Cinema Papers January 1978

IANUAR y

ISSUE 15 $2.00*

A M

A Z 1 ^ G

D

a.J°

m

T O

ïO

U

R

NOW...forthe FIRSTTIME, see music aswell ashear iti

^

°vy

EMBASSY THEATRE Castlereagh Street, Sydney

A McELROY& McELROY production in Association with J.C.WILLIAMSON Productions Ltd.

SUBSCRIBE 1 YEAR $8 00 * g g Nam e................................................................................................................

Address............................................................................................................ ....................................................................................... P ostcode................

To commence with Issue 15 ( Issue 16 (

) January. ) March.

‘ A u s tra lia o n ly . F or overseas rates see ove rle a f.

C inem a Papers Ply. L td . I4 3 T h e r r y Street M e lb o u rn e . V ic to ria . A u stralia 3000

P lease a llo w up to four w e e k s for proc

.. sing.

CINEMA PAPERS “...just thegift tobrighten a friend.”

We'll enclose the card. You enclose $8.00".

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

A ddress........................................................................................................

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

Message............................................................................................... * A u s tra lia o n ly. For overseas rates see overleaf.

C inem a Papers Pty. Ltd . 143 T h e rry Street, M e lb o u rn e , V ic to ria , A u s tra lia 3000

'■V .C

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

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 MOTION PICTURE INDUSTRY A tlab Film & Video Laboratory Service, Television Centre, Epping, N.S.W. 2121 Telephone: 850224 F747

Following the Australian Film Commission’s decision to assume responsibility for the administration of the Experimental Film and Television Fund from the Australian Film Institute, the Commission has just appointed Greg Tepper to open a Melbourne office.

With a big percentage of Creative Development Grant applications coming to the Commission from Victoria, South Australia and Tasmania, it made a lot of sense to have an office and an advisor where those applicants are.

Greg Tepper came to the Commission from freelancing and Experimental Film Fund work for the A.F.I., before that he was Fred Schepisi’s production manager, Film House and Devil’s Playground.

Greg Tepper is also responsible for providing information on all activities of the Commission which includes production, development, promotion and marketing of Australian feature and documentary film and television programs.

SAMUELSONS ANNOUNCE THEIR NEW SALES DIVISION

THERES ALWAYS SOMETHING NEW A N D E X C IT IN G AT SAMUELSONS

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.

SOLE DISTRIBUTORS FOR

SOLE DISTRIBUTORS FOR

SOLE DISTRIBUTORS FOR

R o n fo rd - B a k e r L td .

aaton

Cinematografia Marin

FLUID HEADS and TRIPODS

16mm CAMERAS

35mm PORTABLE PROJECTORS

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

GUN RENTALS

9

COLLSHOOT SALES Dealers in Antique— Military & Collectable Firearms — Related Items

Tasmanian A Film Corporation

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.)

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

•F ILM PRODUCTION • STILL PHOTOORAPHIC WORK • SKILLED PERSONNEL • 16/35 FACILITIES • EQUIPMENT H IR E INCLUDING DYNALENS •

CONTACT THE CORPORATION FOR FILMING IN OR OUT OF TASMANIA 6 4 B risb a n e S tre e t,H o b a rt 7 0 0 0 Tasm ania.

P h o n e 3 0 8 0 3 3 Telegrams T a s film H o b a rt

INTERNATIONAL^ Eumig824Sonomatic: FILM GUIDE Dual track

1978

The fifteenth edition of the world's most unusual, most informative, and most respected cinem a annual is, quite simply, the best. There are illustrated reports from a record 50 countries _ Essential surveys of film festivals, schools, archives, animation, film collecting, and educational films.

An invaluable guide to Films on 16mm (U K ) and Non-theatrical (U S A.) Perceptive, detailed profiles of Five Directors of the Year — Goretta, King Hu, Minnelli, Ritchie, and Saura ALL THIS - AND MORE - IN THE 536 PAGE 1978 EDITION. £3.25/$6.95. _____________

From good bookshops internationally or, in case of difficulty, direct from the publishers (please add 40p/60c for postage) U.K. and EUROPE: The Tantivy Press, 136-148 Tooley Street, London SE1 2TT U S A : AS. Barnes & Co. Inc., Cranbury, New Jersey 08512.

T here are other projectors that perm it dual-track recording. But the Eumig 824 Sonomatic is unique in offering not only dual-track recording but also Sonomatic recording control.

Distributed and serviced by R. GUNZ (Photographic) Pty. Ltd. P0 Box 690 Darlinghurst, NSW 2010.

BRANCHES IN A LL STATES

I (eum ig w makes film ing easy

Published W eekly at West 46th Street, New Y o rk, N .Y . 10036, by Variety Inc. A nnual subscription, $30. Single copies, 75 cents.

Second Class Postage Paid at New Y o rk, N .Y . and at A d ditio nal M ailing Offices.

© COPYRIGHT, 1977, BY VARIETY INC., ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

Now available “air-speeded” by

P ^ r Ie T y Trade Mark Registered

Subscription Order Form

FOUNDED 1905 by SIME SILVERMAN Published Weekly by VARIETY, INC.

c

COURIER

COURIERS TO THE COMMUNICATING WORLD

HOLLYWOOD, CALIF. 90028

E n close d fin d c h e q u e fo r $ . . □ Please se nd VA R IETY fo r □ □

O ne Y e ar T w o Y ears T h re e Y ears

T o .......................................................

Please Print Name

Firm N am e . . .

....................................T it le ...............

S tre e t..............

C it y .................. . . . S ta te ................ Post C o d e ..............

Regular Subscription Rates (Surface Mail)

One Year — $30.00 Two Years — $57.50 Three Years — $80.00 Canada and Foreign — $3 Additional Per Year

PZ

r

Ie T y

154 West 46th, New York, N.Y. 10036 (212) 582-2700 Cable: Variety, N.Y. Telex 1-26335

$3.50 per copy from selected newsstands such as: SYDNEY: Hoyts Entertainment Center; Anchor Bookshop; Kings Cross; Porter, Castlereagh St.; Piggot, Oxford St.; Wynyard Ramp.

MELBOURNE: McGill’s, Elizabeth St.; Southern Cross Hotel; Australian Film Institute.

1400 North Cahuenga Boulevard.

(213) Hollywood 9-1141 Cable: Davar, Hollywood. Telex 6-74281 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005

1050 Potomac St., N.W. (202) 965-4301 Telex 8-9568 CHICAGO, ILL. 60611

400 No. Michigan Ave. (312) Delaware 7-4984. Telex 2-53268 LONDON, SW1A 1JX

49 St. James’s Street, Piccadilly.

Phone: 493-4561 Cable: Variety, LondonjSWl. Telex 24547 PARIS, 75008

33 Champs Elysees Phone: 225-08-07. Cable: Variety, Paris.

ROME, 00187

Via Marche 23, Phone 463-290 Cable: Variety, Rome.

MADRID, 6

Calle Lagasca, 104. Phone: 276-4262.

Cable: Variety, Madrid.

SYDNEY, N.S.W. 2000

For more information and about annual subscriptions, call Mike Harris in the Sydney Bureau.

1-7 Albion Place.

Phone: 61-3124. Telex 22969.

SYD SILVERMAN Publisher and Executive Editor

■ B

The Australian Film Institute .developing a film culture in Australia

The Australian Film Institute is an independent, non-profit, cultural organisation. It was established in 1958 w ith 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 wide 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

The 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

Other 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 will 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

★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ Q p| ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★

Publishing In conjunction w ith 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

(Pictured: 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.

N a m e .................................................................................................

Address

Signature.

so what’s your problem ?

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

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

has a trick knee as well

For your final scene (in Arnhem Land) you will be flying the Cambridge Boy’s Choir out from London and you’ve arranged a five-concert tour for them while they’re here (London, by the way, is rumoured to be having a flu epidemic) . . . "

There is a last minute hassle looming over the music rights You’ve got your AFC loan, you begin shooting in two days, so what’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.

$

11

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, Qld. 4000 (07) 221-5816

Articles and Interviews Tom Cowan

Tom Ryan

202

Francois Truffaut

Jan Dawson

206

John Faulkner

Tracier Faulkner

209

Delphine Seyrig

Gail Heath wood

214

The Irishman

Barry Tucker

217

Stephen W allace

Danny Torsh

221

The Brothers Taviani

Verina Glaessner

226

Miami Convention

Delphine Seyrig Interviewed: 214

Andrew Phillips

229

Sri Lankan Cinema

Geoff Burton

232 236

The Spectrum Report Film P eriodicals: Part 2

Basil Gilbert

The Irishman On Location: 217

238

Features The Q uarter Tehran Film Festival

200

Scott Murray

224

Guide for the Australian Film Producer: Part 8

Antony I. Ginnane, Leon Gorr, Ian Baillieu Film Censorship Listings International Production Round-Up Box-Office Grosses Production Report: The Chant of Jimmie Blacksm ith

Scott Murray, David Roe

John Faulkner A Recollection: 209

230 235 240 241 243 251 267

Production Survey Television Soundtracks

Ivan Hutchinson

TheTavianis Interviewed: 226

271 272 275 278

Book Reviews Picture Preview : Apostasy Columns

Film Reviews •

The Last Wave

Jack Clancy

259

Annie Hall

John O’Hara

260

The Beast

Inge Pruks

260

Backroads and Love Letters From Teralba Road

Keith Connolly

262

Star Wars

Annie Hall Reviewed: 260

Freya Mathews

263

Bilitis

Scott Murray

Managing Editor: S co tt M urray. Editorial Board: Peter Beilby, Philippe Mora, S co tt M urray. Contributing Editors: Antony I. G innane, Graham Shirley, Rod Bishop, Tom Ryan, John O ’Hara, John Reid, Noel Purdon, R ichard Brennan, G ordon Glenn, David Elfick, Andrew Pecze. Design and Layout: Keith Robertson, Andrew Pecze. O ffice Manager: M ary Reichenvater. S ub-editor: M aurice Perera. Assistance: Peter Kelly. C orres­ pondents: London — Jan Dawson, Los Angeles — David Brandes, Paris — Meaghan Morris, Rome — Robert Schar, Denm ark — Gail Heathwood. Advertising: Sue Adler, Sydney (02) 26 1625; C hris Davis, M elb o u rn e (0 3 ) 3 2 9 5983. Printing: R am say W are Stockland Pty. Ltd., 552 Victoria St., Nth. M elbourne 3051. Telephone (03) 3 2 9 7300. Typesetting: A ffairs C om puter Typesetters, 74 Eastern Road, South M elbourne 320 5. Telephone (03) 6 9 9 2174. D istribution: N.S.W., Vic., Qld., W.A., S.A. Consolidated Press Pty. Ltd., 168 C astlereagh St., Sydney 2000. Telephone (02) 2 066 6. A C T ., Tas. — Book People, 5 9 0 Little Bourke St., M elbourne 3000.

Front cover: Tommy Lewis as Jimmie Blacksmith and Angela Punch as his new' wife Gilda. The Chant of Jimmie Blacksmith. Photograph by John Pollard.

265

Tom Cowan Interviewed 202

Cinema Papers is produced w ith financial assistance from the Australian Film Com m ission. A rticles represent the view s 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 P ublishers accep t any liab ility for loss or dam age w hich may arise. T his m agazine may not be reproduced in w hole or in part w ithout the prior perm ission of the copyright owner. Cinema Papers is published qua rterly by Cinem a Papers Pty. Ltd. M ain O ffice: 143 T herry St„ M elbourne 3000. Telephone (03) 3 2 9 5983. Sydney O ffice: 36 5 A Pitt St., Sydney. Telephone (02) 26 1625. ® C opyright Cinem a Papers Pty. Ltd., Num ber 15, January 1978.

■Recommended price only.

TAX BREAKTHROUGH Prior to the December 10 election, the Liberal Party announced that changes would be made to investment write-offs for feature films. Considered a unit of industrial property, a feature could till now only be written off over 25 years, if the film failed commercially. The mooted tax revisions would see this changed to a 100 per cent write-off in two-three years.

While the Australian Film Commission and other bodies, including the Independent Feature Film Producers, were hoping for a 12-month write-off period, this new incentive is a much-awaited step forward. It is now a question of awaiting the implementation and seeing if this will in fact encourage private investment in an industry sorely in need of new injections of finance.

R.O.T.

FILM STUDY RESOURCE CRISIS The Australian Film Commission, in taking over the duties of the Film, Radio and Tele­ vision Board of the Australia Council, was obliged to assume the cultural responsi­ bilities of that organization. These include financial support for services providing film information for the use of students and the public.

However, recent budget cuts to two resources cen tre s in M elbourne are seriously affecting their operations. These are the George Lugg Library, which did not get its submitted budget and has been given notice by the AFC that from the end of 1978 it will have to look elsewhere for financial support, and the Australian Film Institute.

When the George Lugg Library began in 1957 it was the private domain of George Lugg, editor of Federation News, the journal of the Victorian Federation of Film Societies.

Mr Lugg’s efforts in acquiring research material for his film program notes have resulted in the library being able to collect more than 1000 film reference books and s u b s c rib e to 31 in te rn a tio n a l film periodicals.

Mr Lugg also instituted a 65,000 card index system which is unique for a film library in this country, for it documents individual references to films and film per­ sonalities in each one of the library's periodicals.

In 1973, a grant of federal government funds enabled the George Lugg Information Service to be set up, and this placed the resources of the library at the service of the Australian public. A part-time research o fficer was employed, and photocopy extracts from articles and reviews, as well as technical information from trade journals, were supplied for a nominal charge.

The service has been used by teachers and students, film critics and film societies, and by members of the film industry through­ out the country, at a cost to the Australian taxpayer of $7000 per year.

The George Lugg information Service is of particular value to the historian of the Australian cinema, for among the journals held by the library are extensive holdings of such short-lived Australian film periodicals as Film Journal (1956-65), Film Digest (1965-67), Sydney Cinema Journal (1966­ 68), and Melbourne Film Bulletin (1968-71).

Complementing this historical material are contemporary newspaper clippings, which provide a critical record of every Australian feature production of recent years, taken from the nation’s leading newspapers.

The facilities of the Information and Resource Centre of the AFI are equally impressive. For the film student, the AFI’s microfilm reader provides a complete biblio­ graphy of articles on a film or a film personality to be printed from microfilm editions of the British Film Institute’s card indexes. Details on more than 200,000 films, made between 1908 and 1976, are available, and the index, which was compiled in London, is updated every two years.

There are also rare first editions of film publications which form part of the David Francis Collection recently acquired by the AFI. There are more than 1300 books in this collectio n (including works in French,

200 — Cinema Papers, January

German, Dutch, Danish and Italian), and it is supported by a collection of rare film journals dating back to the first years of cinema.

However, lack of funds is preventing this collection being made available to the public. , The Institute also subscribes to the International Federation of Film Archives (FIAF) card index to international film literature. The journals indexed are current ones, and the subject headings (eg., film distribution and exhibition; sociology of film; film history and c ritic is m ; producers, directors, actors) make access to informa­ tion an easy task. The system is remarkably up-to-date, for the cards are added to on a weekly basis.

The AFI is also planning to make its resources available to a wider number of Australian users. It has been studying the experiments of the BFI, which has been extending its services to the regions of Britain, particularly through the use of duplicate and microfilm material.

The AFI could also take a lesson from the Danish Film Museum in Copenhagen. This progressive body not only supplies leaflets on films to the public, but also adds to its extensive collection of the world's film classics by arranging exchanges with foreign film archives.

B.G.

STAR WARS GROSSES While it is a simple matter to ascertain box-office grosses in the U.S. and Britain, these figures still remain largely secret in Australia. It is therefore with interest one notices the Australian grosses of Star Wars as printed in Variety, November 30. (All figures are in U.S. dollars.)

WEEK SYD. MELB. 1 $73,711 $66,616 2 $73,040 $59,587 3 $72,784 $64,981 It is to be hoped that the release of these figures is the beginning of a trend, one which will be of considerable value to people in all areas of the film world.

S.M.

CHILDREN’S FILM AND TV SEMINAR A sem inar in C h ild re n 's Film and Television took place in Canberra during October 12-16, 1977. ' Following in the wake of the Australian Broadcasting Tribunal’s report on self­ regulation for broadcasters, the seminar was clearly very important. It was organized by the Australian Film and Television School, the Australian Broadcasting Commission, the Federation of Australian' Commercial Television Stations, Film Australia and the Australian Film Commission. These bodies, re p re s e n tin g va rie d and som etim es conflicting interest, co-operated in trying to improve the quality of material for children.

Their interaction was perhaps indicative that further unified action may be forthcoming, and not only in the area of Children’s Film and Television.

The first three days of the seminar con­ centrated on discussion, but the last two days were set aside towards producing a final, crucial report and recommendations.

In all, 25 recommendations were passed, and the seminar agreed to send them, as soon as possible, to the Minister for Post and Telecommunications, the Senate Standing Committee on Education and the Arts, and the Minister Assisting the Prime Minister in the Arts.

These recommendations and a fuller article on this important seminar will be printed in the next issue of Cinema Papers.

B.T.

TASMANIAN FILM CORPORATION Further to a Quarter item in the October, 1977, issue of Cinema Papers noting the Corporation’s establishment, Corporation

director Malcolm Smith has issued the following policy statement: The Tasmanian Film Corporation is a stat­ utory body of the State Government. It is an independent, profit-oriented organization which aims to participate in, and help the growth of, a stable film industry in Australia.

It plans to operate with high artistic business standards, presenting Australia, and in particular Tasmania, to the world through factual and fictional productions.

It is interested in the economic and best use of film to meet the needs of audiences and sponsors and to provide effective sales and distribution outlets. It aims to encourage and assist filmmakers within Tasmania, to help visiting producers with advice and contacts, and to assist, where possible, with training programs.

The main functions of the Corporation are to produce, market, distribute and exhibit film (including video tapes, photographs and other works) for the entertainment and education of adults and children through commercial and government agencies in Australia as well as overseas. It is also involved in hiring its personnel and equipment.

The Corporation will work with private industry, public organizations and with State and Federal Government departments and instrumentalities. It does not receive govern­ ment gra nts, but is gu a ra n te e d the production of all State Government films, has the right to borrow Loan Fund money from the State Government, and also has the right to borrow from any source, subject to Treasury approval, with an expectation of profit from any investment.

The Corporation will promote audience education in film and television (both critical study and creative activity) among its own staff and members, teachers and students, and the public.

• A.P.

HODSDON REPORT UPDATE The Australian Film Commission has lent financial assistance for the recent exhibition in Sydney of films produced with the assistance of its Creative Development Branch, for the ongoing activities of the Sydney Filmmakers’ Co-operative Ltd, and the exploratory seasons early next year at the Sydney Opera House Music Room by the Australian Film Institute. It is perhaps now worth asking what, if any, are the likely gains of this flurry of film exhibition and whether the filmmaker is benefiting.

An analysis of the audited statements of the AFI and the Sydney Co-op for 76/77, and figures supplied by the AFC, possibly cast new light on the conclusions made by Barrett Hodsdon in his report on Minority Exhibition and Distribution in Australia.* In examining the relevant figures, one can concentrate on either of two ratios: amount of subsidy for every dollar returned in film hire (derived by dividing total film hire paid out into total subsidy for the financial year); or, total cost of generating $1 in film hire.

While the second may have some relation to the efficiency of an organization, the former ratio is of more importance, because it is the subsidy level which alone may decide whether a screening of independent Aus­ tralian films can proceed. (i) The Sydney Co-op operates a small, 11 2-seat cinema in St. Peter’s Lane and was subsidized by $23,460 to return $8685 in film hire. Gross receipts totalled $17,029 and the cinema cost $40,990 to run. Overall, this represents a cost of $2.66 in subsidy for $1 of film hire generated. (ii) Over the same period, the AFI’s Longford Cinema (300 seats) grossed $110,695 to return $29,901 in film hire. The cinem a, w h ich co st $165,684 to run, lost $53,021; this, meant it was subsidized by $1.77 to return $1 in film hire. (iii) The Creative Development Branch’s *ln s tu d y in g th e e ffe c tiv e n e s s of s ubsid ization to the P la ybox and C o -op cinem as, H odsdon exam ined the c o s t of s u b s id y per a tte n d a n t T h is b ro k e do w n to P laybox $1.4 0 ; S yd ney C o -op $ 2 .3 0 ; and M elbourne C o -op $2.70.

involvement in this area is via the “ four-walling” of the Union Theatre at the University of Sydney. Although the exact breakdown was not available at the time of going to press, it appears that almost $13,000 was outlayed in promotion for a total of three weeks' exhibition (although these programs were subsequently given seasons at the Co-op cinema).

The only film hire generated was $1 200 for one program (The Singer and the Dancer and Love Letters From Teralba Road) and the gross receipts for the seasons were about $10,000 for a loss of about $3000. In other words, it cost $2.50 to generate $1 in film hire, which appears to have been calculated according to what was left after all costs had been deducted.

Given this, in comparing the AFI and Co­ op operations, it must be pointed out that the Co-op operates a different programming policy from the AFI. This results in a much higher turnover of product (including, like the AFI, a good proportion of foreign films) and the considerably smaller seating capacity means that the figures can't be very high.

Therefore, the above ratios should be viewed in this light.

B.G.

ASSOCIATION OF INDEPENDENT FILMMAKERS The first annual general meeting of the Association of Independent Filmmakers was held in Melbourne on Wednesday, November 30, 1977.

The objects of the Association are: a) to promote and encourage the de­ velopment of a strong independent Australian cinema, free of foreign domination; b) to represent the interests of its members by lobbying, making repre­ sentations, providing information for the media and any other activity that promotes the interests of its members; c) to promote ways and means of facili­ tating the production, distribution and exhibition of the films of its members.

Membership is restricted to people who have produced or directed a film, but associate membership is available to those who are employed or otherwise engaged in the film industry. The founding membership is made up of those present at the inaugural meeting, though new members will, from time to time, be admitted.

It was also decided that a committee of six (three members each from the Association and the Australian Film Institute) be formed to meet and formulate a two-year plan to facilitate the distribution and exhibition of the films of the Association’s members through the Vincent Library.

The elected office holders are Don M cLe nn an (p re s id e n t), B asil G ilb e rt (secretary), Paul Jansen (treasurer), Vicky M olloy and Scott M urray (com m ittee members).

S.K.

QUEENSLAND FILM CORPORATION On October 3, 1977, the Queensland State Government passed the Queensland Film Industry Development Act 1977. This Act provides for the establishment of the Q ueensland Film C orporation whose functions are: (a) to encourage the development of the film industry in the State; (b) to continuously review the state of development of the film industry in Queensland; (c) to advise the Minister on matters concerned with the development of the film industry in Queensland; (d) to adm inister financial and other asssistance provided by the Govern­ ment of the State to the film industry; and " (e) to co-ordinate the provision of all forms

THE QUARTER

of assistance, whether made available by the government of the State or otherwise.

The members of the Corporation are: Mr Syd S chu be rt, C o -o rd in a to r-G e n e ra l (chairman); Mr John Bensted, Director of Industrial Development (deputy chairman); Mr Leo Hielscher, Under Treasurer; Mr Mike Williams, managing director, Martin Williams Films; Mr Terry Jackman, managing director, Hoyts Theatres; Mr Ron Archer, general manager, Channel 0; Mr Frank Moore, managing director, 4IP; Mr Ron Parkes, senior partner, F. J. Hart and Co.; Mr Syd Williams, chairman, Bush Pilots Airways; Mr C harles Porter, Member, Le g isla tive Assembly, Queensland Parliament.

Powers of the Corporation To enable its functions to be carried out, the Corporation is empowered: (a) to investigate and make recommen­ dations to the Minister on applications for financial and other assistance; (b) to provide financial assistance for the purpose of this Act on such terms and conditions as the Governor-in-Council approves; (c) to levy such fees and charges in respect of the provision of financial assistance as are prescribed by Orderin-Council; (d) to acquire plant, machinery and other equipment, and to sell, lease or other­ wise make it available to the film industry on such terms and conditions as it thinks fit; (e) to accept gifts, devises, bequests and assignments made to the Corporation (whether on trust or otherwise); (f) to provide advice and such other assis­ tance to the film industry as it thinks fit, and on such terms and conditions as it thinks fit; (g) to undertake research and investi­ gation into any matter related to the functions of the Corporation; (h) to acquire rights in respect of films; (i) to act as trustee of moneys, films or other property vested in the Corp­ oration upon trust; (j) to engage persons having suitable qualifications or experience as consul­ tants to the Corporation; and (k) to exercise such other powers and functions and to perform such other duties as are prescribed.

Conditions of Financial Assistance The provision of financial assistance will be conditional upon the employment of Q ueensland film in d u stry personnel, including local trainees where appropriate.

In addition, films supported by the Corp­ oration will be expected to be shot predom­ inantly in the State.

Logistical Support Government back-up services, such as technical advice and the use of government buildings, police cars, uniforms etc., will be made available to film producers.

Free or concessional transport on the state railways will also be provided for film personnel and equipment moving to or from a Queensland film location.

Production of Films The Corporation will not itself produce films. However, in order to promote co­ ordination in the government production of films, State Government departments will be requested to keep the Corporation advised of their filmmaking activities.

AFC ANNUAL REPORT The 1975-76 Annual Report of the Australian Film Commission was tabled in federal parliament on September 21, 1977.

An examination of this important report will appear in the next issue of Cinema Papers.

R.S.

CENSORSHIP The two most important films to pass through censorship this quarter were Walerian Borowczyk’s La Bete (The Beast) and Nagisha Oshima’s L’empire des sens (Empire of the Senses).

La Bete was o rig in a lly banned in November 1976. The decision was appealed in July 1977, but the film was again denied registration. At this stage it ran 2815m or 102.61 min. The film was then cut by its distributors to 2701.70m (98.48 min.) and it was finally passed with an “ R” classification without further cuts.

To meet “ community standards” , 4.2 min had to be deleted. These cuts represent most of the sequence where Romilda’s (Sirpa

Patti D’Arbanville as Bilitis in David Hamilton's film of the same name. Unaccountably it has been classified “ R” .

Lane) passionate lovemaking exhausts the beast who collapses to the ground and expires. As a result, the tale has been robbed of its irony.

Oshima’s L’empire des sens, the troubled history of which has already been well documented in Cinema Papers, was finally passed by the Censorship Board. This apparently necessitated three cuts: the climax to the fellatio sequence; a shot of some geishas impregnating a virgin with the tail of a china bird; and one close-up of an erection.

One issue of growing importance in the past months has been the ‘upgrading’ of “ NRC” classified films to “ M” and “ M" films to "R” . Richard Fleischer’s The Prince and The Pauper, when given an “ M” classifica­ tion to the amazement of distributors and exhibitors who expected no more than an “ NRC” , highlighted an observable tendency on the part of the censorship office. Another example was the James Bond film, The Spy Who Loved Me, which received an “ M” rating, though clearly it is not a film “ for mature audiences only” .

In an effort to show its disapproval of stylized violence, the censors have created a situation where television ratings, with regard to violence, are far more lenient than the corresponding cinema classifications.

And, of course, television has none of the built-in safeguards of the cinema.

Three more examples are the "R ” classifications given to Serail, Grand Theft Auto and Bilitis. Serail has been so rated for a few explicit sub-titles and, as such, carries a rating quite at odds with its subject matter.

Grand Theft Auto was rated “ R” but the distributors appealed and the appeals board overturned the rating and reclassified the film “ M” .

B ilitis ’ rating represents Australian censorship at its most moralistic. The film has only fleeting nudity and two brief glimpses of intercourse which are not as explicit as those, say, in the “ M” -rated Inside

L o o kin g Out. So the film is being deliberately kept out of the reach of those who would most appreciate and gain from it.

Clearly, the censors regard Mr Hamilton’s liberating views on pubescent sexuality too subversive for Australian minds.

S.M.

ACTORS’ EQUITY FEATURE FILM AGREEMENTS in the previous issue of Cinema Papers, No 14, authors Antony I. Ginnane, Leon Gorr and Ian Baillieu printed the standard Actors’ Agreement By way of reply, Uri Windt of Actors’ Equity was invited to write on unionism within the industry and to comment on the Actors’ Agreement.

I appreciate the opportunity to present the rationale for many of the clauses in the feature film agreement published in Cinema Papers.

Unfortunately, the tone and expression used by the authors indicate that they believe half their fears. The reference to an actor deliberately breaching his contract by “ purposely forgetting his lines or otherwise failing to perform” (p 129) verges on the offensive.

I would, however, like to concentrate on the positive, and explain Equity’s attitudes and policy on a number of matters.

1. Local Production v Internationalization We are firmly of the attitude that the capacity and talents are available, within Australia, to provide for an artistically successful film industry. The days when it was argued that we had so much to learn from an overseas actor (or director, etc.) are no longer with us.

It is now more common to argue that it is

econom ically necessary to have that overseas actor in order to break into the overseas market. Common as that attitude is, no evidence has yet been produced to support this proposition. It is an article of faith held by some producers, more for the comfort it gives than the results it shows.

Australian producers are caught in a contradiction of their own making. Not satis­ fied with Australian artists as a means of drawing box-office in Australia, they seek an overseas actor. Most Australian productions do not have the budgets to carry “artists of international repute” , so a string of foreign artists of either lesser capacity or a smaller “ box-office appeal” are proposed.

The irony, of course, is that it is precisely because these overseas artists are used, that the logic of a “ big-name” does not work.

It is because the foreign artists are not of “ international repute” that the question arises of whether or not they are assisting the industry or displacing Australian artists.

We would wish to examine each case on its merits.

2. Billing.

The agreement provides for credits (clause 21) for any speaking part of more than two lines. The only additional stip­ ulation made is when a foreign artist is engaged — in which case we seek co-billing for at least one Australian on par with the foreign artist. That is, equal prominence (eg. above title) and equal size and type.

It is important, if producers are taken at their word, that the Australian industry is seen as viable and vibrant. It is of little use to have Australia projected as a source of “ cute” fauna and flora. We do not believe that it is helpful to the industry to have Aust­ ralian actors credited overseas as only supporting performers. The only answer is to have equal billing.

3. Union Membership The principle of union membership has been fought and won: no one who is not a member of Equity should walk in front of a camera.

There has to exist a pool of people, of sufficient variety in skills and looks, to portray all that is asked of them.

And actors have to be alive and well to be available for casual work offered them.

A number of irresponsible producers seek to cast new faces merely for the sake of doing so; often without thought to any responsibility they may have to keeping films “ within” the industry.

It is the policy of the union to restrict entry of new members to the union. We have done this to encourage producers to make the work available, in the first instance, to existing financial members. If no one is suitable, or available, from the existing membership, then we w ill allow the producer's nominated artist to join the union.

4. Supplementary Rights The agreement incorporates rights of exploitation associated with theatrical and “ free” television transmission. No remuner­ ation is set out explicitly for supplementary rights such as cable television, pay tele­ vision, retail cassettes, etc.

It is an important principle that remuneraation to the artist is comparable to the exposure his/her performance receives. The horrific prospect of actors starving while audiences applaud their excellent, albeit, pre-recorded performances dominate our thoughts.

The way in which recorded material is exploited d ire ctly affects am a cto r’s potential for earning a living. That is the reason repeats in television drama are limited to three or less — the less repeats, the more production is generated.

An unregulated exploitation of recorded performances would kill the film and tele­ vision Industry. That is why the Canadian industry has sought to stop the introduction of pay television.

In the case of Australia, supplementary markets would prove detrimental to work opportunities; it would prove just another medium for dumping more American “ product” .

Supplem entary markets exist only overseas. If these rights are to be sold overseas, then it is only fair and equitable that Australian performers receive the “ market value” for their work. Hence, we have set the ceiling for these supplementary rights at the prevailing rates — that of the Screen Actors Guild in the U.S. Conclusion The agreement as published in Issue No. 14 is the basis for current negotiations between Equity and feature film producers.

Alterations are made in nearly all instances to accommodate specific problems of individual producers.

Equity is quite happy for a standardized agreement to be instigated, and negotiations have twice been initiated in the recent past.

In fact, the Independent Feature Film Producers Association have our proposition.

We await their response.

Cinema Papers, January — 201

*â–

and go into the wilderness. They go through certain rituals and try to find a new basis for existence.

Finally, a balance is attempted between the two. Journey Among Women, however, is the more full-blooded version.

