first two shots of the film initiate the viewer into an exposition through images, rather than through the logic of events in time and space. Shot one is a red-coated soldier moving at a distance on horseback through a green world. Shot two closely traces the descent of a feather through the air as it lightly touches the bare shoulder of a woman standing in a room.

Neither shot has temporal or spatial context, and neither shot establishes temporal or spatial context for the next few shots. R etro sp ectiv ely they may be

The escape from the penal settlement in Tom Cowan's Journey Among Women. interpreted as fitting into one or more possible parts of the story, but they do not need to be ‘fitted’ into anything. They are self-sufficient: they juxtapose inside and outside worlds, male and female domains, and they begin to establish the color symbolism of the film, and the way shots of women will be differently handled to shots of men. The men (all soldiers in a glaring red that is utterly foreign to the green bush) belong to the world of the story, in long shot; the women belong to the world of the poem, in many kinds of descriptive camera movements and every kind of shot, including very close, unclothed shots.

When the women begin to survive in the bush, to form their community of women, there is a long passage of shots that are edited, not for the illusion of action in continuous time and locatable space, but for the exposition of ideas through juxtaposed images.

Their bodies become more beautiful to the camera; they form sexual relationships with each other; they learn to hunt and survive; they invent customs and music; they are at home in the wilderness. But the habit of thinking in (quite beautiful) images, and gradually developing an aesthetic of women as strongly alive, beautifully adapted creatures of nature, who have more humanity between them than exists between men and women, is ultimately broken by reversion to the story, the world of men.

Elizabeth (the judge’s daughter) who initiated the convict women’s escape and then went with them, goes unwillingly back into the world (where her nakedness must be a sign that she is “sick”), to be left, finally boxed in a genteelly wall-papered room, looking almost without recognition at the strange objects that are her dresses, hanging on the back of a door.

The other women successfully fight off a variable number of red-coated soldiers; but then again, the women are helped by

a p p a re n tly “ m ira c u lo u s” pow ers of regeneration. For example, Lisa Peers is blasted lifeless from a tree, but is later seen galloping on horseback, resurrected either by that peculiar life force of women, or by the bizarre continuity I mentioned as a danger of mixing myth with ‘plot’, openended structures of meaning with closed narrative. In fact, there are quite a few points in the film where it falls short of what I read as its mythopoeic ambition, and collapses into untidiness. This seems particularly true of the first and last sections of the film, before the escape, and after the attempt to recapture them, when the mythic and the realistic planes of the story seem out of control and in mutual contradiction.

The period setting of the film seems to work well, as a distancing device. Instead of evoking a past world and enticing the viewer to live vicariously in it for a while, Journey Among Women holds the past at a suitable distance for scrutiny — and finds it a contemptible place. Elizabeth’s fiance can simultaneously hold in his mind a picture of declasse women as contemptible objects for his (contemptible) lusts, and of women like Elizabeth as another class of objects altogether.

■ Meanwhile Elizabeth is able to break out of her world when she sees, for a moment, the intolerable nature of that contradiction, but out in the bush she imperiously calls for Meg, her former servant, to help her remove her stays. The outrage at her own oppression as a woman leaves her blind to the way she oppresses other women. She is part of the very knot of the contradiction that she repudiates: she relegates the menial ‘women’s work’ assigned to her by a patriarchal society to another class of her own kind, her own minority group, and thus stre n g th e n s the pow er of her own oppression.

■ As she achieves integration with the group of convict women, and as it becomes a

community outside the terms of the society it has escaped, Elizabeth is “re-humanized” along with the other women, from their former state as terms in an oppressive equation.

And as the process takes place, in the “middle section” I have described, the women move completely out of historical tim e, ju st as by journeying to the uncharted wilderness, they moved out of historical place. The exposition of images, that is the centre-piece of the film and of its meaning, detaches itself from the period setting of the plot as the women lose the last shreds of their period clothes.

However, it must be admitted that all of them, whether they represented female bourgeoisie or female felons, from the beginning looked more like reasonably liberated women who, from the vantage of a liberal, middle-class education, have opted for the look of a declasse state. Even if unconsciously they already had the marks, the cliches, of women’s liberation in the way they move, speak, look. This could either be seen as further distancing the period setting, and the trappings of plot, or as faking the evidence, planting the proof, depending on which film you are inventing/discovering — the successful Journey Among Women, or the one that failed.

Sim ilarly, perh ap s, the n oticeable stiltedness of the dialogue, which was restricted mainly to the world of the plot, may also be seen as a deliberate attempt by filmmakers to frustrate the realism of the past, or it may be seen as an inability to handle dialogue well. Fortunately it suits the film, fits in with its suppression of plot m o tiv a tio n , p e rio d e v o c a tio n , and psychological realism; but unfortunately, it remains impossible to be sure how far each of these effects was intentional.

Which brings me back to what I think is the biggest handicap to the film’s attempt to portray women’s sentience, and perhaps the Cinema Papers, October — 173

MR KLEIN

JOURNEY AMONG WOMEN

reason it is forced to veer between plot and myth, instead of steering a course that collides with neither. And that is its implicit thesis that women can rediscover their humanity, their true identity, by mingling with the primal forces of the wilderness.

By making the women journey into the uncivilized wilderness, the film opts for being a lyrical celebration of women’s apprehension of nature, instead of an analysis of the sources of their oppression in a post-industrial society. . In fact it may be argued that the film is, therefore, celebrating one of the most fundamental of those sources, since the idea of the closeness of women to nature has been one of the mainstays of patriarchal ideology, excluding women from the world of rationality and decision-making. So that the film is myth-making in ways that may perpetuate the very oppressions that we see the women heroically break from, at the beginning of the story.

This central idea of the film also widens the gap between the mythopoeic and narrative directions it takes. The world of the plot and the world of the women making myths in the wilderness remain disjunctive, and uncomfortable when brought into contact with each other. The plot raises questions that lyrical exposition through images cannot answer. The central ‘poem’ of the women learning to survive in the exquisitely photographed bush is not a necessary and sufficient answer to the contradictions that drove them there. When women repudiate the oppressive world-view of patriarchy, they must journey to a radically new epistemology, and not just to a deeper layer of sentience underlying the old one.

The totally female utopia of the women in the bush lacks a critique of what it is replacing, in its complete isolation from men, and past civilization. It also lacks a future. It cannot be more than a passing gesture — a pleasantly rude one — towards the old oppression.

Is the successful military defeat of the male an answer for the questions raised by the women’s breakaway? It would be possible to think so only in the most naive terms, confusing the cause and effect of a closed narrative with the cause and effect that operates in the material world.

However freely and beautifully the film handles its images of women casting off the rags of their oppression, the total is a retreat into lyricism and away from the hard mental work needed to sort out the issues raised by the story.

I like the idea of a mythopoeic treatment of women coming out from under an ideology that exploits them, rather more than I like this attempt to meet it. I find that the actual story of Journey Among Women frustrates what I see as its larger ambitions.

Another viewer, seeking a good yarn rather than the fairly intellectual demands I have made of the film, might find that its larger ambitions frustrate the film’s story.

JOURNEY AMONG WOMEN: Directed by Tom Cowan. Producer John Weiley. Screenplay Dorothy Hewett, John Weiley, Tom Cowan and cast. Director of Photography Tom Cowan. Editor John Scott. Music Roy Ritchie. Sound Recordist Jeff Doring. Cast: Lilian Crombie, June Pritchard, Martin Phelan, Rose Liley, Diane Fuller, Nell Campbell, Lisa Peers, Jude Kering, Robyn Moase.

Production Company Ko-An. Distributor Greater Union Film Distributors. 35mm. 102 min. Australia 1977.

MR

KLEIN

Stephen Kennett “ I saw them leave. The morning of July 16,1942 we had been awakened by the unusual noise of buses being driven round the Paris avenues at daybreak . . . One learned that they were Jews who had been arrested at dawn and were being assembled at the Winter Velodrome. I saw that there were children of our own age among them, squashed tight and still, their faces pressed against the cold windows, at a time made for the sweetness of slumber. I thought their round, black eyes were millions of stars in the night . . .’’

Valery Giscard d ’Estaing, President de la Republique, Aushchwitz, July 18, 1975.

Mr Klein is Joseph Losey’s best film in years, its cold and formal surface concealing a political and moral parable of considerable richness. The recent excesses of the Losey baroque are absent, replaced with precise, though never self-parading, imagery, and his use of space (notably in Klein's stair-well) is inventive. And while Losey is generally well served by his actors, Alain Delon as Mr Klein is particularly good.

The most telling scene in Mr Klein occurs when the enigmatic Florence (Jeanne Moreau) explains to Klein the uniqueness of man; for while there are various species of, say, insects, there is only one species of man.

For many of the French in 1942 there were two classes — themselves and the Jews. Robert Klein believes in this distinc­ tion also, repeatedly pointing out that his persecution has nothing to do with him. But the lesson of Mr Klein is that while we tend

Alain Delon as Robert Klein, a man fascinated with his Jewish double. (With Juliet Berto). Joseph Losey’s Mr Klein.

174 — Cinema Papers, October

Susannah Fowle as Laura (right) in Bruce Beresford's film of Henry Handel Richardson's

T h e G e ttin g o f

W is d o m .

to notice persecution only when it is of ourselves, we are all always responsible.

The inhumanity of man to man shown by the French who collaborated with the Germans in rounding up the Jews, is the guilt of every man, of every Mr Klein.

Paris 1942; an art-dealer, Mr Klein, is cold-heartedly purchasing works of art from fleeing Jews. One day a Jewish newspaper arrives at his door. When Klein complains (“I think I am a victim of a practical joke”), he is told the police have all the subscriber lists. He visits the police, and finds there is another Mr Klein, but is not told of his address. This Klein discovers by scratching off the erasure on “his” newspaper.

The search begins and a trail of clues, from a photo of a girl on a motorcycle to some boots worn in a cabaret revue, leads Klein to his inevitable fate — involvement.

At first, believing a report that his double, a Jewish member of the Resistance, is dead, Klein flees for Marseille. He returns to Paris, however, on hearing that this other Klein is still alive. He arranges a meeting but arrives to see him being driven away by police. Klein then returns to his own apart­ ment where he is arrested for being Jewish.

He is bundled off to the Velodrome d’FIiver where he ignores his chance of freedom (his lawyer is there with proof of his parentage) and allows himself to be swept down a dark tunnel to where trains await to take him deep into the night.

Why does Klein accept his death so wilfully? Klein is likened by Florence to a vulture, Jhe symbol of greed. But in a tapestry Klein has earlier thought of buying, there is an image of a vulture punctured through the heart by the arrow of remorse.

He decides against bidding for it because he feels it would bring its owner bad luck.

Klein is cruelly indifferent — to his girlfriend, his past mistress, his clients — and that indifference excludes the possibility of compassion or pity. It is also an indifference increasingly typical of man today — Mr Klein is certainly not only about the past.

I therefore see Klein’s resignation to death as a realization of his own involvement in the nightmare, and not, as most critics do, as a final, desperate bid to glimpse his double (once in the tunnel Klein shows no interest in those with him, not even of the Jew standing behind.)

The first clue of Klein’s guilt by association comes when he shows a newspaper cartoon to Janine (Juliet Berto).

At first, he is amused by the crudity of its anti-semitism, but then he understands what Pierre (Michel Lonsdale) has told him —

that the public is being prepared for the inevitable Grand Rafle.

Another clue is the connection between the hidden branch of the Klein family — the Dutch Jews — and the von Ostade painting he becomes increasingly fascinated in.

Mr Klein is a parable of involvement and Mr Klein, like the audience, finds that involvement is inevitable — it is never something that can be disowned. Klein’s journey in search of his double can therefore be seen, like that of Nicholas Urfe’s in John Fowles’ The Magus, as an elaborately staged truth game, each turn in the labyrinth aiding in a growing awareness of everyman’s responsibilities. And it is on this level that Mr Klein has excited so much interest.

Who after all is responsible for this frame-up? The Jews or the jealous Nicole?

The trail of clues laid by Franco Solinas and Losey begins with the re-addressed newspaper which is left lying on .the doormat. As the postman always slips Klein's mail under the door, someone else must have left it. Most likely it is the man with the von Ostade painting. Presumably, it is also he who passes Klein’s business card on to the concierge (“I know friends who could use it"). The frame-up has, therefore, been thought of before the film begins.

Slowly one pieces together the puzzle: a Resistance group is ferrying wealthy Jews out of Paris, using as a half-way house the chateau at Ivry-la-Bataille. The other Mr Klein is a member of this group and it is likely the Jew with the painting is also, the less faded areas of wallpaper therefore suggesting that paintings are being sold off to finance the operation. It is also probable that the motorbike in the photograph is the one used by Florence’s “husband".

Deciding on any plausible explanation, however, while intriguing, is ultimately unimportant because the message of the film remains unambiguous. And it is this ability to sustain two levels of interpretation simul­ taneously that makes one’s journey through the complex labyrinth so rewarding.

M R KLEIN: Directed by Joseph Losey. Producers A la in D e lo n , R a y m o n d D a n o n , R o b e rt Kupferberg, Jean-Pierre La Brande. Executive Producer Ralph Baum. Screenplay Franco Solinas.

Director of Photography Gerry Fisher. Editor Henri Lanoe. Music Egisto Macchi, Pierre Porte.

Art Director Alexandre Trauner.SoundIRecordists Jean Labussiere, Maurice Dagonneau. Cast: Alain Delon, Juliet Berto, Jeanne Moreau, Suzanne Flon, Michel Lonsdale, Francine Berge. Production Com pany Lira Film s/A del P roductions/N ova Films/Mondial Te-Fi. Distributor Fox. 35mm. 123 min. France 1976.

THE GETTING OF WISDOM

THE GETTING OF WISDOM Brian McFariane Henry Handel Richardson’s name heads the credits on Bruce Besford’s film of The Getting o f Wisdom, so one anticipates a respect for the informing spirit of the book.

The film is often perceptive and amusing, but where it goes wrong is where it does most violence to Richardson’s view of life; in relinquishing the essentially grim view of her square-peg heroine and the kind of success she grants her, the film loses coherence.

My admiration for the book is not, in it­ self, the reason I find the film inadequate.

The point is that the film trades the book's controlling ironic concern for its heroine for a purely episodic treatment. It is easy to see why the film’s makers decided not to show Laura’s hard-earned success with the Lite­ rary Society (a passing reference to her winning the literature prize is no help) and to settle for the showier business of turning her into a budding concert pianist bound for Leipzig.

This was no doubt justified on the grounds that it is what actually happened to the author, on whose own school days at the Presbyterian Ladies’ College (Melbourne) the novel is based. However, despite Laura's moment of defiance in not playing the an­ nounced piece on Speech Day (and the point is too elliptically made to register as it should), this finale does not help to pull the threads of the film together. The book is episodic, too, but it knows where it is going; the film does not.

Everything that happens in the book is seen as contributing to the growth of a mind which will ultimately seek to express itself in the writing of a certain kind of fiction, though Laura is still far from clear at the end just where this will lead her. “. .. not a word of her narration was true, but every word of it might have been true.” This has been the basis for her success with the Literary So­ ciety and it illuminates the experience that has gone before. For instance, the story­ telling to her sister Pin (with which, prom­ isingly, the film opens), her effortlessly inventive and convincing lies about the rector’s lustful forays against her virtue, her attitude to the expulsion of Annie Johns for theft (which the film mishandles).

These remain isolated and not very mean­ ingful episodes unless — as Richardson does and Eleanor Witcombe’s script does not — they are drawn together by a persuasive over-view of what they mean in Laura’s growth as an artist. In such episodes, Richardson shows how Laura's imagination goes to work on a few basic facts which she then works into a lively fiction, from which she, as an incipient artist, maintains a neces­ sary detachment. Without the book's Lite­ rary Society episode to mesh the preceding insights, we are left, almost, with a cross be­ tween What Katy Did and A Star is Born.

The episode involving Annie Johns’ expulsion also loses any real point in the film by making the girl a friend of Laura’s and the motive for the theft her feeling for Laura.

The value of the episode in the novel — as a stimulus to Laura’s creative imagination by showing how detachment and empathy work together — is lost and nothing replaces it.

Barry Humphries’ otherwise well-controlled performance as the austerely Victorian headmaster here succumbs (along with the script) to broadly melodramatic effects. The whole scene gets played as if it were some kind of climax, whereas it seems themat­ ically quite adrift in the film.

To turn Laura into a concert pianist might conceivably have worked if the film’s musi­ cal references had been more coherently or­ ganized towards Laura’s final success and what it means in her development. As things are, it tends to make chunks of the film, as

CRIA CUERVOS

well as many minor moments that seem to be pointing towards a literary orientation, ap­ pear isolated touches at best, extraneous at worst. And this is a pity because many of these moments and scenes are, in them­ selves, sharply entertaining. What music means to Laura is never integral to the film; the fact/fiction dichotomy that is often hinted at easily could have been.

What we are left with, then, is unhappily something much less substantial than we might have had. Beresford and Witcombe have elected to present an awkward, prickly, outgoing girl whose ego gets rather badly bruised in the process of getting wisdom. There is not enough detail about the way she is actually taught for us to see the liveliness and spontaneity being ironed out of her; and, equally, there’s not enough evidence of her ultimate resilence for us to trust in her rising above the conformity, hypocrisy and cynicism of the school and its teachers.

Possibly the role of Laura is like that of Shakespeare’s Juliet: by the time the actress is emotionally mature and complex enough to play it she is already too old for it.

Susannah Fowle makes a good try, but is too inexperienced to weld into a convincing whole the disparate elements — show-off, rebel, emotional obsessive, frightened ado­ lescent, imaginative fictioner, dedicated musician — that the script offers her instead of a character. However, she is sensitive enough to the demands of some individual sequences, especially those involving her lopsided friendship with the beautiful older girl Evelyn, to make one hope to see her again.

Generally the young actresses playing the schoolgirls have been encouraged to overdo the vulgarity and snobbery, though there are certainly some amusing touches, especially in the performance of Kim Devine as the greedy, raucous Lilith; and Hilary Ryan plays Evelyn with a lovely tact and grace.

Otherwise, the real acting pleasures of the film are provided by the gallery of intelli­ gent minor perform ances as school­ mistresses from such actresses as Patricia Kennedy (believably humane even in an in­ scrutably pointless scene in which she per­ haps imagines herself as the school superin­ tendent), Monica Maughan (especially sharp and funny), Dorothy Bradley, Jan Friedl, and Candy Raymond. They are good enough to make one wish the film had interested it­ self more in the staff and less in the girls.

Sheila Helpmann, as the tyrannical superin­ tendent, is an imposing presence, but the role, a sort of cut-price Mrs Danvers, finally

invites monotonous overstatement.

Like most of the Australian films of the past few years, The Getting of Wisdom looks handsome: Don Me Alpine offers some lovingly photographed interiors of muted clutter, with sudden sharply contrasted bursts of harsh landscape, rolling coast-line, and formal gardens which point up the claustrophobic aspects of the school’s life. I wish he had avoided the modish soft focus effects which he uses to obscure one face while he highlights another: it’s a mindless technique which serves only to draw atten­ tion to a restless cameraman rather than to make any useful narrative or thematic point.

THE GETTING OF WISDOM: Directed by Bruce B eresford. P roducer P hillip Adams.

S creenplay E leanor W itcom be, D irecto r of Photography Don McAlpine. Editor Bill Anderson.

Art Director Richard Kent. Sound Recordists Desmond Bone, Gary Wilkins. Cast: Barry Humphries, Patricia Kennedy, Susannah Fowle, John W aters, Candy Raym ond, Jan F ried l, Monica Maughan. Production Company Southern Cross Films. Distributor Roadshow. 35mm. 100 min. Australia 1977.

CRIA CUERVOS Inge Pruks Cria Cuervos is a masterpiece, and like Jules et Jim and Citizen Kane it creates its own limits and reference. Indeed, it almost defies discussion; its structural threads are so organically woven that to disentangle them is to distort them.

Carlos Saura (born in Huesca, Spain, in 1932) is well known in Spain and France, where this film in particular was a big success. He has since made the much darker Elisa, vida mia, which earned Fernando Rey the Best Actor award at the 1977 Cannes Film Festival. It is a pity that Australian audiences have had little chance to view Saura’s work, as it is rich in both personal and political content.

Cria Cuervos (literally, “nourish, or raise the crow") is concerned with a Spanish middle-class family as seen through the eyes of a little girl. Ana Torrent, who made her film debut in Victor Erice’s Spirit of the Beehive, plays the central character Ana, and gives an uncannily hypnotic per­ formance. Her gaze is both innocent and knowing, profound and matter of fact, impassive yet deeply disturbed — as only dreams, and the future, can show.

Ana loses her mother, then her father

Ana Torrent and Geraldine Chaplin in Carlos Saura's Cria Ctservos.