Office Picnic is really more about the man than the group — I think he is the hero of it. So to say I have only been making films about women is inaccurate. 1 made Journey because I wanted to express something. Maybe it’s about women, but maybe it’s about a psyche, about balancing elements in a single personality.

And though it fits in with many interesting contemporary sociol­ ogical views, I didn’t make it for or about an audience of women, but for myself. >. In Promised Woman, the film I f made in between these two, I £ made a lot of mistakes; it’s more | conventionally motivated and | commercial. I didn’t actually write i the story for that.

3 If not a continuity of theme, do you have a continuity of style?

Tom C ow an’s “ Journey Am ong W om en’’ is a recent phenom enon of the A ustralian cinem a. M ade for the very low budget o f $ 1 7 0 ,0 0 0 , th e film not on ly m anaged to find a com m ercial release through a major chain (The Greater U nion O rganization) but has also done w ell at the box-office. In M elbourne, for exam ple, it opened at the R apallo C inem a and took $14,732 in its first w eek, the high est figure since the re-release there of “ Gone W ith The W ind’’. “ Journey Am ong W om en’’ is C ow an’s third feature and follow s the critically-regarded “ The O ffice P icn ic’’ and “ Prom ised W om an’’, both of w hich have managed only lim ited releases.

In the follow ing interview , conducted by Tom Ryan and N adya A nderson, Cowan exp lain s the concepts behind “ Journey Am ong W om en’’ and the w ays in w hich he sought to realize them .

Where did you get the idea for “Journey Among Women” ?

It is an original idea, though influenced by various sources. At that time I was reading Les Guerilleres, a science fiction poem

by French w riter, M onique Whittique. It is about a group of women in the future who, after a nuclear disaster, live outside of the cities and society — they have an Amazon type of existence.

I was also living in the bush then and seeing things very differently.

So I put a lot of ideas together, though ultimately it is an original and fictional idea.

Then John Weiley came in as producer and he decided we should make it into a serious film.

We wrote a screenplay to help raise money, and this was done by John, Dorothy Hewett and myself.

Where did you raise the finance?

From private investors that | John found, as well as the Aust­

ralian Film Commission. There was also an original loan of $25,000 from the Experimental Film Fund.

Throughout your career you have relied on government funding.

Are you happiest working in that sort of situation?

It doesn’t really matter; the only thing is whether a film should be subsidized or not. I think there should be room for subsidized films and for films that are viable in the commercial market place.

No. I think my photography is very simple and straightforward.

Is that deliberate or a virtue of your limitations?

I think it’s both. I don’t think of myself as a very good cameraman; 1 just do what I enjoy doing. I constantly experiment, and as a result I have never reached what you would call competence.

Obviously a number of people would disagree since you have worked for many directors. Have your own films gained anything from these experiences?

Yes. One of the inspirations for doing Journey the way we did was Pure Shit, which I photographed.

Bert Deling was using workshop techniques with the actors and developing their characters this way. That was a big impetus.

John Duigan’s film Mouth to Mouth was also very stimulating because of the idea behind it.

Working on other films keeps me thinking, though it is sometimes a strain, and I only work with the few people I get on with.

“Journey Among Women” is c o n c e r n e d w i t h w o ma n ; “ Promised Woman” the same.

Is this an intended continuity in your work?

You have focused in “Journey Among Women” on the strength of women; the male characters by comparison are very weak. Yet you say the film isn’t about women, it’s about yourself. How do you relate yourself to the strength of the women as you portray them?

T h e re is a v ery s tro n g connection between Office Picnic and Journey Among Women because they utilize the same plot; that of a group of people who make an escape from confinement

Well, it’s the strength of the intuitive faculty in the personality.

I am using women as a sort of symbol of that. The male side, the logical part of the personality, is rigid.

Cinema Papers, January — 203

Tom Cowan, with cast and crew, debate the next set-up while on location for Journey Among Women.

of its themes, the history of the struggle for emotional liberation.

Perhaps it’s a bit obscure.

I am not quite sure that I ever feel the women become liberated emotionally; I find them trapped all the time — despite the ending . . .

Well, 1would only find it to be a true liberation if it was an inte­ gration of the emotional and logical sides of the personality — it’s not just being able to do what you want.

It is obvious that there has been a certain liberation of our emotions over the years, an upward thing of being able to express the emotional side of one’s personality. I am really speaking about men more than women.

Nell Campbell as one of the convict women escaped into the Australian bush.

I hoped you w ouldn’t say that . . .

Well, you have to use these words. The man in the film you say is weak, but he has a vision and he has plans, though he doesn’t have an ability to cope with the present. That’s his weak­ ness, whereas the women are weak in that they are totally irre­ sponsible; they have no way of u sing th e ir fa c u ltie s c o n ­ structively. I see them as being almost as extremely out of balance as the main character.

Why is the film set historically?

You took it from a futuristic poem, and set it 200 years in the past. . .

Are we meant to see Elizabeth as being emotionally liberated at the end, when she can go back to civilization and endeavor to come to terms with it? It seems to me that it is a far more constructive act than the violence and the inevitable further retreat . . .

Yes, that’s literally what I meant by her going back. But by “ liberated” , I mean she is more able to cope with society; she is a more fully integrated person.

The actresses have very strong personalities. Did you choose them because of this?

Yes, they had to be fairly strong to withstand it. Only one ran away and she did come back to finish off the war.

How closely were the women modelled on themselves?

I think this film is pretty clearly about the present, and one of the Fairly closely, but that was the ways I look at the film is that it is a idea. We felt the film would be sort of journey though time; one more lively and vivid if the 204 — Cinema Papers, January

actresses did their own research and created their own characters.

You have taken on a subject which at least partially deals with women’s liberation; what are your feelings on the move­ ment?

and experiment. I wouldn’t have been prepared to do that without having had a good story to begin with.

It certainly went out of control I feel very strongly and emotionally about the liberation at times, and that’s a sort of movement because of all sorts of criticism that one makes of that confrontations I have had with aspect of life; that too much women who were trying to freedom means things fall apart. express themselves. It was painful But I can certainly say that it was a and 1 got caught up in it. It was if rich emotional experience. they were in a relationship in which they were trying to work During the six-week shooting period, you lived together in things out.

At the same time, I was living in conditions like those seen in the the bush near the Hawkesbury, film. Did that raise problems? and I began to see how beautiful it Yes, it was a tremendously was. I was also studying how the British had always described the difficult way of making a film; but bush as ugly, and because of this I thought it was the only way to the whole cultural cringe in Aust­ make one which would have ralia had for years accepted that enough guts to outweigh its limi­ the Australian landscape wasn’t as tations of budget. I think one of beautiful as that in Europe; that it the things we did achieve was getting our strengths onto the was empty and colorless.

Obviously when the British first screen, and we used these struck it, they just couldn’t make techniques to do it. out what it was and so it appeared awful to them. And it is the same I found quite a bit of the dialogue way that women are looking at the embarrassing; as when the new, at acting in a new way. It is soldier sees Elizabeth at the unknown and, therefore, awful. camp site and says, “Is it my And until we had experienced it little Princess?” . . . and taken it into ourselves, there could be no beauty in it. The I wish you’d laughed. I think it’s perception was that it was ugly, as quite an amusing and witty film. the other perception of the bush was that it was ugly. So I just tied The voice-over reflection about the process of love seemed an the two things together. i n t r u s i o n on w h a t wa s Various reports have said that happening; it didn’t really have a the screenplay was written as context. . . you went along. What sort of I get this kind of response often, control did you have and how and what it says to me is that much of the film is yours? people have very strong ideas The structure of the film was about what happens in a film and very rigid, and I hope strong what they feel people should be enough to give us the freedom to doing or thinking. They seem to try other things, to go off the track get very uncomfortable if they are

The flashback to the Greek island in Cowan’s Promised Woman. Jean-Claude Petit and Yelena Zigon.

The dramatic logic of the film led me to think that there would be an annihilation at the end . . .

Well, we chose to have a romantic ending which suggested the possible overcom ing of repression — this is really the essence of it. I thought I would be able to convey that through the character of Elizabeth, in that she was able to overcom e her repression and integrate the two faculties of her personality.

Takis Emmanuel and Yelena Zigon in Promised Woman, Cowan’s most “ con­ ventionally motivated and commercial film”

not doing what they expect them to do.

That does not deny the voice-over was unexpected . . .

I agree, because it’s not estab­ lished as a convention — it only happens once in the film. It just so happened that we liked this tape of Diana talking about herself, and it seemed to comment on other parts of the film.

But there is such a thing as dramatic logic, whereby you construct certain expectations within the film itself. Now you don’t construct the expectations of her discussing herself in those terms . . .

You are quite right, and if that’s a criticism, then it’s valid. There is such a thing as dramatic logic I agree, but whether there is a need to abide by dramatic logic, I think is questionable.

I believe the planned ending was quite different, in that you were going to wipe everybody out . . .

The ending in the film is similar to the scripted one. I think the only difference was that everyone was to be caught in the bushfire, but with the women rising up again from the ashes — a very poetic image. What I originally had in mind is now suggested by the couple of women who are reborn at the end.

Jude Kuring, for instance, is shot off her horse, but rises up again out of the waters. The girl who is shot in the tree (Lisa Peers) also re-appears later on.

I got the feeling that when she went back I could not trust her in the same way as I might have before she left . . .

Well you are a hopeless, cruel romantic.

At the beginning there is a panning shot which picks up a soldier riding a horse through green forest. You then cut to a different movement over the naked body of the woman, a movement connected with the gentle fall of a feather. You move, in effect, from romance to reality. Now that movement is reversed at the end; it almost seems a retreat into the romantic rather than a confrontation with the reality . . .

I think those elements are definitely and strongly there. One feminist lady who saw the film said that after she had seen the first couple of scenes she thought to herself, “ Oh there’s a bloody guy riding through Marlboro Country; this is going to be another of those shit films.” But then it’s certainly got contrasts.

I don’t consider it to be a realistic film and I don’t know about your interpretation of the ending. I suppose it is a bit romantic, but I believe that repression can be overcome. At the same time, I think there have been a lot of films over the past 15 years that have had very negative readings of reality. I am sick of that convention.

minutes taken out, which was two very long shots of people walking in the bush. We felt it was a good idea to make it move a little quicker.

As far as the flow of the film, something happens after the escape from the camp; it begins to meander, become aimless . . .

It changes throughout the film and that seems to have been the most upsetting thing aboutjt for the critics. The first scenes are very structured, and refined society is reasonably structured.

And when they escape it becomes very meandering, and that is because there was less direction applied in that part of the film.

I had the feeling, after about half an hour, that we are going to have another “Dalmas” which set up a fictional context, then threw it away . . .

No, I never thought of that, but I had considered it as a possibility in the audience’s perception. I hope that all along the sequences question each other, like at the end where it turns to fantasy in the war.

I hope the film relies on contrasts, not only in the visual sense,, but also in the way the shots are taken and the changes in the style of acting throughout.

Are there any particular Aust­ ralian films you consider impressive?

I mentioned Pure Shit before; I think that’s a very striking film because it has such a lot of life in it. In contrast to many other Aust­ ralian films, it moves along and has a lot of energy. Bert is the foremost director in Australia for getting energy on the screen. I haven’t seen Backroads, but I believe that’s also got a lot of fire in it.

The films that have most influenced me are my own, just by finding out what worked and what didn’t. Every time I make a film it Was there a recut on the film? sort of comes up to 20 per cent of Apparently the Cannes print was what I wanted. Then I just feel like different from those in current going out and solving those release? problems: technical problems, o r g a n iz a tio n a l p ro b le m s , Basically there are about four problems of com m unication,

The lovers (Gay Steele and Philip Deamer) in Cowan’s first feature, The Office Picnic.

production, editing, etc. I am a real filmmaker in that sense; I like to be able to do the whole thing myself. But now that I am working with John Weiley (the producer) my experience and confidence is such that I can now trust other people to do things. I am doing less and less, and the films will start making themselves soon.

What are your future plans?

The next film is going to be about two people trying to come to terms with each other. They live in a bed-sitting room, cut off from society. There is no one to talk to and no one is repressing them —just each other and that’s the drama of it.

So, in fact, you are moving away from a film about groups towards a film about relationships . . .

Yes, though there are relation­ ships in Journey, even if they are only schematic. ★

FILMOGRAPHY 1962 Nimmo Street (short) 1964 The Dancing Class (short) 1967 Helen of Sydney (short) 1970 Australia Felix (short) 1971 The Story of a House (short) 1972 The Office Picnic 1974 Promised Woman 1975 Wild Wind (Chandamaruta — short) 1977 Journey Among Women

Cinema Papers, January — 205

ÿuc am mit ie &

^ e m

tu e &

A thematic reading Idee fixe and perpetual motion: these two extremes have provided the twin magnets to which Truffaut’s past heroes (and, more rarely, his heroines) have all been drawn. The stubborn survival of an obsessive emotion in an unstable universe has provided the dramatic tension in most of his films, as has the struggle between chance and destiny, between preconception and spontaneous experience.

Truffaut’s cinema may be divided into three parts: • Films of promiscuous experience (most notably the Antoine Doinel cycle), usually in the form of a sentimental education, and driving th e ir p ro tag o n ist tow ards the conclusion that, no matter how full of cruelty and suffering it is, life is marvellous and people are unique.

• Films of 1’amour fou — La mariee etait en noir (The Bride Wore Black), La sirene du Mi s s i s s i ppi ( Mi s s i s s i ppi Mermaid), L’histoire d’Adele H. — in which a central character remains faithful to a preconceived passion, to an idea of the person he/she loves, in the face of all kinds of conflicting experiences. It is the nature of such fidelity to be treated unto death, and these frlms nearly all end fatally, on an exalted emotional note that lies somewhere between tragedy and 206 — Cinema Papers, January

Bottom left: Francois Truffaut with his stars of L’argent du poche. Top left: Truffaut with Brigitte Fossey (as Genevieve) in The Man Who Loved Women. Above: Truffaut in his role of Ferrand in Day for Night.

Truffaut, through a collection of unstable and provisional characters describes his own amour fou■for another form of communication, the Jan D aw son cinema — one strand or another has always fulfilment. been dominant. Now, with L’homme qui • F ilm s w hich c e le b ra te h u m an amait les femmes (The Man Who Loved achievements rather than human emotions: Woman), he has achieved a perfect synthesis Fahrenheit 451 was a hymn to the power of of all three strands. literature, L’enfant sauvage (The Wild It is another tale of amour fou, distinguished Child) a hymn to the power of language — by the fact that the object of his hero’s love is linking the two films was the idea that this time collective rather than individual: communication is sacred and separates man Bertrand Morane is obsessed, not with one from the beasts. woman, but with all women; and in the best The three parts of Truffaut’s cinema, dramatic tradition of heroes who devote their however, have never been entirely separate. lives to the pursuit of a single goal, he dies as The fidelity with which the Fahrenheit he has lived, ■in the active service of his bookmen stuck to the classics of world dominant passion. It is the sight of a unique literature in a world which had outlawed the pair of legs that causes him to make the final, printed word had all the emotional hallmarks suicidal move from his hospital bed. of l ’amour fou. In the course of acting out her At the same time, the nature of Bertrand’s single obsession, the bride-in-black discovered single-minded passion is such th a t' he is on the way the infinite variety of the human constantly open to, and in active pursuit of, species. new and varied experiences.

Whether fighting the provisional nature of His promiscuity is not of the common stamp. all relationships or joyfully endorsing the He does not collect love-affaires in the spirit of status quo, the fickle and the faithful have the vulgar womanizer for whom quantity is been guided by a single perception of the more important than quality. And it is not magical nature of one or more other people. restlessness, but idealism that drives him from Yet, even if the three parts were never one bed to the next. Each seduction is an act of entirely separate, they were never entirely homage to what is unique and irreplaceable in equal. With the possible exception of La nuit each woman he meets. américaine (Day for Night) — in which Bertrand’s job at the Institute for Fluid

FRANCOIS TRUFFAUT

The Word Triumphs: Oskar Werner and Francois Truffaut in the last scene of Fahrenheit 451.

Charles Denner (Bertrand) and one of his beloved women. The Man Who Loved Women.

Mechanics is a more responsible version of Antoine Doinefs work with the model boats in Domicile conjugale (Bed and Board), and there are enough other similarities between the two characters for one to interpret Bertrand Morane as a 40 year-old version of Antoine Doinel. He may be seen as someone who has taken literally Delphine Seyrig’s advice to the adolescent Antoine in Baisers voles (Stolen Kisses) — “ Nous sommes tous des etres extraordinair.es*” — and who spends his life recreating that one unrepetable and irreplaceable consummation.

Bertrand’s recollections of his negligent and promiscuous mother also invite comparison with Antoine’s. While in his final affaire with Genevieve, the one woman he can talk to, he seems also to be coming to the same conclusion that drove Antoine back to his rather boring marital nest in Bed and Board: that exotica is all right in the short run, but that it’s no substitute for communication.

For in Truffaut’s tale of the amour-fou of a promiscuous hero, the third strand of his filmmaking is equally dominant. Bertrand is a man of reflection as well as of action. He is in the process of writing a book about himself, and this work (through which he meets Genevieve) brings him face to face with the paradox of all artistic creation: that com­ munication is a solitary business.

Like Ferrand (the director played by Truffaut in Day for Night), Bertrand spends his nights alone. His provisional, peripatetic existence grinds abruptly to a halt. At his funeral, Genevieve reflects that, beyond the tenderness and momentary pleasure which he gave to all his women, Bertrand has left something permanent behind him. Once again, Truffaut attests his faith in the power of *“ We are all extraordinary beings.”

L'amour J'ou. Julie (Jeanne Moreau) and one of the 'imaginary’ portraits. The Bride Wore Black.

A Sentimental Education: Claude Jade (as Christine Darbon) and Antoine Doinel (Jean-Pierre Leaud) in Stolen Kisses.

the written world — Ars longa, vita brevis. . ., the message of all his films.

Apart from the obvious parallels between Bertrand and Antoine Doinel, The Man Who Loved Women is more than usually crammed with references to Truffaut’s earlier films. This is not so much a form of self-indulgence as a recapitulation, for in loving all women, Bertrand inevitably loves all former Truffaut heroines (and minor female characters) as well. For the hardened film-buff, part of the fun of the new film lies in spotting the references, and it would be wrong to spoil that fun by providing a complete catalogue. Here, are a few examples: Bertrand is attracted to two cousins (cf.

Anne and Muriel); his friend Alphonsine performs a skeleton number in a fairground

identical to the number described by the prostitute in Tirez sur le pianiste (Shoot the Pianist); his friend Delphine goes to prison for a crime passionnel — The Bride Wore Black, Une belle fille comme moi (A Gorgeous Bird Like Me); he finds what might be a durable love over breakfast in bed (cf.

Stolen Kisses, Day for Night).

Finally, Bertrand meets his end in a manner already described, for comic effect, in Shoot the Pianist. One of the crook’s fathers had also been killed while pursuing a pretty girl across the street.

It is not so much that women (or their legs) obsess Bertrand as that they perpetually excite his curiosity. As Fabienne explains when she leaves him, it is the idea of love, not love itself, which motivates him. Behind this idea, there lurks the mystery of otherness, the mystery of one sex for another, described in a variation of Renoir’s La regie du jeu (Rules of the Game) and showing, like Renoir’s film, a society in which the rules for social and sexual behavior are undergoing a striking change.

Whatever the moral of his story, Bertrand Morane, at the age of 40, is still building his life around the question put by the juvenile lead, Alphonse, in Day for Night: “ Est-ce que les femmes sont magiques?”

And Truffaut’s answer, expressed this time through Genevieve, is still the same: if women are magic, then men are magic too.

Cinema Papers, January — 207

FRANCOIS TRUFFAUT

The Man Who Loved Women, Truffaut’s perfect synthesis of the strands of his previous cinema.

Did you intend to make a kind of resume film about a middle-aged Antoine Doinel who falls in love with all your previous heroines?

It wasn’t that deliberate. It was rather that there were a number of actresses I wanted to work with.

And I realized that this film gave me the chance to do so. It was just a question of following the logic of the script. Though in fact, I still wan’t able to provide parts for half the actresses I’d have liked to use.

The script was written for Charles Denner, and in the end he was the only person for whom a part was specially written.

A couple of reviews have criticized the film as being misogynistic . . .

I knew that was ,one of the dangers. But on the other hand, I think it’s very important to stand firm and not be too servile towards the latest trends. Of course it’s true that no one today is going to talk about women in the same terms they did in the old days, but that doesn’t mean that men have to abandon a male point of view. That would be absurd, pure servility.

And is a male point of view the same as a misogynist one?

208 — Cinema Papers, January

No, but it can’t be a purely feminist one either. And I don’t feel guilty about it. It’s obvious that in my 15 years films, the women’s parts were better than the men’s. Not just from the actresses’ point of view but also on the feel of the characters — the women were much more postive.

Anyway, people have often complained that the men in my films are too weak, so if I had to make a conscious effort, I suppose it would be to make my male characters stronger. Although in fact, as with women, I show men the way I see them.

What I am trying to say is that I don’t have any complexes about it. It’s not a problem for me. I don’t need to keep telling myself that in 1977 you can’t talk about women the way you used to.

I have the feeling that I just have to be true to myself. Being natural is the most important thing of all. It’s better to stay natural and be attacked for it from time to time.

S ervility is u n fo rg iv eab le, especially in the cinema, where i t ’s glaringly obvious when someone injects into a film some fashionable ideas that he’s just reproducing and not actually feeling.

Most of the complaints about the film being misogynistic are from men who have seen the film

and decided that women were going to be offended by it.

Whereas women’s reactions to the film have been about 80 per cent positive.

Even som eone like M arie­ France Pisier, who was a feminist before there was a fashionable word for it, and who was political before 1968, didn’t have any complaints. No, the complaints really came from men who were trying to put themselves in a woman’s place.

Most of the reviews from women critics have been very favorable. There is much pressure nowadays to conform to a certain political line. And you have to resist it. You can’t complain about Hollywood producers trying to force people to make films with a happy ending, and then have socialists insist that people make films with a positive ending. Or with a feminist ending.

You can’t make films to please other people. You don’t try to displease them either. But a film can’t be entirely deliberate. You have to allow for the unconscious as well. You have to work with both elements. I don’t like films where it’s obvious that the meaning was entirely determined before they had even started s h o o tin g . I t ’s w hat I call Cayattism.

Andre Cayatte used to be the

only French director to make this kind of pre-planned cinema.

Unfortunately, since 1968 there has been a rebirth of Cayattism. It forced th e cinem a in th at direction. Films whose meaning is spelled out on paper in advance.

And I can’t see what pleasure you can get from making a film in that situation, because so many things change when you start to shoot.

When we had finished the script for The Man Who Loved Women, we thought it was going to be very funny. The people who saw it at the first private screening came out saying they hadn’t expected it to be so sad .

I don’t like to put a label on it, but I suppose I could call it a dramatic comedy. That’s what I’d call the script, though again, the proportions of comedy and drama change once you start to shoot.

Jan Dawson, 1977

★

FILMOGRAPHY Shorts 1955 1958 1959 1962

Une visite Les misions Histoire d’eau (with Godard) L'amour a vingt ans (episode)

Features 1959 Les quatres cents (Four Hundred Blows) 1960 Tirez sur le pianiste (Shoot the Pianist) 1961 Jules et Jim 1964 La peau douce (Soft Skin) 1966 Fahrenheit 451 1967 La mariee était en noir (The Bride Wore Black) 1968 Baisers voles (Stolen Kisses) 1969 La sirene du M ississippi (M ississippi Mermaid) 1970 L’enfant sauvage (Wild Child) 1970 Domicile conjugale (Bed and Board) 1971 Les deux anglaises et le continent (Anne and Muriel) 1972 Une belle fille comme moi (A Gorgeous Bird Like Me) 1973 La nuit américaine (Day for Night) 1975 L’histoire d’Adele H. 1976 L’argent du poche (Pocket Money) 1977 L’homme qui aimait les femmes (The Man Who Loved Women)

Trader Faulkner

Introduction by G raham S h irley.

John Faulkner is best remembered for his dual role of twins in Raymond Longford’s m urder m ystery, The Blue M ountains Mystery (1921). One review er judged Faulkner to be “ about the most powerful actor who has a p p e a re d in lo c a lly -m a d e productions.” !

While The Picture Show magazine rated Faulkner’s performance as the best of his career,2 a portryal which reached well beyond surface departure in make-up to probe the subtle mental distinctions separating the two look-alikes, a murder victim and his imperson­ ator, the Sydney Sunday News wrote that “ Mr Jack Faulkner rises to the heights of genius. ” 3 The Blue M ountains Mystery came ap p ro x im ately halfway th ro u g h John Faulkner’s screen career and was to remain his most demanding and best work up until his death in 1934. That he was given no other role to seriously challenge his range was a reflection of the declining fortunes of the Australian film industry and Faulkner’s own lack of ambition. As his son, actor Trader Faulkner, was able to ascertain years after his father’s death, John Faulkner’s considerable talent as an actor was offset by his critical — sometimes harsh — comment on professional standards, and his laziness.

John Faulkner had a solid theatrical background in Britain and the U. S ., and had been associated with such showbusiness notables as Oscar Asche, John Barrymore and Charles Chaplin. Yet when large opportunities became available overseas, Faulkner preferred sporadic employment in Australian silent films.

Despite his experience in theatre overseas, Faulkner was seldom seen on the Australian stage. He kept out of debt by dividing his Graham Shirley is a Him historian who is currently writing a book on early Australian cinema.

employment between acting and work in other professions — as an inventor, entrepreneur’s offsider and even as a salesman. His knowledge of drama was enough to involve him on the production side of Australian films as well.

As an actor, his most distinctive roles were those of the refined heavy, but he also played a gallery of indulgent or put-upon fathers. His appearance was more suited to the villains than fathers.

The polish which he brought to even minor roles was again evident in Silks and Saddles, a recently restored film of 1921, which was featured at the 1977 Sydney Film Festival.

Between 1918 and 1929, Faulkner appeared in 12 Australian films and one in New Zealand.

And more than any other British actor of the period, Faulkner provided an added dash of

style through his own appearances, and helped directors boost the work of other performers.

John Faulkner’s son, Trader, has lived in London since 1950, when he left Australia to pursue a career in the theatre. As a young stage and radio actor in Australia, Trader Faulkner trained under Peter Finch and Bryson Taylor, and between 1948 and 1950 made impressive appearances in stage productions of They Walk Alone, The Guinea Pig, Ah, Wilderness!, Fly A way,„ Peter, and The Merry Wives of Windsor.

Recognizing his talent in Merry Wives, Tyrone Guthrie sent Trader Faulkner to London. Since then, his career has embraced the stage, feature films, and television. His non-acting assignments have included theatre p r o d u c tio n , fla m e n c o d a n c in g and choreography, journalism, and work on English translations of the plays of Spanish ^ playwrights, Antonio Buero Vallejo, Alejandro Casona, Garcia Lorca, and Ramon de Valle Inclan.

Trader Faulkner offered to write about his father’s career when he read press reports in August 1976 that the National Film Archive had rediscovered vital missing sections of The Breaking Of The Drought, filmed by W. Franklyn Barrett in 1920. John Faulkner had played the star heavy in this film and served as the film’s co-producer.

The following article has been drawn from John Faulkner’s press clipping and still collection, as well as conversations Trader Faulkner has had with relatives and friends. In editing this article, I have expanded various p o in ts w ith in fo rm atio n gained from correspondence with Mr Faulkner and from additional research.

My father’s death was sudden. The day after he collapsed, in September 1934, I was sent away to my grandparents at Manly Vale. I ran away and was finally sent to stay in Mosman, Cinema Papers, January — 209

I;

iiiiiiSIi tlilfit .■ • •

:

3|## ###*

..

B

•■•'■.

s ía w -I .f il i:' « ÏÎS

¡ ^ « H■

■s V,ïs"':"'« ' ; SW I! ^»V- * **» UMS

i

with my uncle and aunt. That time was traumatic and ghastly. I went everywhere trying to find my father.

The family was relieved he had gone, except me. Some of his mementos were thrown out, and I remember a dustman furious at finding me raking through a garbage bin in search of Dad’s things at eight o’clock one morning, in the backyard of our flat at North Steyne.

By the time I was an adolescent, my mother and other relatives regarded Dad as a bit of a joke. I believe he was an extremely good actor, born about 20 years ahead of his time. In truth, my mother adored him. According to her, he was very much the John Barrymore type — arrogant, Victorian/Edwardian, and with too much charm, good looks and appeal for his own good. He had a beautiful and unaffected English voice, but was lazy. Everything came too easily to him.

I am sure the arrogance, good looks and great charm were his undoing. Women adored him, and I imagine helped to ruin him. I can remember him more vividly than anyone now gone, because at the time of his death, I was at a very impressionable age.

He was like Jean Gabin. He had the same weight and strength, though he was more raffiné than Gabin. The Englishman he sounded and looked most like was the actor Clive Brook.

When I grew up in Sydney in the 1930s and ’40s, nobody wanted to know about people like Raymond Longford, Franklyn Barrett, Beaumont Smith; or the actors my father had worked with — Claude Fleming, Tal Ordell, Robert MacKinnon and Nan Taylor. They were passe by 1930, and by 1946 unheard of.

Tal Ordell was very kind and helpful during the time I was trying to break into Sydney radio. When I spoke to Tal Ordell, Nan Taylor and Bobby MacKinnon in 1948, they were reticent about those years in which they had done so much. By then, they were giving radio some of the dimension, style and tradition it lacked, and they seemed ashamed of silent film as a non-auditory medium.

I worked as a make-up assistant on Eureka Stockade in 1948 under Ealing’s Tom Shenton, but I kept very quiet about my father. I didn’t want to hear any smart alec talk about what a load of crap all that silent shit was. This was the way they talked about silent film in the late ’40s.

of Commerce. In 1893, he returned to England and worked several years as a traveller for the brewing concern of Bass and Company. In the early 1890s he met and formed a long-lasting friendship with Oscar Asche, a 23-year-old actor from Australia.

Asche had left Australia to study drama in Norway and Britain. From 1893 he was engaged by the Benson Shakespearian Company. With John Faulkner, he travelled the length and breadth of Britain. Among his other accomplishments, John was an inspired inventor, and he invented and patented a coffin-like contraption on wheels loosely described as a thermosfridge. In one half, a cooked meal could be kept at the required level of heat all day; and in the other, salads, wine and other perishables could be kept cool or frozen.

Dressed in black like undertakers, Faulkner

and Asche wheeled and sold their thermosfridge across the country. They successfully lured the lonely housewives with its potential and made a small fortune. Oscar Asche invested his half in theatrical productions, climaxed in the 1910s with his spectacular success Chu Chin ChowA Faulkner’s profits John Faulkner was the fifth of 10 children, went into horses, the good life, and eventually born at Ashby-de-la-Zouche, Leicestershire, a trip to Australia.

England, on July 13, 1872. He was a I possess no documentation on John’s entry descendant of Warren Hastings, the first into professional work in the theatre between Governor-General of India. John Faulkner’s the 1890s and 1906. He had behind him that grandfather was the Marquis Warren Hastings Victorian-Edwardian conditioning which made of Donisthorpe, who, facing old age and that generation aware the world was theirs; and imminent death, married his nurse and sired after the pig farm interlude, he was one child. The child was John’s father Edwin, determined never to start at the bottom again. born on April 23, 1836. John later told Too frequently, however, his positive relatives that his father ruled the family with direction was undercut by an enormous ego. draconian discipline.

One example I heard concerned the time By the time his wife had died in childbirth in Oscar Asche tried to get him a contract with 1885, Edwin was in charge of the big Moira the Benson Shakespearian Company. Sir Frank Colliery at Ashby-de-la-Zouche. That same Benson’s insistence that male members of his year, his second wife demanded that all the company must be able to play a first-class game Faulkner children aged 13 and over should of cricket drew from John the comment that leave home. John turned 13 in July, and clad he found cricket as exciting as masturbation — in a cerise blazer, white ducks and straw and that the advantage of masturbation over boater, he was despatched to work as a sty- cricket was one’s ability to play in winter, hand on a relative’s pig farm in Ontario, never having t o . assume fancy dress, and Canada. finding the balls to be far less lethal. Needless Clearing out the sties was not the herculean to say, he failed to get the job. role in which he saw himself at that age, so he In the early 1900s he became a drinking fled the farm and made for Toronto. There he companion of John Barrymore, of whom he trained for eight years with the Canadian Bank later said he had his own understanding. John

Top: John Faulkner as Capt. Wolff Forrest in £500 Reward (1918). Above: Cast and crew of the film, including Lacey Perciva! (behind camera), Renee Adoree, Claude Fleming (third from right) and John Faulkner (extreme right).

Barrymore was a painter before he turned to the stage, and Faulkner had the highest regard for him as a painter, as an actor, and one who would ultimately share his own genius for self­ destruction.

Barrymore invited Faulkner to travel with him in the William Collier Company to Melbourne in 1906 to appear in The Dictator.

But Faulkner refused on the grounds that he was planning to take his less-known company to South America.

On March 8, 1906, the Faulkner company embarked from New York for Buenos Aires on the Hobart. They played to capacity houses in Montevideo, Buenos Aires, Rosario, Las Palmas, Panama and Celina. In his youth John had achieved some notoriety through the performance of risque, sometimes bawdy monologues and ballads at society parties.

Judging from the rave reviews in press cuttings of the South American tour, this amateur preparation in comedy had paid off.

Reviewing his work as a character comedian, one Buenos Aires newspaper wrote: “ Mr Faulkner is one of the far too few entertainers who can be exceedingly funny, and yet entirely free from anything that savours on the vulgar.”

Cinema Papers, January — 211

Above: The Enemy Within (1918), Faulkner’s first Aust­ ralian film. Centre foreground: Lily Molloy and Faulkner as the German spy Karl Brandt.

Right: At opposite ends of the table in this scene from The Enemy Within are Billy Ryan and John Faulkner.

Below: John Faulkner as “ Patch” Mason in The Birth of New Zealand, one of Faulkner’s few non-villainous roles.

In 1907 he then appeared as a comedian at the Lincoln Square theatre in New York.

In 1911, John’s big break came when he played George D’Alroy in a U.S. tour of T. W. Robertson’s Caste. Charles Frohman, the American impresario, wanted a young leading man to play opposite his protegee, Ethel Barrymore. He had seen John Faulkner on stage, and invited him to go on tour with Ethel in a repertoire of plays by Pinero and J. M. Barrie. In another moment of arrogant madness which was to determine the future pattern of his life, John turned down the offer and insulted Frohman and Ethel Barrymore by saying he regarded the U.S. as a zoo for the scum of the worst British and European bour­ geoisie. After this tirade, John took a boat back to England and began his film career.

There is no record of the films he made in London, though one title, remembered as the butt of family jokes, was God’s Prodigal.5 Between 1911 and 1914, he invented, patented and made considerable money from an elastic­ sided shoe called “ Boscalace” . Another of his inventions, still in vogue when I was a child, was a roulette-style horse racing game, in which a cardboard disc the size of a record would be marked up with horses and their

starting prices, and spun on a gramophone. He was to remain an inventor of gimmicks and useful devices for the rest of his life.

It was a meeting with fellow actor Roy Redgrave that made John decide to come to Australia. Redgrave, father of Sir Michael, had worked on the Australian stage since around the turn of the century, and found frequent employment in Australian films. Redgrave’s account of Australian entertainment possibil­ ities inspired John to book his own passage, and he left for Australia in early 1914.

Soon after settling in Sydney, he married an older woman — a wealthy widow called Annie Bedment. They had their honeymoon on a houseboat, and a photograph shows John looking the real Edwardian dandy in white ducks, with Annie beside him in a wicker chair, very much the femme fatale.

He may have known Claude Fleming, an actor with whom he would work in Australian films. Like Faulkner, Fleming had already toured Britain and the U.S. with the added distinction of film roles in both countries.

John’s other friends and drinking companions were the Sydney jet set of the period, including Percy Stewart Dawson, Lindsay Browne, Charles Du Val, Libbias Hordern, and Hugh D. McIntosh, the vaudeville and boxing entre­ preneur. These people assisted John with money at various times until his death.

He was occasionally employed by McIntosh, and also by another friend, J. D. MacDonald, in the sale of Parkinson and Cowan gas stoves.

MacDonald also dealt, and was an expert, in antiques.

It is more than likely that John Faulkner appeared on the Australian stage between 1914 and 1918, although no reviews have been found to support this assumption. Probably in early 1916, he decided to re-visit the U.S. He visited Hollywood and befriended Charles Chaplin and got to know him well enough to devise a scenario, which my mother found in 1934 at Manly scrawled with Chaplin’s comments. The scenario, which was never filmed, was based on one of John’s experiences while travelling through Cornwall for Bass and Co.

In late 1917, John returned to Australia. The next year he became the business manager of Sheila Whytock, a ballerina working for J. C. W illiamsons. Sheila had studied under Espinosa and Diaghilev in London and toured South America with Pavlova. She was the niece of John’s friend Jim McDonald, and came to Australia with her parents in 1917.

Faulkner’s marriage to Annie Bedment had collapsed, and while arranging divorce in 1918, he asked Sheila to become his second wife.

Sheila wanted little to do with him as a married man and was disenchanted with Sydney and the dance scene. She was planning to leave and sign a contract as premiere danseuse at the Metropolitan Opera House in New York, when she was able to watch John at work on his earliest Australian films.

Faulkner was cast as a heavy from the outset.

At 46, he was beyond the range of ingenue, and Australian filmmakers normally cast him as a villain. Exceptions included the pirate he played in his second film, £500 Reward (1918), and portraits of lower class evil in The Blue Mountains Mystery and The Birth Of New Zealand (1921). But his most charac­ teristic roles were suave Edwardians, rarely out of a formal suit, butterfly collar and spats.

Faulkner’s first Australian film was The Enemy Within (1918), directed by Roland Stavely. John Faulkner played a German spy, Karl Brandt, who was bent on destroying Australia’s social fabric from ‘within’, while averting suspicion through a facade of society life. Brandt’s world of respectable soirées and garden parties masked his plotting with lowerclass thugs in a concealed room, and such dastardly deeds as the kidnapping of the heroine and a wild brawl with Jack Airlie, a special agent played by Reg L. (Snowy) Baker.

The Enemy Within gave Baker the chance to display his athletic skills; but Faulkner’s portrait of least-suspected evil was subtler.

Amid all his films surviving today, it is his best.

The Enemy Within was Snowy Baker’s first film as well as Faulkner’s; they made their second appearance together in The Lure Of The Bush (1918), directed by Claude

Above: Franklyn Barrett’s The Breaking of the Drought (1920).

Marie La Varre and John Faulkner as partners in crime.

Left: John Faulkner, Robert MacKinnon and American actress Brownie Vernon, in Silks and Saddles.

Below: John Faulkner in The Man From Snowy River. The film was co-directed by Beaumont Smith and John K. Wells.

Fleming. This time Faulkner’s character was more benign — an elderly squatter called Mr Trelawney. That same year, Fleming made another film, £500 Reward, on which he was writer and star as well as director. John Faulkner played Captain Wolff Forrest, alias “ The Pirate of the Pacific” . Renée Adorée, later prominent in Hollywood in King Vidor’s The Big Parade (1925), made her film debut as the heroine.

Filming of £500 Reward took place on Sydney Harbor and in heavy seas off the coast aboard the six-masted American barquentine E. R. Stirling. According to Sheila Whytock, the film came close to abandonment. She recalled that Faulkner and Fleming clashed frequently over interpretation, and battled for a lion’s share of the limelight. Sheila judged Fleming as a “ ham with a capital H” , and John Faulkner, who could deliver the goods when required, could not stomach Fleming’s own brand of thespian bullshit and grandeur.

The Theatre Magazine classified £500 Reward as a “ five-act melodrama of the oldfashioned once-aboard-the-lugger-and-thegirl-is-mine type” , and denied that the film marked “ any advance in local picture production” .6 According to Sheila W hytock, John freq u e n tly helped with the scrip tin g , production and direction of the films in which he appeared. He was a good ‘actor’s director’, and helped with the direction of £50(LReward, as well as Silks And Saddles, The Breaking Of The Drought, and The Blue Mountains Mystery.

The fact that he knew a great deal and was a strong personality som etim es brought resentment. Nan Taylor, who worked with him on The Breaking Of The Drought and The Man From Snowy River, told me that John was a “ natural” and a marvellous actor, but if he felt that a scene was misdirected, he went straight in with the gloves off and without tact.

He also cared little about whom he offended in his fight to see that the actors were well paid and treated. When companies penny-pinched over food and conditions, Faulkner was able to interfere and shooting would halt until things were run efficiently. John’s own wealthy

Sheila W hytock, who saw and later remembered The Man From Snowy River, commented on the deep sincerity of the performances. Supporting the leads, Cyril Mackay and Stella Southern, were John Faulkner, Tal Ordell, John Cosgrove, Robert friends — Hugh D. McIntosh among them — MacKinnon, Nan Taylor and Dunstan Webb. were sometimes the backers of films he In August 1920, John Wells, Smith’s co­ appeared in, and he used this advantage more director, planned to launch his own film than once in arguments with directors.7 venture. The result was Silks And Saddles, a John Faulkner’s name was among the racing film featuring American actress syndicate that backed his next film, The Brownie Vernon, who had earlier appeared as Breaking Of The Drought (1920). His Snowy Baker’s leading lady in The Man From financial partners were the film’s director, Kangaroo (1919). The supporting cast was Franklyn Barrett, C. F. Pugliese, and Jack lifted almost intact from The Man From North, who had written The Lure Of The Snowy River — Robert MacKinnon, John Bush. As a theatrical piece, The Breaking Of Cosgrove and John Faulkner, with Tal Ordell The Drought had enjoyed consistent success as the gentleman villain. Faulkner played from its first production by Bland Holt in 1902. Vernon’s father — a role that demanded little Holt had, until then, refused to sell the screen but was graced by his customary polish. rights to the property, but he expressed Commonwealth Pictures, the backing com­ confidence in the ability of Barrett and North pany, went into liquidation after Silks And to do full justice to the subject.»

Saddles: not because the film had failed (it was The results netted high praise and good sold to Britain and the U. S .), but because of returns. The Breaking Of The Drought took the familiar tale of ludicrously small share of eight weeks to film, in locations ranging from box-office returns. actual drought district around Narrabri, to In August 1921, six months after the Sydney Mulgoa, Kangaroo Valley and the National prem iere of Silks And Saddles, John Park south of Sydney. The interiors were Faulkner was at work on his most challenging filmed at Sydney’s Theatre Royal, and by role — in Raymond Longford’s The Blue courtesy of Hugh D. McIntosh, Trilby Clarke Mountains Mystery. Many scenes were and Marie La Varre were engaged to play the filmed amid the old-world palatial atmosphere country heroine and city femme fatale. of the Hydro Majestic and Carrington hotels in Marie La Varre also helped with direction, the Blue Mountains, west of Sydney. The and on screen played Faulkner’s partner in script by Longford and Lottie Lyell was crime and eventual victim by strangulation. adapted from Harrison Owen’s novel Mount The Picture Show magazine quoted John Marunga Mystery. John played the dual role of Faulkner’s desire to play fewer heavies in wealthy businessman Henry Tracey, who is future — Faulkner’s fight scene with Marie La murdered and in turn impersonated by his Varre had cost him two fistfuls of hair. The murderer — a look-alike twin. magazine described Faulkner’s work as Continued on P. 273 “ always distinctive” .9 After The Breaking Of The Drought, Faulkner hoped to re-visit Hollywood to update his knowledge of filmmaking tech­ niques. instead he remained to appear in Beaumont Smith’s screen adaptation of the Banjo Paterson poem, The Man From Snowy River. The co-directors were Beaumont Smith and John K. Wells. Smith, normally identified with swift-return quickies, was determined to lavish more care on this film, which reviews indicate to have been one of his best.

D oubtless, John W ells, with American directorial experience, and a strong cast were of considerable help.

Gail Hcathwood.

Do you prefer stage or film work?

That all depends on when you ask me. I am not really a film actress; I think I really am a stage actress. But every two years I start making films again — it just happens that way.

It’s not a question of what I like best, although right now I am enjoying the theatre.

I am what I would call a “ dilettante method actress” . I don’t consider myself to have gone into acting deeply enough, or tried to put to practical use, whatever I have learned.

Have you worked much for television?

I have done several things in France. I don’t like working in France, however, because things are not done well there and I don’t think they have any good tele­ vision directors — any that interest me, that is.

My big problem is directors. 1 was recently re-read in g an interview I had given 12 years ago a n d I w as a lr e a d y th e n complaining about them.

Before a stage actor is confirmed or becomes well-known, any deviation from the norm is not acceptable. In my case, it was that I didn’t speak normally. They always wanted to know why I 214 — Cinema Papers, January

D elp h in e S eyrig’s standing as an actress has for som e tim e been lin k ed w ith her outspoken advocacy of the w om en ’s m ovem ent, abortion and other im portant is su e s .

T h is h a s, in som e ca ses, resulted in profession al friction , but the continued ex cellen ce of her perform ances h as alw ays enabled her to work w ith m an y sig n ifica n t directors, such as M arguerite D uras, L uis B uñu el and F rancois T ruffaut. H ow ever, it is probably her per­ form ance in “ India S o n g ” — that hypnotic poem of the past by D uras — th at is her m ost rem em bered.

Seyrig w as in London recently to work in the B B C ’s adaptation of J a m e s ’ ‘T he A m b assad ors’ and to perform on stage in ‘A nton y and C leopatra’. Cinema Papers’ Scan d in avian correspondent, G ail H eathw ood, in ter­ view ed her there, and ta lk s of her film s w ith B uñu el and D uras, her attitudes on the role of fe m in ism in her profession al and private life, and her recent w ork w ith video. spoke a certain way and not and more 1 feel that I should be another. Now they tend to trust less sociable. I used to feel that I what I do and give me less of a had to be sociable whether I hard time — at least in France. wanted to or not, but now I am There they feel fairly safe with me trying to force myself not to — though they shouldn’t. behave in the same way with Films, however, are different; people I like as with those I don’t. there is something that frightens I think the women’s movement me about a camera, whereas has helped me a lot. audiences don’t frighten me at all.

I was very im pressed by something I read in the U.S. Does that indicate that you have about a Smile Strike — about not a rapport with people? necessarily smiling, which I didn’t know you could do. Things like I am very sociable, but more that have at last got through to

me; they have always been in me but I have never dared practise them. Now I dare more; I feel more confident.

Have you been greatly influenced

by American thinking?

I lived in the U. S. when I was a child, then went back after I was married to an American painter called Jack Youngerman. I didn’t work much in . New York, and when Alain Resnais offered me L’anee derniere a Marienbad (Last Year In Marienbad), I went to work in France. That was the beginning of my stay there.

What was it like working with Buñuel?

With certain exceptions, it doesn’t matter whether or not.you are just a pawn in a director’s game. And I liked to be one for Buñuel. I told him I was available because I wanted to work for him.

I don’t think it makes much difference to him whom he uses as long as it’s the kind of character he wants. So, I feel as though I chose him and not the opposite.

Buñuel is a very respectful person and a humorous one. I think he has a sort of genius, and even though I may now have reservations about his way of approaching certain- things, I still

DELPHINE SEYRIG

think he is great. I loved the film I did with him. (Le charme discret de la bourgeoisie.)

In comparison, how do you find wor ki ng wi t h Ma rg uer i t e Duras?

They are very different. One is a male genius with a culture that’s past, although in a way he is still very much avant garde. I feel much closer to Marguerite Duras in a more effective, emotional

Very much so. I feel I know what she is talking about. Whereas with Buñuel, I know that he knows what he is doing and I sort of blindly follow. If he says “ move one step to the right” I do it. It’s his film and I am a pawn in his game. But with Duras, it’s a kind of girlish feeling, as though I was meeting a schoolfriend again.

We are not quite the same generation, and had different class upbringings, but it doesn’t matter.

Do you find the theatrical quality of Duras’ films suits you?

Theatrical is a vague word. I’d say she is closer to someone like Daniel Schmidt than to most French directors. She started making films very late, but she has the same kind of freshness towards filmmaking that the new German filmmakers have, and the same taste for music and visual things, although they are still

way.

Do you theref ore have a particular affinity for the characters you play in Duras’ films?

When did you first become interested in the wo me n’s movement?

In 1969, when I began to read te x ts w ritten by A m erican women. They were the first to come out and speak in a strong way. I remember reading Notes

Top left: Seyrig and Jean-Pierre Leaud in Truffaut’s Baiters Voles. Left: Seyrig and Duras during the shooting of India Song.

Above: Seyrig in Resnais’ Muriel.

Are your ideologies more aligned with Duras’?

No, Buñuel delights me. I experience enormous satisfaction when I see any Buñuel film and I think of him as a very moral and healthy person.

With Duras it’s much more to do with the subconscious — with the fact of being a woman, and her use of language, her poetry. I feel that I am her twin. When she directs me, or when we discuss things together, I feel as though she’s been inside me and that her fantasies are also mine — it is like a double view.

Marguerite was brought up in Indo-China and I in Lebanon, and I can’t help thinking that there is a parallel and that her fascination with certain people she knew in her childhood is very close to the fascination I had with, let’s say, women in my childhood.

Perhaps it was because we grew up in foreign countries. And suddenly we saw people who were from our own cultures, but who emerged from the banality of the rest, who made us dream. I am very touched by her fantasy.

present, but I find I can only understand it through re-finding the past — it doesn’t make sense without the accumulation.

From the First Year, a sort of review of all the writings of what they called “ The First Year” , which I suppose was ’68.

It was a revelation and since then I have hardly read a book by a man because there have been so many by women. Suddenly it seemed urgent to find out what other women thought and felt, which I’d always heard through men’s interpretations or trans­ lations. Suddenly they were speaking out for themselves and for me it was like being born.

You live alone. . .

When did you first become associated with Duras?

I made her first film, La Musica, 12 years ago and I probably met her once or twice before then. On La Musica, Duras was only a co-director with Paul Seban. And for this reason the film was, I think, very unsatis­ factory. She was not able to do what she had in mind, to do what she proved later she was capable of.

different.

When I saw India Song for the first time, I told her that I felt she had much in common with people like Schmidt and Schroeder.

Perhaps it’s a use of the past with very modern means; a great nostalgia for the past that is still quite original in its own making.

Does the past hold a special fascination for you?

I am quite devoted to the

Yes. I find that relationships with men are almost bound to fail, and as I have become more and more conscious of my own strength I have found that I couldn’t accept things that I had accepted before. I find that it destroys me to give in to things I cannot accept and there is a very cruel moment, always, when you think, “ What shall I do; shall Î be honest with myself, or dishonest because there will be compensa­ tions in being with this man I like?”

I find' it is totally destructive to go in that direction, so I go the Cinema Papers, January — 215

DELPHINE SEYRIG

other. I don’t know where I’ll be in the future, but right now I feel that it’s better to live alone — even if it’s very cruel, very hard — than to compromise. I cannot compromise and I am very glad that I can’t. I feel much better that way.

Everybody has the right not to have relationships; this is what women tend to forget because this sexual liberation thing was a male idea to begin with; it was a male gift to us. So when we acquired it, we merely imitated male themes,

Yes, I’ll still continue to be an actress — 1 don’t know what else to do — and to speak out, certainly. I cannot repress it; I don’t think it could be repressed.

I think that’s the nice thing about ageing and maturing and getting to know more and more things, having known more and more people as you go along. So I don’t see why one shouldn’t pretend one’s learned them. I can pretend as an actress, but they can’t keep me in a midget poodle

Above: Muriel. Centre: the enigmatic “ A” in Resnais’ La derniere anee dans Marienbad. Top right: Seyrig in Dura’s first film, La Musica. Right: India Song.

Perhaps. I don’t like what French women have become.

They are very pretentious, behind the times, crystallized in their culture; in a culture that was great

Will you continue to work in Britain?

I feel very much at home here, at least it’s new to me, and I find the directors I have worked with very pleasant. I have actually been commuting from France and I don’t mind it at all.

Would you say that the women’s movement in France is strong?

216 — Cinema Papers, January

You are much more outgoing than most French women . . .

at one time, but which they have been unable to step out of or beyond.

male models, role models. I don’t want that.

I don’t know; I know much more about British women — even the suffragette movement in England during the past 100 years.

There is nothing written about women in France, whereas there has been a great deal written in When you say “they” , does that England.

Anyway, there’s not another include other women in the feminist in the French theatre or industry?

Film industry — I am the only one.

Other women are okay — it’s the producers, the directors. They Is being alone in the movement don’t like a woman taking space difficult?

— not as a star, because I am not a star — but as a woman. They want It is lonely in the sense that I women to stay little, they don’t wish there were other actresses in want them to be strong.

France who would understand — I am a nuisance to them, and although I think that all women they won’t even look for parts I are feminists and they just have can play any more because they different ways of working at it. can see that I am not the quiet, It’s very difficult to reconcile, sophisticated lady they see on the and I am in a very dangerous s c r e e n a n d w h i c h t h e y position. I am working less and automatically thought I was in life. less in France because they don’t like me, because I stick out, and If that’s the case, will you pursue not only for feminist issues. your career as an actress?

to get out and work somewhere e lse . I have n e v e r re a lly considered myself as a typically French person, having lived abroad all my life.

Presently you are working with video. . . box.

What led you to work on the British stage?

Frank Dunlop, who directs at the Young Vic, has been a friend of mine for some years and we have often thought of doing something together here, but we couldn’t find the right thing. Then this idea of Antony and Cleopatra came up which seemed suitable to both of us. Actually, very few people realize I speak English.

Do you like working in Britain?

I love it. I have been working a great deal in France and it’s great

It’s the most important thing in my life right now. I have done tapes, either alone, or with two or three other women who have wanted to express themselves about the same things.

We have done a tape about the French ex-minister of women’s affairs, Francoise Giraud. She did a television program on the last day of International Women’s Year — which we did not particularly advocate, hated it in fact — but she closed the show by claiming that while women could cook at home it was very difficult for them to do great cooking, and how that the famous cooks of the world were men because it was very hard work.

Concluded on P. 287

The Irishman is the latest film of producer A nthony Buckley and director Donald Crombie, and follows their highly successful Caddie.

Based on the novel by Elizabeth O’Conner, The Irishman is set in the logging country of Queensland and “ is the story of one man who would not accept the changing times and who decided to exit at the same moment as the times he had known and loved.”

During the location shooting, Tony Buckley issued weekly progress reports for the investors and from these has been culled the following story by Barry Tucker. (The report extracts have been italicized.)

T he early gold mi n i n g t owns of Queensland’s Gulf country — the setting for The Irishman — have virtually disappeared.

Director and screenwriter Donald Crombie, and production manager Ross Mathews, surveyed the Gulf towns during June/July 1976, returning for another look at Ravens­ wood and Charters Towers in November. They decided on the latter.

The location was ideal for the purposes of filming: one of Australia’s best preserved gold towns of the turn of the century, countryside faithful to the book and not seen before on film. It had reasonable facilities to house a crew and cast of about 60 people.

On return from the location survey, Donald Crombie revised the screenplay and the search for the team of 20 Clydesdales began. We didn’t have to search far. In Brisbane we found Don Ross, horsemaster, and 20 Clydesdales, eight of which were already working as a team. Don didn’t even blanch when we said we wanted to film at Charters Towers.

By the end of the second week the art department had set up an office above the Collins Pharmacy in Gill St., the main street in Charters Towers. The staff included Robyn Coombes, the only student from the Film and Television School studying production design.

Casting began in Sydney in late April and, based on screen tests, the lead role of Paddy Doolan went to Michael Craig; his wife Jenny to Robyn Nevin; Mrs. Bailey-Clark to Roberta Grant.

Simon Burke had already been selected from a preview of Fred Schepisi’s Devil’s Playground for the part of Michael, Paddy’s youngest son. The part of his eldest son, Will, was left uncast by Buckley and Crombie till further tests were made with Melbourne cameraman Lou Brown, who was finally chosen.

Twenty-six Queenslanders, most of them locals, were given speaking parts. There were two discoveries — Granny Doolan was played

by Tui Bow, step-mother of “ It” girl Clara Bow, and Andrew Maguire, breeder of Bernborough, played Grandpa Doolan.

Everything ran smoothly until May 9, when Crombie, Mathews and 1st assistant director Mark Egerton were booked to fly to location — but they were gr ounded by the Air Controllers’ strike. Buckley didn’t want to start behind schedule, so he chartered a plane which took eight and a half hours to get to Charters Towers. The strike continued for another week, finishing only nine hours before Michael Craig’s plane from London was due to leave.

The color stock used in The Irishman was another decision Buckley felt to be of major importance. And it was in this area that there had been a break with tradition.

film; in story totally different from other Aust­ ralian films and, therefore, should look visually different from any of the current batch of films.

Previous competition is quite keen. Picnic at Hanging Rock, Break of Day and Caddie are The look of the film is under the control of the all visually superb. So after extensive tests it was production designer, Owen Williams, who co­ agreed to film on Gevacolor 680 with prints by The production office opened in Sydney on ordinates the feel, mood and color of every scene Agfacolor.

April 4, 1977, and construction manager Bill with the art director Graham Walker, costume The Agfa-Gevaert company produces these Howe left by road on the 3000 km journey to designer Judith Dorsman, director of photography C harters Towers the same day. While Peter James, ACS, and director Donald Crombie. compatible film stocks in Germany and Belgium. production designer Owen Williams, location The scenes are discussed weeks before production Most films are shot on Eastmancolor; however, manager Beverley Davidson, and director of begins and the result is a well planned and the Agfa-Gevaert color has given our cameraman photography Peter James went to Brisbane to organized scheme between those departments to that extra dimension we were looking for. check out the horse team, costume designer give the film that special something. Our team had The color in one aspect is rich in greens, browns Judith Dorsman went to Charters Towers to done this on our previous film, Caddie, and it and beautiful fesh tones, but not as bright as get the feel of the place, and to find old worked very well.

However, The Irishman is an outdoors period Eastman. In some ways that wonderful Tom costumes and bits for extras.

Producer Anthony Buckley with authoress Barbara MacNamara (Elizabeth O’Conner) and husband, Phil.

218 — Cinema Papers, January

Director Donald Crombie with Simon Burke who has the role o f Michael Doolan.

THE IRISHMAN

Simon Burke, Michael Craig and Robyn Nevin with the team of Clydesdales.

Roberts look of the Australian country-side.

Our laboratory in Sydney, Colorfdm, was well equipped to handle the change and are in fact quite excited about the challenge of handling the new stock. In fact, it isn’t so new because AgfaGeva is used by most European film producers and Claude Lelouch’s latest film has received high praise for its use of Agja-Geva.

We are now keeping our fingers crossed for good weather. June should be (by the records) ideal. However, two weekends ago Charters Towers had six inches of rain in three days, the first time ever in May! The town’s set dressing looks marvellous, a superb job by the art department.

weeks shooting had been completed of the total seven week schedule.

Our first week was a long and tiresome one for cast and crew. Our location was Bluff Downs — a two-hour drive from Charters Towers. A considerable amount of night shooting took place at the Downs, which at Jirst caught us a little illprepared.

The days are hot and sunny, but the nights are freezing. A t one stage in the first week our rushes boxes carried more sweaters than film.

Zane Grey visited Bluff Downs in the early ’30s seeking permission to use the property for a film.

He was then making White Death on the Barrier Reef with the Cinesound team. The owners at the On June 10, Buckley reported that The time, the Bassingthwaites, rej'used. This time, Irishman was now 11 days old. Nearly two however, we were welcomed and given every

The Irishman crew on the blocked Gill St., Charters Towers, during the eight days of location filming there.

facility by station manager, Alastair McDougall.

Week two loomed and Sunday was quiet until about 5.30 p.m. While quietly riding a push bike at a goat race picnic staged by the towns people for the crew, Michael Craig lost his hat in a gust of wind. He tried to stop the bike quickly and fell off It was obvious he was badly hurt and after a tense two hours in Charters Towers hospital the verdict was a dislocated shoulder. An immediate examination by a Townsville specialist was felt necessary.

By late evening, Monday’s planned shoot had been rescheduled. At least 40 extras had been cancelled and most of them were not on the ’phone. The Council, which planned to begin covering the main street with dirt at 5 a.m. had been notified.

The art department of any film is perhaps the busiest, managing to keep one jump ahead of the schedule. To completely reschedule at less than 24 hours notice is taxing the department to the hilt.

However, art director Graham Walker and his team were ready for the new scenes next morning, and by 7.30 a.m. the crew was on the road and the film back on the rails.

On Monday, Michael and I flew to Townsville where an orthopaedic surgeon said the injury would be painful, but recommended against pinning it. Michael can work if his load is eased and pinning, if necessary, will be done at the end of shooting.

In the meantime, Michael will “bite the bullet”.

He resumes back on the set next day and performs as if nothing is wrong. The accident causes a major reschedule to vary the work-load and by Friday afternoon it’s finalized.

We are completely disorganizing the life of the towns people and they are loving every minute of it. They are happy and only want to know “ when is Gerard Kennedy arriving?”• (to play Michael’s friend Logan).

Gerard casually walks on set during shooting of major street scenes and is besieged by 500 towns people and truckloads of children.

Fortunately for alt concerned, his jirst scenes at Logan’s camp were shot the previous day, 25km from town, at 4am.

The Miles Franklin Award winning auth­ oress of The Irishman, Elizabeth O’Conner (Steak for Breakfast and A Second Helping), and her husband Phil, were invited to Charters Towers to watch the filming. The Irishman is reminiscent of Phil’s childhood.

Director of Photography, Peter James, and Simon Burke.

Cinema Papers, January — 219

THE IRISHMAN

Elizabeth was interested to meet face to face the actors playing her characters. Would they measure up? She was thrilled to see Michael Craig as the Paddy Doolan she had imagined, but more surprised to see young Lou Brown as Will.

To Elizabeth, he had walked off the page.

Monday dawned bright and sunny for our major street scenes. But by mid-morning it was overcast and by mid-afternoon there was rain.

Tuesday was slightly overcast, then on Wednesday the sky was clear for some quite spectacular street scenes.

Saturday night saw the results of that shoot, and despite the weather our dialogue scenes don V need to be re-shot — thanks to lighting cameraman Peter James.

The November location survey selected the Mingala race-course — a half-hour drive along the main road from Charters Towers. It wasn’t what was really wanted, but the production designer felt his department could “ do a job on it” . When the advance party arrived in April a new stand had been built at Mingala.

As for answering the questions of where the original race-course was located and how people dressed for country race meetings in the ’20s, an advertisement for photographs and information was placed in the Northern Miner. Three great discoveries resulted: Mrs. Bassingthwaite had an invaluable album of photographs from a meeting held by the Basalt Hack Club in the early ’20s; Graham Walker found the original course on Dr. Allingham’s Fletchervale property — 45 minutes from town — and on inspection discovered the straight, finishing post, grandstand frame, rail posts and rails, bough sheds and bar frames, and six metres of wire hanging from a gum tree which was used as an aerial to receive the race broadcast from Sydney in 1927; one of the townspeople had a box of crockery “ that might be of interest” . It contained cups, saucers and plates carrying the insignia of the Basalt Hack Club.

In one of his weekly letters to investors Buckley mentions that his previous film, Caddie, had helped to bring the Venus battery back to life. Proceeds from a charity performance of Caddie in Charters Towers were given to the local branch of the National Trust. This money and a government grant was used to restore the battery.

Composer Charles Marawood spent some time on location to get the “ feel” of the Clydesdales, walking beside them and watching them work. He had already put together some guide themes and these were used on the sets to provide a mood for the actors and crew.

On the second day of the river crossing scenes the sky blacked over. Mark Egerton and Donald Crombie conferred on whether they would move to another location or wait and see what happened to the weather. Returning on another day would have cost another $10,000. They decided to sit and wait.

At 3 p.m. the sun burst through. Mark Egerton yelled “ turn over!” Three cameras rolled, the horse team lunged forward and completed the crossing of the Burdekin. At 4 p.m. the sky was dark again, blit it was all in the can, and Egerton’s decision had paid off.

The bad weather continued after the river crossing. Donald Crombie began improvising locations, revising the script and transferring exterior scenes indoors. Scenes that were to be shot in a leather shop and a hotel on the coast were done in Charters Towers.

The weather was so uncertain that on the eve of the last scheduled shooting day in Charters Towers two call sheets were devised — a 4.30 a.m. call and an alternative 7.30 a.m. call. Buckley said the call sheet was the most complex for the entire shoot and he included a copy in that week’s newsletter.