(whom she holds responsible for her mother’s death), and she and her two sisters are looked after by aunt Paulina and their servant Rosa.

At first the film may seem confusing, for Saura has structured his narrative so that Geraldine Chaplin plays both Ana’s mother and Ana 20 years later, remembering the events of her childhood. However, the adult Ana sections provide explanatory bridges — other transitions are extremely fluid — and there is such a strong unity of place that the intuitive viewer who allows himself the pleasure of just watching can accept the shifts in time without too much difficulty.

The ‘doubling’ of Ana with her mother is not only done visually through Geraldine Chaplin, but also through matching verbal motifs: Ana’s mother repeats Ana’s words, “I can't sleep”, when her husband comes in late; Ana repeats her mother’s “I want to die” in that terrible moment of crisis when she hears the Almendrita story told by her aunt.

Ana remembers an epoch when her mother was alive, and then another when she was an absence, a period when she could conjure up her mother by just wishing for her.

Saura has said that he believes death does not have the same weight of significance for adult and child. “For a child, death is equated more with disappearance, it does not have a tragic meaning: beings, animals, things die, disappear, and once this has happened there is no reason to dwell on this fact. For Ana the child, the death of her mother signifies her disappearance, which means that at any given moment she can reappear, and she is able to make her come back to life when she needs her. I believe that the child is incapable of establishing differences between the real and the non­ real, and that the step between the real and the imaginary is accomplished without any shock. A process of rationalization is not necessary to justify it, as is the case generally with an adult.” (Positif no. 194, June 1977).

The title no doubt points to the film’s strong preoccupation with death: Ana hears her father's death rattle;she sees her mother dying through illness; her pet hamster Roni dies; her grandmother wants to die; the children play a hide and seek game involving symbolic death; and, of course, Ana herself believes she has power over life and death, and gives what she thinks is a fatal dose of “poison” (sodium bicarbonate) to her father and aunt Paulina. She offers it for more practical reasons to her grand­ mother, too.

However the film is concerned with much more: with love, power, repression, guilt and sexuality — although, of course, all these are interrelated and cannot be separated entirely from the central concern with death.

All the adult characters are defined in terms of sexuality: Rosa is healthy and motherly, listens to women’s radio serials, and can even respond to her master's advances. Ana's mother is frail and unable to satisfy her husband, although this creates hysteria, frustration and jealousy within her.

Ana’s father, captured in his photographs in moments of power (on a horse, or in the military splendor of his uniform), is obviously more suited to the sensual Amelia, and yet Amelia's husband is more drawn to aunt Paulina.

So much is left unsaid in the film, and yet Ana is a witness to all. When prodded to speak about the things she has seen or heard, Ana merely says “nada” (nothing), and this word recurs like an echo throughout the film. Several characters say it, but perhaps it is most tellingly spoken by Ana’s mother: “There is nothing (after death). . . they have cheated me . . . there is nothing.” Ana uses it in different contexts, but in her case it is a closing of the shutters, until 20 years later, Cinema Papers, October — 175

SUMMERFIELD

CRIA CUERVOS

secret becomes known. This comes in the unsatisfying last scene where Simon watches Jenny and David make love. Upon climax, David notices Simon watching and, clutching a gun, chases him into the yard.

Here is the stalked and the stalker. What David finally decides (and it should, I suppose, remain unprinted here) is horrific.

But it only surprises because of its improb­ ability. Surely the revelation of David and Jenny’s secret is not sufficiently alarming to warrant such slaughter. It is far more probable that David would want Simon silenced, or that the Abbotts would move interstate or overseas. After all, incest is not the taboo it once was.

At times, however, Green's dialogue does suggest a deeper level of narrative. When the intruding Simon breaks a cup, for example, he offers to glue it back together.

Jenny exclaim s, “ No, it would be imperfect". And when Sally says she cannot find her kittens, Jenny replies that probably the sea-eagle or a fox has taken them.

David and Jenny are clearly creating their own perfect world — one divorced necessarily from all outside worlds (hence the reference to “the world beyond our world"). Having opted for the impossible choice of living together, they are seeing their dream through. And from what we are able to observe — obviously it is a deliber­

Nick Tate as Simon Robertson (left) being welcomed into Summerfield. John Waters, as David Abbott and Elizabeth Alexander as his sister, Jenny.

when she talks and confesses — but to whom? We are not told, but the memories are painful.

Saura has also spoken of his wish for a “subterranean communication" between himself and the spectator. “Inexplicable films interest me more and more; their mystery is subjacent, and they acquire their hold and their magic the moment they are projected."

Cria Cuervos is such a film, and there are many such instances of wordless com­ munication. One can recall the fascination of the yellow hen’s feet in the fridge; Ana’s vision of herself at the top of the building — does her smile suggest complicity or recognition? Is it directed at herself or at what she encounters? Is it suicidal or is she looking beyond death? All these possibilities are there.

That maddening ambiguity is in her smile at the beginning of the film, when she watches Amelia rush in disarray from her father’s room: is her gaze one of accusation? of satisfaction at a deed accomplished? or merely curious in an omnipotent god-like way, watching mere mortals scurry after she has decided their destiny?

Then there are the bathroom scenes, and the hypnotic lingering over Ana combing her hair. Saura passes easily from present to past, from Ana’s reflection in the mirror, to Ana with her mother.

Ana is often linked to her grandmother — she steps behind her after having refused to kiss her dead father, and eyes Amelia from her sheltered position. If Ana has her favorite, catchy and soothing record, so does her grandmother, whose closed world of memories is still very real for her.

There is obviously much more to be said about this complex and haunting film, and a close analysis of Saura’s editing would be most rewarding. In his other films he is interested in the idea of the double, and in the self and its relationship to memory and the past. His films are not easily categorized, and they are tending to become more and 176 — Cinema Papers, October

more personal — certainly Elisa, vida mia which treats his own relationship with Geraldine Chaplin.

It is to be hoped that other films by Carlos Saura will reach commercial distribution in Australia: we have been ignorant of them for too long.

CRIA CUERVOS: Directed by Carlos Saura.

Producer Elias Querejeta. Screenplay Carlos S aura. D irecto r of P hotography T eodoro Escamilia. Editor Pablo G. del Amo. Sound Recordist Bernardo Menz. Cast: Ana Torrent, Geraldine Chaplin, Monica Randall, Florinda Chico, Hector Alterio, German Cobbs, Mirta Miller. Distributor Ronin Films. 35mm. 97min.

Spain 1976.

SUMMERFIELD Scott Murray Summerfield is a domaine, a mystery island off the coast of Victoria, where Jenny Abbott (Elizabeth Alexander) lives with her brother, David (John Waters) and daughter, Sally (Michelle Jarman). It is a peaceful retreat cut-off from the mainland by a narrow bridge and padlocked gates. The island, once a topic of speculation, is now of little interest, the locals tolerating, though not understanding, the privacy of its rich owners.

Into this balanced world comes the schoolmaster, Simon Robertson (Nick Tate), a replacement for the previous teacher who has mysteriously disappeared. Simon boards at the local hotel, taking the same room as his predecessor. Inevitably he becomes fascinated by the reclusive Abbotts, and by processes of luck and persistence, he stumbles upon Summerfield’s ‘ugly’ secret.

This precipitates the film’s tragic climax.

Summerfield is essentially a writer’s film;

Simon Robertson (Nick Tate) caught up in the violent climax he has precipitated. Summerfield.

it is a attempt to invest a simple thriller with a degree of character analysis and by doing so, tries to satisfy the rigors of genre and naturalism. This it does rather well.

An example is the scene where David advises his sister to go with Simon to the c o n c e rt; Simon being ro m an tica lly infatuated with her. On the genre level, David’s suggestion is a deliberate misleading of an obtrusive ‘foreigner’. But at the same time, David is acting naturally by wishing to avoid any suspicion of closeness between himself and Jenny. It is, after all, his only choice given this successful but unwarranted invasion of their domain.

Where the scripting does falter is in Cliff Green’s seeming unwillingness to decide finally on the exact nature of the film and at whom the film is aimed. If Summerfield is meant to be a mystery thriller, then more concern should have been levelled at creating suspense. Instead it looks as if scared by the ending he has created, and fearing audience disapproval or disbelief, Green has decided to play safe.

O ver-helpful hints abound — the numerous references to blood, the possible combinations of high and low carriers of thalassem ia, or, most explicitly, the reference to the cats as being “a pretty poor lot; they are all inbred” — and this hedging of one’s bets minimizes the possible tension.

The “secret” is too easy to guess (in fact, one almost believes we are supposed to guess it), and the only possible basis for suspense is what will happen when the

ately restricted view — their world functions well, perhaps too well. None of the moral or ethical traumas that give so much tension and joy to, say, Jude and Sue’s relationship in Jude the Obscure are present, and this detracts from the film's potential richness.

There is, as well, an unnecessary insistence on Summerfield as a place of “fascination". Magical domains, as Alain Fournier has shown in La Grande Meaulnes, enrapture by their own mystery and not by directorial or authorial insistence.

Redressing this to a degree, however, is the contrast between the ordinariness of the hotel where Simon stays, and where the height of intellectualism is the weekly card game, and the Abbotts’ island. Also, the contrast between the near cruel scene where Simon and the landlady have intercourse, and that of Jenny and David at the end. And balancing nicely between these two worlds is Simon.

Part of this is due to a solid performance

by Nick Tate, who with the excellent John Waters and Elizabeth Alexander (they achieve the near impossible and convince as both lovers and siblings), gives the film an appreciable resonance. And there is also a nicely idiosyncratic performance by Bud Tingwell as the doctor.

Ken Hannam’s direction is much crisper than in Break of Day, and though occasionally let down by some loose editing (for example, the scene where Simon first finds the gates of Summerfield locked),

SUMMERFIELD

A BRIDGE TOO FAR

manages to keep the film pacey — the climbing of the cliffs, for example, is a well­ cut and effective piece of sub-textural tension. Hannam is also helped by an unobtrusive and atmospheric score by Bruce Smeaton, and camerawork by Mike Molloy whose beautifully rich exteriors make an odd contrast with the sometimes over-lit interiors.

Summerfield is a commendable, though only-partially successful thriller. There is evidence of much thought and care; if a little more intuition and less calculation had been applied, the result could have been commanding.

SUMMERFIELD: Directed by Ken Hannam.

Producer Patricia Lovell. Associate Producer Pom O liver. Screenplay C liff G reen. D irector of Photography Mike Molloy. Editor Sarah Bennet.

Music Bruce Smeaton. Art Director Graham W alker. Sound Recordist Ken Hammond. Cast: Nick Tate, John Waters, Elizabeth Alexander, Michelle Jarman, Charles Tingwell. Production Company Clare Beach Films. Distributor Greater Union Film Distributors. 35mm. 95 min. Australia 1977.

A BRIDGE TOO FAR Phil Taylor The assumption that an appreciation of the strategic situation in a film like A Bridge Too Far is vital to an understanding of the plot is typical of the genre. Films such as Objective Burma and Cross of Iron open with compilation footage so that there is an economical orientation in terms of place, date and the state of the war up to this or that point.

The technique is believed to be important if the film has some factual basis, and with the decline of the fictional war film, since the abortive The Green Berets, most contemporary war films have had a profound ‘historical’ framework about the only really safe war that has been fought within ‘popular’ memory: World War 2.

Rarely is this technique as vital as its use seems to demonstrate, but it has become such a ubiquitous part of the war film that its use is mandatory.

Richard Attenborough's A Bridge Too Far opens with original documentary footage of an aircraft dropping a stick of bombs, freeze-frame, and a woman's voice, tired and weary, “ It's hard to remember, but Europe was like this in 1944.’’ The pre­ credit sequence goes on to explain that Field-Marshal Montgomery has formulated a plan whereby paratroopers will seize the Rhine bridges in Holland and thus allow an armored thrust to be made across into the Ruhr and so “end the war by Christmas”.

The sequence not only provides us with information that is repeated later, but it also determines the film’s structural framework.

Unlike the traditional fictional war film, A Bridge Too Far is episodic, a patchwork of scenes illustrating a large number of the facets of the resulting battle.

That the scenes are only related functionally is the greatest structural weakness. It inhibits dramatic flow to the extent that the tension generated by the Allies’ necessity to relieve the paratroopers from their besieged position in Arnhem, for example, is dependent solely on credits noting the decreasing distance. Yet the film’s strengths also arise from this very structure, for while A Bridge Too Far is an epic war film of rather average quality, it n e v e rth e le s s d e m o n stra te s R ich a rd Attenborough’s skill at choreographing battlefield action. He is a talented observer of what J. Glenn Gray has described as war’s “fearful beauty”.

The core of the film lies in the growing conviction that the operation will fail. At

Dr Spaander (Laurence Olivier) and Kate ter Horst (Liv Ullman) leave their desecrated homeland in A Bridge Too Far.

Sgt. Eddie Dohun (James Caan) orders an unco-operative doctor to examine his ‘dead’ friend. A Bridge Too Far.

first this predilection arises from the competitive relationship between the various field commanders.

In the pre-credit montage we discover that the plan proposed is not a manoeuvre arising from a tactical advantage, but from the desire to increase Montgomery’s public image at the expense of the dashing American, General Patton. Later, in an estranged briefing scene, the commander of the airborne troops, Lt.-Gen. Browning (Dirk Bogarde), off-handedly explains that the elite British 1st Airborne Division commanded by the affable Maj.-Gen. Urquhart (Sean Connery) is given the most difficult objective, the capture of the Rhine bridge at Arnhem — the farthest of the four bridges.

The m ore e a sy -g o in g A m eric an commanders, aware that they form merely a

part of an essentially British operation, are given the four less prestigious bridges closer to the Allied lines. Browning practically ignores the Polish Maj.-Gen. Sosabowski (G ene H ackm an) and in a studied afterthought informs him that the Poles will form the reserve for the British operation at the Arnhem end.

Placed in an essentially redundant position, Sosabowski instinctively recoils from the whole operation. In a later scene, after the final briefing, he angrily predicts a massacre to Browning, who is furious that Sosabowski has dared question the wisdom of “the biggest operation since D-Day”. The war, then, becomes merely a public event, a means for senior officers to further their ambition.

This view of warfare planned and co­ ordinated by bureaucrats is starkly

contrasted with the demoralized, but professional, German army commanders.

Unlike the British Field-Marshal, von Runstedt (Wolfgang Preiss) is under no illusions. In response to a question from an aide about what they should do, the newlyappointed Commander-in-Chief of the German forces in the West replies. “End the war you fools.”

The riv a lry among A llie d arm y commanders gradually deepens to a cloying sense of doom. And while the airborne commanders ineptly plan the operation based on a German defence of “panicky old men and boys”, von Runstedt coincidently moves two frontline Panzer divisions to the quiet Arnhem area for refitting. It is these divisions that ultimately surround the 1st Airborne Division.

When Dutch and British Intelligence report German tanks near the planned drop zones, Browning chaffing to launch the operation, declares them “unserviceable” and orders the “party” on. Furthermore, pre-operation testing of the British field radios reveals that they are short-ranged and practically useless; but the officer responsible shrugs off the fact for fear of “rocking the boat".

The commander of the ground force, Lt.Gen. Brian Horrocks (Edward Fox), a toothy, incurable optimist, views the entire o p eration “ as a W estern film : the parachutists besieged, short of food and vital supplies"; the Germans are the bad guys; “and us the Cavalry on the way to the rescue”.

Once the operation is launched and Urquhart finds the Germans in force in Arnhem, he is cut off from his troops, unable to give orders to his men, or to radio a report to Britain. And when the Poles, under Sosabowski, eventually parachute in, the Germans are waiting for them. Sosabowski’s portent of the massacre of his men becomes fact as they Boat to earth with their parachutes, easy targets for the Germans.

This pervading sense of failure is, of course, the rationale behind the film and Attenborough is careful to remind us of the Cinema Papers, October — 177

A BRIDGE TOO FAR

obvious fact that it should never have happened. As Browning reminds his officers at the final briefing: “If any one group fail, it is total failure for us all.”

The film’s achievements, however, do not lie directly in these lesson of history, but in Attenborough’s excellent sense of the battlefield. Here, more than in Oh, What a Lovely War and Young Winston, he has contrived scenes where the image itself becomes a crucial momentary force in the world of the battlefield. One of these aspects is the presence of danger.

Death comes quickly and randomly.

British paratroopers, German soldiers and Dutch civilians are exposed and vulnerable to both the aimed and wild bullet. The lethal potential of a machine-gun is realized in such scenes as Major Harry Carlyle’s (Christopher Good) careful and quiet advance with a platoon of soldiers onto the seemingly undefended bridge at Arnhem; Major Julian Cook’s (Robert Redford)crazy row across the Rhine at Nijmegan into the machine guns of the waiting SS troops; and Sosabowski’s men attempting to cross the Rhine in rubber boats near Arnhem at night while the Germans fire a flare revealing the Poles as clear targets against the water.

In all these scenes, Attenborough keeps Geoffrey Unsworth's camera close in with the soldiers.

In contrast, a different technique is used to convey the timeless and alien world of a battle where two armies stand and fight it out. Lt.-Col, 'Joe' Vandeleur’s (Michael Caine) armored advance up the road into the range of German anti-tank guns becomes a disordered ugly world of screaming shells, smoke, flames, and cries of the wounded.

Here, Unsworth uses his telephoto lenses in a similar way to John Coquillon in Sam Peckinpah's Cross of Iron. The battle is a place of no escape — tight, anarchic, claustrophobic, and lethal.

Although Attenborough, in an endeavor to cover every aspect of the battle, has cast his net too wide, there are moments that remain memorable: Lt.-Col. John Frost's (Anthony Hopkins) triumphal entry into Arnhem only to be pinned down in a house near the bridge; the death of the old Dutch woman driven crazy by the battle; the paratrooper who runs to collect a dropped British canister (containing replacement red berets) and is shot by a German sniper; Carlyle carrying a black umbrella into battle, because- he had a bad memory for passwords and so had to prove he was an Englishman; Cook's frenetic fight for the German-held end of the Nijmegan bridge; Sgt. Eddie Dohun (James Caan) driving his apparently dead captain through the German lines and ordering an unco­ operative doctor at gunpoint to examine him; Kate ter Horst (Liv Ullman) reading from the Bible to wounded British paratroopers in the wreckage of her once neat Dutch home on the outskirts of Arnhem; and Col. Bobby Stout (Elliott Gould) arriving at the Son Bridge just as the Germans blow it up — “Shit!" he says belatedly. The examples are many and varied, but A Bridge Too Far necessarily becomes the sum of parts such as these.

Apart from detailing the multi-faceted aspects of battle; the film's greatest strength lies in its demonstration of war as a spectacle, the fascination that accompanies manifestations of power. Herein lies the importance of the airdrop sequence.

Whereas Raoul Walsh focused on the expectations of the men of Nelson’s command in the parachuting scene of Objective Burma, Attenborough seems awed by the machines — the dakotas, the gliders, and such mechanical details as the uncoiling of tow ropes as hundreds of aircraft take off.

Attenborough has said his film isn’t tailored “It shows what really happened — the horror.” If this is an oblique reference to I 78 — Cinema Papers, October

HIGH ROLLING

H: 7 % Joseph Bottoms as Tex, the man “who prefers bixrbs to bullets” . Igor Auzins'High Rolling.

the more gratuitous statements in the film, then it may go far toward explaining the over-statement of “War the Destroyer."

When, for example, Dr. Spaander (Laurence Olivier) travels through the wrecked streets on the way to a ceasefire meeting with Lt.Gen. Wilhelm Bittrich (Maximilian Schell), he sees once-neat Dutch homes smashed, the furniture and paintings spilling onto the streets, and the children suddenly homeless and frightened.

There is the sense of waste, too, when the last of the British paratroopers, the wounded men who could not cross the Rhine fol­ lowing Browning's order to Urquhart that he was to withdraw from Arnhem, collapse outside the Hartenstein Hotel wearily singing Abide With Me as they wait for the Germans to arrive.

Much of the film is concerned with images and scenes such as these. Yet, with tighter and more disciplined economy, Attenborough may have retained the crisp­ ness of such scenes as when Urquhart is re­ grouping on fst Airborne Division's dropzone beside a wood and he notices some lunatics who have escaped from a nearby asylum that has been bombed earlier in the morning. They dance among the trees, laughing at the paratroopers who rush shouting orders and organizing their equip­ ment. “Do you' think they know something we don’t?” Urquhart murmurs.

A BRIDGE TOO FAR: Directed by Richard Attenborough. Producer Joseph E. Levine. Co­ P roducer M ichael S tanley-Evans. Associate P roducer John Palm er. Screenplay W illiam Goldman. Director of Photography Geoffrey Unsworth. Editor Anthony Gibbs. Music John Addison. Art Directors Roy Stannard, Stuart Craig.