The crew moved to location in a rain forest, near Cardwell, to shoot the logging camp scenes. It was decided to shoot some night scenes as day-for-night, to pick up lost time.

Michael Craig spent his Sunday rehearsing his fight scene, practising swings and falls so that he would not damage his injured shoulder.

Charters Towers has the only remaining orecrushing battery in Queensland, and when it turned over for the first time in 50 years its steady “ crump, crump, crump” brought the rest of the town to a standstill.

The crew support was absolutely marvellous.

The weather was awful. Rain and wind. It was Realizing our predicament, they offered to work decided to go for broke and shoot a scene in a on Sunday if the weather was fine, enabling the cemetery the arts department had constructed on film to be completed and the crew to return home the edge of a swamp. Within 30 minutes of the on Monday. shooting having been completed, the sun It was another of those 4 a.m. calls to shoot the disappeared and heavy cloud and light drizzle set dawn scenes we had not been able to get the in. previous week. A clear starry sky, followed by a Tuesday, and Townsville weather bureau issued golden sun, greeted us at 6.30 a.m. ★

The crossing o f the Burdekin River.

220 — Cinema Papers, January

a gloomy forecast: a week of heavy coastal cloud and rain conditions. The locals agreed that the weather was going to be bad. We needed one fine day and our impending return to Charters Towers made it seem we were losing the battle.

Wednesday, 6 a.m. No one could believe their eyes. A clear sky. By 9 a.m. the first main scene o f the day was in the can. The rain forest looked spectacular, with long shafts of sunshine reaching down through the trees and vines and hitting the clearing. The varieties of palms caused the wry comments from the crew that the set looked over­ dressed!

One lesson so far learnt from this exercise is not to take any notice of weather bureau or the locals.

A few days later, a T model Ford truck,vital to a scene in the rain forest hit a displaced board on a bridge and ran into a parked vehicle, badly damaging a mudguard and headlamp and, worst of all, breaking the Ford’s steering rod. The rest of the day was abandoned.

Crombie began revising the next day’s storyboard so shooting could continue, but the Ford would still be required by 11.30 a.m. The repaired vehicle arrived on time. Standby propsman Ken James had found a retired toolmaker in Cardwell who knew all about T model Fords. He had the parts and the equipment.

It took the toolmaker 90 minutes to put the parts together and install a new steering rod.

The mudguard and headlamp had been straightened out.

Saturday was a big move and the “luck of the Irish’’ struck once again. An electric’s vehicle broke down on the road to Charters Towers. The heavy arcs and equipment were needed for that afternoon’s filming.

Filming proceeded, but without arcs the light beat us again.

Catching the right effect: Julian McSwiney with the baffled mike.

Where did you get the idea for “ Love Letters” and how did it develop?

The basis of the film was four letters and a note that were found in a drawer of a flat I had rented in 1972. They were written by a man living in Newcastle in 1959; he was asking forgiveness of his wife in Sydney whom he had beaten up. The note was clearly written some time before the letters; in it he threatened to beat her up again if she continued to go out drinking.

About three years later, Dick Mason at Film Australia asked me if I could write a half-hour script about life in the city. It was going to be part of a series and they wanted it set in Fairfield.

I suggested the letters, or excerpts from them, as the basis of a script and I wrote out a storyline which they accepted.

Moya Wood and 1 then wrote the script — Moya was the script­ editor for the series, and was tremendously helpful.

The series was shelved, but you decided to make it yourself . . .

Yes. I showed it to Richard Brennan and he agreed to produce it. We then approached the Creative Development Branch of the Australian Film Commission.

You have now met the woman whom the letters belong to . . .

I met her under pretty awkward circumstances and I felt a mixture of guilt, curiosity and intimacy.

You are probably aware that a reporter from The Australian found her in Northern NSW. He phoned me the night he made contact and told me she was very upset about the film and was going to sue us. Curtis Levy (from the AFC) and I had to rush there to see her. The reporter, with a photographer, had arranged a meeting in a restaurant. He wanted a story, of course.

So, my initial meeting with her was under the scrutiny of the press, and all I could say was, “ Look, I would like to get away from the reporters and talk. I feel very embarrassed.” She seemed embarrassed too, and agreed we should talk alone.

Could she have sued you?

‘Love Letters’

What happened finally?

She came to Sydney and in a highly emotional state — like everyone else — saw the film. But she liked it and said Len was very much like her husband. We signed a contract paying her for rights to the letters and giving her a percentage of the film. Her mother came to Sydney for the opening night and also liked it. So, I felt quite relieved.

Why did you think the letters would make a good script?

It wasn’t a question of that really; it was more the character of the man behind the letters. That was the inspiration — the germ of the film.

Here was a man under pressure who was unable to cope with life.

He wrote foolish letters in a language that wasn’t his own, and he used Hollywood concepts of love and relationships. They were like letters I had written myself, like a lot of people have. But behind them were very powerful emotions; descriptions of a life that was difficult and tragic.

Did the publicity help the film?

Yes, the reporter wrote his story in The Australian and it caused a lot of interest. But it wasn’t planned that way; it had got very much out of hand and was a strain at the time.

How did you construct the character of the wife when you had no information about her?

I based her on people I had k n o w n in N e w c a s tle and elsewhere, and from the way he wrote about her. She seemed weak in his presence, but strong and independent by herself. After all, she had run away, though in real life she didn’t go to her father but to another relative. She finally allowed him to see her, so she still felt for him in some way.

The real woman wasn’t like Kris McQuade; she was much softer and more overtly emotional and vulnerable. She was also very bitter about her husband, who had died three years before.

Yes. We did not have the rights to the letters and they were used verbatim in the film. The Aust­ ralian was quick to point this out and seemed to regard us as exploiters.

D uring th e past year several low -budget, short features have gained recognition w ith critics and audiences.

Step hen W allace’s “ Love L etters From Teralba R oad’’, w in n er of a Gold Award in the fiction section of th e 1977 A u stralian F ilm A w ards, stand s out. Its look at a m a n ’s attem p ts to reunite w ith a w ife he h a s cruelly beaten, is rea listic, tragic, and very m oving.

W allace has directed two other shorts — “ B reak U p ’’ and “ B rittle W eather Jou rn ey’’. For a tim e he worked at F ilm A u stra lia under R ichard M a so n , and is p resently one of the four w riting stud en ts at the A u stra lia n F ilm School. “ Love L etters From Teralba R oad’’ is h is first short feature. * In the follow ing in terview , W allace ta lk s about “ Love L etters” w ith F ilm School stud en t, D a n n y T orsh.

“ Love L etters” has been regarded as a very realistic film.

Does this realistic style relate solely to the letters or also to your own experiences and cinematic background?

I did try to make the film in a very realistic way. It wasn’t a deeply personal film because it was written for Film Australia, for a director unknown to me.

T he film was re la te d to experiences and people that existed, and my background in documentary, however slight, was also influential. But mostly it was an attempt to make believable the characters that had grown out of the letters.

A lot of contemporary Australian Cinema Papers, January — 221

STEPHEN WALLACE

films depict sexual relationships as sexist because that’s how most of them are. In “Teralba Road” , however, it doesn’t come across like that. . .

had very little chance of coping well in this society.

The film was shot simply, with no la v ish sets or trick y camerawork. How much was I think that is probably acci­ that planned? dental as I didn’t consciously try not to be sexist. I was mainly I had always wanted to shoot the interested in the characters, the film without fancy cutting from situation, and the pressures they scene to scene, or technical feats were under. I think their relation­ for their own sake. In this sense, ship was sexist, but even that is a the style was very much part of result of history, social pressures, the content. The actors were to act etc. No one is free from prejudice. as simply as possible; the camera was m erely a s y m p a th e tic You are not politically active, yet onlooker. as a filmmaker in “ Teralba The aim was to get the emotion Road” you make social comment of the situation into the texture of the images, not to leave it as a mental suggestion.

A g a in , I w a s n ’t o v e rly When I went to Britain about concerned with social comment in eight years ago I thought I knew the film, though it certainly was a all about filmmaking; I was very conscious effort at making some arrogant. I then saw some of the comment. Len is typical of a filmmakers at the British Film certain type of Australian. People Institute working and I realized have called him “ western suburbs that I had clogged myself up with working class” but he is not rubbish.

There was a filmmaker there, meant to be; he is from a pocket in Newcastle.

Richard Saunders, who worked He is cut off from a background alone on his drama films, and he which would give him more seemed to me to get down to the understanding of his situation. His core of things in a pure way I had difficulties are grounded in social never seen before. His style came conditions and not purely in his out of his nature and out of his subject matter, and it all fused in a nature, or in his heredity.

I went to school with many subtle and intense way.

It’s a big fight to avoid stereo­ people like Len and saw them grow up; it seemed obvious they typed ways of doing things when you have been trained in an institution like Film Australia or the ABC. The difficulty is to be aware of the conditioning which you have accepted. A lot of filmmakers in Australia have this problem.

Would you use the workshop technique again?

though we couldn’t hire a lot of extras or use expensive equip­ ment or a large crew.

The most difficult thing for me Yes. It is, I suppose, only one was that we only had two weeks in technique, but it’s particularly which it. It always felt u s e f u l in d e a li n g w ith rushed;toin shoot fact, a couple of scenes inexperienced actors. It is also a had to be dropped there way of getting to know the was no time to because shoot them experienced actors but they tend properly, and they looked awful to resist them unless convinced they are necessary, or are paid for on screen. them, which is a pity.

The AFC eventually helped promote the launching of the How did you go about casting? film. Did you approach them?

Richard Brennan and I made a pre-selection of possible actors and actresses and asked them to come to a video session and do some tests. They were generally given a script to read some days before.

At the video session, they did one or two scenes from the film, and some improvizations, and were matched with various other actors. Kris McQuade came back two or three times, and to find the mother, actresses were coming back three or more times to do tests.

One of the things that seems to characterize you as a filmmaker is that you try to work with friends, both as actors and crew

I have always felt insecure with technicians who I didn’t know well. But I think it is possible to get to know new people well enough before a production starts if you can’t have people you do know. It is just another alienating device to have a group of strangers making a film with you, and it Was this the first film you made always shows in the finished film. after leaving Film Australia?

Are you happy with the film?

No, I made Brittle Weather Journey and Break Up, both Not totally. There is a major about 20 minutes long. Break Up construction fault in the second was made as part of a film actors’ half and a lot of the dialogue workshop, run with a group of seems a little contrived. Some actors at the Sydney Filmmakers scenes aren’t acted well either, Co-op. We had been trying to especially at the beginning. explore problems of ‘simple’ There have been criticisms of acting in films; of being able to the lighting and the sound quality, relax and concentrate for short and to some extent I agree these periods, as is required in films. areas are awkward. But the lighting was an attem p t at You workshopped “ Teralba complete naturalism — using as little light as possible to express Road.” Was that successful? mood — and it hasn’t been The workshop part, as distinct received with much u n d e r­ from the rehearsals, wasn’t really standing. successful as none of us knew Only one or two scenes work each other well and the exercises well for me, and with the others seemed awkward. there is always some nagging Brian, Kris, Gia and Joy all fault, often not noticed by an cam e c o n s is te n tly an d audience. One never seems to be enthusiastically, but we didn’t completely satisfied with one’s work intensively enough for it to own films. have a really deep effect. It should Was the relatively small budget have been longer.

A workshop is a cumulative of $25,000 sufficient? thing, one has to be prepared to do a p p a re n tly irr e le v a n t and I always thought it was more ridiculous things, to make a than enough to make the film. corpplete fool of oneself. It takes Richard handled the money well and we could pay all our bills time to get people to do that.

All stills: Bryan Brown as Len and Kris McQuade as Barbara. Love Letters From Teralba Road.

There happened to be about six 50 to 60 minute dramas made around the same time: Love Letters,Backroads, Singer and th e D a n c e r , Out of I t , Queensland and Listen to the Lion. Curtis Levy had the idea that the AFC should spend money promoting these films, or they might remain unseen like so many before them. The AFC put up some money to launch them at the Union Theatre for one week as a series of double bills.

Lachie Shaw asked me, as soon as Teralba Road was finished, if I would be interested in a double bill and I said I would; it went from there. We had to pay back the promotion money if we made it at the Union, but we were free to keep the money the films then made at the Co-op and other cinemas.

Have they helped since with promotion?

Yes, Curtis arranged for the film to go on at the Dendy in a double bill with The Singer and The Dancer. They have also offered to finance someone to promote the films independently, but Richard didn’t like the idea of having more money to pay back to the AFC. The Co-op is now distributing the film, both theatrically and non­ theatrically, except in Melbourne, where it’s going on at the Longford.

Do you have any plans for future productions?

Yes, but nothing concrete that I can talk about. I have been busy this year writing scripts at the Film and Television School, so all my plans were put to one side. But this year I would hope to make a film of some sort, either an original idea or from a script by someone else. ★ FILMOGRAPHY Shorts 1973 Brittle Weather Journey 1975 Break-Up

Short Feature 1977 Love Letters From Teralba Road

Documentaries 1967 Two Australian Diary Items 1969 Westwood Retarded Girls’ Home 1972 Eric Hiaiveta in Canberra

Cinema Papers, January — 223

TEHRAN 1977

Scott Murray

The scheduling of a film festival is important to its value in the world market.

If it is held before the Cannes Festival, it finds little new product to choose from, as most filmmakers tend to premiere their films at this festival, whenever possible.

However, a festival’s late position, while limiting its possible number of new films, does give it the chance to show the best of the year’s films. And at Tehran this year, the selection was of a very high standard.

Under new director Houshang Shafti, the festival has become more film orientated, and this policy is evident in the improved organization. The traffic in Tehran is no less hectic, but the festival’s attempts to combat it proved successful.

Of the films shown, my favorites were Bresson’s Le diable probablement (The Devil, Probably), Pollack s Bobby D eerfield, S hindo’s The Life of Chikuzan, Z anussi’s Camouflage, Saless’ Diary of a Lover and Weir’s The Last Wave (winner of the Grand Prix). “ Bresson is a loner in this frightful profession. He expresses himself in film like a poet with his pen.”

— Jean Cocteau R o b e rt B re s s o n ’ s Le d ia b le probablement opens with an image from Quatre nuits d’un reveur (Four Nights of a Dreamer) — a barge floats down the river Seine at night, its lights trans­ forming it into some kind of incandescent insect. But where Quatre nuits found in its grave portrayal of frustrated platonic love a suggestion of hope, Le diable probablement finds only despair.

Charles is a 22 year-old Parisian disillusioned by the failure of man to cleanse himself of his neurotic insis­ tence on doom. Religion has lost its believability; relationships have become impossible; and politics still continues to promise a revolution that will never come.

Bresson’s vision is of a people who are “cruel by laziness, by indifference, egotism, because they think only about themselves and not at all about what is happening around them, so that they let everything grow ugly, stupid.” * And because Charles can see no possibility of man’s downward path being averted, he is trapped in a spiritual cul-de-sac. The much quoted line of Charles accurately defines it: “ Any useful act in a corrupt world only serves to re'-inforce that corruption.”

The choice for Charles then is complicity or death: he chooses the latter but cannot do it himself and tosses the revolver he has stolen into the Seine.

Two of his women, in attempting to help him, arrange a meeting with a psychiatrist, but his pat explanations are no answer.

Still committed to his decision, Charles decides he must find someone to pull the trigger for him. With the promise of money, he lures Valentin, a drug-addict into doing it.

They walk slowly to the Pere Lachaise cemetery, stopping only at an open window, where in one inexplicable moment they pause to catch a few seconds of a Mozart sonata. A sense of absence, of a beautiful presence now lost, weighs heavily.

At the graveside of Thorez (a French politician), Charles stands puzzled by his calmness: “ You know, I was sure I would have some sublime thought at a moment * Film Comment, September-October 1977. pp. 26-30.

224 — Cinema Papers, January

The graveyard ‘suicide’: Charles and Valentin. Le diable probablement

like this. But what I’m actually thinking about. . . ” The gun fires. It is tossed to the ground and much as in Un condame a mort s’est echappe (A Man Escaped), which ends abruptly with figures running into darkness, the assassin disappears into the night.

The hallmark of Bresson’s style is his austerity, his purist’s sense of detail — the flashing red light on the lift no one takes, the rows of cathedral chairs pushed slightly out of line, the eerie wilderness of the Hotel Meridian in Paris.

But what is astounding about Le diable probablement is that Bresson has been able to refine ever more the . style he seemingly perfected in Quatre nuits and tentatively lost in Lancelot du lac.

Unquestionably Le diable is his most moving film; it has a sadness less definable than that gripping Journal d’un cure de campagne (Diary of a Country Priest), but one more painful. For while a void overtakes the audience during that final image of a cross in Journal, here one is left adrift from the start. All the traditional foundations of religion, science and intellect are destroyed at the outset and man’s perverted progress only presses one further downward.

How Bresson achieves such an intensity is difficult to evaluate. His films invoke a gentle presence quite at odds with the desperateness of his story and into which one is absorbed. It is as if one is sitting in a peaceful church exper­ iencing a sense of calm. As well, Bresson communicates with us invisibly, without talking or visualizing, like the Latin mass must have done for many, even for those unversed in Latin.

In an intriguing discussion with Paul Schrader* Bresson explains his method * Ibid.

with a poetic allusion: “ I don’t think so much of what I do when I work, but I try to feel something, to see without explaining, to catch it as near as I can — that’s all.

It’s why I don’t move so much. It’s like approaching a wild animal — if you are too brusque it will run away.

“When you work, you mustn’t think anymore. Thinking is a terrible enemy.

You should try to work not with your intelligence, but with your senses and your heart. With your intuition.”

It is, therefore, not a question of calcu­ lation (as many see it) but of capturing the essence of a moment with gentle­ ness, with a submission of self in the pursuit of an emotional purity.

Thus Bresson gives his audience an experience no director, except Dreyer in Ordet, has ever given. But then, Bresson is probably the primary creative force of our age.

Sydney Pollack’s Bobby Deerfield is a love story that in eschewing sentiment for emotion offers significant insights into the reasons behind one man’s fear of life.

Deerfield (Al Pacino) is a champion formula 1 driver on the European circuit.

He lives in Paris with his charming girl­ friend (Anny Duperey), and though followed by adoring fans, allows no one to come near him emotionally. Even his brother Leonard (Walter McGinn) cannot approach or re-ignite buried memories of the past. And when in the touching scene Leonard reminds his brother of a Mae West imitation he did as a child, Deerfield asks, “What did we do Leonard; did we live in different houses?”

Deerfield, like many introverts, has built a protective shield to hide a sensi­ tivity that wishes to be released. The way in which this release occurs is the story

of Bobby Deerfield. And in making this positive statement, the film transcends the romantic genre it is based on and creates a work commanding in its own right.

A fellow driver is badly injured at a race meeting and Deerfield visits him at a mountain sanatorium in the hope of finding some explanation for the crash.

Everyone is convinced it was the result of bad luck, but Deerfield’s wilfully ordered life does not allow such “ accidents” to occur.

He se a rch e s fo r a ra tio n a lis t explanation: a mechanical failure, the distraction of a lady’s mirror reflecting sunlight, a rabbit crossing the track. In looking for these “ rabbits”, Deerfield clearly avoids facing up to his own insecurities.

Then into Deerfield’s life comes Lillian (Marthe Keller); it is her values, her spontaneous way of wresting from every moment some meaning, that slowly helps Deerfield recognize his limitations.

T hey m eet in the s a n ito riu m restaurant in a scene destined to be remembered with any from Casablanca.

In a matter of seconds, Pollack hum orously e stab lish es the vast differences in their attitudes. Mostly Lillian talks with her back turned to Deer­ field; what follows is how they come face to face.

They leave the next morning, and travel down the mountain to Bellagio where they plan to stop. Then over dinner, Lillian confronts Deerfield who has become withdrawn at a mention of his family: “ You watch people eat, but you don’t eat. You are a careful man Deerfield.” He does not react.

Next morning, Lillian sees a hot-air balloon floating over the lake. She implores Deerfield to follow, but he refuses: “ How can you follow it if you don’t know where it is going?” They drive on, but the remark has instantly cooled any chance of their already awkward relationship developing.

Deerfield drives Lillian to her uncle’s home where she leaves him, handing him a parting note. Being in Italian, Deerfield enlists the less than expert help of a garage proprietress who translates the message: “ Life is made sweeter by taking a chance.”

Deerfield is now caught between his growing desire for Lillian and his firm refusal to change himself into the person she could love. If his fears are mostly over the uncertainty of where one’s actions can lead, here before him is a very tangible and meaningful way to overcome them. But then Deerfield is a very careful man. And later when he is asked by Lillian to join her and a friend in the balloon he refuses, saying that he has no desire to be at the mercy of the wind.

It is a beautifully handled scene and the overhead shot of Deerfield as he walks away with a stooped gait, is extremely sad. One understands only too well why Lillian refused to spend a weekend with him because she didn’t think he could keep her interested for that long. And as a shot it reminds one of Raintree County where s im ila rly Montgomery Clift used his stooped back to convey an inexpressible sorrow.

The scene where Deerfield finally abandons his fearfulness and recog­ nizes the lesson Lillian has effectively been teaching him, comes when she asks him back to her flat after she has returned from a climbing weekend.

Lonely, Deerfield is hoping for sympathy, but Lillian’s obvious depression — “ I so wanted to climb it, but they turned back” — unsettles him: “ I don’t want to be your boring friend Lillian, but who can I go and see about that.” Lillian looks up: “ Surprise me,” she says.

Unexpectedly Deerfield lets his guard drop; he attempts an imitation of Mae West. It is terrible: cramped and nervous.

He stands and tries again; he pushes himself to become more expressive; he lets go. “ It’s beginning," she whispers.

This transform ation is superbly handled. A seemingly impossible scene, Pollack faces it head on by playing it as a

TEHRAN

delicate shift of mood. And by the end of his “act” , the audience fully understands its significance to both. A radiant Lillian looks up: “Wouldn’t it be ironic if I began to find you irresistible.”

Deerfield sits near her and from his pocket removes an envelope of family snapshots. They pause over a photo of a boy with his bicycle: “That’s my brother Leonard. He’s kind of a god-damned fool, ’cept he tries.”

The echo back to the earlier meeting and the way we now re-evalute Leonard, is very effective — it is if the lesson is now complete. And so when Lillian in the penultimate scene asks: “ Bobby, what will you do tomorrow?” , everyone is able to answer for him.

There are many more things one can say about Bobby Deerfield: its structure, for instance, effectively utilizes a tunnel as a metaphor for release. It first appears when Deerfield is driving to the sanatorium; he takes off his glasses and for the first time examines the photos. On the journey back with Lillian, she trie s to coax D eerfield into screaming with her — he doesn’t, but it is a beginning.

And finally, the last, silent, sequence where Deerfield’s car approaches the tunnel’s end and the dark screen breaks into brilliant sunshine which then dissolves into white.

Equally effective is Pollack’s paral­ leling of Deerfield’s transformation with his increasing femininity. The first references are humorous: “ Are there homos in Newark?” Then serious: “ I think all the best men have feminine qualities.” It is handled by implication, but effectively so.

This careful underplaying has become typical of Pollack’s direction. Notice the way he cuts from a coffin being loaded into an ambulance to Lillian at her hospital window. She returns to her book (by Anny Duperey) and when a nurse admonishes her for drinking wine, she replies: “ I shall come to death on my own terms.”

That is all that is said of Lillian’s illness until the wonderfully handled and very funny scene where Deerfield strokes her hair, only to find it come away in his hand. There must have been a temp­ tation to sentimentalize the film with more references to Lillian’s approaching death, but it is studiously avoided.

Finally, there are Keller and Pacino. It is hard to recall any two actors who have recently generated such an electric presence on screen. Their quarrels, hesitancies and shared joys are, for the audience, moments of intense pleasure.

Bobby Deerfield is a wonderful film to watch and one that rewards all those who allow themselves to be drawn in by its captivating charm.

indicated a personal cu l-de -sac, Camouflage is a wonderful refutal. A tauting, teasing and very warm film from a director at his peak.

The Last Wave is reviewed on page 259 in this issue, so rather than double up I will only say it proves again Peter W eir’s position as A ustralia’s top director. The tension is unrelenting, and though it perhaps becomes a little monotone, it is totally involving.

The ending has caused much debate, but I find it perfectly in tune with the lowkey nature of the film. Wishing a Hollywood-type cataclysm at the end of a film which has so well established its own frame of reference (and exploited brilliantly), is just inconsistent.

Reifezeit (Time of Maturity) was a major highlight of the 1977 Melbourne and Sydney festivals. Sohrab Sahid Saless’ Tagebuch eines liebended (Diary of a Lover) is even better.

An unremittingly bleak and despairing film, Diary of a Lover tells of a lonely 30 year-old man awaiting the arrival of his girlfriend to dinner. She does not arrive for days and a depression overhauls him.

Stunted by a sensitivity unable to absorb the harshness of a modern world, he retreats inward.

One day his mother calls, but as one imagines happens every visit, she quietly breaks into tears. Before her is a son she has great sadness for, but cannot reach.

Saless, like Bresson, builds his films through detail: the precision of the orange-painted windows set in a wall of grey concrete; the plastic neon-lit horror of the supermarket where he works; the attempted colorulness in the decor of his flat which he begins to paint out with white, m irroring the encroaching limitedness of his outlook.

Diary of a Lover is perhaps too bleak in its vision to function dramatically over its entire length, and nearing the end the tension is momentarily lost by, I believe, unnecessary repetition. The climax, however, is devastating, and the anguish one feels for this man born without possibility is intense. Like a glimpse into a void, Diary of a Lover has to be endured, but it is a masterpiece.

Krzysztof Zanussi’s Camouflage is, in a sense, an argument between prag­ matism and idealism.

During a university holiday camp, a tension builds between Janoslaw, a liberal-minded lecturer in linguistics, and Jakub, an old vice-rector. Jakub takes the line of least resistance, judging decisions only on how they will effect his position.

Janoslaw is the reverse, often charging into difficult situations with a complete disregard for himself — only the ideal is important, or so he thinks.

Much of the film is verbal sparring between the two, and as is usual in a Zanussi film, it is rivetting. And despite a tendency to frame things in the language of a philosophy tutorial, Camouflage is suprisingly accessible. Perhaps it is the energy with which these verbal games are played that makes them interesting; more likely, it is the ease by which one can recognize oneself in Janoslaw and Jakub.

Zanussi plays on this identification and in his usual, slightly impish way, he leads us down many cul-de-sacs before finally upending most of our pre­ conceptions. At the start, one sides quickly with the idealistic Janoslaw, but his liberalism is soon seen to be tinctured by self-satisfaction and aloofness, an intellectual refusal to dirty ones hands — hence the fight on the muddy river bank in the climax.

Inversely, Jakub’s conservative refusal to involve himself unnecessarily, while still disturbing, at least has a basic ‘human-ness’ that Janoslaw's smug stance avoids.

Zanussi has made many brilliant films — Structure of Crystals, Family Life, Behind the Wall — and while The Balance for many (including myself)

Kaneto S h in d o ’ s The Life of Chikuzan Is a dramatic recreation of the life of Chikuzan Takahashi, master player of Tsugaru shamisen. This type of regional folk music is played on a distinctive kind of shamisen, a traditional Japanese stringed instrument.

The film opens with Chikuzan playing at a recent concert, then goes back to him as a boy. Chikuzan’s progress as a player is then treated rather episodically and, with a constant reference to maps, charts his wanderings across Japan.

The only way for shamisen players to mature as artists on completion of their apprenticeships, is to earn their living solely from the playing for food. Thus, through the changing seasons, Chikuzan travels the islands of Japan, playing wherever he has an audience. Partially blind since birth, his journeying becomes an act of devout pilgrimage.

Shindo’s film is extremely moving, and in Chikuzan one senses a nobility of spirit that must have come from a hardship deliberately endured. And in returning to see the real Chikuzan play at the end, one acknowledges a greater depth of emotion and strength in his music that one might have felt at the beginning.

Despite a large reputation for his earlier Le meilleure facon de marcher, Claude Miller’s Dites lui que le I’aime (T e ll Her I Love Her) is a d isa p p o in tm e n t. T aking a m an’s obsessional desire for a girl who ignores him as its theme, it rather tiresomely details the man’s encroaching madness.

G e ra rd D ep ard ie u is q u ite extraordinary as David — as is Miou Miou as Juliette, the one girl who loves him — but he cannot overcome the predictability of Miller’s screenplay. On occassions the film sparks to life, but mostly one watches with a kind of academic fascination.

Pierre Lhomme, however, proves once again why he is the best of today’s cameramen. The sureness of his touch, and his clever balancing of exteriors with interiors is wonderful to watch. And the stunning last scene where time warps in front of us, is as perfect a piece of effects work as one could wish to see.

“ Why won't you come fly with us? What do you have to lose? There are no rabbits in the sky.”

Pacino and Keller in Bobby Deerfield.

Silvio Narizzano’s Why Shoot The Teacher is a gentle comedy of a young schoolteacher’s appointment to a

ghostly Saskatchewan town in the 1930s. As the teacher Max Brown, Bud Cort (Bernice Bobs Her Hair and Harold and Maude) is excellent, ranging from a naive, cookish young man to one whose ideals are well in tune with the practica­ bilities of teaching kids more interested in catching goffers.

Samantha Egger plays Alice Field, a woman on the brink of leaving her dullwitted and insensitive husband. There is a nice scene where, in flight, she shelters at the schoolhouse with Max. Forgetting momentarily her distress, they throw themselves into a humorous rendition of a play. Inevitably the awkwardness of their situation dawns, and the hopeful abandonment of the moment is borne down by the rules of the society outside.

It introduces a feeling of despair into an otherwise delightful film.

Ken Ichikawa’s The Inugamis was perhaps the festival’s most entertaining film. Very light-hearted, it spoofs its way through a convoluted tale of relatives contriving to deprive each other of an inheritance. The acting is larger than life, with the detectives forever scratching their heads in blank amazement as another corpse lands before them.

Only in the last half hour of this 2 xh hour film does the pace falter. Here, despite everyone’s ready grasp of the plot, the two detectives laboriously recount every devious twist. Still, it is a minor flaw in a very amusing film.

Salvatore Samperi’s Nene is a virtual remake of his earlier Maiizia , only this time the cast is younger. Beguiling photography by Pasqualino de Santis covers most of the lapses in pace: but this tale of adolescent sexuality has an annoying simplicity about it.

Only in the closing moments when Samperi links the disillusionment of a communist supporter on the day of the party’s crushing defeat in 1945 with Nene’s betrayal by her would-be lover, does the film approach significance.

Certainly the gentle eroticism is handled well, and as Nene, Leonara Fani is lovely, but it is a far reach from Samperi’s first and greatest film, Fists in the Pocket.

Best of the shorter films was Gianni Amelio’s Bertolucci Shoots 1900. This documentary on the filming of 1900 is rew arding in Its own right, and unquestionably the best of its type.

It opens with an evocation of the sequence in 1900 where the peasants are dancing in the forest. The mood of Bertolucci’s film is beautifully captured, and Amelio’s camera movements from actors to crew are quite fascinating.

It is the visuals of Amelio’s film that distinguish it. For example, when shooting an exterior scene a large diffusion screen is pulled in front of the camera. Then as Bertolucci and his crew move about during a take, they are silhouetted on the screen. It is very effective.

Another excellent sequence is the tracking shot that begins on Dominique Sanda and Robert de Niro in a small cafe and pulls back to reveal the cafe as a set in a studio, with fake snow falling from the rafters.

There are also several interviews: Bertolucci in Italian; Sterling Hayden in English; Sanda in French; etc. This in fact highlights what must have been a terrible strain on Bertolucci, with all the actors speaking in different languages.

In one scene we have Gerard Depardieu fig htin g de Niro with Depardieu screaming in French and de Niro in English; in another, Sanda agonizing over her English as she speaks to -de Niro. It would certainly frighten most directors off a co­ production.

Other films shown but missed were Padre Padrone, L’homme qui amait les femmes, Cavani’s Al di la del bene e del male (Beyond Good and Evil), Meszaros’ The Two of Them and Annie Hall. All in all, an excellent festival. ★ Cinema Papers, January — 225

T h is year the Grand P rix at the C annes F ilm F estival How do you d e f i n e t h e Vittorio and Paolo Taviani during the filming of Padre Padrone, w as won by a low-budget film shot on 16m m and made for relationship between your films telev isio n . That film , “ Padre Padrone” (“ M y Father, and Italian neo-realism?

M y M a ster” ), is the seventh feature made by Paolo and We were born with neo-realism. Tolstoy, Thomas Mann, Goethe.

V ittorio T aviani — the first to w in international acclaim . Our entry into cinema came when Leonardo da Vinci says: “ I am a T he T aviani brothers are engaged m en of the Left; they we saw Roberto R ossellini’s midget. Everyone who came are also p assion ately engaged cin eastes. T hey m ake no Paisa. As children we lived the before me was a giant. But by of the war. We saw climbing on the shoulders of these sim p le conflation of politics and film , and the m aterial experience that an immobile situation, such g ia n ts , I can see fu rth e r. th ey choose to film , though influenced by their political as existed under fascism, could be Otherwise I remain a midget, p osition , becom es as cinem a som ething new , for “ film is broken up — in this instance by unable to see past their boots.” the war and resistance. a very particular way of dealing w ith rea lity .”

When we saw Paisa we saw this You made your first film in 1961, W hat is probably m ost im p ressive about their work is traumatic of ours but you had made a number of the way it m obilizes all the resources of cinem a, not proposed onexperience the screen as a film: short films during the 1950s — m erely those of narrative, or character, in the service of a an experience we thought was the film on Moravia, one about genuin ely cinem atic d iscu ssion of ideology and ideological private, communal and commun­ stoneworkers, another on the argum ent. T hey forego the shorthand of agitprop and icable. We were about 15 years- southern town of Volterra, and, propaganda for a lucid and em otion ally bracing handling old, at the time, and we decided of course, your film 'with Joris that cinema would be our life. Ivens. . . . of com plex issu e s.

Later on, neo-realism became A ll their film s tend to concern th em selves w ith the very bourgeois and Rossellini and We made those to survive. Our struggle of individuals to enter into a constructive Luchino Visconti took other d o c u m e n ta rie s are to ta lly roads. misconceived. We would have 10 relationship w ith their society and history.

In fact, when we made our first m in u te s and try to cram “ U n uomo da bruciare” ( “ A M an B urnin g” — 1961) in 1961, we had already e v e r y th in g in. W hen we show s the attem pts of a m an who returns to h is native film begun to embark on a different collaborated with Ivens on S icilia n village to rouse the peasants against the M afia. path. It was then that we decided L’ltalia non e un paese povero “ I fu o r ile g g e d el m at rim o n io ” ( “ T h e M a r r ia g e to detach ourselves from neo­ (Italy is Not a Poor Country), he O u tlaw s” — 1964) dealt w ith Ita ly ’s restrictive law s on realism in the narrow sense and took one look at our footage and that subject and w as awarded a h igh ly controversial concentrate on the wider strand of said, “ It is beautiful, but it is not neo-realism that runs from documentary.” reception. “ I so u v ersiv i” (“ The S u b versives” — 1967) Shakespeare through to Brecht. It fram ed a group of ind ividu als, each at a crisis of was then that we began to read You would say, then, that your conscience, against the backdrop of the funeral of com m unist leader T ogliatti.

W ith “ Sotto il segno dello scorpione” (“ Under the Sign of Scorpio” — 1969), the T aviani brothers’ political a rg u m en ts becom e m ore sp e c ific . “ S co rp io ” bold ly d iscu sses the struggle betw een the m iddle Left and the revolutionary Left in the am bience of the peplum fan tasy. “ San M ich ele aveva un gallo” (“ S ain t M ich ael Had A R ooster” — 1971), freely adapted from the short story ‘T he D iv in e and the H u m a n ’, by T olstoy, d iscu sses a n a r c h ism and th e birth of s c ie n tific s o c ia lism . “ A llo n sa n fa n ” , set in 19th century Italy, explores the ten sio n s experienced by a bourgeois in tellectu a l w ith progressive and even revolutionary lean in g s. “ Padre Padrone” , in one sen se, returns to the them e of their first feature as it too is about a peasant who gains an ^education and returns to h is village (in Sardinia, th is tim e), but it goes m uch further.

In th is interview , conducted in Italian and through an interpreter, V ittorio took the lead and Paolo added The young Gavino (Fabrizio Forte) is left on the mountain where he is to become a shepherd. succinct com m ents and exam p les.

226 — Cinema Papers, January

Opposite: Gavino (Saverio Marconi) and one of his flock.

* 'I

il

■■■■■P

38 ♦ The father (Omero Antonutti) with the young Gavino after he has beaten him.

early experience working in the theatre was more relevant to your development in filmmaking . . .

Yes. We began working in theatre when we were 18. We started the Theatre of the Masses in Livorno, writing and directing a play about the 10-year period up to the resistance. As a tribute to neo-realism the actors were all workers from the port. We had been writing scripts that inevitably landed in the bottom drawer: theatre was a way to write some­ thing more seriously.

We b ro u g h t G ian M aria Volonte, then an unknown stage actor, into film. He played the lead in our first feature, A Man For Burning, and in his performance we pushed him deliberately towards the theatrical.

We had a deep hatred for the conventional naturalistic cinema of the period. As far as we are concerned, the audience must always understand that they are watching a film. They may then become emotionally involved and s im u lta n e o u s ly m ake th a t experience their own by reflecting on it.

We work towards the delicate balance of maximum emotional involvem ent and intellectual detachm ent: the opposite to Brecht. There is a danger in constructing a film that is totally rational, that is not a spectacle.

On a practical level, how do you work together?

Our characters are very different — you could say we are two complementary neurotics. There is no division of roles, but constant exchange. No one finds this unusual when one discusses scriptwriting partnerships. We simply extend it to the shooting process, alternating each other shot by a shot behind the camera.

In New Y ork, M arcello M astroianni explained how initially he hadn’t known which of 228 — Cinema Papers, January

Family structures and the use of power. Padre Padrone.

us to turn to for advice on his performance when we worked together on Allonsanfan. By the end of the film he had practically forgotten that there are two of us.

Of course, it is difficult for the director of photography because we are always ready for the next shot.

How about the actual process of filmmaking, from the initial conception through to final realization . . .

When we have the first ideas for a film we are already thinking of the image. When we write the script we write because we already know the image and the music that we will use. We do not see a division between writing and direction though while we are shooting we might change things.

We believe that before a foot of film is shot the film is already complete. But then reality always screws us up. Like Giulio in Saint Michael Had A Rooster, who understands everything while he is imprisoned in his cell, but when he e m e r g e s he fin d s h is understanding at odds with reality.

During the making of a film we struggle with the actors, with the location, with the people that are round about, and with ourselves, because we are working in a new situation. This is what makes cinema so beautiful: the fact that it is always in movement. When a film is finished we are not interested in seeing it all over again: it is really over.

Do you find that the final result accords with your initial vision of the film?

Strangely enough, yes. If the film has gone well everthing returns — perhaps in a different way — to the original concept. We decide to make a film because it seems like the only possible thing to do. This sensation is enormous, as if the world is waiting for us to

Reflections of age: the young shepherd (above) and as a young man.

make our film. When it is finished everything goes back to normal and the film becomes a film like many others.

You discovered the subject of “ Padre Padrone” through a newspaper report. . . .

We were surprised to read that a shepherd, Gavino Ledda, from the mountains of Sardinia, a

virtual mute, who had been left alone until he was 20, became a professor of language. We asked ourselves why this man, who lived in silence, decided to study the science of communication, of sound. He could have become a lawyer, an engineer — anything he wanted to. Instead he chose a discipline that was in direct opposition to his life.

Concluded on P. 281

Î NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF THEATRE OWNERS

$

iminmiconuEnTioni ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ A ndrew P h illip s The annual National Association of Theatre Owners (NATO) convention was held in Miami, Florida during October 24-28. As sev e ra l A u stra lia n o rg a n iz atio n s and individuals were at the conference, it was one of great relevance to an Australian industry battling to break into the U. S. market.

Andrew Phillips, who was there as a freelancer with the Four Corners team, sent this report.

For the first time Australia has mounted a concerted campaign to break into the difficult American market. Independent attempts have been made in the past by producers and the Australian Film Commission, but this is the largest and most important exercise attempted so far. Led by marketing director Alan Wardrope, and assisted by James Henry of the North American office of the AFC, the A u s tr a lia n s faced m ore th a n 2000 representatives of the American film industry.

The National Association of Theatre Owners is the largest local exhibitor meeting held in the U.S.; it reaches more than 6000 of the 15,000 screens in the U. S. It is also the closest the Australians could expect to get to the large and lucrative American market in one hit.

The Australians hosted the ‘new product’ evening and showed a 17-minute product reel consisting of sequences from The Last Wave, Raw Deal, Eliza Frazer, FJ Holden, Summerfield, Journey Among Women, Deathcheaters, Storm Boy, Dot and the Kangaroo, The Irishman and Mango Tree. It was a highly professional presentation — it utilized an American voice-over — though nothing like viewing the real thing. It received a warm response.

Later in the week, Summerfield was shown to about 50 delegates and made an impression on the audience with the quality of acting and the standard of its production.

Summerfield is a very beautiful film to look at, though many said it was too slow in developing; that its pace was unusual for the American market and, therefore, more

suitable for the art circuit. A similar complaint was levelled against Picnic at Hanging Rock.

There is no doubt that American exhibitors are hungry for exploitable films. The local industry in the U. S. is in a state of crisis because the large distributors have a stranglehold on exhibitors; they claim they need more product, but the deals offered by most distributors leave very little profit for exhibitors and producers.

If exhibitors can get directly to producers and, conversely, producers to exhibitors, exhibitors can then make better deals. But to find an exhibitor who can offer up-front money for advance film rentals, prints, the extensive and expensive advertising this country needs to get a film rolling, is very difficult, Earlier Australian films like the Alvin and Alvin Rides Again have done well in Canada and the most recent success story, Oz (retitled Twentieth Century Oz) has managed to break through. The distributor for Oz is Max Keller.

He has reworked the film with the AFC and the producers, and it has so far grossed more than $1 million.

Australian films often rely on beautiful locations and a violent and sexual flavor, laced with obtuse Aussie humor, to win an audience.

Perhaps that formula works in the Australian context, but the Americans are generally not interested.

Few foreign films, including so-called success stories as the French Cousin Cousine, do well in the U. S. Very few crack the million dollar barrier and almost none are shown outside New York, Los A ngeles, San Francisco and Chicago. The money does not lie in these specified markets; it is the middle American screens that need the product and will pay and yield profits. These areas do not want the ‘art film’ or the period piece; they want entertainment films and the distributors and exhibitors know it.

Only seven foreign films topped the million dollar mark in the U. S. last year. Cousin Cousine is approaching the $2 million mark, but Black and White in Color, the French film which won the Academy Award for Best Foreign Film in 1977, is by no means a smash

■ WARDROPE ON MIAMI What is the AFC’s strategy here?

Literally to sell films, which of necessity we are playing by ear.

Some of our films are suitable for American cinema release, while others, we feel, would get a quicker, cleaner return by going straight to television. They are the two prongs we adopt, but carrying that out is, of course, not easy.

For example, in the past 18 months five Australian films went

hit in American money terms.

Marvin Goldman, national president of NATO says: “ Actually, I think the market is ripe for the introduction and inclusion of films from any source. I don’t think it makes any signifiqant difference as to the country of origin. “ I think the most important thing Aust­ ralians should realize is that it should be a film that has appeal to everybody, and one that just happens to be shot in Australia. A good example was Fiddler on the Roof which concerned the adventures of a little Jewish man in the Soviet Union. “ It played in Japan, Germany, Ireland and Africa, and everyone of those cultures could recognize themselves in it; they felt a sense of kinship and warmth to it because it mirrored their problems, and it didn’t make any difference if they were Australian, American or Japanese. “ The universality was there and that is what any film hoping to attract wider audiences must have. The Australian film doesn’t need kangaroos or koalas. “ The Australian film industry and its representation are basically an unknown quantity in the U.S. They have not made any noise and they are now calling attention to themselves at the convention. “ I think they will have to adopt a very broad program — it may go in three or four different directions — for introducing Aust­ ralian films into the U.S. Certainly you have made some films of merit and which should be in the American market. I think it is the merchandising and marketing which you have not done to this point.”

Mike Thornhill, representing the New South Wales Film Commission, probably best summed up the Australian presence at this very American convention. “ What we are doing is attempting to bypass the structure to get the film industry going in Australia. We would have no industry, no production, if we had not bypassed the American distributors in Australia for instance. So we are virtually doing what we did in Australia.”

into this very important market.

Three of them are being released and two are in the contract stage.

That sounds good; perhaps in no s im ila r p e r io d h a v e fiv e Australian films been aimed at th is te rrito ry , but w ith an inventory of some 50 films, and a production output of 15 to 17 films a year, obviously it is not good enough.

say it’s great, but will that great mass of American theatre owners in the heartland of the U. S. be interested? No, they won’t even want to look at the film.

The idea in coming here is to meet the exhibitors and let them see some of our films. With Summerfield the result was very pleasing; they like the product and asked why they couldn’t buy it?

This is putting pressure on the Can the Australians bypass the distributors. big distributors?

Would you sell directly to theatre We can bring a film to an owners?

American distributor and they can Concluded on P. 2 73 Cinema Papers, January — 229

GUIDE FOR THE AUSTRALIAN FILM PRODUCER: SERVICE AGREEMENTS In this eighth part of a 19-part series, Cinema Papers contributing editor Antony I. Ginnane and Melbourne solicitors Leon Gorr and Ian Baillieu discuss service agreements a producer will encounter as he enters production: agreements for the production crew.

1. Introduction

It is subm itted that the p ro d u cer’s agreement with each member of his crew will need to contain certain basic clauses which will reflect the attitude the producer takes to the status of the technician as an employee or independent contractor, as well as setting out details of compensation and certain protective (for the producer) clauses.

These agreements will be simple, may easily be reduced to pro formas and will differ only inasmuch as specific conditions relevant to the technical grade or class may need to be inserted. It is proposed to deal briefly with these forms of agreement, but to begin by considering a desirable form of agreement for that key technician who stands along with the director and the writer as crucial to the success of the production. We refer, of course, to the director of photography.

2. Director of Photography Agreement

If the director of photography trades through a company, the service agreement will provide for his company to provide his services to make the film which will be decided in the agreement.

If the agreement is with the individual, it should provide, inter alia, for a start/stop date for the technician’s services with certain provisions for varying the term of the agreement should the film’s opening date be postponed. The agreement will set out the place of the services (whether in Australia or elsewhere).

The compensation clause can be complex.

Apart from a straight cash payment (which may be paid weekly, but is in fact frequently paid 50 per cent on first day of principal photo­ graphy and 50 per cent on last day of filming); 230 — Cinema Papers, January

it may provide for a share in the net profits of the film (either foreign or domestic or both).

Certain ' ‘per diems” (living allowances and accommodation payments) may need to be noted if the production is a location shoot; and the status of air tickets (first class or economy) will need to be clarified. The technician may provide his own equipment and, if so, the question of the producer’s liability for insurance will need to be canvassed.

Generally, a lower rate of payment will be negotiated for any pre-production worked by the technician.

The agreement will also need to specify that the director of photography is to provide, at no additional fee, certain “ incidental services” and to perform the shooting of the film and the “ incidental services” with his best endeavors.

The “ incidental services” include: attending publicity conferences, viewing rushes, basing with the laboratory, reprinting and grading; and (sometimes) the making of theatrical trailers.

There will be a general grant of rights clause; an exclusive services clause; a clause purporting to prevent the director of photo­ graphy resorting to injunctive relief in the event of a claimed breach of the agreement by the producer; and a clause granting the producer the right to make certain uses of the technician’.s biography, likeness and voice in certain activities connected with the merchan­ dising and exploitation of the film.

Many of these clauses may be similar to those already discussed in the talent service agreements or director service agreements in this series. A precendent of such agreement is set out below as, Precedent 11 A. Other useful provisions include a clause indemnifying the technician in any actions against the producer by a third party arising out ofthe technician’s participation in or work for the producer. There may be resistance to such a clause being inserted, especially if the film is likely to be controversial.

Other normal clauses would include a “ pay or play clause” (discussed in parts 6 and 7 of this series); a right of assignment by the producer of the benefits and/or obligations of

PART 8 -

3

the agreement; provisions as to billing; and (often) some arrangements on termination of employment (if the technician proves unsatis­ factory).

Some agreements, including Precedent 11 A, do not provide specifically for termination and in these cases normal principles of industrial law might be applied with an eye to prevailing union attitudes.

It may or may not be prudent for the producer to include a warranty by the tech­ nician that he is a fully paid up member of the relevant union (the Australian Amusement and Theatrical Employees Association — AATEA) and a proviso that if he is not, the producer is authorized to deduct relevant union dues from his compensation.

Occasionally in specialist technical areas outside present local expertise, the producer may consider engaging a technician from overseas. As in the case of talent, application will need to be made for a work permit from the Department of Immigration, temporary residents section. Certain undertakings will have to be given by the producer. For example, the producer/sponsor may need to undertake that he will be responsible for any unpaid bills left by the technician after he has left Australia.

The departm ent will not approve the granting of a temporary work permit without the nod from the AATEA, and the Association will only stamp the application if the producer, in addition to demonstrating that there are no specialist local technicians to do the job, covenants to pay the member’s union dues to AATEA. 3. Short Form General Technician’s Agreement:

The short form general te ch n icia n ’s agreement is almost a mere merorandum of heads of agreement which the technician and the producer have reached. It is generally simple for the production manager to fill out (for a sample, precedent 1IB is set in the subscription service); but certain special conditions may need to be professionally drawn.

Most film technicians in Australia claim to

GUID E FOR THE FILM PRODUCER

be freelance operators and generally prefer the producer to treat them as independent contractors rather than as employees. The distribution between independent contractors and employees is a fine one at law and it is likely that many technicians who in fact claim to be independent contractors are probably employees. The responsibilities of the pro­ ducer for worker’s compensation insurance then becomes hazy. Weekly tax is rarely deducted from technicians’ salaries and few production companies set up on a one-off feature basis pay payroll tax. Producers who elect to treat their technicians as independent contractors should be aware that they may be taking a grave risk. Liabilities may arise long after the film is completed if the taxation department takes a different view of the technician’s status.

The agreement provides a compensation clause including details of work hours, per diems (if appropriate), and other expenses chargeable to the production. The producer is given the right to nominate the technician for c o n sid e ra tio n in any film award or competition.

Overtime provisions, as well as rates for certain specialist equipment maintained by the technician, may also be noted. Again detailed termination clauses are infrequent in pro forma crew agreements, but they may become appropriate.

PRECEDENT 1 1 A DIRECTOR OF PHOTOGRAPHY AGREEMENT

THIS AGREEMENT made the day of 1977 between of in the State of Victoria Australia Film Producers (hereinafter called “the Producer” ) of the one part and in the said State (hereinafter called “the Employer” ) of the other part.

NOW THIS AGREEMENT WITNESSETH and the parties hereto mutually agree as follows: 1. The Producer employs Employee and Employee accepts such employment to render services in the role or capacity of Director of Photography and otherwise as the Producer may require, at such times and places as the Producer may designate with respect to the motion picture photoplay (hereinafter called “ the Cinematograph film” ) tentatively entitled 2. The Employee’s services commence on and shall continue until . The Producer shall have the right, after layoff or dismissal of the Employee, to recall the Employee for further services hereunder.

3. Provided performs his services as Director of Photography hereunder, the Producer hereby agrees to pay the said for his services as Director of Photography on the said photoplay: (i) on or within 45 days of the execution of this Agreement the sum of $A (ii) any accommodation and reasonable meal expenses of the Director of Photography during the filming of the photoplay.

4. The Director of Photography will provide for the Producer the following equipment to be used for the production for no reward other than the amounts hereinabove referred to in paragraph three: — (i) Cinema Products CP16 Camera.* 5. The Producer will obtain at his own expense appropriate insurance cover for the duration of the Agreement for the equipment hereinabove referred to in paragraph 4.

6. The Employee shall render such services as the Producer may designate with respect to the production of motion picture photographs and shall devote full diligence efforts and abilities to render services required in a competent, painstaking and artistic manner as well as any incidental services the Producer may request.

7. The term “ incidental services” as referred to in

paragraph six above shall include publicity conferences, viewings of rushes, production con­ ferences, services for the making of film trailers, laboratory print liaison and all other similar or dissimilar services which are not generally considered as work time in the motion picture industry.

8. The Employee agrees that no other commitment of any kind shall interfere with the Employee’s rendering of all services required by the Producer with full and complete diligence.

9. The Producer shall be entitled to all rights in and to all results and proceeds of the Employee’s services without restriction or limitation. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing the Producer shall be the sole and exclusive owner of all rights throughout the world in perpetuity in and to the cinematograph film, all motion picture photographs, still photographs and sound recordings, such rights including (but not limited to) the sole and exclusive rights to exhibit, a d v e rtis e , m e rc h a n d is e and e x p lo it the cinematograph film and all motion picture photographs, s till photographs and sound recordings in any fields and media now or hereafter known, without any limitation whatsoever, and without any obligation to the Employee other than the payments set out in paragraph 3 hereof.

10. The Producer shall have the right in perpetuity (but shall be under no obligation) to authorise others to use the Employee’s name, voice, likeness, biographical material concerning the Employee in and in connection with the production, exhibition, advertising, merchandising and exploitation, in any fields and media now or hereafter known, of the cinematograph film or any rights therein, or any motion picture photographs, still photographs or sound recordings. The producer shall have the unrestricted right to nominate the employee for consideration for any award in any competitive cinema event or festival world wide.

11. The Employee understands and agrees that the Producer shall have no responsibility or obligation to the Employee arising out of any claim, demand or action of any nature whatsoever made or taken against the Employee with reference to the Employee’s participation in the production of the cinematograph film, motion picture photographs, still photographs or sound recordings, whether such claim, demand or action be instituted by any federal, state or local governmental agency or authority, or by any private person, firm or corporation whatsoever. In particular, and without limiting the generality of the foregoing, the Employee understands and agrees that the Producer shall have no responsibility or obligation to the Employee arising out of any claim, demand or action made or taken against the Employee alleging the violation of standards of propriety, morality or decency, or alleging that the cinematograph film, motion picture photographs, still photographs or sound recordings is or are lewd, obscene or pornographic.

12. The Producer agrees to use its reasonable efforts to p ro d u ce and re le a s e or d is trib u te the cinematograph film. In the event, however, that the Producer is unable to complete production of the cinematograph film, or to obtain its release or distribution, the Producer shall have no obligation to the Employee of any nature whatsoever, save for the compensation to the Employee set out in Clause 3.

13. Nothing herein contained shall be deemed to require the Producer to utilize the Employee’s services hereunder, or the results and proceeds thereof, it being agreed that the Producer shall have discharged all obligations to the Employee by exercising the efforts hereinabove referred to in P a ra g ra p h s and by making the payments hereinabove referred to in Paragraph 3 upon the terms and conditions specified therein.

14. In the event of any breach by the Producer of any of its o bligations under this Agreement, the Employee’s remedies shall be limited to the recovery of monetary damages, and shall not include injunctive or any other form of specific relief in connection with the cinematograph film, motion picture photographs, still photographs or sound recordings. In no event shall the Employee have the right to rescind the grant to the Producer of any rights herein contained and provided for.

15. The Employee agrees that the services to be rendered by the Employee hereunder are of a special, unique, unusual, extraordinary and intellectual character, which gives them peculiar value, the loss of which cannot be reasonably or adequately compensated by damages in action at law. If the Employee shall violate any of the terms of this Agreement to be performed by the Employee, the Producer shall be entitled to equitable relief by way of injunction or to any other remedy, at law or in equity, which may be available to the Producer.

16. The Producer may freely assign and/or lease and/ or license its rights hereunder in full or in part, to any person, firm or corporation, and this Agreement may be assigned, leased or licensed by any assignee, lessee or licensee thereof.

17. The Employee agrees to execute any and all additional instruments and documents which the Producer may reasonably deem necessary or desirable to evidence or establish its rights hereunder.

18. No provision hereof shall be construed to violate any applicable law contrary to which the parties have no legal right to contract. However, if any provision hereof shall be adjudged by a court to be void or unenforceable under the circumstances, the same shall in no way affect any other provision of this Agreement, the application of such provision in any other circumstances or the validity or enforceability of this Agreement.

19. This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement between the p artie s, re p la cin g all p rio r understandings. There is no representation, warranty or undertaking except as herein specifically provided. The Employee acknowledges that the Producer is relying on the rights granted herein in planning for the production, financing and distribution of the cinematograph film. Any amendments, waivers or terminations of this Agreement or any provisions thereof must be in writing and signed by both parties. This Agreement shall be interpreted by the laws of the State of Victoria.

SIGNED for and on behalf of in the presence of:— SIGNED by the said in the presence of: —

M 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 February 3 will be guaranteed a February 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:............

•E xam ple only.

Cinema Papers, January — 231

G eoff Burton Earlier this year, a ceremony was held in Colombo to celebrate the first 30 years of Sri Lanka’s cinema. Since 1947, films have been made in the Sinhalese language. Most of the 350 features produced over this period were in fact copies of the ever popular Indian formula films, produced against painted backdrops in the studios of Bombay and Madras. The language was the only thing that separated Sri Lanka’s cinema from that of India.

These formula films of escape and fantasy — usually romantic stories illustrated with songs and dances having little or no relevance to the plot — proliferated as the people looked to the cinema to provide a brief escape from their day-to-day problems. Of course, it was in the interests of the masters to keep the people content with an occasional escape via the cinema, and thè continuance of this style of cinema can be seen as a lasting effect of the colonial cultural infiltration of the times.

The national independence movement led to a cry for realism in Sri Lanka’s cinema. The struggle against neo-colonialism, in Sri Lanka as in the rest of the Third World, rejected dependence on the established formula art forms and sought a means of expression for the crises of an evolving new society. For a while the cinema reflected the dual influences of the imitative formula film and the efforts of some local filmmakers to treat historical and nationalistic themes in their films.

The filmmaker, Lester James Peries, guest at the 1977 Sydney and Melbourne Film Festivals and acknowledged as having been more influential than any one person in ^shaping Sri Lanka’s cinema, released his impressive Rekawa in 1956. In this first G eoff Burton is a cinematographer whose credits have included Storm Boy and Picture Show Man.

232 — Cinema Papers, January

feature Peries successfully freed the film from its studio confines and portrayed his actors in real village situations.

Rekawa was widely acclaimed, but the years of formula film conditioning on the audiences made it a commercial failure. It took Peries another seven years before he could mount his next film. “ My seven lost years” , he calls them, but his effect had been felt by filmmakers throughout the industry. By the time Peries had produced his greatest film, Gam Peraliya, in 1963, the realistic trend in Sri Lanka’s feature films was well established.

Recently, Peries’ films, mostly humanist stories of personal relations, have been criticized for lacking social relevance. It has always been acknowledged that his films had broken new and important ground in the establishment of an indigenous cinema, but Peries’ critics point to his development of the film’s form at the expense of the content. The socialist realists wanted a cinema that reflected the increasing problems of the society around them and provided an outlet for their own propaganda message.

A new generation of filmmakers has evolved out of this need to portray the contemporary problems of the masses whose increasing political awareness was demanding access to the country’s most influential medium — the cinema.

Dharmasena Pathiraja has been regarded as the most outstanding filmmaker to emerge since Peries. The first film made by this young university lecturer was Ahas Gawwa (A League of Sky), a story of unemployed youth.

It was produced with the help of fellow students — all unemployed at the time — on a shoestring budget.

Screenw riter and film critic, Reggie Siriwardene, observes that the release of Ahas Gawwa “ . . . announced unmistakably the arrival of a remarkable new talent — not only in the fluidity and spontaneity with which

Pathiraja handled his camera, but also in his sympathetic insight into the lives of urban lower middle-class youth, unemployed and adrift. “ This level of life and experience was new to Sri Lanka’s cinema. And Pathiraja’s social radicalism commanded respect by its refusal to sloganize. He left his hero marching and cheering in a May Day procession — but with no suggestion that this was necessarily the final answer for him.”

As with Peries’ first film, Ahas Gawwa was a commercial failure but a critical success.

Pathiraja’s second film Eya Den Loku Lamayek (Coming of Age) won an award for its leading actress at the Moscow festival.

What is probably Pathiraja’s most important film, Bambaru Avith (The Wasps are Here), is yet to be released, but previews indicate that it is “ . . . potentially the film of greatest social immediacy to reach Sri L anka’s screens” .

Pathiraja has also made Ponmanie, a film in the Tamil language, and is currently shooting Para Dige (Along the Way). Para Dige, an original screenplay by short story writer Ajith Thilaksena, is the story of a girl who finds she is pregnant to a repossessor of mortgaged cars.

The two follow a difficult pursuit of the 3000 rupees needed for an abortion. With only 400 rupees left to find, he tries his luck at gambling, inevitably losing the lot in the process. In a reversion to the traditional answer, he decides to marry the girl.

The following interview with Dharmasena Pathiraja was recorded on the set of Para Dige.

Translating and assisting with the interview was Sunila Abeysekera, production manager on Bambaru Avith.

This interview was recorded during the rule of the Bandranaike governm ent which has recently been voted from office.

SRI LANKAN CINEMA

Pathiraja directing Vijaya K um aranathunga in a scene from Para Dige.

SlPiS

pggr

Donald Karunaratne and crew during the shooting of the Elephant Boy television series.

Pathiraja (left), Godamanna, the second assistant director, and first assistant (Wijay Jayasiri).

Critics have said that your greatest technique as a director is in the handling of actors. How do you regard the actors you work with?

i l l i g l l l llillSSjSII ! i i l t S i l l l i i l i i i l m Ê ÎÊ Ê u à fiiilfiS ïliils c i l i llilS É S S S S S S l l l l l l l SSifSSS S I B I I B S Ì I # * '■S II® *# mi ssg g g lllililS IilllillillI i i l l l l l i Iflljlisfi lllllll

m i l ■Éfe

W ÊÊÊÊÊF WBÊÊÊÊRÊÊ,* S i l i WÊSÊÊHKm

W

WÊÊÊSBÊÊ

MmÊzmfï

* ■

Director Dharmasena Pathiraja with producer Thilak Godamanna.

Fonseka, it’s possible to get what awareness, some kind of social you want. content.

Comparisons are often drawn between yourself and Lester James Peries. Peries, in the 1950s, broke away from the Pathiraja: Film is a director’s ^established studio format and medium. Actors are for me to use. took his cameras into the streets I won’t let them interpret what and villages. Now there is a they want in the characters. realism in your films which is breaking even more ground than Is this why you use so many non­ Lester’s films . . . actors in your films?

Pathiraja: Yes, particularly in Pathiraja: Yes. It is possible to terms of content. Our problem work this way in Films; in drama it from the beginning, up to Lester, is not possible. Sometimes I was the form — it didn’t change at decide not to give scripts to the all. Then came the change and you actors as this stops them coming can see it, over about 10 or 15 on location with a lot of their own films, but we can’t really call these ideas. I take them onto the set and films realistic.

Abeysekera: As far as content tell them the situation they will be playing; that the reactions should goes, these films are limited. This be somewhat like this and so on. is what a lot of us have always felt Then I leave them for a while to Pathiraja: This is what we think about it. The total character sh o u ld talk a b o u t — th e is in my mind. limitations of Lester’s selection of Do you find t h i s method films. I am not saying I am satisfactory with professional unlimited, but at the same time, I am aware of the new social actors? problems.

Abeysekera: Technically, I Pathiraja: T here are two categories — the trained actors think we have quite a few people and the box-office stars. The stars who are .. competent filmmakers. are very difficult to work with. Films are much better than they They are not trained: they are just used to be. But I think they are used to provide the glamor. But still not good in content. Only a with good actors like Joe few people are aware that cinema A b e y w ick ra m a and M alini should have some kind of social

The film being shot now is your fifth feature. Of the four completed films, one has been released which, although a critical success, failed commercially. A second film has just been released and it’s too early to judge its success. Yet the five films have been made virtually one after the other.

Lester’s first film was also a commercial failure, and he had to wait seven years to make another. What has changed to make this situation possible?

Audiences have changed; so have producers.

Pathiraja: A lot of finance now comes from a class of new-rich mudalalis (middle men) who have replaced the traditional bour­ geoisie, and who are making films for prestige, as a method of estab­ lishing status and class. Even Lester is making more films these days. His name has prestige; it’s good for a mudalali to have his own label behind it.