Sound Recordist Simon Kaye. Cast: Dirk Bogarde, James Caan, Michael Caine, Sean Connery, Edward Fox, Elliott Gould, Gene Hackman, Anthony Hopkins, Hardy Kruger, Ryan O ’Neal, Robert Redford, Maximilian Schell, Liv Ullman, Arthur Hill, Wolfgang Preis. Distributor United Artists. 35mm. 175 min. Britain 1977.

HIGH ROLLING Basil Gilbert In his recent book, Double Takes: Notes and Afterthoughts on the Movies 1956-76, London film critic Alexander Walker notes that Robert Redford once said of Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid: “On a gut level it appealed to me as a fairy-tale. It also fitted in with some of the things I had done in life."

Similarly, the screenplay of High Rolling is based on writer Forrest Redlich’s ex­ periences on the Gold Coast in 1968, when he fought in tent shows and hitched about with a friend. But while Redlich sees the story of High Rolling, or at least its two male leads, as “a variety of the Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid pair of guys”, the similarities are superficial. The film certainly derives from the male-bonding type that was initiated by Butch Cassidy and which perhaps found its definitive form in the Dustin Hoffm an-G ene Hackman relationship of Scarecrow (although the bond between the two in High Rolling is more one of convenience than a genuinely human link), but there is none of the romantic Western flavor of the Redford film.

The film opens at a North Queensland carnival: Tex the American (Joseph Bot­ toms) is re-loading the ,22s at the rifle range, and Alby the Australian (Grigor Taylor) is taking on customers in the boxing booth. Tex is more interested in boobs than bullets, however, and is sacked for seducing the cus­ tomers, while Alby finds his hands full when he meets an over-sized opponent.

They head off for the South and get a lift from Arnold (John Clayton), a homosexual, who drives a sporty Corvette and peddles marijuana. The two men deal with Arnold and steal the car and the dope. In Surfers Paradise they have their share of adventure which culminates in them holding up a tourist bus.

The film is more concerned with action and adventure, than with human relation­ ships; although Tex and Alby are matched as a contrasting pair. Tex is extroverted and enthusiastic and converses in an irreverent jive-talk that was in fashion a few years ago (eg., “I think I’m having a orgasm, man!”).

Alby, on the other hand, modulates his Aus­ tralian slang, sometimes acting in a way that makes one suspect he had a Catholic up­ bringing. He is delightfully naive, and when he timidly asks Arnold, “You ain’t a queer, are you?’’, the cinema audience (largely composed of 10 and 11 -year olds) roars with laughter.

Redlich still has a lot to learn about the characterization of women, however, even when they are playing minor roles in an oldfashioned male-chauvinist film. The female lead Lyn (Judy Davis), a 16-year-old drop­ out who has ambitions to join a commune and also wants to earn a living as a prosti­ tute, has no memorable dialogue, and is completely one-dimensional. Some critics have confused this negative quality with feminine gentleness and have, therefore, praised it, but femininity should not be equated with weak-mindedness and an in­ ability to speak the Queen’s English.

From a production point of view, it would appear at first sight that Tim Burstall and Hexagon are showing initiative in making a film in which the average age of the produc­ tion unit is 24 years, and of which the writer, director and male leads are new to feature films, even though they have worked in tele­ vision productions. It would also suggest convenient cost-cutting were it not that High R o llin g ,. only an 83-minute film, cost approximately $400,000.

Quality, of course, does not bear a precise relationship to production costs, and even if the film breaks even at the box-office or makes a good profit, the question of whether it was worth it remains.

If one were to give the film an in-depth Marxist analysis, study its seminological structure and list its negative stereotypes, then the answer would probably not be in the affirmative. The script is trite and trivial, women and homosexuals are treated as inferiors, and the dramatic form of the film has few surprises. Even the popular rock music of the group Sherbet is merely an addition to the dramatic narrative structure, not an integral part of it. It is also remark­ ably predictable, the music for the most part functioning as a segue, linking one episode to the next. Only in sadder moments, such as when Tex is suffering from a brutal assault by nightclub bouncer Ernie (Gus Mercurio), does the music add to the introspective mood of the images and action without being simply superimposed upon it.

As for the direction of television Logie winner, Igor Auzins, his camera control is quite polished, and the framings, although occasionally repetitive in the landscape se­ quences, are functional. They might not have the captivating richness of a Mauro Bolog­ nini or the orchestration of a Peckinpah, but they are not obtrusive. More obtrusive is the slight overacting by Joe Bottoms which is allowed to pass unchecked or unobserved by the director.

However, High Rolling is not a film d ’auteur but merely a light-hearted oldfashioned romp that, one hopes, will bring a satisfactory return on the financial investment.

HIGH ROLLING: Directed by Igor Auzins.

Producer Tim Burstall. Associate Producer Alan Finney. Screenplay Forrest Redlich. Director of Photography Dan B urstall. E ditor Edward McQueen-Mason. Music Sherbet. Art Director Leslie Binns. Sound Recordist Barry Brown. Cast: Joseph Bottoms, Grigor Taylor, Judy Davis, Wendy Hughes, Sandy McGregor, Gus Mercurio.

Production Company Hexagon. D istributor Roadshow. 35mm. 83 min. Australia 1977.

PRODUCTION SURVEY Continued from P. 131 Film A u stralia production listings continued.

NO WAY BACK

is fbtr Wry v/ery

Wry very çatiï+y.

AUSTRALIAN WHEAT BOARD — PEST CONTROL S cre e n p la y ..................................Ron Saunders Exec P roducer........................... Peter Dimond S p onsor..................... Australian W heat Board S y n o p s is : To m ake farm ers aw are of the problem s caused by insect infestation and to m otivate them to take steps to eradicate in sects from farms.

Prod C om pany......................... Film A u stralia Dist C om panies....................... Film Australia, N ational Nine Netw ork D ire c to r........................................ C hris Noonan S c rip t.............................................. Laura Jones P rodu cer.......................................... Don Harley AUSTRALIAN WHEAT BOARD Exec P rodu cers..................... Richard Mason, — QUALITY Lynton Taylor S cre e n p la y ..................................Ron Saunders M u s ic...................................... Rory O 'D onohue Exec P ro d u c e r............................Peter Dimond P h otog rap hy.................M ick Von Bornemann S p onsor................... A ustralian W heat Boarrd E d ito r.......................................... Sarah Bennett S y n o p s is :T o increase understanding of why Prod M anager...........................................Damien Parer qua lity is im portant in sales and what factors A rt D ire c to r............................... C aroline Duffy a ffe c t quality.

Prod C o -ordinator....................Rod Freedman Prod S e cretary............................................Jenny Day AUSTRALIAN WHEAT BOARD Unit M anage r................................ W illis Davies — SCHOOLS W a rd ro b e ................................................... Kathy James Sound R e cordist......................... Howard Spry S c re e n p la y ..................................Ron Saunders Asst D ire c to r.................................. Gerry Letts Exec P rodu cer........................... Peter Dimond Cam era O p e ra to r...............

Bill Grimm ond S p onsor..................... A ustralian W heat Board Boom O perator............................. Steven M iller S y n o p s is : A film for schools highlighting G a ffe r.............................................. Bruce G ailey m ajor developm ents In the history , of the C o n tin u ity .................................. Adrienne Read industry and describ ing it as it is today, G rip ................................................................. RonLoebel M a keup......................................T ric ia C uncliffe CONDUCTING L e n g th ....................................................... 72 min Prod C om pany............. M ilton Ingerson Film G auge........................................................ 16mm and TV Productions C olor P rocess........................... Eastm ancolor D ir e c to r . .. ............................. M ilton Ingerson P rogress................................................... Editing S cre e n p la y............................... Ron Saunders Release D ate.................................................. Late 1977 Exec P rodu cer......................... M alcolm Smith C a s t: J o h n W a te rs , M ic h e lle Faw don, P h otog rap hy............................... M artin Turner Sandra M cG regor, Stephen O'Rourke, Judy E d itor........................................G. Turney-Sm ith M orris.

A s s is ta n t................................M ichael A tkinson S y n o p s is : A girl film m aker returns from a Sound R e cord ist......................... Peter Barker unique expe rience overseas to see her old S p onsor....................... Education Departm ent w ay of life — work, m arriage, frie n d s — in a S y n o p s is : Follow up on the m usic series on new perspective. She discovers that serious the art of the conductor. p rin c ip le s are at stake.

FOOD A SMALL BODY OF STILL WATER

is for

fist-

fn;f Striae

Cart.

Y io fo rtm

film La6or«f°ft*S

*r

film

is oor r i ) h it

FROM THE RELUCTANT EARTH

S y n o p s is : O u tlin e s th e s e rv ic e s and activ itie s of the M others and Babies Health A ssociation.

.

NEW RAIL PIN

Prod C om pany........ Ellson Film P roductions S cre e n p la y .................................... Peter W elch Exec P rodu cer..................... Lesley Hammond Len g th ....................................................... 10 min G auge......................................................... 16mm S p onsor............................... Dept of Econom ic Development Synopsis: Shows how rail tra cks are laid using a new pinning device, and explains its advantages.

PLAYGROUND SAFETY S cre e n p la y .................................... Peter C larke Exec P ro d u c e r....................... Peter D im ond S p o n s o r.................................. C.G .A. Fire and A c c id e n t Insurance Synopsis: To effe ct a decrease in the n u m b e r o f a c c id e n t s o c c u r r in g in playgrounds.

PREVENTATIVE MEDICINE S c re e n p la y................................. Russell Porter Exec P rodu cer.....................Lesley Hammond L e n g th .......... ............................................ 15 min G a u g e .........................................................35m m S p onsor...................................... Dept, of Public Health Synopsis: To illustrate to the p ub lic that good health means m aking the most of life's potential. '

PORT Prod C om pany.................Pepper A udiovisual S cre e n p la y............................... Terry M cEwen Exec P rodu cer......................... M alcolm Smith S p onsor.................................... Dept, of M arine and Harbours Synopsis: A film to m arket the Port of Adelaide.

Synopsis:- To inform the pub lic of the different types of energy as they relate to tran sport w hen the w o rld 's oil supply has reached a stage w hen it can no lo nger be used fo r o u r e veryday tra n s p o rt needs.

VIOLIN MAKING S cre e n p la y......................... M ichael Ingam ells Exec P rodu cer........................................... Lesley Hammond L e n g th ....................................................... 50 min G auge......................................................... 35mm S p onsor.................................... P rem ier's Dept.

Synopsis: To show how violins, cello 's and other stringed instrum ents are made by A d e la id e M a s te r V io lin M a k e r J o h n Ferwerda.

WATERBIRDS OF AUSTRALIA

SOUTH

Prod C om pany............... Bosisto P roductions S cre e n p la y............................... Kevin Brewer, Ron Saunders Exec P rodu cer........................................... Lesley Hammond L e n g th ....................................................... 10 min G auge......................................................... 35mm S p onsor............................. N ational Parks and W ild life S ervice S y n o p s is :T h is film is based on the birdlife of the C oorong. and shows the in teraction of thre e elem ents; the birds, the landscape and the chan ging seasons.

N.S.W. FILM CORPORATION The follow ing productions have been offered investm ent: Palm Beach P roductions P/L, Newsfront $300,000 C hapel Lane Productions, Palmer Street $175,000 A nthony Buckley, The Night of Prowler $350,000

Prod C om pany............................. Scope Films SAFE DRIVING — Prod C om pany............................................. Film Australia D ire c to r........................................ Edwin Scragg A QUESTION OF ATTITUDE Dist C om pany..................................................Film Australia S cre e n p la y ...................................... David Tiley D ire c to r............................................ Dietm ar Fill Prod C om pany.................Pepper Audiovisual Exec P rodu cer.....................Lesley Hammond S c rip t...................................... David G. M organ D ire c to r.......................................... Max Pepper A ra b ic T ranslation......................... Omar Abu, AUSTRALIAN FILM P ro d u c e r.......................................... Don M urray S c re e n p la y............................... Terry Jennings Elshaw arab M. Ragheb COMMISSION A sst P rodu cer.............................................. RonHannam Exec P roducer......................... M alcolm Smith French T ranslation................... Robert Hallon P h otog rap hy......................... Dietmar Fill A.C.S. P h otog rap hy............................... Paul Dallw itz L en gth....................................................... 17 min E d ito r............................................................. Henry Dangar E d itor...........................................................

K erry Regan G a u g e ......................................................... 16 mm C inem atography A s s t........................... Bibi Fill Sound R e cord ist....................................... Peter Barker S p onsor............................. Dept, of A g riculture CREATIVE DEVELOPMENT M ix e r.............................................. George Hart and Fisheries S p onsor................... G eneral M otors-Holdens Sound E ffe cts......................... Doug M cM urdo BRANCH Ltd S y n o p s is : A film aimed at the Third W orld L en gth.............................................................. 15mincoun tries to show how the Ley Dry Land Synopsis: A film aimed at students in basic Production approvals from the July 1977 AFC G auge......................................................... 16mm driver education. system of farm ing from South Australia m eeting: C olor P rocess........................... Eastm ancolor w o rk s and achieves increased productivity.

P rogress............................................................... InRelease SAFE LOADS J o h n S te v e n s (N .S .W .), W o rk in g th e Release D ate.......................... Septem ber 1977 GOLDEN GROVE Prod C om pany.................Pepper Audiovisual Alternatives $2000 S y n o p s is : A study of life in a freshw ater D ire c to r.......................................... Max Pepper Prod C om pany.............................

Scope Films pond.

S cre e n p la y............................... Ron Saunders, S c re e n p la y ..................................R ussell Porter PROJECT DEVELOPMENT Terry M cEwen Exec P rodu cer......................... M alcolm Smith TALKING SHOP — BRANCH Exec P rodu cers.........................M alcolm Smith, S p onsor......................................................... S.A.Lands DEMANDS ON LANGUAGE Peter Dimond Commission Prod C om pany........................... Film Australia P roduction approvals from the July 1977 AFC P h otog rap hy............................... Paul D allw itz S y n o p s is : H istorical coverage of creating Dist C om pany................................Film Australia meeting: E d itor.............................................. Kerry Regan and building a new estate.

D ire c to r.......................................... Karl M cPhee S p onsor............................. Mayne N ickless Ltd S c rip t.......................................... . Karl M cPhee Synopsis: A film on the safe loading of SCRIPT DEVELOPMENT/PREHANDLING MEAT IN THE HOME P ro d u c e r.................................... T om M anefield trucks.

PRODUCTION APPROVALS S c re e n p la y............................. Andrew Prowse P h otog rap hy.................................. Kerry Brown Exec P rodu cer......................... Peter Dimond E d itor.............................................. M ark W aters STORY OF A TREE A le x a n d r a M o r p h e t t / D o u g M ic h e ls , S p onsor....................... Australian Meat Board Sound E d itor.................................................David G lasser Brainwave $7200 S cre e n p la y .................................... Peter Clarke S y n o p s is : A film for use in schools and L e n g th .............................................................. 26 min Exec P roducer..................... Lesley Hammond c o m m u n ity g ro u p s s h o w in g the c o rre c t Yoram G ross Film Studio P/L, Tom From the G auge......................................................... 16mm S p onsor............................. Dept of W oods and m ethods of storing meat in the home.

M ilitary M ill $7680 C olor pro c e s s............................... Eastm ancolor Forests Jam es W orkm an, The Hammer and the P rogress............................................................... InRelease S y n o p s is : T o in c re a s e th e p u b lic 's Spike $5400 HOW TO GROMBLE A FLUB R elease D ate................................. A ugust 1977 aw areness of wood and its uses.

S y n o p s is : Speaking habits of teenagers.

Prod C om pany..................... S-M Productions PRODUCTION APPROVALS S cre e n p la y ................................Ron Saunders THIS LITTLE PIG WENT TO MARKET H exagon Productions P/L, Pandora Smith Exec P rodu cer......................... M alcolm Smith $130,000 .

TUTA S p onsor.................................... Dept, of Further Prod C om pany..................... Newfilm s Pty Ltd Samson Productions, Weekend of Shadows Education D ire c to r................................... ; . , Ron Saunders Prod C om pany........................... Film Australia $200,000 S y n o p s is : To enlarge awareness- of the S c re e n p la y ..................................Russell Porter Dist C om pany............................. Film Australia chan ging em phasis in Further Education Exec Producer. ................... Peter Dimond D ire c to r.......................................... Stanley Dalby from trad itiona l classroom teaching to non­ P h otog rap hy.......................

G eoffrey Simpson Production approvals from the AFC m eetings S c rip t.............................................. Stanley Dalby dire c tiv e le arning methods.

E d itor................................................ Justin Milne of A ugust/S e ptem ber 1977: P ro d u c e r...........................................................DonM urray Prod M anage r................................. Luci Clark P h otog rap hy......................... Ross King A.C.S. Sound R e cordist...........Soundtrack Australia JULIE E d ito r.............................................................. Brian W oods SCRIPT DEVELOPMENT/PRELen g th ....................................................... 15 min Prod C o -ordinator........................... Ian Adkins S c re e n p la y......................... M ichael Ingam ells PRODUCTION APPROVALS G auge......................................................... 16 mm Sound R e cord ist..................... David G lasser Exec P rodu cer.......................... Peter Dimond Ray B iehler/R on Scheldrup, Mary Loves S p onsor............................... Dept, of A g riculture M ix e r......................... ............ Julian Ellingworth S p onsor................................. South Australian Peter Loves Paul $6400 and Fisheries, The Pig Len g th ....................................................... 15 min Division of Tourism Industry Research M cE lroy and M cElroy, Space Trip$23,750 G a uge......................................................... 16mm S y n o p s is : J u lie A n th o n y fe a tu re s in a Council C olor P rocess........................... Eastm ancolor prestige tourist film on South Australia.

A rtis Film Productions, Four Wheel Drive Synopsis: A film to prom ote the p rinciple of P rogress............................................................... InRelease $7000 pig c a rc a s e c la s s ific a tio n to g ro w e rs, Release D ate......................... Septem ber 1977 LIFE OFFICERS PNG Ridge River Films P/L, The Ridge and processors and consumers.

Synopsis: Training of personnel w ith in the the River$8316 S cre e n p la y................................................ Peter W elch trade union.

Exec P roducer......................... M alcolm Smith P lastic Dynasaur Films, A ll the King’s TIM — THE INHIBITED MAN S p onsor................... Life O fficers A ssociation Horses $5400 of Australia D ire c to r.............................................. John Dick Eleanor W itcom be, Baby Bait$7070 S y n o p s is : A film aimed at school leavers to S c re e n p la y ...............................

R ussell Porter SOUTH AUSTRALIAN FILM stim ulate interest in the protective value of P ro d u c e r..................................... M ax Pepper CORPORATION PRODUCTION APPROVALS life assurance.

Exec P ro d u c e r......................... Peter D im ond L ig h tin g C a m e ra m a n .............. Paul D a llw itz Samson Productions, The Odd Angry Shot LISTENING Prod M a n a g e r............................. B a rb a ra Lee $290,000 (subject to m inisterial approval) S ound R e c o rd is t....................... Peter B arker S cre e n p la y ........................................ John Dick TV W /G rundy Productions, The Rowan See also 35mm P re-Production and 16mm L e n g th ............................. ......................... 10 min Exec P rodu cer......................... M alcolm Smith Connection $40,000 Production Survey.

G a u g e ......................................................... 16mm S p onsor............................. Australian Institute A rtis Film Productions, The Last Tasmanian S p o n s o r....................... Dept, of P u b lic H ealth of M anagem ent $17,054 (additional funding) S y n o p s is : First in a series of film s about AUSTRALIAN WHEAT BOARD A u stralian International Film C orporation c o m m u n ic a tio n used fo r m a n a g e m e n t — MARKETING P/L, P atrick $140,000 trainees.

TRANSPORT AND ENERGY S c re e n p la y ..................................Ron Saunders Voyager Films, Newsfront$1 05,000 (altered Exec P rodu cer........................... Peter Dimond S cre e n p la y ..................................Ron Saunders funding) M.B.H.A. ACTIVITIES S p o n s o r..................... Australian W heat Board Exec P rodu cer..................... Lesley Hammond Synopsis: A general film on the Australian S c re e n p la y ........................... M ary C overnton Len g th ....................................................... 50 min w h eat industry w ith em phasis on m arketing.

MISCELLANEOUS APPROVALS Exec P ro d u c e r...................Lesley H am m ond G auge......................................................... 16mm S p o n s o r......................... M oth ers and Babies S p onsor................................Dept, of Transport G reenboe Corporation, S parks $250,000 Health A s s o c ia tio n (Transport Planning Section) (approval reinstated)

har*e.

Cinema Papers, October — 179

which sex roles are portrayed in “family comedy television programs”.

The introduction to the main body of this The Media Centre booklet briefly argues that “the human Papers reality of sex role stereotyping is socially La Trobe University constructed reality”, and then concedes the difficulty of locating the degree to which television characters, as a part of that “social reality”, provide behavior models for The Centre for the Study of Educational viewers.