Abeysekera: After the political and sociological changes that ended the aristocracy, the newrich emerged making money from the tourist industry ànd things like that. Of course, they had the support of the government in power. Also, I think over the past few years people have begun to admit that formula films are not the only ones th at can be commercial successes. Up to two years ago a film needed two fights, seven songs and two dances.

Lately, we have had a few successful films without any of these ingredients.

Pathiraja: The second film came to me by chance. The actor Wiyaya brought the film to me — I didn’t have to look for a producer. The film got good publicity after Malini won her award at the Moscow festival. By then the State Film Corporation was established and had started a loan system.

Abeysekera: Pathi was able to begin his third film only because by that time the State Film In “ Para Dige’’ you plan to use Corporation was willing to finance three songs. Is that a concession films — they give 60 per cent, or to the box-office? something like that. He was able to begin shooting Bambaru Avith Pathiraja: Not really, because I and show Tilak what had been use the songs differently. One is done,-and—he was willing to -for- background, -another—is the contribute the rest of the budget. theme — a title theme. I like to I think a lot has changed since use the songs as I would in a 1956 when Lester made Rekawa. drama.

Cinema Papers, January — 233

SRI LANKAN CINEMA

But the audience would still feel a little cheated if they didn’t get a couple of songs . . .

Pathiraja: Yes. On your next film, you will be director as well as producer. This has been made possible by the State Film Corporation totally financing the film. Will this enable you to be free of all the usual influences from producers and investors?

mostly about the setting up of a police station in a village where there had been no police station before. Originally there were scenes of armed police taking over the village. There was one policeman who was determined to repress the people. The film ends with the arrival of the van and the police getting off. I couldn’t take it further than that.

In that case it seems the restrictions are overcome by leaving the ending ambiguous.

D e p e n d i n g on your own particular values, you could take the establishment of the police post as either reassuring or disturbing . . .

Pathiraja: Yes, I can do what I want; the Corporation won’t interfere, especially in the content of the film. Of course, I don’t know what our censors will do.

Our censor board is political, you Pathiraja: Yes, that’s what we know. We are not allowed to talk Kumaranathunga and Indira Abeysena in need to do, to be able to survive. about controversial subjects — Dharmasena Pathiraja’s Coming of Age. the scene from Para Dige where they find Abeysekera: The point of the su ch as p o litic s , re lig io u s they have enough money for an abortion. film is that Pathi knows problems p r o b le m s , m o r a lity . T h e aren’t solved by setting up a police Corporation and the censor board in camera tricks or gimmicks. We available. w o rk to f in d th e r ig h t station. If Pathi had been able to screen all the scripts. composition, to accommodate the Do you feel very restricted in do it the way he originally wanted, Does this screening process movements of the actors. I believe having to shoot all your films in maybe it would have had a little happen for films that the in covering from one angle, black and white? more power, and it would have corporation may not be investing usually in one shot. There impressed more people. As it is, s h o u l d n ’t be a n e e d for in?

Pathiraja: Well, this is a the film is sort of soft. Pathi alternatives. I don’t believe in p ro b lem w ith o ur fo reig n should have gone further, but he Pathiraja: Yes, it happens for master shots and close-ups as exchange. Unfortunately, we are couldn’t. such. Sometimes I start with a not able to get the funds to import Pathiraja: I don’t want to all films. blank frame — this is a device I color stock. So we work in black change the m entality of the As an independent filmmaker, like — and then the action and white and make the best of it. people, or anything like that. I continues into the frame.

Sometimes the look of black and have no message for the people. I does this process worry you? white is very appealing — there just want to be able to discuss the Pathiraja: We are totally Do you work with a shooting often seems to be much more different situations that exist. script? depth, which I like. I think there Abeysekera: People are being opposed to it. are some stories where the use of exploited and sucked dry, and no Pathiraja: Oh yes, I have done. color would be a distraction, one has a chance even to protest How did you come to make your I hate papers really, and although which is not to say that I wouldn’t or question what it is and why it is first film, “Ahas Gawwa” ? the film is clearly plotted in my like to work in color. happening. Important things like police repression, strikes, trade Pathiraja: I collaborated in mind, I never work it out that writing the script while studying at closely so it could be prepared as a What are the biggest problems union problems, you can’t talk the Peradeniya University. I was shooting script. There was a facing a filmmaker in Sri Lanka about them. really interested in low-budget shooting script for Bambaru today? films that broke away from the Avith, with shots numbered from In addition to your fairly prolific commercial film framework. It’s a one to a thousand. It was well filmmaking activities, you have Pathiraja: I think the producer film mainly about unemployment visualized, but it was a problem. is the biggest problem. Finding a full-time lecturing job at the among a group of young men and The script was a co n stan t him and keeping him satisfied, Jaffna University. Can you see the kind of problems they come headache for me — I always had without having him interfere. And the situation arising where you different ideas. Finally, I threw it then there is the State — the w i l l be c ome a f u l l - t i m e up against.

Abeysekera: At that time, I away. existing system, the censor board. filmmaker? think, many of Pathi’s friends were unemployed. In fact, Pathi How do you feel about changing Pathiraja: When I was a If it was not necessary to have le ctu rer at V idyalankara — was unemployed, too. They were dialogue in a final script? your scripts vetted by the another university — I was all going through the same Pathiraja: Sometimes, some Corporation and the censor discredited and had no job. At that problems, and it was a film about those experiences. words and lines come easier for board, what films would you time I wanted to be a full-time Pathiraja: I remember we were certain actors. I write most of my make? professional filmmaker, but there staying in a very rough building. scrip ts, so changes are no were no producers and I suffered a Pathiraja: I would like to make lot. I was without a job for about There was not much to eat and we problem. However, those writers I had no money. We suffered a lot, use are good friends, so we can political films. But there are so two years. many subjects we just can’t talk and I think that experience came work together on any changes.

Abeysekera: The irony of about. through the suffering.

Pathi’s position was that at the Abeysekera: Pathi’s films, time he wanted to make films Abeysekera: As a film it took Which films have influenced you especially his original scripts, are there were no producers. He about three years to complete. most? always full of things he can’t do. applied for this lecturing job, came The man who invested in the film Pathiraja: Very early on, I saw Even Bambaru Avith had many here, and then there were three was the brother of a friend. He was not a rich man: he gave what he Last Year at Marienbad. That ideas that later became impossible films. could, when he could. I think it film was a shock to me. I went to to film because of government Pathiraja: I don’t want to be a was the first film made in Ceylon see it with Donald Karunaratne restrictions. full-time film director. I don’t where everyone worked just for and we talked a lot about the shots want to lose my academic career, and the technique used. It was Were the changes brought about because I feel it helps my the love of it. three years before we started our by a government directive? filmmaking. Every time I go back Your films all seem to be shot in first film, and we spent a lot of to it, it polishes me, you know. As Abeysekera: No, Pathi foresaw a lecturer I read a lot, do some a straightforward, conventional thafr time looking at many films, discussing and learning. They the likely problems and made the w riting and com e back to manner . . . were mostly French films, then a changes to avoid conflict. filmmaking quite refreshed. * Pathiraja: Bambaru Avith is Pathiraja: I am not interested lot of Polish film s becam e 234 — Cinema Papers, January

FILM CENSORSHIP LISTINGS Reprinted from JUNE 1977

Australian Government Gazette AUGUST 9 -

The Mystical Rose (16mm): M. Lee. Australia (735.00 m) Pussy In The Bathhouse: C o nsta ntin Film. W est

-j f e r

Published by the Australian Government Publishing Service

FILMS REGISTERED WITHOUT ELIMINATIONS For General Exhibition (G)

Mustang, The House That Joe Built: R. G uralnick. U.S. (2353.00 m)

A U G U S T 30 - S E P T E M B E R 2 7 NOVEMBER 8

O C T O B E R 29 -

GENERAL

Ante the Lapp Boy' (16mm): Centra Film A.S., Norway (953.00 m)

Gentlemen Boys': Barrandou Film Studio. Czecho­ slovakia (2402.00 m)

Lahn El Wafaa (16mm): Not shown, Egypt (1502.00 m) La Vida Sigue lgual(16mm): Filmayer, Spain (932.00 m) Lions fo r Breakfast': Tony K ram re ithe r. C anada (2688.00 m) The Magic Jacket': Hunnia Studio, Hungary (2692.00 m) Tutti per Uno Botte per Tutti: Not shown. Italy (2804.00 m) 'Im ported for show ing at the Adelaide C hildren's Film Festival 1977.

Not Recommended for Children (NRC) Cria Cuervos: E. Q uerejeta, Spain (3044.73 m) Die Wildente: B. Eichinger. W est Germany (2885.00 m) Fire Sale: M. W orth, U.S. (2358.00) Highway One (16mm): S. Otton, Australia (844.00 m) Les Enfants du Paradis (16mm): Consortium Pathe, France (2068.00 m) Lo Spione: G. De Beauregard, Italy (2804.00 m) The Lover of Fresh W ater C. Carajopoulos. G reece

(2600.00 m) Mr Funny Bone Shaw Brothers, Hong Kong (2605.85 m) Roti (Bread) (16mm): R. Desai, India (1612.00 m) Partings (Pozegnania): Film Polskl, Poland (2743.00 m) Snapping of Love: Yau Lee Film Co., Hong Kong (2614.00 m)

Star Wars: G. Kurtz, U.S. (3317.00 m)

For Mature Audiences (M) ACI Sevida: Not shown, Turkey (1860.00 m) Annie Halt C. Joffe, U.S. (2496.00 m) The Bitter Tears of Petro Von Kant (16mm): (a), Tango Films, W est Germ any (1372.00 m) Black Sunday: J. Frankenheim er, U.S. (3840.00 m) The C ar E. Silverstein. U.S. (2550.00 m) Degueyo: Not shown, Italy (2621.00 m) Demon Seed: H. Jaffe, U.S. (2523.00 m) Heroes in Late Ming Dynasty: Fu Lee Wah Film Co., Hong Kong (2660.71 m) Hurry Up, Or I’ll Be Thirty: J. Jacoby, U.S. (2331.55 m) Joseph Andrews: N. Hartley, U.K. (2797.00 m) L ’Amore Primitivo: P. Giordani, Italy (2221.88 m) The Left Hand of the Law: Laser Films, Italy (2715.00 m) Oldurew Ask: Guney Films, Turkey (2743.00 m) Outlaw Blues S. Tisch, U.S. (2688.00 m) Shao Lin Hero Chang San Feng W u’s Picture Co., Hong Kong (2963.00 m) Sybit J. Babbin, U.S. (3565.00 m) Three Women R. Altm an, U.S. (3044.00 m) Welcome To Blood City: M. Stonehouse, Canada/U.K. (2550.99 m) White Buffalo: D. De Laurentils, U.S. (2520.80 m) (a) Previously listed in Film C ensorship Bulletins Nos. 5/73 and 6/74.

For Restricted Exhibition (R) Black Magic: Shaw Brothers, Hong Kong (2743.00 m) The Brute J. Quested, U.K. (2413.00 m) Faustrecht Der Freiheit(16mm): (a), Tango Films, W est Germ any (1327.37 m) G irls’ Diary: Shaw Bros, Hong Kong (2880.00 m) I’m Not Feeling Myself Tonight Antler, U.K. (2228.00 m) Little Godfather From Hong Kong Golden Harvest, Hong Kong (2591.46 m) Love Garden: R. Chinn, U.S. (1865.00 m) The Man With Two Heads W. Mishlan, U.K. (2276.00 m) Marco Polo: Shaw Brothers, Hong Kong (3522.00 m) Mrs Stone’s Thing (2nd Reconstructed Version): (b), J. Robertson, U.S. (1700.00 m) The Prodigal Boxer II: Hong Kong Sth Sea Film Co., Hong Kong (2550.00 m) Serait FilmobJic, France (2441.00 m) Vai Gorilla: Not shown, Italy (2648.71 m) Zoltán Hound of Dracula: A. Band/F. Perilli, U.S. (2390.00 m) . (a) Previously listed in Film Censorship Bulletin No. 8/76. (b) Previously listed In Film Censorship Bulletins Nos. 8/76. 10/76 and 11/76.

Special conditions: For show ing not more than tw ice at Sydney a n d /o r M e lb o u rn e /A d e la id e /B ris b a n e /P e rth Film Festival and then re-exported.

Black Shadows On A Silver Screen (16mm): Post Newsweek Stations, U.S. (627.00 m) Dog’s Heart (Cuore Di Cane): M. Gallo/A. Lattuada, Italy (3100.00 m) Harvest (Oss): Norsk Film, Norway (2369.00 m) How Beautiful To Die Assassinated: Italnoleggio, Italy (2276.00 m) Letters From The Front Italnoleggio, Italy (3010.00 m) Libera, My Love: R. Loyola, Italy (2993.00 m) A Life For Swe Italnoleggio, Italy (3026.00 m) Love and Gymnastics: Gianni Lucari, Italy (3000.00 m) The Matteotti Murder G. Mordoni, Italy (3370.00 m) Near And Far Away: Swedish Film Institute, Sweden (2855.00 m) Pallieter City P roduktiem aatschappij/K unst En Kino, Belgium (2468.70 m) The Red Carnation: Fllmcoop, Italy (3167.00 m) Seated At His Right C. Lizzanl, Italy (2440.00 m) The Suspect Clnericerca, Italy (3017.00 m) In the Height of Summer Polish Corp. Film Prod., Poland (2428.00 m) We Want The Colonels: P. A ngeletti/A . De M icheli, Italy (2845.00 m)

Special conditions: That the film be shown only to its members by the National Film Theatre of Australia.

The C ount Not shown, Finland (2523.56 m) The Green Widow. Not shown, Finland (2112.11 m) Home For Christmas Not shown, Finland (2468.70 m) One Man’s War. Not shown, Finland (2962.44 m) W hen The H eaven’ s Fall: N ot sh o w n , F in la n d (2743.00 m)

A W orker’s Diary: Not shown, Finland (2496.13 m)

The masturbation sequence from Walerian Borowczyk’s La Bete. The film was finally awarded an “ R” certificate after 113 m of deletions were made.

FILMS REGISTERED WITH ELIMINATIONS For Restricted Exhibition (R)

Crime

Busters:

Tritone

C inem atogratica,

Italy/U.S.

(3143.00 m)

Man And Wife — An Educational Film For Married

The Devil Is A Woman: (a). Paramount. U.S. (2293.00 m) Dharmatma: F. K. International, India (3999.00 m) The G etting of W isdom : P. A d am s, A u s tra lia

A dults Not shown, U.S. (1853.00 m) Eliminations: 17.5 m (39 secs) Reason: Indecency

(2743.00 m)

FILMS REFUSED REGISTRATION

(1510.00 m)

The Good

Children (16mm): S. Am er, Lebanon

The Greatest: Colum bia Pictures, U.S. (2819.00 m) Harlan County U.S.A. (16mm): Cabin Creek Prod.. U.S.

Nil

FILMS APPROVED FOR REGISTRATION AFTER REVIEW

(1130.00 m)

The Prince And The Pauper (a), P. Spengler/Salkind Co., U.K./Hungary (3290.00 m) Decision Reviewed: Appeal against (M) registration by the Film Censorship Board.

Decision of the Board: Uphold the decision of the Film C ensorship Board.

FILMS NOT APPROVED FOR REGISTRATION AFTER REVIEW Nil (a) Previously listed in Film Censorship Bulletin No. 5/77.

JULY 1977

My Dark World: Not shown. Turkey (3291.00 m) New York, New York: R. C hartoff/I. W inkler. U.S. (4169.36 m)

Nobody Waved Goodbye (16mm): N.F.B. of Canada.

Canada (905.00 m)

One Hour With You: (b). Paramount. U.S. (2287.00 m) Piange II Telefono: Coralta Cinem atogratica S.R.L., Italy (2600.00 m) Rollercoaster: J. Lang. U.S. (3209.31 m) The Scarlet Empress: (c). Paramount. U.S. (2899.00 m) The Trap Of The General: Sutjeska Film. Yugoslavia (2730.00 m) Twist The Tiger’s Tail (16mm): F. W eintraub/P. Heller, Thailand (978.00 m) Only Today: Youz Film Ltd, Israel (2469.00 m) (a) Previously registered in 1935. (b) Previously registered in 1932. (c) Previously registered in 1934.

For Mature Audiences (M) FILMS REGISTERED WITHOUT ELIMINATIONS For General Exhibition (G) Ayaam We —

Laialy (16mm):

Bombay Talkie (16mm): (a). M erchant Ivory Prod., India (1173.00 m)-

Not shown,

Egypt

(1217.00 m)

Damn You, I’m Grown Up!: Veb-Defa-Studlo, East Germ any (2681.00 m)

Dot and The Kangaroo: Y. Gross. Australia (2194.00 m) H ekm atak Ya Rab (16m m ): Not sh o w n . E g ypt (1084.00 m)

Herbie Goes To Monte Carlo: Disney Prod., U.S. (2935.00 m)

Incompreso A. Rizzoli, Italy (2878.00 m) Lialy El Hob (16mm): H. Raflah. Egypt (1308.00 m) Laughter: (a). Paramount. U.S. (2087.00 m) Noi Non Siamo Angeli: Flaminia Prod., Italy (2407.92 m) Parmi Les Decombres (16mm): Ezzel Zulfikar. Egypt (1426.00 m)

Race For Your Life, Charlie Brown: L. Mendelson/B. Melendez. U.S. (2140.00 m) The Rescuers: W. Reitherman. U.S. (2084.68 m) Ruggles of Red Gap: (b), A. Zukor, U.S. (2557.00 m) Trouble In Paradise: (c), Paramount, U.S. (2341.00 m) Sinbad and The Eye of the Tiger: Colum bia Pictures, U.S./Spain (3140.50 m) Unnaithan Thambi: Not shown. Malaysia (4114.00 m) Zorro’s Dream: Titanus. Italy (2924.00 m) Streamline: Instituto Luce. Italy (2760.00 m) Ayamna El Helwea ( 1 6 mm): Not show n, Egypt (1217.00 m) (a) Previously registered in 1930. (b) Previously registered in 1935. . (c) Previously registered in 1932.

Not Recommended for

Children (NRC)

Black September: N. Gilbert, France/lsrael (2332.00 m) Call Him Savage: R. Danon, France (2963.00 m) The Choice of Love: David Film Co.. Hong Kong (2663.41 m)

"

~

A Bridge Too Far: J. & R. Levine, U.K. (4819.00 m) Citizen Band: F. Fields, U.S. (2578.00 m) Cosy Cool (16mm): G arron Int. Films. A u stra lia (767.00 m)

Daglar Kurbani: I. Toraman. Turkey (1639.00 m) The Deep: Colum bia Pictures. U.S. (3454.00 m) Derby: Cinerama, U.S. (2477.41 m) Elizabeth Lucy: M. Sam uels/J. R offm an. C anada (3017.00 m) Eric: L. & H. Hinschmann. U.S. (2575.60 m) The Ernie Game (16mm): C.B.C./N.F.B. of Canada.

Canada (965.00 m) General Stone: G oldig Films. Hong Kong (2304.00 m) The Longest Road: V a rd a r Film s, Y u g o s la v ia (3382.00 m) One On One: M. Hornstein, U.S. (2633.00 m) Running Time (16mm): N.F.B. of Canada, Canada (913.17 m) Smokey And The Bandit: R. Levy. U.S. (2686.00 m) The Spy Who Loved Me: A. Broccoli, U.K. (3431.74 m) 21 Hours At Munich: Filmways. U.S. (2606.00 m) (a) Previously listed in Film Censorship Bulletin No. 8/73.

For Restricted Exhibition (R) Backroads (16mm): P. Noyce, Australia (670.00 m) Black Snake: R. Meyer, U.S. (2331.00 m) Dr Death — Seeker of Souls: E. Saeta, U.S. (2374.39 m) The Evolution of Snuff: R. Rimmel, W est Germany (2311.00 m)

Fellini's Casanova: A. Grimaldi, Italy (4306.00 m) The Hunter, The Butterfly & The Crocodile: GolcJtg Films, Hong Kong (2825.00 m) Journey Among Women: Coan Production. Australia (2551.00 m)

L e s P o r n o c r a te s ( R e c o n s t . V e r s io n ) : Contrachampe-J. F. Davy. France (1645.00 m)

(a ).

Germany (2358,00 m) Ruby: G. Edwards. U.S. (2276.00 m) Super Witness: Not shown, Italy (3240.00 m) Thunder And Lightning: R. Corman. U.S. (2583.00 m) Uncle Tom ’s Cabin: Gordon Films. U.S. (2715.00 m) The Undergraduate: J. Flanders. U.S. (1152.06 m) The Town That Dreaded Sundown: C B. Pierce. U.S. (2550.00 m) (a) Previously listed in Film Censorship Bulletin No. 3/77.

Special conditions: For showing not more than tw ice at Sydney a n d /o r M elbourne- A d e la id e /B ris b a n e /P e rth Film Festival and then re-exported.

Central Bazaar (16mm): S. Dwoskin. U.K. (1678.41 m) Happy Day: P. Raptis. Greece (2650.00 m) Irene, Irene: Artea, Italy (3072.00 m) Numero Deaux (16mm): J-L. Godard. France (965.36 m) Riddles Of The Sphinx: P. W ollen, U.K. (987.30 m) Special conditions: That the film be shown only to its members by the National Film Theatre of Australia.

Agostino: Not shown. Italy (2468.70 m) , A s s a s s in a tio n o f M a tte o tti: Ita ln o le g g io , Ita ly (3370.00 m) Dog’s Heart: Italnoleggio, Italy (3100.00 m) Good Morning (16mm): Shochiku. Japan (1032.00 m) Early Spring (16mm): Shochiku, Japan (1579.68 m) The Flavour Of Green Tea Over Rice (16mm): Shochiku. Japan (1264.55 m) Hunger: N o r d s d is k F ilm T e k n ik .

Denm ark/Norway/Sweden (3017.30 m) I Was Born But . . . (16mm): Shochiku. Japan (1097.00 m) II B e ll’ A ntonio: C. D el D u c a /A rc o Film s. Ita ly (2880.15 m) The Inheritance Not shown. Italy (3319.00 m) it’s Lovely To Risk Being Killed Italnoleggio. Italy (2276.00 m) L'Assoluto Na Naturale — She and He: L. Harvey. Italy (2331.55 m) La Notte Brava: Ajace Films. Italy (2633.28 m) La Giornata Balorda — A Day Of Sin: Euro-lnternational Film. Italy/France (2797.86 m) Late Spring (16mm): Shochiku. Japan (1184.76 m) Letters From The Front: Italnoleggio, Italy (3010.00 m) Libera My Love: Italnoleggio. Italy (2993.00 m) A Life For Sale: Italnoleggio, Italy (3026.00 m) Love And Gymnastics: Italnoleggio. Italy (3154.00 m) The Love Makers: Not shown. Italy/France (2907.58 m) Perkele! Images From Finland: J. Donner. Finland (2775.00 m) The Pistol (16mm): B. Forslund. Sweden (921.48 m) Purgatorio (16mm): B. Forslund. Sweden (943.42 m) Red Carnation: Italnoleggio, Italy (3167.00 m) Seated At His Right. Italnoleggio. Italy (2440.00 m) Senilità: Zebra Film-Aera Film, Italy/France (3017.30 m) The Suspect: Italnoleggio, Italy (3017.00 m) Un Bellissima Novembre — A Fine November: Not shown. Italy/France (2551.00 m) We Want The Colonels: Italnoleggio. Italy (2845.00 m)

FILMS REGISTERED WITH ELIMINATIONS For General Exhibition (G) Roots

Of Our B irthp lace :

N

M atza s,

G re e c e

(2633.00 m) Eliminations: 9.3 m (20 seconds) Reason: Excessive violence

For Mature Audiences (M) High Rolling: T. Burstall, Australia (2332.30 m) Eliminations: 7 m (15 seconds) Reason: Indecency

For Restricted Exhibition (R) Andy Warhol's Bad: J. Tornberg, U.S. (2852.78 m) Eliminations: 13.9 m (30 seconds) Reason: Indecent violence Brother & Sister: L. Adrain, U.S. (1974.00 m) Eliminations: 100.2 m (3 mins 39 secs) Reason: Indecency Matinee Hookers (Reconst. Version): (a). R. Leigh, U.S (2017.20 m) Eliminations: 159.8 m (5 mins 50 secs) Reason: Indecency No Way Out: L. Martino. Italy (2797.00 m) Eliminations: 31.2 m (1 min 8 secs) Reason: Excessive violence (a) Previously listed in Film Censorship Bulletin No. 2/76 as Matinee Wives.

FILMS REFUSED REGISTRATION The Bite: 808 Pictures. U.S. (1684.30 m) Reason: Indecency The Erotic Adventures Of Felicia: Les Films Du G riffon/M . Pecas, France (2811.70 m) Reason: Indecency The Farmer: M ilway Prod./G. Conway. U.S. (2663.40 m) Reason: Indecent violence.

He And She: New W orld Studios, U.S. (1744.30 m) Reason: Indecency.

Intimate Games: G. Coen, U.K. (2699.6 m) Reason: Indecency.

A Touch Of Genie: J. Russell. U.S. (1739.90 m) Reason: Indecency.

W eekend G irls . R. B re tw ic k /P . B a la c h o ff, U.S. (2212.90 m) Reason: Indecency.

FILMS APPROVED FOR REGISTRATION AFTER REVIEW Nil.

FILMS NOT APPROVED FOR REGISTRATION AFTER REVIEW La Bete: (a). A. Dauman, France (2815.00 m) Decision Reviewed: Appeal against rejection by the Film C ensorship Board.

Decision of the Board: Uphold the decision of the Film C ensorship Board. . (a) Previously listed in Film C ensorship Bulletin No. 11/76.

C o n c lu d e d o n P. 2 8 5

Cinema Papers, January

235

THE SPECTRUM REPORT ON AUSTRALIAN FILM AUDIENCES There is very little publicly available information about the Australian filmgoer. The exhibitors, distributors and U. S. film studios have explored the market in varying degrees but, with the exception of Hoyts (and thereby 20th Century-Fox), the information is highly fragmented. In addition, box-office figures have traditionally been guarded secrets.

Because of this situation, Australian film producers and directors have been in the unenviable position of making a product without any concrete data on the nature of their market, the film-going public. With this in mind, Spectrum Research approached the Australian Film Commission and suggested a research project aimed at reducing this information gap and providing the AFC, and through them the movie industry, with insight into the needs and aspirations of their market.

Printed below (courtesy of the AFC) is several sections of Volume 1 of this report. It has been sub­ edited for style.

M E T H O D & SAM PLE After detailed briefing sessions with the AFC and representatives of the Australian film industry, the following research techniques were adopted:

Focus Group Session Eight focus groups were conducted, four each in the Sydney and Melbourne “fishbowls” . Respondents were selected from the following demographic groups: Age Status 14-17 single, schoolchildren 18-25 primarily single, working, no children 26-40 married with young children 4 0+ married, “flown nest” parents.

All respondents were drawn from the middle socio­ economic groups with a slight blue collar emphasis.

The groups consisted of six to eight respondents who were screened to ensure that they had attended a film at least two to three times in the past 1 2 months.

Representatives of the AFC and the industry observed the groups through the one-way mirror facility.

Telephone Interviews The results of the focus group sessions were used to develop a formally structured questionnaire which was administered to a random probability sample of 500 respondents in Sydney and 500 in Melbourne, aged between 12 and 70 years.

Respondents were screened by cinema attendance and those who had attended less than twice in the past 12 months were adm inistered a “ non-goers” questionnaire.

R E C O M M E N D A T IO N S 1. We strongly recommend that the AFC begin testing the script concept, title and star appeal of all productions in which they have an investment. A research project to achieve this objective could be designed by Spectrum Research and implemented by students in Human Communications at Murdoch University. Professor Frodsham has agreed in principle to such a program.

2. The program should isolate: the connotations behind the title individual star appeal interest levels in seeing such a film entertainment potential of the synopsis across the key target publics. Once in double head stage each new film should be thoroughly tested for: length pace/involvement contribution of the musical sound track where relevant.

3. There is a need to encourage the emergence of a stable of Australian film stars. We are not suggesting a rehash of the old Hollywood star system, but there must be avenues for more people of the stature of Jack Thompson and Helen Morse to gain exposure in films.

4. It should be remembered that filmgoers have a completely different image of film stars, compared with stars of television shows to which they are constantly exposed.

1236 — Cinema Papers, January

5. The presence of an international, big-name star can assist with initial box-office — and with subsequent overseas sales. Certainly stars such as Rod Taylor should be given continual encouragement to contribute to Australian films (as Taylor has in Picture Show Man).

6. Australian filmmakers must be made aware of the following potential pitfalls in their productions: looking cheap (such as the Eliza Fraser ship­ wreck). lack of pace, involvement and suspense over-emphasis of the Australian origin of their film inconclusive and “ unsatisfying” endings saving money on essential elements such as theme and background music taking too long to establish the plot (this is especially critical for younger audiences).

All these areas emerged as causes of frustration about Australian films among audiences.

7. Special consideration should be given to “true” stories which have great appeal to many people.

Part of the success of Picnic and Caddie was in fact that they were s e e n to be true life stories.

8. Publicity plays a vital role in stimulating good wordof-mouth about a film — prior to and in the early weeks of its release.

We strongly recommend that the AFC strengthen its existing publicity department.

9. The major function of this department should be to generate a very high level of awareness of each new film in which the AFC has invested funds, from the time production commences. High awareness of new releases can be readily obtained without the expenditure of substantial advertising dollars. Eliza Fraser proved conclusively how readily this objective can be achieved. This publicity should not rely on trade magazines such as C in e m a P a p e rs , but should be inserted in the mass media.

10. The publicity department should cultivate a mailing list of peer group leaders (and especially theatre party organizers and club social secretaries) informing them of new Australian film releases, the venue and perhaps enclosing a request form for group bookings.

11. Programs like 2JJ’s “ What’s On” are free, yet currently are not being adequately utilized for their publicity value. Details of new releases would be welcomed by current affairs programs, provided they were professionally presented.

12. Consider cinema screenings of “the making of” films in conjunction with new releases as a total package. Obvious benefits obtain, so long as these featurettes are highly entertaining and do not reveal too much of the plot, mainly because they will be screened to the target market. There should be little problem in selling such a package as there is an enormous shortage of high quality featurettes.

13. The Academy Awards and nominations have a powerful effect in convincing people that the film is better than average (many went to see Cuckoo’s Nest for this reason), and is a great way to reinforce the publicity coverage. It is important that the Australian industry consolidates on the existing awards for Australian films and stars, and injects show business pizzaz into the presentation ceremonies along the lines of the Logie awards.

14. We believe there is a need for a full market segmentation study, based on the data bank generated by the current project. The segmentation study should ideally be conducted in conjunction with the distributors and exhibitors and would: (i) isolate areas of potential for new cinemas; (ii) enable media purchase on the basis of the geographical location of target market clusters; (Mi) enable planning of cinema release strategies based on market appeal.

15. It’s time to put the ocker image in Australian films behind us. Similarly bushranger films have been done to death.

“ BLU E SK Y ” R E C O M M E N D A T IO N S The following recommendations are offered as thought starters. Some may be impractical or long term but we suggest they be given serious consideration before they are rejected.

Consider establishing a central facility for Australian filmmakers with a range of sets and sound stages. This

facility would go a long way to providing greater "professionalism” in Australian productions. Additional revenue to help defray the overhead could be forthcoming from television production houses.

There is a need for better script properties to be channelled to Australian producers. The AFC should consider establishing a formal network to expedite the flow of script ideas from overseas into the local industry.

The AFC should consider the possibility of entering the fields of both distribution and exhibition. One possibility is the establishment of the Australian Cinema Centre in Sydney and Melbourne initially. Such a complex would provide an excellent venue to launch and promote Australian films without normal exhibition pressure.

Consider forming closer links between Australian orchestras, pop groups and musicians (such as Don Burrows) and the AFC to develop a pool of readily available musical talent for films.

T H E M AK ING S OF A G OOD FILM Most people are not indiscriminate in their choice of films. Their selectivity tends to increase with age — the greater the experience, the higher the awareness of what is liked and not liked. The majority of adults tend to have a short list of films which they want to see and which is based mainly on a combination of publicity, word-of-mouth, stars and the type of film it is perceived to be.