The question of whether or not they Communication and Media (othérwise known as the Media Centre) at LaTrobe provide models at all is not considered, and University in M elbourne is, to my the issues introduced are rendered mute knowledge, the first academic institution in anyway as the authors pursue a content Australia to embark upon publication of a analysis of particular programs, shown in series of papers offering commentary about peak viewing time for children, “to discover film, television and radio. Though the the ways by which sex roles are portrayed”.

Unfortunately, however, the content opinions of the reviewers would seem to suggest that the quality of these papers is analysis is largely characterized by a uneven, such an endeavor deserves en­ reduction of content to plot outlines or to the couragement. Hopefully other institutions in quoting of a few selected lines of dialogue which are deemed to be significant. this country will emulate the example.

Questions concerning the nature of the comedy, or the various contextual tones of particular episodes of particular series, are 1. A Survey of Audio Visual Facilities in ignored by research more concerned with Universities in the U.S., Canada, collecting details whose meaning and United Kingdom and Australia. „ implications are deemed to be self-evident.

Rather than provide insight into television

by Patricia Edgar and Tricia Sims comedy and the way in which it endorses a particular “ social reality” , this paper provides a model of how not to go about an Prepared by Patricia Edgar and Tricia exploration of the ideological constructs of Sims in 1970, the first of the Media Centre the material of popular culture. For a much Papers provides an interesting comparative more useful starting point, readers should outline of the status of “audio visual turn to Sinclair Goodlad’s provocative and centres” in the four countries. The se n sib le c h a p te r, “ On the Social information for the outline is drawn from a Significance of Television Comedy”, in the questionnaire sent to 194 institutions, the recently published Approaches to Popular 137 responses suggesting two main functions Culture (ed. C.W.E. Bigsby; Edward which the centres supply: the service centre Arnold. 1976).

Tom Ryan (Britain, Australia and Canada), and the academically-oriented centre (U.S. and Canada). The former kind seems to emphasize the provision of technical expertise for other departments, while the 3. Families Without Television

by Patricia Edgar and Ray Crooke latter contains “a higher proportion of teaching assistants, research assistants and graphic artists”.

Apart from providing statistical material, What has come to be known as the th e survey also in c lu d es se le c te d wasteland of children’s television, ebbs and recommendations from the respondents on flows as a topic of public debate according organization, appointment of directors, to the results of the newest bits of evidence services provided, and equipment. Most about it, the report of the most recent inquiry centres shared a dissatisfaction at limitations (staffing, finance, degree of autonomy) or the opinion of the latest notable. Research into the area inevitably produces results imposed on them by the institutions to which which are inconclusive and able to be fitted they belong. into almost any value system: the parent is This is a useful booklet for anyone left with no guidance apart from personal concerned with the place of audio-visual values and his or her own expert knowledge departments in tertiary institutions. of that child.

Tom Ryan Patricia Edgar and Ray Crooke made a study of families whose values had led them to the social extreme of jettisoning the 2. Sex Type Socialization and Tele­ television set. The result is illuminating vision Family Comedy Programs about those parents and their values, but

by Patricia Edgar adds little, if anything, to the debate about children’s television.

An advertisement in The Age drew Prepared by Patricia Edgar on the basis response from 298 families; they filled in of research carried out by students in a questionnaires about their attitudes to second year sociology course, this paper is television, their children and, of course, primarily concerned to expose the way in themselves. They emerge as well-educated,

1go _ Cinema Papers, October

lend weight to the argument that one of the critical priorities for citizens’ participation in planning is structural change, which’ allows the possibility of “publicly locating the source of decisions, the reasons for those decisions and the people involved in making the decisions”.

The conclusion and recommendations are consistent with the already prolific work of David Griffiths. Characteristically, the annotated referen ces in them selves “. . . boys who would be interested in boy scouts and other activities — the normal - constitute a wide-ranging, detailed and relevant bibliographic resource. activities of an adolescent — . . . ” The case study treatment of Labor's “I just think there are too many more administration of the airwaves, between interesting things that I want the children 1972 and 1975, allows the author to work to do”. through his critical position in a context The bulk of the report, which declares particularly appropriate to consideration of itself to be “about opinion rather than the recently available Federal Labor evidence”, quotes from the replies. About a platform on media and information. quarter consists of children's attitudes; they Predictably, that policy looks superficial, naturally mirror the attitudes of their piecemeal and confused. The hidden parents very closely. curriculum and hidden assumptions of “Some parents”, the researchers claimed apparently innovative reform in radio “had actually been accused of depriving their children by not having television”. broadcasting requires continuing critical attention and Autocracy in the Airwaves is, These television-deprived children didn’t go to my knowledge, the major study so far. to the cinema and they didn’t read comics John Hughes either. They seem to have been virtually closed off from the mainstream of popular culture in favor of pursuits their parents see as worthwhile. They could find themselves badly equipped to cope with a world where 5. The Cinematic Synthesis the predominance of visual information is

by Ian Mills even reaching into higher education.

Brian Sheedy

well-to-do cultural snobs who feel they have solved the problem of television competing with them for their children, simply by getting rid of it.

“We refused to repair our television set when we found our only child becoming too absorbed in it mainly because of loneliness .. . she now produces beautiful (needle) work, meticulous and painstaking

4. Autocracy in the Airwaves

by David Griffiths

David Griffiths’ revised submission to the Royal Com m ission on G overnm ent Administration details development in radio during the Whitlam period. He argues co n v in cin g ly th a t the fu n ctio n of broadcasting in the present social context is to “divert and contain our broadcasting and perception of reality” and that “questions of reforming or restructuring the media cannot be resolved in isolation from the larger context of a society in which the mass media operate and function.”

His analysis of Australian Labor Party pragmatism points up the divergence between their “rhetoric of policy intention and the reality of policy implementation”. A chapter devoted to the machinations of Australian Broadcasting Control Board and Media Department personnel draws quotes from a document outlining the way in which advocates of public broadcasting could be brought into line with the values and aspirations of commercial broadcasters.

Griffiths’ analysis of the McLean Report, Priorities Review Staff recommendations, the Media Department’s 10-year plan for radio, in which 292 radio stations were envisaged by 1985 (all except 10 private licences were to be government-controlled, with two public access stations owned and controlled by the Media Department), all

The description of “the cinematic synthesis” by Ian Mills is a confused piece of film theory. His synthesis is the marriage of “the reality of the external, material world and the reality of the internal world of the mind” in film. On the occasion of their union, according to Mills, “film as art was conceived”. Sjostrom and Stiller are thus praised for the way in which they draw on external reality to reveal the inner states of characters within their films.

Of Sjostrom: “What predominates are the states of the physical world as images of states of soul of the protagonists: the sea, the snow, the mountains, the storm, the manifestations of the physical external world, are objective correlatives for manifestations of man’s inner world of the spirit”.

Certainly this is an acceptable reading of Sjostrom’s visual imagery, but M ills’ assertion is that his art is that he draws these two realities together, rather than how he does it. Questions of film form, even the most basic ones, seem to be irrelevant to Mills’ vague, romantic generalities about man and nature.

He finds it easier to reject expressionism outright, because it does not fit into this remarkably reductive notion of art, than to explore particular examples of its internal workings: “It was when they added to the romantic inner world of expressionism, the romantically simple view of the external world of everyday objects and people that German filmmakers attained the heights of art. It was then that they achieved what Kracaeur would call “the redemption of

BOOK REVIEWS

physical reality'.''

The single-minded rhetoric of Mills' theory is founded, firstly, on a consistent refusal to discuss film as film '(he gets as far as recognizing it as “light waves and sound waves", but the details of mise-en-scene seem strangely irrelevant to his purpose), and, secondly, on a particularly limited and unproblematic view of reality.

Of Stiller: “Like Sjostrom, Stiller deals with all of reality, the external world of nature and the inner world of the mind."

The political and social identity of the films themselves, and of the world in which and about which they are made, are thus excluded from the discussion, because they do not belong to reality. Eisenstein, Mizoguchi, Rossellini, Godard, and many others might well be pardoned for excusing themselves at this point.

Mills observes, “It is only after we have established and understood the dimensions of any art form, both the material and mental aspects of those dimensions, that we can proceed to establish a mode of perception, a critical methodology, based on those dimensions.” Agreed, but Mills’ synthesis, scarcely a cinematic one, offers no help.

Tom Ryan

6. Two Reflections on Australian Broad­ casting

by N ic h o la s Johnson and M ark Armstrong

In these essays, two lawyers discuss problem s of A ustralian broadcasting planning and administration in the context of historical, legal and social precedent.

Nicholas Johnson, former U.S. Federal Communication Commissioner, outlines impressions and comments on his visit to A u stralia, sponsored by the M edia Department in November 1974. Mark Armstrong’s article focuses specifically on broadcasting bureaucracy and the potential for reform in the post-coup context.

Already, Armstrong’s “ Obstacles to Sensible Regulation of Commercial Broad­ casting” * has been an important contribution to the broadcasting debate. This more recent essay details the structured intricacies of our c u rre n t b roadcasting adm inistration, systematically pointing out the legal and political implications.

In discussingthe potential for community participation in the broadcasting tribunal’s licensing process, the author argues that the Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act and the Administrative Procedure Act will potentially open the bureaucracy to community control.

In response to Nicholas Johnson's suggestion that “young lawyers should be encouraged to work with interested groups in seeking ways under the current law to participate in the licence renewal process," and while regretting the lack of legal sophistication among media activists, Armstrong points out “there is little likelihood of a major change in the direction of broadcasting law or administration (in Australia) through the courts. At least there is little likelihood of such a change in favor of reform.”

The problem of limited resources available to community groups, in opposition to th o se a v a ila b le to com m ercial broadcasters,, compounds the problem of conflict-of-interest facing decision makers in the bureaucracies.

“Until Senator McClelland was appointed Minister for the Media, there had not been more than one former commercial broadcasting executive on the board at any one time, but, for much of the McClelland period, four out of five * A u s tr a lia n

Q u a r te r ly ,

Voi. 46, No. 4. Dec. '74.

members were from that background. Any action against friends . . . ” “The embarrassment of the ABCB in sitting in judgment on old friends would have been nothing compared with the embarrassment of Liberal and Country Party Postmasters-General between 1949 and 1972 in executing a sentence against coalition figures of much greater prestige and importance than themselves.”

Mark Armstrong's qualified optimism leads him to conclude that “Labor’s period in office has now disposed of the myth that one side of politics has a monopoly of w isdom about b ro a d c a stin g . Even acceptance of the idea that the structure and control of broadcasting are not immutable is an advance on the stultifying inertia of our last twenty years.”

Nicholas Johnson’s reflections on his November 1974 visit remains a useful complement to Armstrong’s essay. The paper outlines conversations with members of the bureaucracy on the question of the ABCB's reluctance to use their powers to enforce standards and their resistance against taking action which might lead to a definition of the legal legitimacy and extent of their power.

Turning to the problem of American domination of Australian television, Johnson describes, with apparent dismay, his initial Australian television experience: “The first channel was about to show an American motion picture from Paramount . . . the second channel was running a promotional item for Gilligan’s Island. In desperation I turned to the public broadcasting channel ABC. And there was Sesame Street. I turned off the television and turned on the hotel room radio. Each station was playing an American popular tune.”

In relation to standards requiring Australian content “as far as possible” and to children's programming, where he notices “ 10 potential violations in 10 minutes of programming while at the same time getting dressed for the day”, Johnson suggests the possibility that the standards are not being enforced as rigorously as they might be.

He continues, “because all televised advertisements must be produced in Australia according to standard 39, I presume the similarity of McDonalds commercial to those I had seen in the U.S. was merely coincidental." I can recall shooting commercials six years ago in which the U.S.-controlled advertising agencies required each shot to be lit and framed precisely from blow-up of U.S. television commercials.

Johnson sees the concentration of control over the medium generally to be “the most serious problem Australia now confronts . . .

It would be my expectation that they (ownership patterns) will ultimately make governing the country at all very difficult .. . the uncomfortable suspicion lurks that the industry was permitted to take over the broadcasting bureaucracies with the full participation of the government."

The “ possible courses of action” suggested by Johnson are based on a commitment to gradual reform. They include support for the development of public broadcasting and for “active citizen participation in the process of making programs, making decisions about programs, and making social policy decisions about broadcast regulations.” Perhaps we should add a specific suggestion that we work toward community control of the fourth network, where the continuing work of video access centres, Australian mainstream and alternative cinema could be released and the challenge of creating “new popular attitudes and behavior patterns about television" could really begin.

The publication as a whole, and Mark Armstrong’s paper in particular, is an

essential addition to a growing body of discussion on broadcasting in Australia.

Essentially, the papers’ usefulness resides in their descriptive detail; lacking is an analysis of the contemporary, social and p o litic a l ro le of b ro a d c a stin g . In consequence, the authors propose a peaceful road to democratic broadcasting which, finally, seems unduly optimistic in the light of their evidence here.

John Hughes

7. Australian Film Studies; Efftee Productions

by Ina Bertrand

For a few years in the early 1930s, Frank Thring Snr. was Australia’s most prolific director of feature films. Between the opening of his Melbourne studio, Efftee Films, in June 1931, to his death in July 1936, he was responsible for seven fulllength features, two 40-minute featurettes, a number of travelogues, and musical and novelty shorts.

Probably the kindest thing one can say about his work as director is that it was idiosyncratic and consistent. Unlike his principal contemporaries, Ken G. Hall of Cinesound and Charles Chauvel, Thring eschewed the language of Hollywood cinema with which his audience was most familiar. Thring’s films were tied instead to the mainstream of commercial theatre; his camera was seldom more than a rigidly static recorder of entirely verbalized narratives. The film frame formed a simple proscenium arch for performers on an indoor set, often with painted backdrops.

The literary emphasis of Thring’s style was evident in his dependence on writers (C. J. Dennis, Betty Roland and even Norman Lindsay, although nothing by Lindsay was actually filmed), rather than technicians. Thring himself rarely directed the placement of the camera; he was often occupied elsewhere while scenes were being shot. His principal technicians — Raymond Longford as associate director on several films, and Arthur Higgins as photographer of all the features — were veterans of the industry and way past their prime.

The cast were drawn directly from the stage; they simply reproduced their theatrical performances in the studio, with little if any modification. The result could sometimes be disastrous for the performer; George Wallace was one who thrived in vaudeville by interacting with his audience and, in Thring’s films, Wallace’s songs and comical routines were performed directly to the camera and became ill-timed, flat and sometimes even glum.

Ina Bertrand’s monograph on Thring’s film career is generous and patient in dis­ cu ssin g th e film s, p e rh a p s m ore sympathetically than they really deserve.

But, as she points out, Thring was far more important for his contribution to the business of the industry, than for his work as a film director. He was closely involved in the growth of the Hoyts cinema chain, which before 1930 was entirely Australian-owned.

In the construction of theatres and in the development of a competitor to the combine of Union Theatres, Thring contributed sig­ nificantly in the 1920s to the growth of the powerful duopoly in the exhibition trade which remained dominant for 50 or more years.

In the 1930s he sold his controlling in te rest in Hoyts to the A m erican distributing company, the Fox Film Corporation, and invested his fortune in film production at Efftee, as well as in live theatre and radio. During this production period, he became a victim of what he had inflicted on local producers in the 1920s,

and experienced the frustration and humiliation of trying to gain adequate returns from an exhibition and distribution trade that was simply not interested in Australian product.

Thring became a vigorous advocate of government-initiated trade incentives — especially a quota obliging theatres and distributors to handle a fixed percentage of Australian footage. He contributed much weight to the pressure which drove the N.S.W. government to conduct an inquiry into the industry and to legislate for a quota system (albeit ineffectual).

Thring’s achievements in the politics of the film industry are easily overlooked in the tangible presence of his work as a film director. The films may lead some observers to repudiate Thring altogether, and Ina Bertrand’s monograph is a valuable con­ tribution towards maintaining a balance.

Andrew Pike

★

★

★

The preceding reviews are the first in an occasional series of commentaries on publications which have emerged from institutions, local and abroad, concerned with the study of the media. A subsequent. issue of Cinema Papers will, for example, deal with the collection of Television Mono­ graphs and other intermittent publications by the British Film Institute.

The New Wave

by James Monaco

Oxford University Press.

Recommended price (hardback) $21.

Regular readers of overseas film journals will probably need no introduction to James Monaco — his fluent and intelligent articles on film and television having appeared in Sight and Sound, American Film and Take One. Nor will they be strangers to the subject of the nouvelle vague, a term commonly coined and translated to describe the films which emerged from this move­ ment, which had earlier (in the pages of Cahiers du Cinema) broken with the tradi­ tional view of French cinema and which, by the late 1950s, had extended its dissension from a rather loose, enthusiastic critical practice into an increasingly disciplined filmmaking profession.

This "new wave”, however, was less an organized movement than a collection of individuals who happened to want to make films, who were seeking the means by which to do so, and whose 'politique', born of a common belief in the possibility of the personal in film, with the Hollywood film as a model, developed in various directions.

The filmmakers — Truffaut, Godard, Chabrol, Rohmer and Rivette — whose work provides the framework for Monaco's book, occupy the foreground among those who gained the opportunity to make features in France at this time. It ought to be noted, though, that there are others, such as Jean Rouch, Louis Malle, Jacques Demy and his wife, Agnes Varda, and Alain Resnais, who made admirable use of the availability of finance and the freedom of expression-, and who, arguably, deserve inclusion in any study of the French “new wave”.

Monaco's work here is most successful in his discussions of Truffaut and Godard, much of the book being given over to a par­ ticularly useful commentary on the form and political nature of their films. Monaco's writing reflects the pleasure he has gained from the films and retains a sound critical/argumentative position, constantly referring back and forth between the two to illustrate the essential union between their Cinema Papers, October — 181

BOOK REVIEWS

aesthetics and their politics.

While Godard's characters are seen as forever static, romantically and politically — “At their best they reveal something of that terrifying internal battle between the paralysis of contemplation and the desire for action . . (p. 112) — Truffaut’s are able to move towards shared contact and enlighten­ ment: “This is not the macro-politics that so fascinates Godard, but micro-politics, an analysis of the basic political unit .. . the human couple" (p. 79).

Arguing that, despite appearances, Godard’s cinema is concerned with life and living, just as Truffaut's is, Monaco urges that we recognize the implications of Godard's concern with film language: “ Materialism, structuralism, semiology, dialectics are not only tools which we use to discuss Godard's films, not only tools which he uses to make them, but also the subjects of his films . . . If we can understand the system of film, he suggests, possibly we can better understand the system of life. Film is politics." (p. 128) In the context of a popular cinema where plot and character provide the subject, the tension in Truffaut's films, as “the focus shifts continually back and forth between the characters on the one hand and the film medium itself on the other" (p. 33), is clearly going to prove more palatable, but Godard's is no less important.

The chapters on Truffaut and Godard are the most successful, perhaps because they are the most fully argued. They provide essential reading for students of those directors, and the flow of Monaco's prose and the insights which he offers should be of relevance to readers with less specialized interests. .

However, the sections on Chabrol, Rohmer and Rivette do not sustain the quality of the rest of the book. The chapter on Chabrol in particular suffers from a carelessness all the more surprising when it is set against the attention to detail and the willingness to argue thoroughly that characterizes Monaco's criticism of Truffaut and Godard.

This is not to say that his discussion of Chabrol is without insight — the brief out­ lining of the sexual imagery in Que La Bete Meure is particularly evocative — but too often he withdraws into assertion without analysis. The patronizing tone of his treat­ ment of Ophelia, La Rupture (compare Michael Walker's excellent analysis in Movie 20) and NADA (his view of the film’s “straightforward style”, shows a lack of awareness of the extent of Chabrol’s irony), and his misreading of the final exchange between Helene and Charles in Juste Avant La Nuit are at odds with his introductory declaration of his intention “to participate in the vital dialogue the films invite”.

The New Wave, the latter reservations and the outrageous price aside, is one of the most useful and accessible pieces of film criticism available at a time when most serious writing is to be found in the pages of the more amenably priced journals.

Tom Ryan

Books of

tfi@

Quarter

Compiled by J. H. Reid

Other publishers have also had their fingers severely burnt. The latest issue of F o r t h c o m i n g B o o k s lists as many already-announced titles as “cancelled" or “indefinitely postponed" as new books. The list of cancellations extends all the way from Bruce Lee to Christian Metz.

The only expanding area is the book-film tie-in.

A whole abundance of books are coming out on Star Wars. There are already five books on Valentino, with another four or five scheduled for publication before the end of the year. Oddly enough, one category that is going to virtually disappear from booksellers' shelves is the screenplay. N a s h v i l l e (Altman), published by Bantam, has been the only commercial success in this field during the past year. The same publisher’s (and author's) B u f f a l o B i l l a n d t h e I n d i a n s was a flop. So was the script of Silent Movie, despite the film’s box-office bonanza.

Viking have discontinued their MGM Library of Film Scripts and Lorrimer have switched from screenplay publishing to lurid handbooks on horror films such as Barrie Pattison’s T h e S e a l o f D r a c u l a and Werner Adrian's F r e a k s : C i n e m a o f t h e B iz a r re .

Actors and Actresses A s t a i r e a n d R o g e r s by Susanne Topper. New York, 1976. $2.45. A well-researched history of the Astaire-Rogers films with a comprehensive filmography.

T h e G r e a t C o m e d i a n s by Larry W ilde.

Secaucus, 1973. $6.95. Interviews, a bit dated (most were recorded in 1967) but still valuable, with Woody Allen, Milton Berle, Shelley Berman, Jack Benny, Joey Bishop, George Burns, Johnny Carson, Phyllis Diller, Jimmy Durante, Dick Gregory, Bob Hope, George Jessel, Jerry Lewis, Danny Thomas and Ed Wynn.

T h e L i f e a n d C r i m e s o f E r r o l F l y n n by Lionel Godfrey. London, 1977. $12.95. Despite its catchpenny title, this is an able summing-up of Flynn’s life, public and private, relying almost entirely on previously-published material.

R o b e r t M i t c h u m by John Belton. New York, 1976. $3.95.

T h e F i l m s o f R o b e r t R e d f o r d by James Spada.

Secaucus, 1977. $19.95. One of the better books in the Citadel series, with fairly complete credits, a detailed synopsis and production notes. This edition is likely to become something of a collector’s item as the publisher’s remaining print run has been bought by Mr Redford who has had second thoughts about some of the remarks he made on various co-stars.

V a l e n t i n o : T h e L o v e G o d by Noel Botham and Peter Donnelly. London, 1976. $2.45.

V a l e n t i n o by Brad Steiger and Chaw Mank.

London, 1976. $2.30.

R u d o l p h V a l e n t i n o by Alexander Walker. New York, 1976. $12.95.

R u d o lp h

V a le n tin o : T h e M a n B e h in d th e M y th

by Robert Oberfirst. New York, 1977. $2.95.

T h e M a g i c o f R u d o l p h V a l e n t i n o by Norman A. Mackenzie. London, 1975. $19.95. This is by far the best of the batch. Meticulously researched by a life-long fan, the book has a complete filmography.

Walker’s book is deeply indebted to Mackenzie’s, though it does have a greater collection of stills.

Botham and Donnelly’s is a competent piece of journalism drawn from old newspaper files and complemented with some original research.

Broadcasting P o p u l a r A r t by Horace Newcomb. New York, 1974. $3.95. Mr Newcomb is an apologist for TV and sees its stereotyped formulas and rose-colored attitudes as a distinctive art form.

T u b e o f P l e n t y by Erik Barnouw. New York, 1975. $19.95. An impressive over-view of U.S. television, its history and development, its cultural and sociological impact by the author of D o c u ­ TV:

The

M o st

m e n t a r y : A H i s t o r y o f t h e N o n - F i c t i o n F ilm .

Directors

by Ronald Lloyd. New Y ork, 1976. $5.95. A ttractiv ely -illu strated coverage on some familiar figures: John Ford, Orson Welles, Howard Hawks, Alfred Hitchcock, Arthur Penn, Stanley Kubrick.

C l o s e U p : T h e C o n t r a c t D i r e c t o r edited by Jon Tuska. Metuchen, 1976. $29.95. Interviews with W alter Lang, Bruce H um berstone, W illiam Dieterle, Joseph Kane, William Witney, Lesley Selander, Yakima Canutt, Lewis M ilestone, Edward Dmytryk and Howard Hawks.

D i r e c t e d b y K e n G . H a l l by Ken G. Hall.

Melbourne, 1977. $14.95.

A m e r i c a n F i lm D i r e c t o r s

Reference

by James Robert Parish and Michael R. Pitts. Metuchen, 1976. $19.50. A sequel to the same authors’ T h e G r e a t S p y P i c t u r e s . 424 pages of comprehensive credits and reviews from A Bout De Souffle to Young Dillinger. “ T h e G r e a t G a n g s te r P ic tu r e s

An unusually small number of books relating to cinema and television were released in the past quarter. The Sydney mail strike was partly to blame. But there is striking evidence of a general winding-down of cinema books in publishers' lists.

The market is definitely over-supplied in certain areas. Both T h e I n t e r n a t i o n a l E n c y c l o p e d i a o f F i lm (Roger Manvell) and T h e W o r l d E n c y c l o p e d i a o f th e F ilm (Cawkwell and Smith) have been remaindered, while Oxford University Press have found sales of their much-touted but inferior O x f o r d C o m p a n i o n t o F i l m (Bawden) sluggish, to say the least.

182 — Cinema Papers, October

H o rro rs: F rom S creen to S cream : A n E n c y c lo p e d ic G u id e to th e G r e a te s t H o r r o r a n d F a n t a s y F i l m s o f a l l T i m e by Ed Naha. London,

1976. $8.85. Reviews and casts of 850 horror films ranging from Abbott and Costello Go To Mars to Zotz! and capsule biographies of about 30 per­ sonalities. The book, obviously intended mainly for the teenage horror fan, is of little value for the serious student. ' k

NEW ZEALAND REPORT Howard Willis

Warren Oates, right, as Willoughby, the un­ scrupulous American adviser. Sleeping Dogs.

Ian Mune as Bullen (right) and Sam Neill as Smith in Sleeping Dogs’ climactic scene.

SLEEPING DOGS

keep the audience entertained.

The film is based on C. K. Stead’s novel, Smith’s Dream, the rights of which, it is said, were purchased for $5000 and a percentage of profits. First published in 1971, the book has been a steady seller, and has been reprinted five times.

Transferring a Vietnam situation into New Zealand, the principal plot follows Smith, his wife, and her lover, as they become involved in the escalating guerrilla war. From this, the age-old fantasy of taking to the hills and fighting evil is given full rein.

Perhaps one of the reasons the book has remained popular may be the very real political polarization that has developed in New Zealand during the past few years. The book’s benevolent dictator, Volkner, can be seen as an extension of Prime Minister Robert Muldoon’s political strongman character.

If the present political disquiet has been a background factor to the sales of Smith’s Dream, it will, presumably, also give Sleeping Dogs a sales pitch when it is released around October this year.

The proposed soundtrack album, featuring several well-known local artists, is another part of the overall marketing effort — an effort intended to return as much of the budget as possible from the local market. A total return would seem unlikely. To break even on the original $300,000 budget would need a box-office equal to Jaws, the biggest money maker in New Zealand’s film exhibition history.

-If New Zealand’s population of three million is insufficient to support local production, and as the Government has so far found no cause to counter this circumstance with subsidies (or even box-office taxes), films like Sleeping Dogs must take their chances on the international market. In that situation, the book and record back-ups will not have the same sales push and other audience attractions will have to be found — which is where Warren Oates comes in.

For the short but important part of the foreign military adviser, an international name and face was required. Jack Nicholson was not available, but Warren Oates’ manager had recently been in New Zealand on vacation. So, on a fee a fraction of his usual, Oates joined the party, maintaining that he was simply trying to outdo his friend Dennis Hopper, who had gone to Australia for Philippe Mora’s Mad Dog Oates is not there to carry a weak cast.

The line-up includes some of the best available locally, although they are not generally known outside New Zealand — and anyway, the film does not demand many intense performances. Ian Mune, playing Bullen, Gloria Smith’s lover, may be recognized by an Australian audience for the title role of the Australian-New Zealand te le v is io n co -p ro d u c tio n Moynihan. The rest, however,, will mostly be new to Australians.

Another international name on a key credit is Michael Seresin, the cinemato­ grapher. More to influence distributors and exhibitors than audiences, Seresin headed an extremely competent camera crew that included two Australians.

Seresin’s last credit before Sleeping Dogs was Bugsy Malone, and his presence on Sleeping Dogs underscores Aardvark’s determination not to be let down by technical considerations. &

Four locally-made feature films will be released in New Zealand this year. They are Wildman, a musical action excursion into Kiwi mythology by the rock group Bleria; Off the Edge, Michael Firth’s Academy Award nominee documentary on the skiing/hang-gliding fraternity; Solo, Tony Williams’ Australian-New Zealand co-produced drama (see Cinema Papers, issue 13); and Sleeping Dogs, Roger Donaldson’s New Zealandproduced adventure drama.

While each of these productions trade on their uniqueness as New Zealand films, and the future of local production depends on their individual successes, Sleeping Dogs is the critical case.

Backed by big corporation money, it is an out and out commercial venture, which, if successful, may unlock large sums of private finance for filmmaking. This, in turn, should prod the Government towards putting more cash into the industry.

It is in the financing of Sleeping Dogs that we see why much depends on its success. Initially, the budget was $300,000 — half of which was put up by the merchant bankers, Broadbank. Of Broadbank’s $150,000, $100,000 was underwritten by the Queen Elizabeth II Arts Council of New Zealand. This was the decisive factor— Government money offered as security. The settlement date on this guarantee is three years after the film’s release.

The other $50,000 of Broadbank’s con­ tribution was an interest-bearing loan, on a first-money-out basis. Hoping to come out with a profit, Broadbank nevertheless claim that they are prepared to write their investment off in the PR budget.

Apart from Broadbank, $50,000 was contributed' by TV 1 (one of New Zealand’s two television corporations), who will have screening rights two years after cinema release.

The remaining $100,000 is private in v e stm e n t.

Roger D onaldson (producer/director), mentions a figure of $50,000 to $60,000 as having come from his production company, Aardvark Films of Auckland. Of the remaining $40,000, Donaldson has been no more specific other than to say that $35,000 came from other members of the production crew.

This accounts for the original $300,000 budget, but Sleeping Dogs has gone over budget. At the time of writing, no one seems to know exactly how much extra money will be needed to finish the film.

Broadbank, however, has kept faith, and Amalgamated Theatres (one of the country’s two cinema chains) has agreed to distribute. It is also possible that they have given a box-office advance.

Should Sleeping Dogs make a profit at the box-office, $100,000 of Arts Council money (that’s a lot of money for film in New Zealand) shall be released for another project, and investment con­ fidence in the industry will be boosted. If this situation does develop, we may at last see the continuity of production that has been lacking in the past.

Will Sleeping Dogs make a profit? It has sex, violence, and politics; it is based on a book that sold fairly well in New Zealand; it has a big name star to paste on the billboards; and it is intended to have a snappy pace and style that will

THE LAST WAVE

film more than anyone — and if he d oesn ’t, then he should be encouraged to do so.

The Last Wave C o n tin u ed fr o m P. 1 5 0

What are your plans for the future?

What are your feelings about the present proliferation of state corporations?

Jim: I think it is quite evident that the state corporations are a political hobby-horse at the moment, and it is up to us all to make sure they continue to be so. I would rather see a number of corporations than just one central body, even though some of these bodies are going through identity reckonings at the present time. Therefore, it would be most useful for the industry if these corporations defined the way they see t h e m s e lv e s o p e r a tin g .

Producers would then know how to deal with them. For example, you would approach the SAFC quite differently to the way you would approach the NSW Film Corp­ oration. They are two quite different bodies with quite different philosophies.

Hal: One vital question is how should these corporations finan­ cially assist producers. Should they cover the difference in airfares, meet the accommodation costs or just invest? The American state corporations — and there are many of them — have generally opted on the side of logistical support, rather than financial. I think smaller states may have to consider this concept as a viable alternative to investment.

It is clear to everybody that film budgets are rising, but the AFC’s budget, given inflation, is almost being reduced. And, as a result, the investment side is being squeezed.

So if we were asked for a recommendation, it would be that if necessary the AFC get out of investment and into completion guarantees and pre-production funding. They are the high risk areas and the areas the commercial industry doesn’t want to get involved in.

Jim: Overseas, completion work is normally handled by insurance companies, but they are not operating in this area in Australia.

They may do so soon and there are moves underfoot.

During his headlong flight through the sewers, David Burton drops his torch into the swirling water.

production areas, do you see any likelihood of all these bodies merging?

Jim: It would be wrong to place the emphasis of our feelings re the AFC as them removing themselves for investment. The emphasis should rather be placed on their concentrating on development funding and completion guarantees.

The role of the producer is threefold: he has to gather the money; make the film; and sell it so that he can return that money to the investors. If corporations assume a production role, then I don’t think the producer is going to be anything more than a line producer for the corporation, and that is not going to establish the film industry.

T h ere has b een o b v io u s disagreement with the AFC in the past about the role of marketing and they are taking a very pragmatic view about that now.

It is interesting to note that almost without exception, successful Aust­ ralian films have had considerable producer involvement in their marketing and distribution, here and internationally.

Therefore, I would say that it should be down the line one way or the other with the film corporations producing their own films or being There has been some criticism of solely investment bodies. I don’t the Victorian and New South think a patchwork quilt of the two Wales corporations in that they would be successful.

Hal: I don’t think you can say, for are solely investm ent bodies without marketing branches. If example, that because the SAFC the AFC was to remove itself from was smart enough to be involved in an investment area and move into a couple of successful films, that the pre-production and post­ means p e r se they represent the only

b&c movie rentals & sales 30 inkerm an st. st. kilda

phone: (03) 94 4883

way one should operate a state corporation. I think that what the New South Wales Film Corporation is doing is terrific, and I would be appalled if they started getting into production because, my God, there are alread y 50 p rod u ction companies in Sydney and 15-odd independent producers.

Several producers have been criticized for tossing away the marketing of their film s. A marketing branch would surely help overcome this. . .

Jim: I don’t think you are examining the root of the problem which is that the producer must have the responsibility of returning the investments to the investors.

Hal: And if he walks away from a project and lets it die in the bum then he shouldn’t be allowed to produce again. Joseph E. Levine is hawking himself around Europe at the moment flogging A Bridge Too Far, because he knows that he has to make the film work. He may not succeed, but by God he is trying.

Jim: Hopefully this doesn’t sound pretentious, but McElroy and McElroy are closer to Joe Levine than we are to being line producers for U niversal, because their marketing department would take away the film and market it. That is not the case in Australia.

Hal: If a state corporation sets up a marketing branch there will be a severe temptation on the part of producers to literally walk away from the responsibility. It may sound fatuous, but a producer should have the desire to market his

Jim: We feel that the future for people in the film industry is to embrace the entire entertainment concept. As a result, we are getting into multi-media presentations involving the skills we have learnt in filmmaking and, hopefully, the showmanship.

What is becoming clear to us is that people aren’t going to leave their television sets unless it is for something fairly extraordinary. We will continue to make extra­ ordinary films. Picnic, in its day, was fairly extraordinary and though with perspective it may not be so, it was at the time. The Last Wave is also an extraordinary film.

Hal: By multi-media we mean other than just looking at a screen down one end of a rather large hall.

We want to bring all the senses together — a combination of tele­ vision films and live threatre.

Jim: The first thing is a venture which we are calling “Space-Trip” where we will take an audience literally on a journey through space.

We will gather the audience in an auditorium in the shape of a space craft. There will be a large cinema screen in the shape of a window on which they can see their journey. A live crew will drive the craft.

Television will show other crafts passing us, and the audience will be sitting on seats supported by hydraulic jacks which will move up and down and collapse to resemble the G-Force. Walls will collapse when the craft passes through a meteorite storm and the crew have to go outside and float through space to effect repairs.

Hal: It is the most ambitious thing that has been done in Australia, and it is the most innovative enter­ tainment idea in the world today. I can say that without fear of contra­ diction, because Jim and Michael Falloon, whose idea it is and who is going to direct it, and Geoff Malone, the designer and architect, went around the world last year looking at all the alternatives like Disney World and we know there is no hope of the audience duplicating the experience. And people will pay $ 13 to go and see C horus L in e , but they won’t necessarily pay $3 or $4 to see a $5 million film, because C horus L in e is a one and only.

That’s what we are into — a unique entertainment experience, i t

equipment rentals ★ 16 & 35 arri b l’s ★ elem ack & c o lo rirá n d o jlys ★ full range of ianiro lighting (hire & sales) ★ disco u n t rates fo r features ★ catalogues available Cinema Papers, October — 183

f onn folland productions

FILM SOUNDTRACK AUSTRALIA OFFER A TOTAL SOUND AN D PREVIEW PACKAGE TO FILM PRODUCERS

RECORDING : TRANSFERS : POST SYNCHRONISING : M IX IN G : PREVIEW.

FILM SOUNDTRACK AUSTRALIA PROPRIETARY LIMITED

■

107 QUEENSBRIDGE STREET SOUTH MELBOURNE 3205

(03) 62 5677

FIRST FLOOR— 475 PACIFIC HIGHWAY, CROWS NEST, N.S.W. 2065 OPPOSITE THE DENDY CINEMA.

16mm EDITING ROOMS KEM— 6 PLATE MOTORISED PIC SYNC

BEST COFFEE IN TOWN OFF STREET PARKING TELEPHONE: (02)431651

---- ------ ----------- -J THE FILM LIBRARY film book specialists Books about: Actors & Actresses ®Directors, Producers & Writers ®History ®Aesthetics • Ge n e r a l Re f e r e n c e © Ani ma t i on • Technical • Annuals

W IN THE GOLDEN SCREEN W O R LD AW ARD

Please write for free book list.

in the 1977 FESTIVAL OF INTERNATIONAL SPECIALIZED FILMS A N D SLIDES December 10-16,1977 Metro Manila, PHILIPPINES All documentary films 16mm or 35mm, TV video tapes, and slide kit presentations, colored, or black and white, dealing with any specialized subject matter but preferably on travel, safety, environmental conservation, trade, industry, health, tourism, science, social welfare, education, advertising, public relations, etc., with English narration or with English sub-titles, and with showing time of not more than 30 minutes are acceptable.

Discounted Group Air fares Pre-arranged first-class hotel accommodation at $US9.00/day or with 3 full meals at . $USl8.00/d'ay

“ Come then to the 1 97 7

Festival

We also specialize in hard-to-get titles

of

In tern ation al

Specialized Films and Slides and visit the PHILIPPINES

where ASIA wears a SMILE." Interested parties may please contact MYRA, Philippine Trade Centre, 37 Pitt St., Sydney 2000 at Tel. no. (02)241 3312.

P.O.Box 49, Harbord, N.S.W. 2096 Australia Mail order service only.

Posted anywhere in Australia or overseas.

NEW FILMS from

South America India Africa Australia Including: Boesmaii and Lena The Middleman The Infernal Triangle Write or Ring for our New Catalogue:

CINE ACTION PTY. LTD. 263 Adderley Street, West Melbourne, Vic. 3003 Phone: (03) 329 5422

TELEVISION

JOHN HUSTON

Television and Uranium C o n tin u e d f r o m P. 1 6 9

Throughout the media, there has been no discussion of the health and safety factors, of the relative cost of uranium, or of the commitments made by companies such as General Electric to supply reactors and fuel to Third World countries that perhaps can’t afford them and may have quite different sorts of energy needs. There has been no discussion of the ways in which technology changes society, such as the ways governments have dealt with the new risks associated with nuclear power; for example, the need to guard against terrorist attack or sabotage.

Since 1969, there have been attacks by terrorists on conventional nuclear power stations in the U.S., France and Argentina. In June last year Britain created a permanently armed police force, run by the United Kingdom Atomic Energy Authority, to guard plutonium and related nuclear installations. At present the force has only 400 personnel, but by the turn of the century, if the nuclear program goes ahead as planned, it could rise to around 5000.

This increase in the police force is likely to be accompanied by increased surveillance of employees at nuclear plants: upwards of some 20,000 employees in the electricity supply industry in Britain alone. And the recent proposals within Australia for governments and police forces to exchange dossiers on anti­ uranium protesters are hardly encouraging signs.

It is being said that people who protest against uranium mining are protesting against democracy itself. In an article in The H e ra ld , one of the consultants to the Uranium Producers’ Forum, Mr Melouney, said: “Many of the anti-uranium lobby are really using this issue to pursue their aim of changing Australia’s democratic way of life.”

The coverage given by the newsmedia reinforces this impression of general disruption.

The fact of protest is more important to the media than the specific point of the protest.

John Huston C o n tin u ed fr o m P. 141

I doubt that anything is. I wonder if any great work of art has had any profound political effect, including Beethoven, Scarlatti, Piero della Francesco, M ichelangelo and Rembrandt. I wonder if it has any universal impact. Sad and cynical observation.

YESTERDAY, TODAY AND TOMORROW

You once said that everything in your films has a function. Could you talk on what one could call your ‘school’ and compare it with what you see on the screen today?

I was raised on the classic concepts of filmmaking. Just like in th e t h e a t r e t h e r e w e r e requirements, and perhaps they were cast a little bit too tightly into a mould. There was the idea of o r g a n iz a tio n , th e in te r n a l combustion, where everything had

Especially for television, the cameras zoom in on the moment of protest and perhaps its suppression by the police.