Obviously, taste in films varies enormously with age, sex, temperament, and the intellect of filmgoers.

There are a few basic ground-rules for a successful film, which are modified for the various segments to produce a film which will satisfy them. Basically, everybody wants a film to be totally involving, to transport them out of themselves and into the action and characters. The great majority of films which received acclaim in the groups had a number of characteristics in common: (i) they maintain a constant tension, either through vehicles of action, well-designed humor situations, fear or emotional situations; (ii) a steady mounting in the tension broken by a number of moments of light relief, usually humorous; (iii) at least one star — hero or anti-hero — who has sufficient likeable features to enable the audience to identify with him; (iv) a reasonably plausible story; and (v) understandable and not too highbrow.

If a film falls down in any of these areas, it will almost certainly irritate or bore people.

On the technical side the production, while seldom analyzed by filmgoers, must be sufficiently competent that it does not detract from the magic of a film. Using the above criteria as a building block, the direction of interests of the segments which we described in the section (deleted) appear to be as follows: — young teenagers — spectacular action, adventure stories, m ystery stories, 'pop m usicals and straightforward story-lines and dialogue. Humor is a very important element. . . most of the filmgoers in this section are not overly discriminating . . .

— independent teenagers — comedy, comic mystery, romance (for the girls), rock and roll, and horror.

— young adults — human drama and sophisticated comedy . . . Among the more settled, committed young adults, musicals start to gain popularity . . .

The uncommitted young adults are more inclined to . . . a measure of violence or suspense, although not on the unsophisticated level which appeals to younger people.

— older adults — human dramas, musicals, and sophisticated comedies. Historical films are also more popular among this age group than any other There are a number of things which tend to turn people off specific films. Most of these aspects relate to either the plausibility of the story and situations within the story, or to the ability of the audience to identify, or at least sympathize, with the major characters.

The problem areas include: (i) confusion and revulsion among the more conservative elements of the audience arising from what they perceive to be an unnecessarily high level of brutality or degradation which attaches to the hero/anti-hero of the film. Films which came in for this kind of criticism included

SPECTRUM REPORT

Taxi Driver, Last Tango in Paris, and Goodbye production. We believe that one of the reasons Picnic Norma Jean. . was not criticized for cheapness was the extensive use (ii) overly-developed or subtle story lines often leave of locations which avoided the repetition of similar many people confused over the point of the film. camera angles in cramped sets.

Several films which were initially described as Also, along with the low-budget criticism, is an “ dull” , “ boring” , “ no story-line” were, after apparent lack of skill in editing. What respondents are probing, admitted to be hard to follow. Films really speaking of is a lack of pace and tension in the which suffered from this type of criticism film for which they blame the director or editor. If this is in c lu d e d The French C onnection and carefully analyzed, the fault more likely lies in the Clockwork Orange. These films also failed to screenplay itself. This is not to say that good editing involve audiences with the characters. might not have minimized the negative effects of a slow (iii) young people are often confused and put off by passage in a film but does point up the need for “ adult” films. Political themes and intrigues which constant attention to the pace of a story from the initial they don’t understand bore them. Similarly, films scriptwriting stage. w hich re fe r to an area beyond th e ir Finally, under the topic of low budgets, is the question comprehension are often classified as boring or of Australian film stars. Very few people question that unimpressive. An exception to this is All the Australia can produce good actors. Often an actor will President’s Men which some young people went be blamed for his performance though it is based on to see out of curiosity “ to find out what Watergate inadequate script or less than perfect direction. The was all about” . other problem from which Australian actors frequently (iv) a cardinal sin is for a film to be slow, drawn out suffer is over-exposure in Australia. This is largely and fail to involve the audience. Barry Lyndon blamed on television where many of our current actors and Fiddler on the Roof were quoted as have been typecast as detectives and bushrangers. examples of films of this sort. Many Australian Under these circumstances, when an actor is seen films were seen to fall into this category. maybe once a week in the home, it is hard for an audience to perceive him as a star in a film. Although ~ / stars of soap operas do have a considerable following, T H E A U ST R A L IA N FILM the nature of their image is rather different from that of a film star. The identification process with a soap opera character is often so close that that actor becomes a The average Australian filmgoer is not particularly part of the viewer’s everyday life. A film star on the other interested in supporting the local industry by his hand is usually seen as glamorous, unattainable, attendance, though patriotically he wants to see it fabulously wealthy and, generally speaking, from succeed for reasons of national pride. His non­ another world. attendance is understandable when one examines the The second criticism centres on films that have been image which Australian films have — many people see made over the past few years and heralded as being them as poorly produced, on an inadequate budget Australian. The majority of filmgoers see them as falling using, at best, fairly stereotyped plots. Since the great into one of two classes: either ocker films, or self­ majority of filmgoers want to be entertained, it can be conscious Australians, relating to bushrangers, seen that with this kind of background, the perceived kangaroos and the like. While we realize, after reading risk of a boring, unsatisfactory evening watching an the list of Australian releases over the past few years, Australian film is too great. This is particularly true for that this is not the case, it is how consumers perceive the person who visits the cinema infrequently. It is Australian films. If a film is heralded as an Australian important that they enjoy the film — they feel they are production, this is what they expect to see. They are on safer ground if they see well-publicized, highly- bored with both these themes. praised overseas productions, rather than risk what Some of the adjectives which are used to describe could be a sub-standard Australian film.

Australian films include: “ ocker” , self-conscious, Basically, criticism of Australian films can be unprofessional, drawn-out, crude and blowing the separated into two broad categories: technical and national trumpet. budgetary; and excessive Australian overtones.

Although many males, particularly the younger ones, It is not true that many Australian filmgoers criticize get a good laugh from films such as Alvin Purple and Australian films because of specific technical aspects. Barry McKenzie, women and older men tend to reject What happens is that certain technical aspects of a such films as stereotyping and misrepresenting the production significantly detract from a film; they are Australian male overseas. There is also the possibility then rationalized by speaking in terms of production, that these films, although largely comedies, come too editing or whatever without understanding the true close to the truth for comfort. nature of the problem. However, some limitations of Everyone is sick of bushrangers; they are not Australian films occur in respondent statements particularly interested in them for their own sake. It’s sufficiently frequently for us to be able to deduce the quite possible that sub-consciously, Australians as a real reasons behind the comments. nation have become sick and tired of being known for Low budgets, for instance, are often blamed when a kangaroos, Fosters Lager and Ned Kelly. Even Ned, our film lacks reality. The causes of this are often more national folk hero, who wrote himself quite a good story, likely to be found in limited sets, unimaginative lighting doesn’t have quite the same excitement on celluloid. and unsophisticated or badly executed special effects. Subsequent bushranger stories are viewed a bit like The other side of this coin is clearly seen when westerns — “ if you’ve seen one, you’ve seen them all”. respondents speak of American films and talk of Picnic at Hanging Rock avoids many of the pitfalls spectaculars such as King Kong, The Towering mentioned above and is widely accepted as a Inferno etc. What they are really speaking of here is the professional, international class film. Although the expanse of the sets and the imaginative use of camera environment is unmistakably Australian, it is not made a angles to create the effect of a big production. Picnic at feature of, it is merely part of the story. It is a film which Hanging Rock for instance, did not come in for this type the great majority of respondents felt could be sent of criticism, although it was a comparatively low budget overseas without the embarrassment of giving Australia

a bad name for jingoism or plain lack of skill.

Although, the film was made with a reasonable small budget, it attracts none of the criticism associated with most Australian films which seem to be made on a low budget. Although it is criticized for being a trifle slow in places, it is generally seen as a film which sustains its pace and tension, and it does not suffer from having a host of ex-television personalities crowding the screen.

For many, Picnic at Hanging Rock is living evidence of the fact that Australian films can be extremely well made and highly entertaining to a wide spectrum of audience tastes.

One respondent commented: “ It could have been filmed anywhere . . . it just happened to be in Australia” . This sums up the attitudes of many people towards Australian films. They feel that Australian filmmakers should forget that they are Australian and set their sights on finding a good story to film.

Filmmakers should make a conscious effort to avoid looking around for some peculiarly Australian feature or incident and building a story around it.

One other area which emerged from the discussion on Australian films was that a considerable number of Australian film stars are considered to be over-exposed and typecast, and there is some evidence to suggest that this can be a disadvantage to their film careers.

Very few people objected in principle to Australian actors. However, it was a fairly frequently voiced opinion that successful overseas stars can be a big draw in Australian films. This is attributed largely to their star quality and ability, and also because they have not become familiar on the television screen.

Australian Film Successes Several recent Australian films generated a high degree of awareness as well as achieving success at the box-office.

The most obvious success is Picnic at Hanging Rock. This film is acclaimed primarily because of its universal appeal (it is seen to offer something for everyone) and its co m b in a tion of e x c e lle n t photography, first-rate acting and a unique mixture of a good story with pace, suspense and excitement. The only real criticism was that it was slightly too long and as a result, lost its pace momentarily. In addition, Picnic was acclaimed because it did not dwell too much on its Australian origin.

Picnic clearly has a stronger appeal to women than men. It does seem to have induced many non-goers to see the film, particularly older women.

Caddie achieved success for similar reasons.

However, it ran second to Picnic for several reasons. It did not have as broad a base of audience appeal, being far more orientated towards women. It was also far more obviously Australian in origin.

At the time this research project was conducted there was a very high awareness of Eliza Fraser, due mainly to the pre-launch publicity and the international stars Trevor Howard and Susannah York. Eliza Fraser also benefited from the publicity about its $1.5m budget, as low budgets do keep people away from Australian films.

Sunday Too Far Away was well received because it combined an interesting story, good acting, a star in the person of Jack Thompson and because Its Australian characters were believable, unlike the exaggerated parodies of Barry McKenzie and Alvin Purple.

It is interesting that a lot of older people have fond memories of They’re A Weird Mob despite the fact that it received severe criticism on release because of its bad language and heavy drinking emphasis, which are the main complaints with Bazza.

Wake in Fright is an example of a film which was extremely Australian in character and yet was well received because it portrayed a believable side of Australian life. Some people felt it could have only limited appeal overseas and are concerned about exporting this image of Australia (also quoted about Barry McKenzie, Stork, Alvin, etc.).

Australian Film Failures It is more difficult to evaluate film failures; most people tend to put them out of their minds quickly because they were boring and unmemorable.

Number 96 and The Box were heavily criticized as being “ rip-offs” in that there was nothing new about them. The standards that are acceptable for television soap operas are simply not sufficient for a feature film.

Oz was strongly rejected, in Melbourne particularly, with many young people making pre dicta ble comparisons with Tommy, Godspell and Jesus Christ Superstar. Oz was seen as very unprofessional and the music simply did not hold even the teenage audience.

Eskimo Nell is another good example of a film that simply did not create sufficient involvement. It was criticized for the weakness of the piot and for being far too drawn out and boring.

The Great McCarthy, which few remembered, is a case of a film which was behind the eight-ball from the start because of confusion over its story (it was variously described as a “football film”, “ a different kind kind of love story” ). ★ Cinema Papers, January — 237

HIM PERIODICALS - A HISTORICAL SURVEY PART 2: BRITAIN The 19th century was an inventor’s age, and this was most apparent in the fields of photography and lantern shows. There were devices such as the lampascope, which was lit by a paraffin lamp and projected panoramic wonders; the phenakisticope, that made a painted image move convincingly; and the triple-lensed, three-tiered brass lantern that permitted superimposed fades and dissolves from one glass slide to the next.

These developments were documented in a London journal, The Optical Magic Lantern and Photographic Enlarger, which was established in 1889. In November 1904, shortly after Edwin S. Porter had completed The Great Train Robbery, the publication changed its name to Optical Lantern and Kinematograph Journal, and became the first monthly film publication in Britain.

By May 1907 it had become a weekly, with the title, The Kinematograph and Lantern Weekly, the reversal in the wording showing that the magic lantern was on the way out and the world of cinema was being born. Then, on December 4, 1919, the journal adopted the name, The Kinematograph Weekly, which survived for the next 50 years. The success of the cinema trade was seen in the journal’s size — more than 100 pages of information on technical developments, synopses and reviews of the new films.

In 1912 The Kinematograph already had a competitor which was directed more to the exhibitor than to the “ renter” , as the distributors were then called. The new journal, The Cinema News and Property Gazette, had grown out of the real-estate journal Mayfair 238 — Cinema Papers, January

News and Property Gazette at a time when the hottest properties in London were those suitable for conversion to cinemas. Business was so brisk that Cinema News became a daily publication, and was in turn followed by The Daily Renter.

For the film sociologist, the early numbers of Kinematograph Weekly and Daily Cinema make fascinating reading, although for the film historian and critic their value is more limited.

Like Variety in the U.S., these trade journals are primarily concerned with promoting commercial film productions and recording economic successes and failures, but between the lines one can distinguish the philosophy of the commercial filmmakers.

The first English-language journal to be concerned with film as art was Close Up, published by POOL at Chateau Riant in Territet, Switzerland. This organization was also involved in film production. The proprietress was Bryther, a pseudonym for W inifred Ellerm an, daughter of m u lti­ millionaire shipowner Sir John Ellerman, and wife of the editor of Close Up, Kenneth MacPherson.

Close Up began publication in July 1927 and continued till December 1933. The magazine was distributed by a London office, and had correspondents in Paris, London, Hollywood, Berlin, Geneva and Moscow. Each number was prefaced by a lengthy editorial discussing problems such as the nature of the film medium, and later the role of sound, which, at first, was not welcomed.

In its first issue, editor M acPherson deplored the fact that the public regarded films as “ trash” and “ box-office stunts” , but added, “ fifty-odd years hasn’t done so badly in getting an art into the world that fifty more will probably turn into THE art” .

Such sentiments, however, did not mean that Close Up was concerned only with art

B a sil Gilbert films. The range of material covered was quite comprehensive: reports on national cinemas throughout the world; answers to technical questions; psychological studies (“ The Film in Its Relation to the Unconscious” ); reports on the new talkies; and book reviews.

Contributors included Sergei Eisenstein and Upton Sinclair, and one number was devoted entirely to Negro cinema. The journal had a wide cultural point of view and even ventured to publish poetry (Gertrude Stein) and creative writing. A reprint edition of Close Up became available in 1969, published in Geneva and London.

When Sight and Sound was established at the beginning of the sound era it was not the official publication of the British Film Institute it is today. It began publication as The Quarterly Review of Modern Aids, a journal on the visual and aural aids to education of film, radio, music, and to a lesser degree, television.

The sponsor was the British Institute for Adult Education, and the idea for the journal arose out of exhibitions of mechanical aids for learning in London in 1930 and 1931.

The Quarterly Review of Modern Aids was soon arguing the case for a national film institute, and when the British Film Institute was finally established in October 1933, it adopted the journal and christened it Sight and Sound. The administrative staff of the new institute was a balance between educational forces and representatives of the film industry (the general manager was former secretary of the British Institute of Adult Education, and the secretary was ex-president of the 1912formed Cinematograph Exhibitors Associa­ tion). The new journal was also finely balanced in its twin concerns: film as an educational tool and film as an entertainment medium.

The early numbers of Sight and Sound provided an important adjunct to the BFI information service, whose aim was “ to act as

FILM PERIODICALS

a clearing house for information on films, apparatus and technique, to keep in touch with educational films and research abroad and to supply news to members and all societies interested in the cultural and educational use of film. It also aims to assist research students in a field where the obstacles to research are, at the moment, immense” .

But the educational bias of the pioneering numbers of Sight and Sound is more than mere historical interest. One may enjoy the antiquarian flavor of articles, such as “ Broadcasting and the Film Lantern” or “ Som e P ro b le m s in T a lk ie C am era Structure” , but of greater value perhaps are the insights to be gained into the documentary film movement in England in the 1930s, that golden age of British film production. The articles by John Grierson (“ I look on cinema as a pulpit, and use it as a propagandist” ), Paul Rotha and Roger Manvell give the modern reader a good idea of the prevailing film aesthetics of the time, the ’30s school of British criticism that was to be strongly attacked and refuted by the younger British critics in the following decades.

The early numbers of Sight and Sound are also important from a sociological point of view. One learns, for example, that the Cinematograph Films Act which was passed in 1927 . . to secure the renting and exhibition of a certain proportion of British films” had important and effective quota provisions. By means of the quota provisions “ the production of British feature films (rose) from about 30 in 1927, the year before the Act came into effect, to 189 in 1934-5” , which is an increase of more than 600 per cent. Perhaps a lesson lies for Australia in these statistics.

Sight and Sound has become more concerned with film criticism than with technical or historical information. However, its critical stance has not escaped the censure of the younger critics. There have been numerous debates on the subject, one of the more lively being the interchange between Alan Lovell, editor of the shortlived radical film journal Definition, and Penelope Houston, editor of Sight and Sound. To Lovell, Sight and Sound showed a “ lack of enthusiasm and evasion of judgement” , to which Miss Houston replied,

“ Enthusiasm, for what?”

Sight and Sound is very much concerned with literary style (eg., “ Hawks is not a forder of rivers; his dryness could never risk a real soaking. He is a man who has filled his life contemplating the river and turning away periodically to make a beguiling model of it, another stream, dark and shiny as celluloid” ), but mixed with such examples of belle-lettres one finds important interviews (recent ones have included Claude Chabrol, Andre Delvaux, Robert Bresson, Steven Spielberg and Billy Wilder); succinct historical material such as a study of “ The Yorkshire Pioneers” ; and pithy reviews of current films.

Apart from assuming sponsorship of Sight and Sound in 1934, the BFI also decided to issue a monthly bulletin with an annotated list of current releases in Britain which the institute regarded as being “ of educational value or of unusual merit” . This was The Monthly Film Bulletin which today is an indispensable aid for the student of film. It lists all the films released in Britain each year, with full credits and concise synopses, followed by critical notes.

The early numbers of Monthly Film Bulletin are invaluable for the historian of the British documentary. Before the entertainment film became an accepted genre in Britain, the magazine concentrated its reports under a series of practical headings: Domestic Science (Frying Batter; Pork Pie); Geography and Travel (Fruitlands of Kent); British History (The Union Jack); Applied Science (The Cathode Ray Oscillograph) and Zoology (Sea Crabs). The section, Entertainment Films, remained in second place until as late as 1939, when a wide variety of international films were discussed and analysed.

The post-war years in Britain saw the establishment of two new film periodicals, Penguin Film Review and Sequence, neither of which exist today; but both are landmarks in the development of British film criticism.

Penguin Film Review, despite its title, has no film reviews in the conventional sense of the word. Instead, one finds a series of reflective essays, discussions on social aspects of film

AFTERIMAGE

FILMS AND FILMING

A fterim age P ublishing Co., 1 2 -1 3 Little Newport St., London, W C2H 7JJ. Irregular, 75p.

Hansom Books, A rtillery M ansions, 75 V ictoria St., London, SW 1.

Monthly, L6.50 p.a.

C ircula tion: 32,000.

Indexed: Int. Ind. Film Per.

CONTINENTAL FILM REVIEW Eurap P ublishing Co. Ltd., R oding Trading Estate, Barking, Essex.

M onthly, L6.20 p.a.

C ircu la tio n : 55,000.

FILM B ritish Federation of Film Societies, 81 Dean St., London, W 1V 6AA. M onthly, L3 p.a.

C ircula tion: 8500.

around the world, technical reports, and Listener-style versions of BBC radio broadcasts about films. Some of these broadcasts were very leisurely in tone, as when editor Roger Manvell said in his discussion of Flandet, “ Let us for a moment examine the artistic problems of whether Shakespeare should be filmed at all” , and added ambiguously, “ Hamlet is really a young prince, a student with a still attractive mother” .

Other writers were less enigmatic. Jean­ George Auriol, who was then editor of the prestigious Revue du Cinema (the forerunner of Cahiers du C inem a), supplied an authoritative piece on contemporary French cinema; Lotte Eisner looked at the films of Fritz Lang; Eisenstein expounded on stereo­ scopic cinema (this was his last essay); and Harry Watt (The Overlanders) headed his contribution, “ You Start from Scratch in Australia” .

Penguin Film Review had completed nine numbers, when a short obituary notice appeared in the trade paper, The Daily Film Renter. “ And so the Penguin Film Review dies — and it serves ’em right! Its sponsors preferred to learn the hard way that, in spite of the British Film Institute, the film societies and all the educational forces that are brought to bear, the public for films of the intellect is very small by comparison with the millions who go to be entertained.”

But Penguin Film Review flickered on for another three years in the form of an annual publication, Cinema 1950 (51, 52), with a number of important articles by Robert Flaherty and screenplay extracts from six British films: Chance of a Lifetime; Great Expectations; The Lavender Hill Mob; Kind Hearts and Coronets; The Third Man; and Secret People.

Indexed: Int. Ind. Film Per., Retrospective Ind., Ind. Crit. Film Revs.

FILMS ILLUSTRATED Independent M agazines Ltd., 181 Queen V ictoria St., London, EG4V 4DD. M onthly, L5.50 p.a.

C ircula tion: 13,500.

FOCUS ON FILM

The contributors to Sequence, which appeared in autumn 1947, were mainly under­ graduates at Oxford University, and their philosophy of film was “ uncompromisingly independent” .

A number of the editorial panel included budding filmmakers, scriptwriters and critics.

Continued on P. 279

MONOGRAM

SCREEN INTERNATIONAL

Monogram P ublications, 63 Old Compton St., London W1V 5PN. Bi-m onthly, L1.25 for four issues.

C ircula tion: 2000.

King P ublications, Film House, 1 4 2 -1 5 0 W ardour St., London, W 1V 4BR. W eekly, L23 p.a.

Indexed: Int. Ind. Film Per.

MONTHLY FILM BULLETIN British Film Institute, 81 Dean St., London W1V 6AA. M onthly, L3.20 p.a.

Indexed: Int. Ind. Film Per. Abstracted: Film Review Digest.

Also available in m icrofilm (WMP).

MOVIE

Indexed: Int. Ind. Film Per., Retrospective Ind., Ind. Crit. Film Revs.

FILM DOPE

Indexed: Int. Ind. Film Per., Ind. Crit. Film Revs.

S ociety for E ducation in Film and Television, 29 Old Compton St., London, W 1V 5P 1.

Quarterly, L4.50 p.a.

C ircula tion: 5000.

FRAMEWORK

indexed: Int. Ind. Film Per., Ind. Crit. Film Revs.

-

Indexed: Film. Lit. Index.

FILM FORM Room 11 7, S quires Building, S andyford Rd., N ew castle-upon-T yne, NE1 8ST. Three issues p.a., L1.50 p.a.

Indexed: Int. Ind. Film Per., Ind. Crit. Film Revs., Art Index, Brit. Hum. Ind., Hum. Ind. Abstracts: Film Review Digest.

UNIVERSITY VISION British U niversities Film C ouncil, 72 Dean St., London, W1 V 5HB. Two issues p.a., L2.50 p.a.

SCREEN

Tantivy Press, 1 08 New Bond St., London, W 1Y 02X. Quarterly, L6 p.a.

W arw ick U niversity Arts Federation, 64 S pencer Avenue, Earlsdon, C oventry, W arw ickshire CV4 7AL. Quarterly, 25p per issue.

British Film Institute, 81 Dean St., London W 1V 6AA. Quarterly, L2.90 p.a.

C ircula tion: 34,000.

Also available in m icrofilm (WMP).

25 Lloyd B aker St., London W C1X 9AT. Quarterly, L4 p.a.

C ircula tion: 6500.

Indexed: Ind. Crit. Film Revs.

Abstracts: Film Review Digest.

5 Norman Court, Little Heath, Potters Bar, H ertfordshire, EN6 1 HY. Q uarterly, L2.80 p.a.

C ircula tion: 1000.

SIGHT AND SOUND

'

Abbreviations of Indexes: Int. Ind. Film Per. International Index to Film P eriodicals R etrospective Ind. R etrospective Index to Film P eriodicals Ind. Crit. Film Revs. Index of C ritical Film Reviews (Bowles) Hum. Ind. H um anities Index Brit. Hum. Ind. British H um anities Index Film Lit. Ind. Film Literature Index

Cinema Papers, January — 239

INTERNATIONAL PRODUCTION ROUND-UP

_______________________________________________________________ ___________ _________ Verina Glaessner

BRITAIN Production on The Sex Pistols’ first feature, Anarchy in the UK, was suspended on the departure of director Russ Meyer after the film ran into financial problems. It has since found independent finance and will roll at some future, unspecified time. Meanwhile, Brian Eno is scoring Derek Jarman’s punk rock film.

EMI’s belated follow up to Murder on the Orient Express, Death on the Nile, is shooting in Egypt and at Pinewood.

John Guillermin directs, and the cast includes Peter Ustinov, Jane Birkin and Bette Davis.

Alan Parker's first film after his success with Bugsy Malone is Midnight Express, produced by David Puttnam and Alan Marshall. Shooting on location in Malta and Greece, it features John Hurt, Bo Hopkins and Randy Quaid (for Columbia).

Kevin Connor continues his line in monster films with Seven Cities to Atlantis (for EMI) with Cyd Charisse, Doug McClure and Peter Gilmore. It is being shot in Malta and Gozo with principal photography at Pinewood.

Guy Hamilton directs another film version of an Alistair MacLean novel, F o rc e Ten F ro m N a v a rone, on location in Yugoslavia and at Shepperton. Robert Shaw, Franco Nero and Edward Fox are the stars. It is produced by Carl Foreman for Columbia.

Ken Russell is directing Clouds of Glory, with David Warner and David Hemmings (for Granada Television). It is from a screenplay by Melvyn Bragg and is set in the Lake District. Clouds of Glory — the series title for three plays (all written by Bragg) about the poets and writers Wordsworth, Coleridge, Southey and Thomas de Quincy — will be shot for te le v is io n . D avid W a rne r plays Wordsworth.

Blake Edwards is in pre-production at Shepperton with Revenge of the Pink Panther.

The biography of Agatha Christie, Agatha, wholly funded from the U.S. (Warner Brothers and First Artists), is on location in Harrogate and London. It features Vanessa Redgrave, Dustin Hoffman and Australia’s Helen Morse who has replaced Julie Christie in the cast.

Among Lord Lew G rade’s vast production list are Ingmar Bergman’s Autumn Sonata, Stanley Donen’s Double Feature and a projected modern version of The Lone Ranger, The British Film Institute Production Board is funding Rapuntzel, a film made

by Francine Winham and a group of women previously involved in the now defunct London Women’s Film Group.

Using theatre and animation, the film examines the sexual politics of the fairytale.

UNITED STATES Brian de Palma directs The Fury (20th Century) from a John Farris script. It stars Kirk Douglas, John Cassavetes and Carrie Snodgrass.

John Milius directs his own script for Big Wednesday for Warners. His next project is a film of Marvel Conres’ C o n a n th e B a rb a ria n which will feature Arnold Schwarzenegger in the title role.

Mark Robson follows Earthquake with the Abraham P olonsky scrip te d " Avalanche Express. Based on a novel

by Colin Forbes, it is being filmed in Europe.

240 — Cinema Papers, January

Murder on the Nile

Michael Hodges directs the inevitable Omen follow-up Damien — Omen 2 in Chicago. Stanley Mann co-wrote the script with Hodges and the film features William Holden, Jonathan Scott-Taylor and Lee Grant (for 20th Century).

Burt Lancaster stars in Ted Post’s Go Tell It To The Spartans, a Vietnam war story based on the novel In c id e n t a t M u c Wa by Daniel Ford.

Arthur Hiller starts shooting Stormy Women in New York in December. It’s about four women from different walks of life, and the film is scripted by Luciano Vincenzoni.

Among a mixed bag of productions announced by the prolific Dino de Laurentiis are William Friedkin’s Big Stick Up at Brinks being made on a $1 0 million budget with Peter Falk; The Hurricane, a $15 million project which Roman Polanski is hopefully to direct; and an even more fabulously budgeted version of Flash Gordon.

James Coburn plays the eye in a version of Dashiell Hammett’s The D a in C u rs e , called Private Eye. Alvin Rackoff directs King Solomon’s Treasure.

American International predictably enter the Star Wars syndrome with Starcrash, directed by Lewis Cozzi from his own script. The stars are Carolyn Munro and Marjoe Gortner.

Scott Jacoby and Randy Herman fe a tu re in the same c o m p an y’s California Dreamin’.

Ivan Reitman, who produced and directed the notably grotesque Cannibal Girls, produces John Landis' National Lampoon’s Animal House for Universal.

Sidney Lumet directs The Wiz (for Universal), another re-interpretation of the Wizard of Oz, shot on location in New York, with Diana Ross, Richard Pryor and Lena Horne.

Irvin Kershner directs Eyes with Faye Dunaway for Columbia. Jerry Jameson, of Airport ’77, directs The Day the Sun Died for an independent company.

W olfm an Ja ck is c a s t in M ike McFarland’s Good Time Band for Mike McFarland Prods.

Robert Rosenthal directs Malibu Beach fo r Crown In te rn a tio n a l.

Paramount are producing American Hot Wax, the story of Alan Freed, the leading 1950s rock ’n’ roll DJ. _ Don Siegel is scheduled to direct I, Tom Horn for Steve McQueen’s Solar Productions.

Georgina Spelvin, easily the best of the U.S. porno actresses, stars in the El Paso Wrecking Corp for Joe Gage Films. It is being shot in Southern California.

Joseph McBride’s script of Blood and Guts is being produced for Independent Pictures/Quadrant Films. It is being directed by Paul Lynch and is shooting in Toronto.

FRANCE Claude Chabrol’s next project is Violette Lozieres for Gaumont. It stars Isabelle Huppert.

The much acclaimed director Andre Techine is to shoot The Bronte Sisters with Isabelle Huppert, Isabelle Adjani and Marie France Pisier.

Eric Rohmer’s Perceval le Gaullois is this director’s second costume drama (the first was Die Marquise von O ...). It has a $2 million budget (for Gaumont).

Nagisa Oshima’s Phantom Love will be made on the Empire of the Senses model. It will be shot in Japan and processed in France. Produced by Anatole Dauman, the film is about murder and guilt.

Jacques Rivette continues his Duelle-Noroit ‘phantom ladies’ series, with Merry Go Round (for Sunchild Productions). .

Joseph Losey directs Roads to the South, the story of a Spanish refugee who returns after the democratization of his country. The script is by Jorge Semprun (Tinacra Films).

Francois Truffaut plays the lead in his The Green Room (Carrosse Films).

Serge Leroy directs Attention, the Children Are Watching, a remake of the classic Vittorio de Sica film for Alain Delon’s Adel Productions. Delon stars.

Ernest Tidyman is scripting Giants on the Road, for Orphee Arts — a film about trucks. Michel Piccoli stars in Alan Bridges’ A Girl in Blue Velvet, which is set in 1930s Cannes (for Orphee Arts).

ITALY Sergio Citti starts filming Something Blonde with Monica Vitti (for Parva) in November. Gillo Pontecorvo directs Operation Ogro, an Italian Canadian co­ production.

Pierre Clementi and Fernando Rey star in another adaptation of de Sade’s P h ilo s o p h y o f th e B e d ro o m (for Sword) in Roma and Altamira, Spain. Dino Risi is working on an untitled project, starring Ugo Tognazzi and Ornella Muti (for Dean).

Miklos Jancso is to direct a film for RAI on World War I. Francesco Rosi begins shooting his adaptation of Carlo Levi’s C h r is t S to p p e d A t E b o li in March.

S e rgio S o llim a c o n tin u e s the Sandokan vogue with My Name is Sandokan, which stars Kabir Bedi. It’s being shot on location in Sri Lanka (for Rizzoli Film).

Monte Heilman is producing an Italian Spanish co-production, China 9 — Liberty 37, starring Fabio Testi and Warren Oates, It will be directed by Tony Brandt.

SWEDEN Jorn Donner directs a film based on Maeta Tikkanan’s feminist novel M e n C a n n o t B e R a p e d . It is co-scripted by Jeannette Donner.

CANADA David Cronenberg, who followed his two remarkable experimental features Stereo and Crimes of the Future with an encouragingly uncompromising and h ig h ly s u c c e s s fu l tra n s itio n to commercial features with The Parasite Murders and Rabid, is currently working on The Brood. This, is a more distanced and reasoned approach to the themes that have tended to haunt his work and is, he claims, largely autobiographical but “ nonetheless horrible for being so” .