Familiar stereotypes are at work, and familiar sympathies are engaged, often for or against the police. For television, the original point of the protest doesn’t matter so much; one placard looks much like another, and the protesters all look the same anyway.

Television has helped to set the agenda for public discussion of uranium in other ways as well. In particular Channel Seven has screened a long film called Uranium on Trial. This was described in its introduction as “a documentary of public interest”. And the narrator told the audience at the beginning that he wanted to give “some impartial guidance”.

But viewers might have thought that the film was presenting the viewpoint of the mining com panies under the appearance of a respectable, even scientific, documentary. Its centre-piece was a model of the proposed mining site for the Pancontinental Company in the Northern Territory, with the firm’s manager, Tony Grey, explaining how easy it all was, and how much care was to be taken of the environ­ ment.

The film returned to this model after con­ troversial points were raised, and Tony Grey gave the assurances for the miners. He was described by the narrator as a man of energy and good geological thinking, and the film certainly left the impression that the future belongs to men like this.

Much of Uranium on Trial featured long shots of lakes and wildlife, and these induced a real sense of relaxation and peacefulness. In general, the film created a sense of tranquillity and order, of peaceful and irresistible purpose, as though mining uranium was already a reality.

At one point there was a shot of Rum Jungle, an abandoned mining town, and a voice-over saying “this is what the opponents of mining fear”, as though the problem is really one of litter. But then a cut, back to the reliable Mr Grey, standing

beside his model, saying “that was a different era; that was a bygone era; that sort of thing could never happen again”.

Viewers are incidentally introduced to the Fox Commission wandering about the Northern Territory. As the camera focuses on a quiet lake, you hear the putt-putt of an outboard motor, and a small boat bursts from the reeds bearing three tiny figures looking like Monty Python images.

These are the members of the Commission, and the technique of filming them this way allows them no status or authority as the authors of two lengthy reports on uranium.

This television special presents misleading im­ pressions of what many people regard as the real questions, and it tends to reinforce a general im­ pression about the media coverage of uranium.

The most interesting fact about the coverage is that the issues are presented as purely industrial or economic or political. There is no sense at all that the question of uranium raises issues that are completely different, in their scale of magnitude, in their implications for our society and way of life.

Uranium is never presented as a continuing and basically human problem that needs to be considered by men and women generally. It is, on the contrary, presented in terms of the needs of papers and television for news that is im­ mediate, fresh, and relying on previously news­ worthy sources. The most interesting exception has been the replay on ABC television of an NBC documentary on the disposal of nuclear wastes. And even that program led to criticisms that the ABC was wasting the services of its own Four Corners staff, having them stand idle for a week.

Of course they are not likely to be allowed to make a similar kind of critical, questioning docu­ mentary for Australian television. And none of the commercial channels are likely to try. Their own financial interests tie in with the constraints on their news and current affairs programs to produce a coverage that could hardly be more favorable to the Uranium Producers’ Forum. ★

Not really. Certainly I have seen location than use studios. films suffer under it, but I don’t think ever my own. However, I You don’t plan to retire. . . worked with the conception of censorship. It was already in the No, never. ★ grain of the film, and very often censorship led me to do things that were even better than I would have FILMOGRAPHY done had there not been that kind of censorship.

Nevertheless it’s a fine thing for films that there is no longer that 1941 The Maltese Falcon 1942 Is This Your Life absurd requirement. For instance, 1943 Across the Pacific when I came in, if Rocky and the 1943 Report from the Aleutians (Documentary) 1944 The Battle of San Pietro Are you now talking about girl had made love before they were 1945 Let There Be Light (Documentary) Godard, for instance? married, they would both have had 1947 The Treasure of the Sierra Madre to die. It was immoral, absurd. I 1948 Key Largo We Were Strangers Y es, the n o u v e l l e v a g u e . remember on some film I had 1949 1950 The Asphalt Jungle However, I see now that the better nothing to do with, a boy came back 1951 The Red Badge of Courage The African Queen films are reverting to the old form. from war and discovered that his 1952 1953 Moulin Rouge A film like Network for instance, wife had been unfaithful; so she had 1954 Beat the Devil 1956 Moby Dick which is very complex. And even a to die. Awful things were forced on 1957 Heaven Knows, Mr Alison film like Rocky which I fell for us. They were harder with us than 195 8 The Barbarian and the Geisha 1958 Roots of Heaven completely. Rocky was outspoken, Moses.

1959 The Unforgiven and also you stand back in 1960 The Misfits admiration of the way scenes were You are going to direct another 1962 Freud 1963 The List of Adrian Messenger done. film soon. . .

1964 The Night of the Iguana Rocky has taken the best of both 1966 The Bible Casino Royale (co-director) worlds, in a sense — the old and the Yes, it is the Hemingway story 1967 1967 Reflection in a Golden Eye new. A wonderful liberation A c ro ss th e R iv e r a n d In to th e Trees. 1969 Sinful Davey occurred as far as censorship is Gladys and I wrote the screenplay, 1969 A Walk with Love and Death The Kremlin Letter concerned, to the great benefit of and we are going to do it in Italy this 1969 1972 The Life and Times of Judge Roy Bean the better films. year. The story takes place in 1972 Fat City Mackintosh Man Venice, and we are shooting it 1973 1975 The Man Who Would Be King Did you suffer under censorship at almost entirely on location. I have times? always preferred to shoot on to work. The drama was the tightness of the construction. A theme that you can render into a plot, lines that furnished the plot as well as the characters, so that the whole thing was like an internal combustion engine.

Today, or that yesterday more I think than today, points didn’t need to be underscored, a film didn’t have to have an ending, and this was in a sense certainly a liberating influence.

Cinema Papers, October — 185

between states. The scheme will eventually be extended to all states and will cover all tertiary media courses.

APPLIED MEDIA STUDIES Applied Media, which is part of the V ictorian Education Departm ent's Audio Visual Education Centre, serves as a resource centre for the educational application of the media. The centre's particular interests are film, television, photography and radio in Victorian schools at primary, secondary and technical levels.

AMS p rovides assistance to media teachers and those'with an interest in aspects of the media through advisory services, in­ service seminars and the publication and production of teaching kits, audio and video tapes on the media. AMS also maintains extensive links with the film and television industry and government bodies such as the Victorian Film Corporation, Australian Film and Television School and the State Film Centre.

Some of the current activities being sponsored by AMS include the production of a film studies kit, based on the film The Getting Of Wisdom. The kit includes numerous articles, 26 photographs, daybills and an audiotape featuring Bruce Beresford, Phillip Adams, Barry Humphries and Susannah Fowle. The kit has been produced .for media teachers interested in studying in depth a current Australian film. For further information, contact either the Victorian Film Corporation or the AMS. The AMS is also helping to organize previous screenings for teachers, particularly at the primary level, of the Yoram Gross animated feature Dot and the Kangaroo.

A super 8mm film festival of student made films will be held in Melbourne from November 2-4. Not since the Bubbles Co-operative held at Melbourne University three years ago, have young filmmakers in schools been given the opportunity to screen and discus's their work with other filmmakers or teachers interested in super 8mm production in schools.

Phil O'Brien, research officer of the ABC's C o u n td o w n has produced, w ith AMS assistance, an audio visual slide and tape show which is being presented to schools In Victoria and interstate. “ The S tudent P rin ts " p h o to g ra p hic' exhibition, compiled by Don Porter, is still being shown throughout Victoria at regional centres, and at this stage has been booked out until May 1978.

A film studies kit, for teachers and students at form 2, 3 and 4 levels, is being released and is available through AVEC metropolitan and regional centres. The kit was scripted and produced by Barbara Boyd, with artwork by Margaret Brennan.

AMS is organizing the Interface Screenings and the Association of Teachers of Film and Video (ATFAV). So far this year, there have been 10 screenings, the last two being for Actors Equity (September 19) and Kestrel Film Productions (October 3).

A fter conducting a successful media studies 10-day in-service course at Bendigo primarily for English teachers, AMS is running two similar courses in Melbourne, the dates being October 10-21 and November 7-18.

The AMS can be contacted for advice and assistance at the Audio Visual Education Centre, 234 Queensberry St, Carlton, Victoria 3053. Phone: 347 3833 — Ext. 138 and 139.

ASSOCIATION FOR A NATIONAL FILM & TELEVISION ARCHIVE Eight months after the Australian Film Commission made its contribution to cover the Archival Interview Programme, six of the 35 interviews approved with Australian film pioneers have been completed. For the researcher-interview ers, who include 10 members of the Archive Association, the process of interviewing, with future archival needs in mind, has provided some valuable lessons. While the style of each interview is in e v ita b ly in flu e n ced by the s u b je c t’s personality and environment, the questioners have had to bear in mind the potential for maximum flexibility of use of the resulting tape and film by future researchers, writers, film makers and television producers.

The first three Interviews to be recorded (first separately on audio tape, then as recapitulative interviews on film) were with Vera James, star of Franklyn Barrett’s A Girl Of The Bush (1920) and Know Thy Child (1921); Agnes Dobson whose long career as an actress included three Australian films in the late teens; and Shirley Ann Richards, star of six Cinesound films in the 1930s and 12 in Hollywood (as Ann Richards) during the 10 years since 1942. Miss Richards was a late addition to the list when she arrived from the U.S. to appear in the This Is Your Life tele­ vision program on Ken G. Hall.

Eight hours of tape have been recorded with filmmaker and author Maslyn Williams; a joint interview has been taped with Cinesound production crew members Stan Murdoch and Marge West; and research is under way for an extensive tape interview with Bill Shepherd, film editor at Cinesound at the Commonwealth Film Unit between 1932 and 1960. Other film

186 — Cinema Papers, October

industry pioneers who have agreed to take, part include Cecil Holmes, Reg Perry, A.R. Harwood, Ian Davidson and Bill Trerise.

All tapes and film will be preserved by the National Film Archive in Canberra. Access by re s e a rc h e rs , w r ite r s , h is to ria n s and filmmakers to this material, and the use to which the completed interviews will be put, is being determined by conditions selected on clearance forms signed by each person who is interviewed. The National Film Archive, on request, will provide the interviewee with a typed transcript of his or her interview. The interviewee can then nominate any areas on which he wishes to place restrictions.

To aid the flexibility of the interview material’s incorporation in films and television programs of the future, none of it will be edited before being lodged at the National Film Archive. Directors wishing to incorporate the interviews will be asked to pay for a dupe, rather than use the original neg and sound. By this archival practice, the interview material can be used more than once without having its original form whittled away by successive use.

All interviews deposited with the archive will also provide research file s containing background documentation.

The Archive Association anticipates that if the interview project can prove its value in a practical sense (such as the use of interviews for research o r as actual content in documentaries), the concept will extend to more interviews than the first 35. Ideally, plans should be made to record comparative interviews on a “ now” and “ 20 years hence” basis with some of the young and well-known filmmakers of today. The recording of archival interviews with television pioneers should also be encouraged; the list of other art and entertainment fields for coverage would seem to be limitless.

A precursor to the existing oral history scheme was set up in late 1975 by the Publicity and Information Committee of the Australia Council. Under that scheme, 35 50minute films were produced. The scheme attempted to embrace a vast cross-section of the arts and literature, but only three of these were with film pioneers.

A lack of adequate consultation with possible users also forced a compromise between the archival, educational and straight-out entertainment objectives of what emerged as a curiously uninteresting 60 hours of film.

Where the A ustralia Council scheme ground to a halt through its lack of co­ ordinated consultation and expertise, the com m ittee for the present oral history interviews with film pioneers is diversified.

The 14 members of the' committee, whose backgrounds lie in film production, scripting, direction, administration, historical research, theory and archival work, are Ray Edmondson and Andrew Pike from the A.C.T.; Joan Long, Graham Shirley, Alan Anderson, Julie JamesBailey, Joy Shepherd, Richard Keys, Hugh Mclnnes, Judy Adamson and Katrina Rundley from New South Wales; Ina Bertrand and Ross Cooper from Victoria; and Barrie King from Western Australia.

In their selection of pioneers, the archival interview committee have given priority to age and diversity of film production roles, as well as to an a d e q u a te g e o g r a p h ic a l representation. This has meant that while the bulk of interviews will cover film activity in New South Wales and Victoria, the committee also aims to give fair historical coverage of production in South Australia, Western Australia, Queensland and Tasmania.

ENTERTAINMENT INDUSTRIES COUNCIL The controversy over the Industries Assistance Commission’s recommendation that the 20 per cent Australian recorded music quota be dropped for radio stations has been steadily increasing.

Since the release of the IAC reporrt last July, the Entertainment Industries Council— a body consisting of the Musicians’ Union, Actors' Equity, Theatrical Employees’ Union, independent record producers and other interested organizations — has been meeting every Tuesday to formulate policy and plans to combat the report.

As a result of these meetings, a highly successful rally called “ Save Our Sounds" was held in the Melbourne City Square and was attended by thousands of people representing all areas of music and art — as well as the public.

Speakers at the rally included Fable Records head Ron Tudor, Countdown’s Molly Meldrum, Mushroom's Mike Gudinski, actor Terry Donovan and the Musicians’ Union Public Relations Officer, Jazzer Smith.

A further rally is planned for Sunday, Septem ber 18, outside the E xh ib itio n Buildings where the Third National Musical Merchandise Exhibition will be in progress.

The rally will be held to gather support prior to the final submissions on the quota issue from the IAC on September 20 in Sydney.

It is hoped to have speakers from the political area as well as from the musical industry at the September 18 rally.

Since the release of the lAC’s recommen­ dation, much support has been received by the Entertainment Industries Council in the form of letters, petitions, phone calls — and surprisingly from leading business and political figures as well.

Victoria’s Premier Mr Hamer, has come out in support of the retention of the quota, and Mr Bruce Gyngell, the man selected by the Federal government to sit on the panel to discuss self-regulation for the television networks, has also spoken out in favor of the radio quota. The Entertainment Industries Council believes that if the IAC Report does nothing else but highlight the sad plight of the entertainment and recording industry in Aust­ ralia, then something concrete has been gained.

If you would like to support the Entertain­ ment Industries Council on this matter, contact Jazzer Smith of the Musicians' Union. Phone 529 1522 during working hours.

AUSTRALIAN FILM AND TELEVISION SCHOOL Director Gillian Armstrong finished shoot­ ing a 24-minute documentary on the school’s Fulltime Program just before leaving for a working holiday overseas. Armstrong, who directed The Singer and the Dancer, now in general release, is a graduate of the 1973 Interim Training Scheme, the forerunner of the Fulltime Program.

The documentary, called A Space and a Time, is intended to explain the workings of the school’s fulltime train in g . to potential employers of graduates, careers advisers and applicants for the course. It is now in post­ production and the School plans a November preview for the film and television industries and the media. It was made with Bill Constable (head of the school’s cinecamera workshop) as director of cinematography, Bob Hayes sound, Ronda MacGregor editor and a crew of fulltime students from the camera and sound workshops of the Fulltime Program.

Novelist, dram atist and screenw riter Rosemary Anne Sisson, one of the writers of Upstairs Downstairs, The Six Wives of Henry VIII, Elizabeth R, The Explorers and The Duchess of Duke Street, and writer of the Disney feature films Ride a Wild Pony and Escape From The Dark (The Littlest Horse Thieves), joined the school’s writing workshop on July 18 as writer-in-residence for nine weeks. Her visit was made possible by a grant from the Literature Board of the Australia Council.

Ms Sisson has met and spoken to writers, p ro d u c e rs and d ir e c to r s in S yd n e y, Melbourne, Adelaide, Perth and Hobart, and has addressed meetings of the Australian Writers’ Guild and the Fellowship of Australian Writers under the auspices of the Open Program.

The school will begin a nationwide diploma course of graduate and post-graduate training of lecturers for the 180 media courses currently being offered by Australian tertiary institutions. Work has begun on assessment, co-ordination and accreditation of courses now available and the scheme will be launched in Victoria and Western Australia, in 1978.

Students taking media courses at any tertiary institution in either of these states will be able to register with the school, and will be awarded credits after they complete the courses. By participating in short courses and workshops run by the school’s Open Program, intended to complement the local courses, they will ultimately become eligible for the school’s diploma.

The aim of the scheme is to rationalize media training and raise standards. Credit will be allowed for work experience and for courses already completed. Credits will also be interchangeable between institutions and

Deputy director Storry Walton will chair a seminar on children's television, titled “ Where Do We Go From Here?” at University House of the Australian National University in Canberra from October 12 to 16. Films and tapes of children’s programs from around the world are being collected for viewing by delegates, and speakers will include children’s television pro­ gramming executives and creative producers from Europe and North America.

The seminar is being sponsored jointly by the Australian Film and Television School, the Australian Film Commission, Film Australia, the Australian Broadcasting Commission and the Federation of Australian Commercial Television Stations.

Abakanowicz, a film by final year student Shalagh McCarthy, won the second art prize at this year’s Melbourne Film Festival.

NATIONAL LIBRARY OF AUSTRALIA Film Study Collection The Library has continued to expand its experimental/avant garde/“ film as art” collec­ tion. Structuralist films by Michael Snow have been acquired: Wavelength, Back and Forth (or <----- > ), One Second in Montreal, Side Sea Paintings Slides Sound Film and Standard Time. Film from the Canadian, Joyce Wieland, include Rat Life and Diet in North America, Solidarity, Pierre Vallieres and Catfood. Early films of the American avant garde have also been added to the collection including films by Maya Deren, Sidney Peterson and Willard Maas. One major addition is the rarely seen feature length film The lllia c Passion by Gregory Markopoulos.

In the documentary area of the collection, three of the African films by Jean Rouch have been acquired: the feature length films Jaguar and The Lion Hunters, and the disturbing short film, Les Maitres Fous. The latest film by Frederick Wiseman, Meat is also available from the Library.

A few feature films are gradually being added as funds and sources permit. They include the first feature, Mandabi, by the Senegalese director, Ousman Sembene, and a package of features from R.K.O.-Radio including four directed by Fritz Lang ( Clash by N ight Beyond a Reasonable D oubt While the City Sleeps and Rancho Notorious), two

by Samuel Fuller (Verboten and Run of the Arrow), John Frankenheimer’s The Young Stranger, Jacques Tourneur’s Great Day in the Morning and Raoul Walsh’s The Naked and the Dead.

These films are available, at no charge, from the National Film Collection, National Library of Australia, Canberra. The films can only be used for non-commercial purposes, and many of the titles (eg. the R.K.O. films) are restricted for use by formal courses in film at tertiary and secondary level educational institutions, and by genuine film societies registered with the Library.

NATIONAL FILM ARCHIVE NATIONAL LIBRARY OF AUSTRALIA During July, Ray Edmondson, Chief Film Officer, spent a week in Tasmania to visit Launceston and Hobart in search for old film materials, especially Australian films on nitrate stock. A number of collectors were contacted and the Archive will begin copying their collections.

In August, Karen Foley, archive officer, made a similar trip to Brisbane, where she co n tacte d the Brisbane Film Festival, Brisbane Cinema Group, Buderim Movie Museum and the local film collectors.

These two field trips complete the project to visit each capital city (except Darwin), during the past nine months, and so make contacts to further the national function of the Film Archive.

HSV-7 Melbourne have deposited approxi­ mately 260 titles including several episodes of Under the Big Top, Sunnyside Up, Homicide, Hit Parade and episodes 1-164 of Consider Your Verdict Chris Collier has donated several important posters not previously held in the collection: The Story of the K e lly Gang (1906); Vengeance of the Deep (1937), the U.S. release title for Ken Hall’s Lovers and Luggers, and Three In One (1956).

Jim Whitbread of Cinesound/Movetone has also donated a large number of posters from: Squatters Daughter(1933), When The Kellys Rode (1934), The Overlanders (1946) and Bitter Springs (1950).

Australian films that have been put on deposit are: Protected: The Truth About Palm Island (1975) director Alessandro Cavadini; Country Town (1971) director Peter • Maxwell; King of the Coral Sea (1954) director Lee Robinson.

The Danish Film Museum in Copenhagen has donated 3000 stills from European and American films.

FILM PERIODICALS

Film Periodicals C o n tin u ed fr o m P. 1 4 3

Two American journals, The S even th A r t and published in 1964, showed con­ siderable promise. But they both lacked the support of a mother university or rich founda­ tion, and their life-spans were short. Their contents, therefore, are not recorded in the recent film journal indexes. So few would know that Susan Sontag has a fascinating piece on Robert Bresson in S even th A r t, or that Pauline Kael wrangles with Sillitoe and The Loneliness of the Long Distance Runner in M o v ie g o e r , or that Pechter wrote on Resnais; Greenspun on Truffaut; Goodman on Chaplin; Sarris on pop.

M o v ie g o e r ,

excellent bibliographies and checklists of materials for the various film genres.

events in the U.S. It also carries short book reviews.

Another ‘sociological’ film journal to emerge in the early ’70s was the feminist W om en a n d F ilm , co-edited by Siew-Hwa-Beh and Saunie Salyer and published at Berkeley, California. W om en a n d F ilm was an instant success. It became a university text in both film and women’s studies cou rses,-w as reprinted, translated and anthologized, and microfilm copies are available from University Microfilms.

W om en a n d F ilm , despite filling a badlyneeded gap in providing information of a specific nature without being propagandistic, was not blessed with a government or public benefactor, and was soon forced to cease publication. One of its major functions was to report on women’s film events and festivals throughout the world. Its contributors — both men and women — were noted for their intellectual grit and freshness of approach: Noel Burch and his film theory, for example, were rigorously examined in 16 pages of interview and argument; the theory and practice of feminist film criticism was expounded; commercial cinema provided material for a regular feature, “The Ideological Massage”; there was news on Super-8 produc­ tions and so on.

This periodical had much to teach the male­ dominated traditional journals and one hopes it will soon resume publication.

Although Chicago’s C in efa n ta stiq u e is not yet listed on the International Federation of Film Archives list of approved international film journals, it fills an important gap in the journal literature dealing with science fiction and horror film. A need for such a journal has been felt since the French publication M id i-M in u it F an tastiqu e was discontinued.

The film reviews in C in e fa n ta s tiq u e are generally accompanied by full credits and a good selection of studio stills.

The University of Dayton’s slim octavo quarterly, F ilm H erita g e, is in a similar class to F ilm Q u a rte rly — the two journals often share a stable of first-class critics. A pointer to the type of articles carried by F ilm H erita g e is that it is abstracted in H isto ric a l A b stra c ts and A m erica: H is to r y a n d L ife , apart from the standard film indexes.

There is a slight literary bias in this journal with contributions by professors of English, rather than professors of film history. But this is offset by the excellence of the interviews and the frequent devotion of a single issue to a leading filmmaker. A curious aspect of the journal is a ratings chart with evaluations from the critics of six regional newspapers (eg. D e n v e r R o c k y M ountain N e w s ) ra n k in g film s as It is difficult to characterize the ideology of “ extraordinary” , “ e x c e lle n t” , “ good” , The V e lv e t L ig h t Trap which was originally “mediocre”, or “negative”. conceived as a journal for the University of Wisconsin’s large and active film scene, and A valuable journal which appeared in the aimed at largely local consumption. According to mid-1960s is A c tio n , a bi-monthly of the Michael Sragow, who writes for the American Directors Guild of America. This journal is Federation of Film Societies’ journal F ilm C ritic, primarily concerned with lengthy interviews The V e lv e t L ig h t Trap “mainly prints on topics with film directors, a forum section, and special that are of interest only to those either still part of reports, such as “The Woman Director” the Academy, or still heavily influenced by its (July/August 1973) which was delicately printed deadening hand”. on mauve paper.

This comment, however, tells one more about the standards of criticism to be found in C ritic T ake O n e is Canada’s leading film magazine. than those of The V e lv e t L ig h t Trap. The latter First published in 1966, it has progressed much concerns itself with both film history and from the concerns of early issues where one was criticism and each issue is on a particular topic. liable to find a report on Japanese Intersex bio­ So far these have included Warner Brothers in cybernetic programs, or a review of John the Thirties; John Ford; Hollywood Comedy; Hofsess’s Black Zero, describing it as possessing Politics and the American Cinema; The Forties “all the gratifications of vision, hearing, taste, in Hollywood; Sexual Politics and Film; The touch, and smell”. T ake O n e is now an entertain­ Actor; and American History, Hollywood Style. ing conglomerate of news and reviews, book A recent issue entitled, “TVLT Revisited” checklists, letters, interviews, director and actor (Winter 1977), reprints articles from issues 1-8, studies, and technical notes. many of which are now out-of-print. The V e lv e t L ig h t Trap is a serious journal which has a C in easte, which began in 1967, is perhaps the variety of contributors and is a far cry from a most intellectual of the radical American film typical undergraduate film journal. magazines. It concerns itself with film and F ilm C ritic was originally designated F ilm society, especially revolutionary society (there was a special issue on Latin American militant S o ciety R e v ie w and its main function seems to be cinema), and questions the value of film theories to alert its readers to what the other journals are which put form before function (eg. “Christian saying. Why it bothers to do this is a mystery, for its opinion of its fellow film journals is far from Metz and the Seminology Fad”). elevated.

Here are some typical samples: Sight a n d One of the important ‘sociological’ film journals which appeared in the early ’70s was Sound it believes has “degenerated into a lavish J o u rn a l o f P o p u la r .F ilm , published by the auteurism”; F ilm J ou rn al “comes on like a Popular Culture Association at Bowling Green scholastic Busby Berkeley, its full-bleed spreads overwhelming”; F ilm s in R e v ie w built its reputa­ University, Ohio.

“Movies are the mirrors by which the tion on “a fusty blend of comic-strip reactionary American culture surveys its mottled com­ and scholarly closet-camp”; Focus! is “just one plexion”, declared the first issue, “a movie says more of the aimless, feckless, self-indulgent as much about its audience, as it contributes to Little Magazines growing across the land like effete mushrooms in the dark of our continuing the development of its art form”.

This journal has a fresh, fascinating approach cultural malaise”.

On the other hand, F ilm C ritic is valuable in seen in such articles as “The Impact of Griffith’s Birth of a Nation on the Modern Ku Klux that it reprints film criticism from such non-film Klan” and “Why There are no Women in the journals as T h e V illa g e V o ic e , N e w s w e e k , Movies”. J o u r n a l o f P o p u la r F ilm has a D isse n t, Tim e and The N e w Y o rk er, and has “Readers’ Forum” for an exchange of views, and information on current film festivals and film

D ia lo g u e on F ilm is not a film journal in the full sense of the word, but a record of seminars conducted by the Center for Advanced Film Studies of the American Film Institute. These seminars consist of interviews with those involved with the creative side of American feature filmmaking and television production.

Each issue is devoted to an individual or a team of co-workers. Directors interviewed include Aldrich, Forman, Cassavetes, Brakhage, Spielberg, Scorsese and Polanski; cinemato­ graphers Vilmos Zsigmond, Laszlo Kovacs and Conrad Hall; stars such as Liv Ullman, Peter Falk and Lucille Ball; TV producers such as Rosenberg and Christiansen. There is also an issue on the pros and cons of cable television.

The seminar-interviews include extensive filmo­ graphies, bibliographies and critical reviews.

J u m p C ut, which first appeared three years ago, is one of the more radical of the recent additions to film periodical literature. It offers a most liberated program: “Theories often unfamiliar to Americans, such as structuralism, seminology and marxism.

The political and social critiques of people struggling for liberation — the working class, women, blacks and Third World people, gays and lesbians.

Film in a social and political context — its practical and political uses, the economics of film-making and distribution, and the function of film in America today.”

J u m p C u t is also unconventional in that it has a newspaper format and a uniform typeface. Each issue contains around 30 pages of lengthy, lightly illustrated articles on subjects ranging from ‘Filming the Cultural Revolution’ to ‘Weatherpeople at Home’. There are also important women’s articles, interviews and news.

The economies achieved in production costs enable this journal to be purchased in America for less than a dollar.

The American Film Institute’s new journal A m erica n F ilm forms an interesting contrast with J u m p Cut. Its sub-title is Jo u rn a l o f th e F ilm a n d T elevisio n A r ts , and it has a typographical elegance which is similar to F ilm C om m en t.

The editors of A m erica n F ilm plan to “roam

through the highways and byways of communica­ tions, and ever under the surface will be root questions on the role of film and television in American life”. One may not, however, find a concern with ‘the working class, women, blacks and Third World people, gays and lesbians’ which was the territory staked out by J u m p C ut, but A m erica n F ilm , with its focus on more middle-class American film happenings, has an important role to play.

There are also forays into the European arena such as Antonio Chemasi’s article on Fellini’s C asanova, and the film student is grateful that the important American documentation which used to appear in the AFI journal D ia lo g u e on F ilm is now a permanent feature of this new American film journal. ACinema Papers, October— 187

A GUN RENTALS COLLSHOOT SALES Dealers in A n tiq u e — M ilitary & C ollectable Firearms — Related Items Offers a Specialised Service to The Film Making Industry via rentals o f . ..

• Most Every Type of Antique Firearms © Most Every Type of Modern Firearms ® Edged Weapons (Swords, Knives, etc.) © Military Items (Uniforms etc.)

m ANYTHING Relating to the above fields

FREE Advice concerning the correct type of firearm(s) etc. to correspond with the period of the film.

Shop Address: 3 Elizabeth St., Coburg, Melb Vic. 3058

Phone:(03) 354-6876

Short film reviews . . .

Feature film reviews . . .

Latest film library news . . .

Film society and festival news .

Films for the specialist . . .

Federation News has all the answers It is the quarterly journal of the Federation of Victorian Film Societies now published with the assistance of the Creative Development Branch of the A u stra lia n Film C om m ission.

FILM REVIEW

INFORMATION SERVICE The George Lugg Library welcomes enquiries on local and overseas films. On request, photostat copies of synopses, articles and reviews will be forwarded. Please detail specific information required and send S.A.E. plus One Dollar search fee for two enquiries to:

The George Lugg Library P.O. Box 357 Carlton South Vic. 3053 The Library is operated with assistance from the Australian Film Commission.

For over 20 years, Federation News has become recognised as an essential reference journal for the non-commercial use of 16mm film . . . film societies, schools, adult discussion groups, specialists who use film and plan programmes.

Federation News is now published in March,

June, September and December.

1977 SUBSCRIPTION: $16.00 inc. postage from: F.V.F.S., 4 Stanley Grove, Canterbury, Victoria, 3126.

Sample back copies available at 60c each.

TERRY JACKMAN

Luke’s Kingdom C o n tin u ed fr o m P. 123

Like Heathcliff, he defies convention, but less as a means to an end than as an end in itself. This madness, coupled with his repeated declarations to Jassy and his desire for a kingdom has been solely on her behalf, provokes the suggestion that it serves as a sublimation for his frustrated incestuous longing for her.

His explanations for the violence done to those who have trespassed on his land on that which is Jassy’s are often predicated in human terms (“They raped my property” or “They violated my land”), and two of the most moving and intense sequences in the drama are built on this tension: firstly, in The Surveyor (in the rain, Luke is forced to face the reality of the impossi­ bility of his union with her), and then in The Prisoner (on the road, before Luke’s murder of an unwitting traveller who has been serenading himself to the tune of the music-box gift which Luke had unsuccessfully attempted to give to Jassy).

In The Prisoner, the closing episode of the drama, Luke reaches the point where he is forced to come to terms with the direction in which his passions have taken him. His off-screen (and thus ambiguous) murder by whip of the traveller in his care becomes an outlet for the frustration of his separation from Jassy, but makes him recognize the way in which his quest has brought him into line with the rest of the convict colony.

He shouts his defiance (“You’ve had it your own way for long enough!”) and to Jason and Samuel he confesses his awareness (“We built a prison”).

Like those around him throughout the drama, he has come to the point where he has to face the reality of the present. Still defiant and passionate, he must, nevertheless, reach for the attainable.

Terry Jackman C o n tin u ed fr o m P. 1 33

Now, it has already been mooted by a number of the state attorneys­ general that the easy way out of this problem, so far as they are con­ cerned, is no more ‘R’ films at the drive-ins. Yet they know, and they’ve had explained to them, that this would be the end of the driveins, and virtually the end of the industry, because all of us rely on drive-ins for a terrific part of our revenue. Therefore, we are going to have to write and live with some sort of code where the rougher type of ‘R’ film, the more visible, sexual ‘R’ film, is either — and I am only guessing — put on late at night or is confined to certain drive-ins, if not screened at all.

If we do it publicly and intelligently, people will appreciate that the industry is making an effort and this will take the flack off the politicians, because that is what’s causing the problem.

What about these containment screens which cam only foe seen from the interior of the drive-in?

They are trying to develop them in the U.S., and I guess one day they will. But at the moment there is nowhere in the world where containment screens work. So, while I think we can’t fence our drive-ins, where we have a main road, a sectional fence might be of

But the colony remains the same. Lieutenant Elliott (Alfred Bell), Jassy’s husband, aware of Luke’s feelings for his wife, imprisons him and charges him with murder. The innocent of The Surveyor, who had seen his duty, in simple terms, as “mapping the interior for His Majesty, God bless ’im”, who had been welcomed “to the cess-pool” by Luke in The Dam and The Damned, as he placed expedience ahead of his duty, now privately admits to Jassy, “I have imprisoned him because he has stolen from me my most treasured possession — if ever you were mine at all”, while publicly declaring, “I cannot allow my personal feelings to interfere.”

He has, as Jassy’s response (“You hypocrite!”) indicates, become one with those in The Hypocrites (written by John Dorsman, directed

by Hugh David) who have found their principles irrelevant to their needs in the colony.

Luke’s release from his arrest is only made possible when those in the township combine to dupe the doctor engaged for the post-mortem into diagnosing that Luke’s victim had died from drowning, rather than from the whipping — “The convict classes stick together.”

In Luke’s absence, a bushfire wreaks havoc on the Firbeck property, and, despite the aid of the local community, it wipes out all but their house.

What Luke had built for Jassy has been destroyed by the flames, Nature (“God’s will”?) seeming to impose on Luke his own judgment of his lusts.

To Jason’s call to his son for a reunited family (“If we’re to fight this place, we must stand as one”), Luke responds with an ambiguous “God has been merciful!” — merciful in sparing the house and the family, or in destroying the kingdom built on promised, but forbidden, land?

The episode ends with Luke and Kate together and the suggestion of a new beginning: Luke has

some assistance.

Nobody in this industry — production, exhibition, or whatever — should underestimate this problem; if we don’t do something ourselves, the governments are going to legislate, and God only knows how tough such legislation could be.

given her the music-box he had meant for Jassy.

Kate, a convict girl, had been rescued by Samuel from among the damned, in The King’s Gentleman (written by John Dorsman, directed

by Peter Hammond), and had come to work as a servant with the Firbecks.

From her near catatonic state in the prison, we see her grow to, perhaps, the strongest positive force in Luke’s Kingdom, taking charge against the bushfire when 'Jason’s confusion has rendered him inadequate. The mutual attraction between her and Luke had been a restrained one up to the closing moment of The Prisoner, but had been felt in their sympathetic exchanges and in, for example, Luke’s murderous reaction to a bushranger who had attempted to rape her in Devil’s Man. That the future lies with her now, as much as it does with Luke, is made clear in the closing shot of her giving her assent to Luke’s request, with “I’ll be with you.”

What is most impressive about Luke’s Kingdom is its structural unity and coherence.

Throughout, a combination of writers, directors and performers appear to have worked at sustaining a flow of character and theme; their achievement is of the highest order of television drama. And while it is possible to locate particular directors’ stylistic preferences — for example, Gareth Davies’ concern with intimate drama, expressed by his emphatic and recurrent zooms to close-up, isolating individuals with their own emotional dramas in the television frame (cf. The Surveyor and An Enemy Too Many) — and thus differences between the realization of individual episodes, that is, finally, a less important exercise at this stage of television criticism than a perception of the way in which this continuous drama is realized in its totality, i t .

invested locally, Fox have invested locally — with Hoyts — and I think you will get distributors to invest without trying to force the Govern­ ment to change the whole tax system.

I would think if I was an American major sitting in New York and they changed the taxation system here, I would say, “Look, let One of the areas where the Aus­ Treasury finance the production.” tralian production situation If that’s the way they want to do it appears to be at a disadvantage we’ll back away from it. I think it vis-a-vis production activities would be a shame, because then the elsewhere in the world, is in the production people have to go to the situation of the taxation of Treasury to get their money and the production revenue. The AFC is Treasury will say they are broke taking the attitude that this ought because of Medibank or whatever. I to be changed and, at the same believe it would take away the tim e, they are sayin g that impetus that’s now in existence in investment in production ought to the local production scene. be automatically tax deductible, which it isn’t at the moment. W hat about the im p en d in g What are your attitudes to those Queensland Film Corporation. two points on the investment Are you still Involved? front?

I have agreed to stay on as long as Naturally I’d like to see invest­ my time permits. The present ment tax deductible. I think situation is that they áre drafting the American companies are being legislation and there’s an interim subjected to a lot of misconceptions. committee of which I am a member.

I hear figures of $30 million and The draft Bill will go to Parlia­ $50 million being returned to the ment, I understand, next month and U.S., and I know it’s just total the Corporation will then be estab­ nonsense. lished. I think I will be asked to be a I don’t think they are going to member, and if so I will accept. I achieve their objective by forcing feel I am obligated to some degree th in gs down the A m erican because I was, with others, instru­ distributors’ throats. It’s a purely mental in convincing the Premier to business thing. United Artists, set it up some 12 or months ago. I’d Disney and Columbia have now therefore like to see it through for as

long as I can.

Will it be structured along the lines of the South Australian Corporation, which is a produc­ tion entity, or along the lines of the Victorian, which is basically just a funding operation, with consultation provided?

Like Victoria, we will have a very small structure —■I’d rather see the money on the screen. We need to avoid duplication, and much as I have terrific admiration for the SAFC, I don’t think any of us facing today’s economic condition will attempt to set up that sort of operation.

Will there be a residency regula­ tion, like the SAFC has, whereby companies seeking funds need to be resident in South Australia and employ a certain number of South Australians etc, or can anyone apply, as with the NSW and Victorian Corporations?

The legislation that we talked about — and as I say this it goes before Parliament and could be changed — doesn’t contain any residency conditions. Basically, I think it will finish up with some­ thing more like a restriction that the film is principally shot in Queens­ land. You can’t say they have to do everything from writing the script on the beach at Surfers Paradise to final editing in Queensland, -fr Cinema Papers, October — 189

There’s No Business Like The

SHOW BUSINESS BOOKSHOP

Out of It

— Ken Cameron

Pure S . — Bert Deling Love Letters from Teralba Road — Steve Wallace Backroads

- Phil Noyce available in 16mm from:

SYDNEY FILMMAKERS CO-OP P.O. Box 217 KINGS CROSS, NSW 2011 (02) 31 6708 Write for our Catalogue of Independent Films — $3 (includes postage).

If you’ve got a conference we’ve got the location.

Exotic Tahiti, Savu Savu, Auckland.

Indigenous P o rt Macquarie, Albury, Geelong, Canberra, Sydney, Melbourne, Adelaide and We’ve also got the information, ring Sue-Elien Doherty (Sydney) 31 0388 for complete information on Travelodge’s facilities and our professional approach to conferences throughout South Pacific and Australia.

where you’ll find a wide range of carefully selected scripts from Samuel French, Dramatists Play Service, Evans Bros., English Theatre Guild, Dramatic Publishing Co., Currency-Methuen plus many others Connections throughout the world enabling us to obtain that hard-to-find script or technical book Magazines including Plays & Players, Dance & Dancers, Films & Filming, After Dark, Dance Magazine, T.D.R., and Cinema Papers Melbourne's largest range of Stage Make-Up including ultra high quality Stein Theatrical Make-Up from USA an efficient and prompt mail order service Open Friday nights only YOU'LL ALWAYS FIND SOMETHING INTERESTING AT THE SHOW BUSINESS BOOKSHOP Y ork House Basem ent A rcade, 294 L ittle C o llin s Street, M elbourne, 3000

63 7508

K .G.’s 24-hour serv ice Process Super 8 Ektachrome Every Night 7 2 4 4 / 7 2 4 2

/ E

1 6 0 / G

160

are all handled overnight This in addition to a full range of 16 mm colour and b/w services — Ektachrom e, Eastman coi., b/w reversed and neg/p os.

K. G. Film Services Suite 22, Valetta Bid., cnr Campbell St & Reserve Rd Artarmon Ph: 439 3555

MATTCARROLL

PHIL NOYCE

story, a story of the disintegration of spoke of an American distributor Newcombe, a film about the a man’s relationship; a story of a who said that Don’s Party was spot- manhunt in 1959 for the two jail person who has the highest ideals on for the North American market escapees, Kevin John Simmonds In many ways, films and tele­ and who sees around himself the because people there had gone and Leslie Alan Newcombe. The vision programs made here have, perversion of ideals by fellow through the same sort of influences. idea was first suggested to me by with a few exceptions like Caddie workers.

They, of course, weren’t sub­ Ken Cameron, who has written a and Pig in a Poke, reproduced The film has a universal jected to American cultural and wonderful script. We are producing certain types of actors. And the significance and there are things in industrial imperialism, but I think it in conjunction with Hilary ABC was probably the worst it that anyone in any country will be Americans might be interested in Linstead and Liz Mullinar. They offender, because for years there interested in. The film examines the finding out what it is like to be on are, in fact, raising the money at was a certain type of speaking on way in which nostalgia acts as a veil the receiving end of the boot. present. the ABC, a certain type of program over the true significance of events.

It is also being made in Certainly the other influences and a certain type of actor. And it We look back to things that have such as the communist scare, the association with Les Newcombe, all smelt terribly of middle-class happened and see them in a influence of the church, the way in who has collaborated on the third values. romanticized way. So the film pin­ w hi ch the Red P er il was draft. He will also act as a consul­ Do you think “Newsfront” will points the true significance of an manipulated, are all relevant to tant during production. We hope to shoot it in September/October next h a v e m u ch i n t e r n a t i o n a l event and, at the same time, fosters these countries. year. ★ a nostalgia. Examples would be the potential? miners’ strike of 1949; the Olympic Will you be involved in selling it FILMOGRAPHY Yes. I may have given the impres­ Games; the Suez Crisis; the coming overseas? sion that the film is heavily politi­ to po we r of the M e n z i e s I don’t think I will need to be 1969 Better to ReignShorts cal, but all the events can be taken government in 1949; the Redex in Hell because David Elfick is an 1970 Intersection on different levels. As pure trial; McDougall the singing dog; 1971 Camera Class entertainment, for example, a the Red Peril; the Maitland floods; excellent showman. Every film he 1971 Sun has made has returned its money. 1971 Memories newsreel of Richard Nixon making etc.

Caravan Park a speech is enthralling. In this film With Caddie, which was set in Admittedly he hasn’t made a 1973 1973 That’s Showbiz you see him when he visited the 1930s, there are only a very dramatic feature film, but his two 1976 Let the Balloon Go (3 x 8 min supports) Australia as Vice-President in small number of the film-going feature documentaries — Morning Documentaries 1953. He was followed by the public who were actually alive at of the Earth and Crystal Yoyager 1972 Good Afternoon Queen in 1954. that time. With Newsfront, there — have been sold world-wide. I 1974 Castor and Pollux Renegades That Nixon speech, quite apart are a large number of people all have no doubt that if the film has 1974 1974 God Knows Why, But It Works from what his presence in Australia over the world who were alive in any international potential, then 1975 Finks Make Movies 1976 Amy David will be able to tap it. represented to the Australian the 1950s.

1976 Mick Of course, their countries were people and to the history of 1976 Greg Australia, is interesting on a purely not necessarily affected in the same What are your plans after 1977 Disco 1977 Brad way and by the same pressures, but “Newsfront”? entertainment level. .

The story of the film is also very when Bruce Beresford was inter­ Short Features strong. It’s an action story, a love viewed on television recently he I hope to make Simmonds and 1977 Backroads

Phil Noyce

C o n tin u ed fr o m P. 1 1 3

Matt Carroll C o n tin u ed fr o m P. 1 1 8

Dunstan initiative, and for the first two years we were looked at very closely by the state opposition. It is only now, with the number of successes behind us and the tightness of the operation evident, that the opposition party has come round to be totally in support.

Yes, probably in the vicinity of $5 million. It is going to take a long time to put together. There is a treatment, but until Peter has finished Last Wave, he and David Williamson can’t really start.

In all the time I have worked at SAFC, the producers have worked hand in hand with the marketing people. The problem of state corporations is that they don’t have What other projects is the SAFC this facility; they are literally involved in at present? handing out money to producers as Does the Act relating to the SAFC bankers.

We are co-producing Weekend I would, therefore, support the place any requirements on the AFC because it has the ability to employment of South Australian of Shadows which Tom Jeffrey is market, and this is an essential personnel or use of the locations directing. We have a one-third investment, though it is being shot requirement. As a film producer I during shooting? entirely in South Australia. We are cannot envisage not being totally One overriding criteria is that we also shooting three television films involved in the marketing of a product. And if more film should foster and encourage a film for the Nine Network with Jane producers felt the same, then a lot of industry in South Australia. The Scott producing, and on September Australian features wouldn’t have SAFC, however, reads this as being 19 we began shooting Dawn, which been made because they weren’t broad enough to allow it to invest in is a co-production with Joy Cavill’s made with a marketing ideal in a film that was being shot in company, Aquataurus.

Each project has a different Queensland if it was thought mind. worthwhile. We did this with The relationship: we have a co-producer What is concerning many, Irishman, though we put a crew in the case of Weekend, but with however, is the concentration of requirement on it — one third I Dawn only an executive producer — Joy Cavill has total creative power in too few hands; that the think. control. decisions to invest in one film and not another are made by the same What is the SAFCs involvement You are financing the television handful of people. Therefore, one in “The Last Wave”? films ind ep en d en tly of the of the possible benefits of a network?

We are the major investor. proliferation of corporations is that it might, with a bit of luck No, there is a very large and a bit of foresight, lead to some With a creative say. . . proportion of network money. They diversity and originality in film are deficit financed in conjunction No, none at all. production. . . with the AFC and the network. The I agree, but you have to face Apparently the SAFC is working first film is about Arab guerrillas political reality, and that is what with Peter Weir on his new film training in Australia, the second a love story, and the third about worries me. The Queensland and on Gallipoli . . . truckies.

NSW corporations are political Yes, I am going to produce it in gestures. They are going through Who will direct them? their political births right now and I conjunction with John Morris. know what a struggle that can be.

Michael Thornhill is shooting the The SAFC was always seen as a It must have a large budget. . .

first and John Power the second.

The third director is yet to be appointed.

What are their budgets?

In the vicinity of $150,000 each.

We are doing them because it builds our production throughput. And we think we can package them with some of our other features, like The Fourth Wish and Storm Boy, in markets we haven’t sold. We may even combine them with some of the other television films produced locally and sell them as a package that way.

What was the corporation’s involvement in the production of “The Last Harvest”?

Within our budget there is a very small allocation for assistance to experimental filmmakers. This can be direct assistance with cash, or the loan of services, etc. It will be a continuing process.

Do you have any feelings about the sort of films we should be making in Australia?

I see great hope when a film like Rocky works so well, because we can make films like that here. But when you see a $12m to $15m budget film with the amazing gadgetry and sophistication of Star Wars you realize this is obviously an area where we can’t compete. I also despair when I see films like Shampoo, which are based solely on the American star system. ★ Cinema Papers, October— 191

STAR WARS

GUIDE FOR THE FILM PRODUCER

Producer’s Guide C o n tin u ed fr o m P. 1 3 0

15. ARTIST EXCLUSIVELY ENGAGED The Producer shall have exclusive rights to the services of the artist during his engagement and the artist agrees that during this time he will not render any services of any kind or for any person, firm or corporation other than the Producer without first obtaining the express written consent of the Producer. Such consent will not be unreasonably withheld by the Producer.

16. NO HAZARDOUS/DANGEROUS PERFORMANCE The Producer may not require the artist to render any services whatsoever of a hazardous or dangerous nature which involve the artist in any degree of risk or to carry out any stunt unless such special services are specifically referred to and detailed in the artist's written engagement. The artist may refuse to carry out any work not specified in the written engagement which could reasonably be construed as being dangerous, hazardous and of risk to life or limb or health or as a stunt.

17. WAGES, OTHER PAYMENTS — WHEN PAID (i) Except as otherwise provided all amounts due to an artist in respect of work carried out during the seven consecutive days ending at midnight on a Saturday shall be paid to the artist within the succeeding seven days. (ii) Meal money and payment in lieu of accommodation shall be paid by the Producer to an artist on a day to day basis. (¡ii) A personal statement of earnings showing separately all amounts payable under the artist’s engagement, deductions, etc. shall be included with the artist’s payment.

10. RECORDS TO BE KEPT (i) The Producer shall keep a record from which can be readily ascertained the name of each artist, the hours worked each day and the payment made in respect of such work. (ii) The time and wages record shall be open for Inspection to a duly accredited Union official during the usual office hours at the Producer’s office or other convenient place; provided that an .

Inspection shall not be demanded unless the representative of the Union suspects that a breach of this agreement has been committed. (iii) The Union official making such inspection shall be entitled to take a copy and/or photo of entries in the Producer’s time and wages record relating to the suspected breach of this agreement.

19. WARDROBE (i) All properties, wigs, footwear and articles of clothing not customarily and usually worn by civilians of the present day in this country and any articles of clothing or footwear peculiar to any trade, calling, occupation or sport shall be furnished and/or paid for by the Producer. (ii) Should the Producer desire an artist to wear footwear and/or civilian dress of a type which is customarily and usually worn by civilians of the present day in this country then the artist may provide such clothing and/or footwear if such clothing and/or footwear is already in the artist’s possession. Provided that not less than forty-eight hours notice must be given to the artist that such items are required by the Producer. The Producer shall not require the artist to carry out any work which may damage clothing or footwear supplied by the artist. (iii) In the event that the Producer requires an artist to wear present day civilian clothing and/or footwear and such clothing and/or footwear is not in the possession of the artist or if insufficient notice as provided for in (ii) of this clause is given to the artist, then such clothing and/or footwear shall be provided by the Producer at the Producer’s expense. (iv) Any relevant wardrobe by either the Producer or an artist shall be maintained and/or supplied in 1a satisfactory ; and hygienic condition by the Producer. Any damage to clothing or footwear supplied by the Producer caused wilfully by the artist shall be paid for by the artist. Any damages or loss of clothing or footwear supplied by the artist other than damage caused through the negligence of the artist shall be paid for by the Producer.

(i) If the production of the film is prevented or stopped by reason of any cause beyond the control of the Producer such as but not in limitation thereof force majeure, Act of God, enemy action, fire, riot, civil commotion, national calamity, order of a Public Authority, epidemics, strikes, bans-on-work, labour disputes, failure of essential supplies such as electricity but expressly excluding weather conditions or failure of the Producer’s employees other than financial Union members to attend for work are concerned; then the Producer may: — (a) Suspend w ithout pay the operation of the a rtis t’s engagement during the period of prevention or stoppage of production in which case on resumption of work on the film the artist’s engagement shall be resumed. (b) Whether or not the artist’s engagement shall have been suspended pursuant to paragraph (i) above, cancel the production of the film and terminate the artist’s engagement as from the prevention or stoppage upon payment of all moneys due and payable to the artist for services actually rendered prior to the date of prevention or stoppage.

23. LATENESS (i) If a financial Union member is late for a call or without reasonable excuse delays rehearsal or performance the other members of the cast may not claim payment for the time so lost and neither shall such time be counted as working time. If the Producer or any member of the Producer’s staff (other than a member of the cast (excluding any stand-in) who is a financial Union member covered by this agreement) delays rehearsal or performance the burden will be borne by the Producer. (ii) The Producer shall not be bound to accept the services of any artist who shall present himself without reasonable cause or excuse after the time at which such artist shall have been required to be present at the time and place fixed for commencing work and shall not be bound to recompense such artist in respect of such attendance.

24. ARTISTS ILLNESS Should illness or other physical or mental cause prevent an artist from carrying out his obligations under his contract and/or this agreement then the artist’s engagement shall be forthwith suspended as from and including the first day of such inability. During such suspension the Producer at his absolute discretion may— (i) Cancel the artist’s engagement without prejudice to the payment of such moneys due and owing to the artist in respect of services actually rendered up to the time of the artist's failure to perform his obligations; or (ii) Resume the artist’s engagement in which case the total liability of the Producer shall be limited to payment of a sum not less than the artist would have received if the terms of the engagement had been carried out.

25. RIGHTS GRANTED TO THE PRODUCER The Producer shall have the right to photograph and/or otherwise produce, reproduce, transmit, exhibit, distribute and publicise in connection with the film any and all of the acts, poses, plays and appearances of any and all kinds of an artist appearing in the film containing such acts, poses, plays and appearances.

The Producer shall likewise have the right to use and give publicity to the artist's name and likeness, photographic or otherwise, and to recordings and reproductions of the artist’s voice and all instrumental, musical and other sound effects produced by the artist in the said film in order that it may be publicised or advertised.

The rights and benefits of this clause shall apply and be to the benefit not only of the Producer but also of all persons who may hereafter acquire from the Producer any rights to distribute, exhibit, advertise or publicise the said film.

26. ARTISTS PERFORMANCE The artist agrees to be prompt in appearing for work as required by the Producer, to perform the services for which he was engaged in a conscientious and painstaking manner and in accordance with the reasonable requests or instructions of the Producer and to abide by the reasonable rules and regulations of the Producer.

27. ARTIST MAKING STATEMENTS, ETC. (i) The artist shall not directly or indirectly make any statement or announcement or furnish any information relating to any of the activities of the Producer to any person, firm or corporation. The artist may however give any such information to his legal adviser, agent or the Union. (ii) The artist shall not take or publish or cause to be taken or published any photograph of persons working on the film or anything connected with the production of the film.

28. PREJUDICIAL CONDUCT If the artist is guilty of conduct which prevents, hinders, limits or otherwise prejudices the success of the film in which the artist is engaged, the Producer shall have the right to terminate the artist's engagement forthwith and the Producer shall pay to the artist pro-rata remuneration of the amount set out in the artist’s contract to the time of termination only. The artist shall have the right however, through the Union, to refer the matter to arbitration as set out in clause 33, Arbitration-Dispute of this agreement.

29. GENERAL RIGHTS OF TERMINATION (i) The Producer may terminate the artist's engagement at any time. (ii) If the Producer terminates an artist's engagement prior to the commencement of production he shall pay to the artist one half of the guaranteed remuneration as set out in the artist's contract with the Producer. (iii) If the Producer terminates an artist’s engagement during the 20. FACILITIES course of production, the amount of compensation due to the (i) The Producer will provide adequate change rooms with proper artist shall vary as follows: seating, clothes hanging, toilet, washing and where necessary (a) If the artist’s engagement is terminated for neglecting, showering conveniences with hot and cold water, clean towels refusing, failing or being unable for any reason whatsoever and soap for the convenience of all artists at any place of work , to perform any or all of the obligations imposed by his which could reasonably be regarded as studio work. There will . contract or this agreement or if the artist commits any be separate rooms for the sexes. All such rooms and . serious breach of contract or breach of the terms of this conveniences shall be kept in a clean and hygienic condition. . agreement, in particular clauses 26. Artist's Performance, (ii) The Producer will provide all make-up at the Producer's expense.

27. Artist Making Statements and 28. Prejudicial Conduct, (iii) At all location work the Producer will provide adequate shelter the Producer shall be at liberty forthwith to terminate the from inclement weather and also washing conveniences, towels artist's engagement and the Producer shall pay to the artist and soap and hygienic toilet conveniences. pro rata remuneration of the amount set out in the artist's contract to the time of termination only.

21. CREDITS (b) If the artist’s engagement is terminated for any reason other All actors/actresses playing speaking parts of more than two lines in the than that covered by (a) of this subclause, the Producer shall film shall receive a cast credit. Such credit shall be visual, legible, and pay to the artist the total of the artist’s guaranteed placed opposite the character name applicable. remuneration as set out in his contract with the Producer 22. RIGHT TO A NAME OR CHARACTER less that amount which may have already been paid to the artist in connection with that contract.

The Producer shall not, after termination of an artist's employment prevent such artist from continuing to use any stage or screen name 30. FORCE MAJEURE used by such artist. However the name of a role owned or created by the Producer belongs to the Producer and not the artist.

Notwithstanding anything else set out in this agreement —

31. ACCESS OF UNION OFFICERS Any two officers of the Union singly or together duly authorised in writing shall have access to any place of rehearsal and/or performance to interview artists. The Union representatives shall not attempt to interview any artist during actual performance or rehearsal and shall not detain any artist from playing his part in the performance.

32. EQUITY MEMBERSHIP All artists engaged by the Producer for work in the film shall be members of the Union in good financial standing and shall remain in such good financial standing during their engagement in any programme of the film.

OR Any non member of the Union engaged by the Producer for work in the film shall make application for membership of the Union on the Union’s official form of application not later than the day before the beginning of the said artist’s engagement. Such application shall be accompanied by the fees, dues and subscriptions which the Union requires from an applicant for membership. If admitted to Union membership the said artist shall continue in good financial standing with the Union during his engagement in the film.

33. ARBITRATION — DISPUTE: In the event of a dispute arising between the Union and the Producer it shall be submitted and determined under and pursuant- to the Arbitration Act of the State of New South Wales.

34. SOME OF THE DEFINITIONS APPLICABLE TO THIS AGREEMENT ’’Artist’’ shall mean each and all of those persons engaged by the Producer to take part audibly and/or visually in the film, including Performers, Doubles, Crowd Extras, Stand-Ins and Stunt Artists. “ Cast” shall mean all of the artists in the film excepting any stand-in.

Words importing the masculine gender shall include the feminine gender.

35. In the event of the adoption of an “ Industry Wide Agreement" for feature films, the Union and the Producer may, subject to agreement by both convert the terms of this agreement to such an "Industry Wide Agreement".

36. SUPPLEMENTAL MARKET It is specifically acknowledged that the rights of exploitation of supplemental markets-are not incorporated in this agreement. Such rights to be the subject of either further negotiations or an Industry Wide Agreement (whichever is applicable). PROVIDED THAT no such rights are to be sought or granted for exploitation in Australia and shall not exceed the terms outlined below. These terms not to be reasonably withheld.

In respect of the Basic Negotiated Fee (or the Basic Rate whichever is the higher) the following percentages shall apply in respect of cassettes, Pay TV, CATV, Hotel Exhibition:— (a) On first release in any supplemental market (except “ In-Flight” distribution which shall be 30%) 20% (b) When distribution gross receipts amount to $62,500 an additional 10% (c) When distribution gross receipts amount to $125,000 an additional 10 % (d) When distribution gross receipts amount to $200,000 an additional 25% (e) When distribution gross receipts amount to $300,000 an additional 22.5% (f) When distribution gross receipts amount to $400,000 an additional 22.5% (g) When distribution gross receipts amount to $500,000 an additional 20 %

(h) For each additional $100,000 of gross in perpetuity an additional 10%

Distributors gross receipts for supplemental market use shall be included in the above formula at 50% of the actual amount of such gross receipts for all supplemental markets other than “ in-flight"; and for "in ­ flight” at 100% of the actual amount of distributor's gross receipts.

Signed on the day and year first above written for

.

in the presence of: fo r AC TORS’ AND A N NO UN C ERS’ EQUITY ASSO C IATIO N OF AUSTRALIA in the presence of:

them in front of the blue screen without the form were duplicated several times over because of support being visible. The answer was to many had to be destroyed in various battle construct a vertical stand, with mounting sequences, or were seen travelling in a fleet.

In some instances, the beams were not simply brackets, that would blend in with the back­ An air cooling system was fed into some of the one color, but were made up of a central white ground blue screen. A single tube enveloped models through the support column to prevent hot section with an outer red flare along its edge, with neon lighting and blue screen material overheating due to the intense heat of the studio thus requiring more animated optical passes. If a supplied the results. It merged with the rear lighting. beam was to miss a fighter, its reflection on the screen making it invisible to the color sensitive The credit list in Star Wars, at the end of the craft’s body would also be rendered, requiring film. film, runs for nearly 10 minutes. It catalogues an more intricate matte processes.

The model makers had to construct 75 models almost undreamed of number of special effects If a ship is hit, this called for a pyrotechnic of, among others, X-Wing fighters, T.I.E. enemy technicians. Given the incredible success of Star effect to be separately filmed and inserted — ships and Y-Wing ships included. An initial Wars (Lucas only expected it to gross around more matting. On several occasions up to 28 design for the models was drawn up and their $16,000,000, but it has already passed composites were needed to complete one scene construction begun by putting together the basic $102,000,000) many of these technical wizards and more than 3800 various film elements custom plastic moulded shapes. may have a more secure future. A sequel is required to make up the final 365 special effects Fine detail was taken from many toy model underway and several others are in planning scenes. kits such as tanks, aircraft and cars, as all these stages. ★ Because the miniatures play such a major role kits have ideal odd shape pieces for glueing on to in the film, a way had to be found of mounting various sections of the miniatures. Many of them Star Wars

C o n tin u ed fr o m P. 1 1 9

192 — Cinema Papers, October

Fourteen films on India today, a unique insight into one of the w o rld ’s most ancient civilisations.

The real stars of this series, one of the most ambitious projects in contem porary film making, are the people of India — people like Padma, a dancing teacher from Madras, Rana, a young Muslim student from Old Delhi, Bijan, a Calcutta artist and Jyoti, a twelveyear-old school girl living in an industrial com plex on the outskirts of Bombay.

Fourteen films that explore the fascinating biways of agrarian, urban and cultural life in the India of the Seventies are available singly or at a special series price.

Running times vary from from 14-20 minutes.

In A ustralia enquiries should be directed to the M arketing and Distribution Branch, Australian Film Commission, 8 West Street, North Sydney.

Overseas to the C om m ission’s representatives: in London, Ray Atkinson, Canberra Fiouse, 10-16 M altravers Street; in New York, James Fienry, International Building, 636 Fifth Avenue, or through any Australian Government office.

Produced by Film Australia

■avourite CARLTON

WM

ENTS

IT 110 J t i t M E L 80UR«t

•IP