HONG KONG Michael Hui, the vastly successful producer/writer/director/performer, is filming a comedy about a film extra with am bitions. It’s a Golden Harvest production. The company is still attempting to resurrect something from the footage of Bruce Lee’s unfinished Game of Death. Robert Clouse has joined the cast which includes Gig Young, Dean Jagger and Hugh O’Brian.

BELGIUM Harry Kumel, who will be remembered for the moody evocative qualities of M. Hawarden, Daughters of Darkness, and the scandalously undershown Malpertuis (from the Jean Ray novel), is filming The Lost Paradise — his first film in several years — for Pierre Films from a script by himself and Kees Sengers.

It stars Willeke van Ammelrooy, Hugo van den Berghe and Bert Andre, and is a melee of rural politics and haur\ting romance: “The rebirth of a love betrayed that has to fight the intrigues of low village minds, of small town demagogy and of large-scale scandals. Very large scale indeed.”

Box-Office Grosses* 0(1)1 55‘ T IT L E

T H IS Q U A R T E R 2 .7 .7 7 to 2 9 .1 0 .7 7

LAST QUARTER 2 .7 .7 7 to 2 9 .1 0 .7 7

CT C o -<«

SYD.

M LB.

PTH.

ADL.

B R I.

Storm Boy

SAFC

(1 2)*(3) 2 7 8 ,5 2 8

(17 )* 388,941

(D * 1 9 ,9 2 6

(17 )* 7 0 ,2 8 9

(3)* 7 7 ,9 5 3

8 3 5 ,6 3 7

Getting of Wisdom |

RS

(1 0 )* 1 5 0 ,6 8 7

(10 )* 2 1 0 ,3 1 4

-

(5)* 3 2 ,6 7 4

(5)* 4 0 ,2 3 8

4 3 3 ,9 1 3

Don’s Party

MCA

(6)* 4 5 ,8 8 6

(17 )* 1 5 7 ,6 0 6

(3) 3 2 ,0 2 5

-

(8) 4 2 ,5 8 2

2 7 8 ,0 9 9

High Rolling

RS

GO) 7 5 ,3 1 6

(10) 6 9 ,6 5 4

(7) 6 2 ,3 5 7

(5) 2 0 ,7 8 2

(6) 3 8 ,2 7 4

2 6 6 ,3 8 3

Picture Show Man

RS

(11) 53,711

(9) 3 0 ,1 8 4

(8) 3 9 ,5 8 4

(6) 3 0 ,5 9 9

(5) 2 5 ,0 3 9

1 7 9 ,1 1 7

Picnic at Hanging Rock

GUO

(5)* 4 3 ,9 4 2

(7)* 4 2 ,5 8 3

(4) 1 8 ,20 0

(4)* 2 5 ,40 6

(6) 3 1 ,8 8 0

Journey Among Women

GUO

G O )* 7 7 ,0 2 4

(3)* 3 0 ,2 2 6

(4)* 2 2 ,6 5 0

- .

Summerfield

GUO

(4)* 4 6 ,0 7 4

(2)* 2 1 ,8 4 3

Devil’s Playground

RS

(D * 5 ,5 5 0

-

Deafhcheaters

RS

-

Raw Deal

GUO

F. J. Holden Caddie

(2)

.-

$

PTH.

ADL.

(13 )* 6 6 ,9 6 3

B R I.

$

33 0) 3

-

66,963

5

—

-

-

—

14 ,99 2

2 1 ,05 9

-

260,050

1

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

2

6

-

-

-

-

-

-

—

1 2 9 ,9 0 0

7

-

-

-

-

-

-

—

_

-

-

2

-

-

-

3

(3) 13 ,92 7

(13 )* 2 1 0 ,0 7 2

4

-

5

162,011

-

-

6 7 ,9 1 7

8

~

-

-

-

-

-

(2) 1 4 ,03 0

-

-

1 9 ,58 0

9

(1) 5 ,1 7 6

(3) 13 ,46 2

(10) 6 9 ,4 6 0

-

-

88,098

-

(1) 15,247

-

-

1 5 ,24 7

10

-

-

-

(1) 1,068

-

1,068

-

-

(1) 1 4 ,14 2

-

-

14,142

11

-

-

"T O 1 1 ,51 0

-

-

11,510

9

GUO

-

-

-

-

10,421

12

(5) 3 3 ,06 7

(6) 4 2 ,6 5 5

-

(2) 4 ,2 1 0

(2) 6 ,8 0 0

86,732

4

GUO

-

-

-

-

1 0 ,09 8

13

(5) 1 6 ,19 9

-

(1) 3,3 16

N/A

-

19,515

8

112,195

93,300

14,784

765,015

-

'

(2) 10,421 (5) 1 0 ,09 8

951,351

258,680

179,750

255,966

2,412,465

2,828,408

2,812,031

782,570

787,856

1,434,952

8,645,817

2,953,745 3,060,181 1,376,696

914,725

884,353

9,189,700

3,605,126

3,763,382

1,041,250

967,606

1,690,918 11,068,282

3,128,679 3,429,983 1,488,891

1,008,025

899,137

9,954,715

’

\

'

174,934

369,802

V IC

WA

SA

Q LD

S ta te s

3

*

13

(1) A u stralian theatrica l distributo r only. RS — Roadshow; GUO — G reater U nion O rganiz ìtio n Film Dis tribu tors; FO X — 20th Cerltu ry Fox; UA — United A rtists; C IC — Cinem a International C o rpo ration' FW — Filmw ays A u strala sian D istribut ors; 7K — 7 <eys Film Di. trib u to rs ; CO L — C olum bia Pictures; REG — Regent Film D istributors; CCG — Cinema C entre G ro i p; AFC — A ustralian Film C om m ission SAFC — South A u stralian Film C orporation: M CA — M usic C orporation of Am erica; S — Sharm ill Film s. (2) Figures are draw n fro m ca p ita l city and inner suburban first release hardtops only. (3) Playing period in w eeks for given city . (4) New Sea son.

BOX-OFFICE GROSSES

Cinema Papers, January

776.718

A ll NSW

—

-

Not Available. = C ontinuing into next period.

-

M LB.

-

This figure represents the total box-office gross of all foreign film s show n during the period in the area specified.

$

T o ta l SYD.

1

B o x-office grosses of individual film s have been supplied to Cinema Papers by the A u stralian Film Com m ission

‘

33 fi} 3

-

Australian Total Foreign0 Total Grand Total

• 0

T o ta l

T O T A L $ TO D ATE

CAMCRA:

SOUND:

GRIP:

16mm double system production: ECLAIR, NPR. 16mm hand held: ECLAIR, ACL. 16mm single system: ECLAIR, ACL, SS. 35mm double system tecniscope and academy: ECLAIR, CAMEFLEX. 35mm hand held: MOVIECAM.

STELLAVOX SP8.2: dual track sync recorder, AMI-48: 5-channel mixer.

MAGNASYNC: transfer recorders, insert, dubbers, reproducers, displacement, recorders and reproducers.

MICRON: radio mike transmitters

LOWEL: link location systems. MATHEWS and RDS: fo rg o b o ’s, stands, flags, cutters, pole cats, scrims, nets, sun screens, clamps and grips. MILLER and QUICKSET: tripods.

TVP: dollys. LOWEL and TVP:sound booms.

LIGHTING: Flickerfree HMI fresnel and open face focussing heads: LTM 200, 575, 1200, 2500 and 4000. KOBOLD fill lighting 575 and 1200. Portable lighting systems LOWEL TOTA and LQD “ yellow heads ’. LOWEL SOFT lights and OMNI lights. Battery driven KOBOLD HMI sungun.

C olour control and diffusion by ROSCO cinegel.

S£TS:

STUDIO:

Grid and hanger systems by RDS and LTM. Studio lighting fixtures by RDS, LTM. Colour effects by ROSCO SUPERGEL. TVP studio dollys and booms.

Paint by ROSCOPAINT. Cladding by ROSCOTALIX Drapes and costume effects by ROSCOGLAME. Mosaics by ROSCOLENE. Breakaways by ROSCOBREAKAWAYS.

LAB:

POSTPRODUCTION:

ifficrs:

NEILSON HORDELL & OXBERRY fo r effects and step printers, liquid gates by OXBERRY.Test equipm ent by HOLLYWOOD FILM CORPORATION.Standard­ isation by SMPTE test films.

PREVOST 16/35 combination editing tables, MOVIOLA flat bed and upright editors, ACMADE pic syncs, EASTON syncronisers and winders, HFC and CIR splicers, Mylar and acetate splicing tape, horses, benches, trim bins and scissors.

OXBERRY animation stands from super 8 to com puter controlled master series with aerial image. NEILSON HORDEL super trick front projection systems and animation stands with aerial image. FAX 16mm low cost anim ation stands.

VOCATION: A.R. ‘ A ndy” GIBSON. HUGH KINGSLEY ROSS OGILVY IAN McAULEY

Sydney melbourne brisbane perth

26 1981 62 1133 52 8816 325 2910

H.O.

8 dungate lane Sydney 2000. telex.

77 city rd, sth melbourne 3205.

28 baxter st, fortitude valley 4006.

121 hill st, east perth 3205.

AA AA AA AA

26664 30912 42054 93582

« M M ^ r a H i

'*SR~ä* ^ ^

FRED SCHEPISI P ro d u c e r/Director/Scriptwriter T hom as K en ea lly ’s ‘T he C hant of J im m ie B la c k sm ith ’ Why adapt Thomas Keneally’s book? is one of A u str a lia ’s few great n o v els. It te lls th e story of a young half-blood A boriginal who leaves h is tribe to It is something that is normally m ak e a go of life in a w h ite m a n ’s world. C onfronted by against my principles, because I pressures he cannot control, he explodes in a fatefu l believe a work of art in a particular media should stay in that media; I “ declaration of w ar’’. don’t believe it is transferable.

S ch ep isi started h is career in advertising at 15. H e then T h e r e a re so m e n o ta b le took charge of tele v isio n production for one advertising exceptions, but I think they are agency before jo in in g C inesound P rodu ctions, V ictoria, as almost always films which are quite different to the book — m anager in 1964. Two years later, he took over the firm Orson Welles’ The Trial, for and form ed h is own production h ou se, T he F ilm H ou se. example.

S c h e p isi’s first fictio n a l film w as “ T he P r ie st’’, a h a lf­ So, I was very wary. However, I hour episode from “ L ibido’’. “ T he D e v il’s P laygrou n d ’’, believe Thomas Keneally wrote the book with it being filmed in w hich follow ed in 1976, w as a fin a n c ia l and critical mind. It is a very visual book, su ccess, and w as the second A u stra lia n film to be invited though when you try to break to th e D irectors Fortnight at C an n es. down and transfer it into film, it is In the follow ing in terview , conducted by A u stra lia n an entirely different proposition. F ilm In stitu te execu tive director D avid Roe and Scott There are just so many things in it M urray, S ch ep isi ta lk s about h is direction, th e lo g istica l that you can’t do in film — newspaper reading would be the problem s of shootin g a $1.2 m illio n film over 14 w eek s, and h is h an d lin g of actors. simplest example.

As well, Keneally is such a p recise w riter th at in one sentence, he can give you a balance between black and white feelings and sympathy for a character, and that you can’t do so easily in film.

What I did was to read the book again and again until I found what he was about. I then put that aside and tried to find my own justification for it, treating it as if I was writing it myself.

What attracted you to the book in the first place?

The subject matter. I think it is a great story, one that is extremely relevant today. I believe it is the kind of story that can reach people on a mass level, and also say something that needs to be said in this country.

244 — Cinema Papers, January

Given the Australian public’s attitude to Aboriginals, do you see a problem in trying to create sympathy for the character?

Would you say so? (Schepisi holds up a photo of Tommy Lewis). With a guy who is as handsome and compelling as that — I don’t think so.

Of course I was concerned, but while I may sit here and talk to you about audiences, in the end yoh can only make a film for yourself You have to make it to your integrity and to the way you truly feel.

You can’t be worried about w hether the audience needs violence, sex or whatever, other ' than in terms of letting them know where they are and what they are meant to feel. Obviously it is no good making a film without any signposts in it — you need some consideration for the audience — but since there is no way of really knowing, you just do what you feel is going to create a real experience.

How have you handled the violence in the film?

Is the film’s concern on racial matters a universal one, or one relevant largely to the Australian situation?

It is universal; it is about half­ castes, of being black and white, and about being torn between two worlds, two cultures. That is a situation that exists everywhere, and I think the ramifications of it are the same. I am sure black audiences world wide will go crazy question of what is the norm for for it. society.

H o w e v e r, th e film i s n ’t specifically one-sided. The book What effect will this de-villaintends to paint all the whites as out- ization have on the dramatic and-out rats, and I don’t believe tension? that they would have been; they were just acting the way they I am not actually de-villainizing knew. them because what they were We are a lot better educated doing was wrong. Rather, I am now, but we still treat Aboriginals trying to humanize them, showing about as badly. So, it is still a that they could have been you or

Correct. Apart from color pressures, the forces on him are the same that would apply to any person who is poor or disad­ vantaged.

I hope from a commercial pointof-view that the audience won’t be thinking of him as a black guy, but that they will be sitting there thinking of him as like them­ selves, trying to get somewhere in the world.

me.

Also, it is not only a black and white thing, it is the story of an underdog, of a person who is trying to make a go of it and isn’t allowed to. Now that problem relates to probably 50 per cent of our society.

The pressures on him are, therefore, not particular to him being a half-caste . . .

The way I like to put it is that it is more Saul Bass than Sam Peckinpah. But I think it will probably fall half-way between the two, because though I have tried to stylize it and do something different, in the end you have to front it head on. You can’t avoid it because that would be like having sex without an orgasm.

Incidentally, I do think a lot of Australian films tend to avoid a lot of things on an intellectual level.

They think that the audience knows what is going to happen so they don’t tell them. What they should do is tell them on a physical level.

Do you think it is an intellectual decision or a refusal to face up to things?

It is a mixture. I have fronted up to this problem a million times: Will I have this argument, or will I leave it out because everyone will

THE CHANT OF JIMMIE BLACKSMITH

Despite his value as a police tracker, Jimmie is constantly subjected to doing menial tasks.

Jimmie on the run

Ray Barrett as Farrell with his tracker Jimmie Blacksmith.

Jimmie with his brother Mort (Freddy Reynolds) while on the run.

know that it’s coming? And each time I have had to say to myself, “ Come on, it is a physical thing, it has to reach its climax” .

So, I fronted up to the murder and it is going to be devastating. 1 think they will have to issue sick bags at the premiere (laughs). I mean, it even gets me.

the studio and set up the cameras and lights. There are offices everywhere with phones ringing, and I told people to keep walking through the studio.

I made him do some things on video-tape, then I walked away, telling him to go through them again 10 times with someone else. ' I then came back and made him do it again.

I was trying to create as much co n fu sio n and p re ssu re as possible. We did this for four hours; he stood the lot and was actually improving. We then knew he had to be good.

Tommy Lewis as Jimmie Blacksmith.

Have you used special effects?

We have tried to do it in a bloodless manner. If there is one thing I am overconscious of in films it is phoney make-up and blood. You won’t find any of that here, though what you will find will be pretty bloody terrifying.

According to Ian Baker, the film takes a panoramic vista of the Australian countryside. Would you agree, and if so, how do you react to the claim that this is poor box-office?

If people say that, they are misunderstanding the value of some of the elements of Ryan’s Daughter, Doctor Zhivago and Lawrence of Arabia. What Ian means — and certainly it was my intention — is the putting of human action within a scale. We keep contrasting things by cutting, say, from a tiny beetle to people who are having, what is for them, the most heartfelt drama in the world. Sure 200,000 Pakistanis could get wiped out in a tidal wave, but there is something in human nature that makes one feel less about that than if you told me I was a dick-head. We are trying to put that kind of feeling in scale.

After completing “ Backroads” , Phil Noyce suggested that only Aboriginals should make films about themselves. Were you

conscious of such issues?

Michael gave them exercises on the emotional areas that we I thought for instance that I wanted: he took them out horse­ should have black interpreters riding, to gymnasiums to get trim, with me so that when I was taught them to run and hardened expressing something there would up their feet in the cold — all be somebody who understood the those aspects of it. actors’ cultures and who would be He then did exercises where able to interpret these feelings for they interpreted each line with them. Then when they acted the gestures. He was really preparing scene, the truth would come out them for me. It is a great way to and that would be exciting and work, and Michael did a fantastic different. job.

But I then discovered, if you spend enough time with your What made you decide on particular actors, you will find that Tommy Lewis for the lead role? truth without interpreters.

I would relate my situation to R h o n d a an d I w e re at that of Roman Polanski or Milos Melbourne airport, en route to the Forman directing in the U.S. opening of Devil’s Playground in They must have had encountered Perth, when I noticed Tommy immense language and culture passing by. When I came back barriers, but they were able, by from checking my tic k e ts, linking with the people, to break Rhonda, who was in the coffee through them. lounge, said, “ That guy over there is fantastic.” We talked You used an actors’ tutor as about it and then I sent her over.

So in the reverse of the normal w ell. . . role she did the “ How would you Yes, Michael Canefield. We had like to be in films?” line; I think heard of his work on Storm Boy he just about died. and in theatre, and as our black She talked to him for a while, stars had never done any acting then I went over. He was going to before, we used Michael to train Darwin, and when he came back them. he rang us up, much to our Firstly, I went through the script surprise — we thought he would with Tommy and Freddy, and my probably be too shy. wife gave them systems by which I put him through a very heavy they could learn their parts. Then test. I stood him in the centre of

And the other actors . . .

Tommy wanted me to meet his friends from the Swinburne Tech, so we went to a party at John Morrison’s place. He didn’t know Freddy Reynolds, but Freddy came as a guest of somebody else and when he walked into the party I took one look at him and said to Rhonda “ There is Mort, let’s get him” . We had a lot of trouble getting him, though.

How long was the shooting schedule?

We did 11 weeks with a major crew, though there were times within that when we should have been working with a smaller one, but the logistics just wouldn’t allow it. I think it would have been better to take another week and work with a smaller crew all the time.

On top of that, we had three weeks with an almost half-crew, one day with cameraman, sound­ man and myself, and a couple of days with the cameraman and two assistants picking up little extras.

It was fantastic.

Cinema Papers, January — 245

THECHANT OF JIMMIE BLACKSMITH

What was the reason for the long shoot?

I wanted to go to a number of different country locations and they were spread all over the place. We went from Dubbo to Gulgong, Scone to Armidale, Kempsey to Dorrigo, Bundarra down to Mudgee, and then back to Melbourne. Now that takes a lot of time, and that was one of the reasons for the long schedule.

Another, was that no matter what our base was we would have at least three hours travel to and from the location. This starts from when you leave base to when you arrive back, so that left us with six and a half or seven hours for actual shooting.

So while it seemed a long schedule, we were still doing two to two-and-a-half minutes a day.

And if you want good light for all those things, you need the time to do it.

The mission school from where Jimmie came.

He was production manager . . .

The budget is — the world will be surprised to know — still $1.2 million. We are in fact $25,000 over budget, which is the amount of the preliminary PR budget that we never had in the budget but which we later tried to squeeze in.

And most of that is coming back through the Department of Trade.

As well, we settled an insurance claim today, and we have yet to sell off our props and wardrobe.

So, we are likely to be under­ budget, which I think is fantastic.

It is certainly contrary to the

rumors of $1.8 million . . .

I would like to say something on that. When this industry grows up and stops wanting everybody’s film to be a disaster, particularly the big budget ones, then we will really start making strides. The rumors that went round before the film started have caused us immense trouble, particularly with the AFC and our private investors.

Anyhow, I believe in correct budgeting in the first place, and with everything that happened to

Why would you have preferred a smaller crew over a longer period?

I find big crews have a lot of time to sit around and do nothing and the minute someone has nothing to do they start to slack o f f . T h e y w h in g e a b o u t yesterday’s motel or last night’s dinner and it builds and builds.

When you have a smaller crew who are all helping one another, they are constantly involved and become part of the film. They have less time for bitching and whinging.

Jackson Thompson as Rev. Neville who adopts Jimmie as his son.

What is the film’s final budget?

246 — Cinema Papers, January

us, thank God we had Roy Stevens out from Britain.

Associate producer will be his title now. He had the capacity when we moved to an area to say, “ Look, transport is costing us so much and since this is a beautiful area, let’s dig in and find some of the things that we have in other places and eliminate a move.”

He was able to contain the film in an extraordinary way and certainly no one in Australia would have been able to do it.

Most people here are a bit up themselves at the minute; they do one job as production manager or associate producer, then they want to be a producer. This is causing disasters across the industry because almost everyone is going over budget. That is one side of the picture.

Flexibility is another thing people in this country cannot understand, particularly big crews.

If you see a great shot, you must get it, no matter. It is irrelevant what it says on the call sheet, because you may never see it again.

People have a disease for wanting to make a film for a price, in so many weeks and with so many people, and that is all that counts. It isn’t all that counts.

If, despite my efforts to contain it, my film needed to go over budget $100,000 to lift it from being an ordinary film to a great one, then I would have spent the money. That is the other side of the story.

Concludedjon P. 269

IAN BAKER

Director of Photography What was the photographic style you were after in “ Jimmie Blacksmith” ?

I have always tried to light e v e ry th in g as n a tu ra lly as possible, so with the interiors I attempted to create the lighting of the period. The rooms are dull because there was not a lot of interior light, and at night I have based the lighting on kerosene lamps which were the only source of artificial light in outback areas.

There was electricity at the time, but we only used it in one big city sequence. We tried to make the exterior sequences look as spectacular as possible by shooting at the most dynamic time of day.

Do you, therefore, prefer to shoot all the night sequences night-fornight?

No, I like day-for-night and I think you can get incredible effects with it. And often these effects are very hard to light nightfor-night.

In Jimmie Blacksmith, the best night-time scenes, as in The Devil’s Playground, are day-fornight. Night-time isn’t shadows and highlights and low lights, it is just a general ambience of soft light and you get that kind of ambience in the day time.

A fter th e relea se of “ T he D e v il’s P laygrou n d ” in 1976, Ian B aker im m ed ia tely becam e recognized as one of A u str a lia ’s top cin em atograp h ers. D e sp ite o n ly a few years of in d u stry ex p erien ce as a cam eram an at Fred S c h e p is i’s production com pany F ilm H o u se , B aker had achieved considerab le tech n ica l s k ill and an already d is tin g u is h a b le s ty le o f lo w -k e y , n a tu r a l lig h tin g .

H ow ever, u n til he and S c h e p isi rejoined for th e “ C han t of J im m ie B la c k sm ith ” in 1977, it rem ained h is on ly featu re, B ak er con cen tratin g on com m ercials and the settin g up o f h is ow n M elb ourne-based production com pany.

T he sh ootin g o f “ J im m ie B la c k sm ith ” is o f particular in ter e st because of its len g th y sch ed u le, its u se o f rem ote outback lo ca tio n s and its tu rn -o f-th e-cen tu ry settin g . On lo ca tio n , B aker used a P a n a fle x cam era w ith h ig h speed anam orp hic standard le n s e s , a P a n a v isio n zoom le n s and an 800m m telephoto le n s . H e also used th e P a n a g lid e on several seq u en ces.

In th e follo w in g in terv iew , conducted by Scott M urray, B a k e r d e sc r ib e s h is e x p e r ie n c e s on th e film and elaborates on h is th eo ries about n atural lig h tin g .

Were the locations actual buildings rather than sets?

Yes, every building was an existing one. All were in New South Wales, with the exception of two in Melbourne. These were either in original condition, or had to be reconstructed by our art department.

How hampered were you with regard to building grids, etc?

A great percentage of the buildings were derelict. They were not N ational Trust buildings where you can’t nail anything up.

We went through that problem with Devil’s Playground, but on Jimmie we were lucky enough to be able to construct grids; we even pulled out part of the ceiling in some places so that we could put cables through. Often we could only light from the ceilings, as when we did 360-degree dolly movements in the one shot, or wide-angle shots encompassing most of the room.

What sort of lights do you prefer for interior set-ups?

I like to use big lights bounced wherever possible. I avoid direct light, although for the first time I was forced to use it just to get an aperture sufficient to solve a depth of field problem.

We started out with the hope of using new HMI lights, but there were problems getting them together in time. We had already backed out of arc-lights, so we ended up using a wad of mini­ brutes.

Yet you have shot night-fornight on “ J i mmi e B l a c k ­ smith” . . .

Most of the night-time material is night-for-night. One reason for this is that in most of the night­ time sequences there were fires, and to get an exposure where the fire flares out, you have to do it at night because the fire cannot dominate that ambience of light in a day-for-night situation. After all, when you are in the middle of nowhere and you light a fire, all that you actually see is the fire — with fast lenses, as in Barry Lyndon where they used 1.4 and everything else goes black. less apertures, is to place all your Were you able to use much actual actors, wherever possible, on one plane. But we composed in a daylight on the interiors? different way. In several scenes we I did on Devil’s Playground had people placed down the length because we worked with spherical of a room; this meant, on some of lenses. On this film we worked our medium close-ups we needed with anamorphic lenses which T-stops of up to 8 to give us the create depth of field problems required depth of field.

1 couldn’t work in my usual way because for every focal length on a spherical lens, it is doubled on an of using natural light from anamorphic lens: ie, a wide-angled windows. We had to add light to spherical lens is 18mm; the make it look natural. We were equivalent anamorphic lens is working in turn-of-the-century 35mm. Therefore, one has less buildings, which were not exactly endowed with huge windows or depth of field.

One method of getting away doorways; the rooms were also

some of the mammoth night-time sequences, like the Aboriginal camps, where getting that extra stop would have meant dragging in a million extra lights.

Do you use filters? small. Small windows, tiny rooms, low ceilings and anam orphic lenses do not make for easy working.

Sometimes we even pushed the film a stop on interior situations which we couldn’t light suffic­ iently. Generally I don’t do this, and didn’t on Devil’s Play­ ground, but it has been quite successful.

That was because you couldn’t get an exposure . . .

Because it was becoming such a huge problem chasing that extra stop of light needed to get the depth of field. We also did it on

I haven’t on either of the two films that we are talking about, ex cep t for s tra ig h t d aylight correction filters. I think filters can do things, but I would rather try and achieve the same effect with light because it gets back into what I said about everything you put on film having to be natural.

I am sitting here looking at you now and you look a particular way.

If I have to photograph you in this natural set I will make you look as natural as you are now. Putting a filter on you, or doing something stupid with a direct light behind your head is just ludicrous.

You live in a natural world, so Cinema Papers, January — 247

THE CHANT OF JIMMIE BLACKSMITH

when you go to a film you should step into that world; it should look as natural as if you were living with those people.

Have you ever experimented with t e c h n i q u e s such as p o s t ­ flashing?

Before Devil’s Playground we did flashing tests with one of the Australian labs. We got the thing under control as far as we could, but the labs needed to put in a lot more work into giving us an actual graphic scale with percentages of flashing. So between them and us never having done it before, it d id n ’t quite reach the exact technical level we needed. But that was four years ago.

I th in k one of the m ost interesting things happening today is the Cemtone process. I think I would have used this a lot if one did not have to wait 10 days for rushes to come from the U.S. Was the power supply a problem in the outback?

We used generators for the 248 — Cinema Papers, January

Baker: “ There is a big shearing sequence and everyone screams out Tom Roberts when they see that” .

entire film — even on the two Melbourne locations.

What problems did that cause for the sound department?

It shouldn’t have, but the day before we were due to leave our big generator blew up. We had to get another one quickly, and the one we found wasn’t made for the film industry — it was a silent generator for some big industry set-up. So the electricians had a difficult time each day having to re-locate the generators and run a lot of cable.

Did you have any problems with drop-off or fluctuation in the cable?

Occasionally we had trouble with drop-off which created a yellow light on the interiors. This I generally laughed off by claiming that since all interior light was

from kerosene lamps or candles, it should have a yellowish effect anyway. It was an easy way out.

What was your technique for making a kerosene lamp look like a light source?

I started out on the film by saying to Wendy Dickson, the art director, that I would always use kerosene lamps with actual wicks because I felt they couldn’t be electrified realistically.

Once again I knew we would have problems with getting exposures, but I didn’t realize the problem was going to be as great as it was. A general wide shot interior aperture, for example, was usually from T 5.6 to 6.3. We couldn’t, therefore, use the kero­ sene wicks because they wouldn’t register. So, mid-production we had to electrify all the lamps.

We put inky globes with yellow

filters into all the practical lamps and lightly sprayed the glass mantles in white. The globes were then wound up on the reostates so that they would burn out. “ The Devil’s Playground” was notable for its control of color.

Did you attempt a similar approach in “ Jimmie Black­ smith” ?

I think the colors from Devil’s Playground came out of the colors of the building and the fact that it was winter. Also, nothing was lit — it was always exposed to look natural.

Jimmie Blacksm ith has a similar tone of costume and set because during that period there were no gay colors — everything was of a subtle tone. And if that is what the period is, then you try to capture it.

As the film includes several Aboriginal actors, did you face any problems with exposures, particularly on close-ups?

It was quite a problem because

THE CHANT OF JIMMIE BLACKSMITH

Soft, natural lighting. Jimmie Blacksmith (Tommv Lewis) lunches with the Rev. Neville (Jack Thompson) and wife (Julie Dawson).

Aboriginals seem to have quite recessed eyes; when you are lighting interiors from the ceiling, it becomes a problem of not seeing their eyes.

It was okay when we had to expose black flesh in a totally black flesh situation, but when we had to mix skin tones, it was more difficult.

We were working on a pretty high-budgeted film, so we had all the equipment we needed. We weren’t light on with crew and equipment, and we had a pretty good production back-up. For most of the film we had an aero­ plane; if we ever needed anything in a hurry we could have got it.

What about exposing faces in the Australian sunlight?

Are you influenced by the way Australian painters at various periods have played with the Australian light?

We hardly ever used hard sunlight or hot locations. Our locations were often in wooded areas, and not central Australia type scenery. However, we often used very soft reflector fill to give slight modelling to a face.

The script apparently calls for several scenes to be taken at dawn with mist and frost. . .

We set out to shoot a lot of sequences in frost, fog and rain, but throughout the film we didn’t get what we wanted naturally. We got rain, but not when we wanted it, though we got a couple of great mornings of fog and mist early in the filming which we used to great advantage.

The few rain sequences were done artificially with hoses, but they don’t have the same look as rain.

The film is set over a seasonal time span. Were you able to shoot most scenes during the correct season?

There were a couple of times when we were meant to be shooting a winter sequence and th e re were d ecid u o u s trees around; but that wasn’t hard to disguise. On one occasion there were a lot of jacaranda trees in flower across the countryside, but we managed to avoid them.

Did you have any problems peculiar to a long shoot?

I am influenced by painters — particularly Australian painters.

It’s actually funny, because everytime Fred and I do a shot we joke as to whom we are imitating.

We did a sequence in a butchershop which we referred to as the

Several scenes, like the one above, utilized natural fog or mist. Tommy Lewis, Julie Dawson and Jack Thompson.

between films, not necessarily doing nothing, but just relaxing, say, with commercials which are not a heavy burden.

I would like to do a lot more features, but having worked on a production of this size I think I could only work on similar films.

It is a luxury to work with a crew of this size, and with all the equip­ ment; you have the time to create the images you need.

I don’t really know what the Do you wish to divide your time between an occasional feature others are like — maybe they are and commercial work, or would like this. If they are, then I would you prefer to be full-time with like to work on them. features?

I never heard any other director 1 would love to do features all of photography say that he had the time, although I don’t really time to create the shots he think you can do that successfully. wanted . . .

I believe you need a sizeable break I will re-phrase that. I don’t think you ever have enough time, but given the industry you are working in and the budgets we are working with, I think we had a fair amount of time.

CREW : I never stop lighting until we roll the camera; I keep trimming Producer/D irector........ . . . Fred Schepisi lights and making it better. It is Screenplay....................... . . . Fred Schepisi like painting a picture, you keep A u t h o r ................ ............ Thomas Keneally Director of Photography ............ Ian Baker painting and painting.

Francis Bacon sequence, and every exterior sequence we did was Tom Roberts or somebody.

There is a big shearing sequence and everybody screams out Tom Roberts when they see that.

In fact, if Fred or I couldn’t come up with an artist we wanted to imitate on a particular shot, then we didn’t think the shot was worth doing. (Laughs.)

The Chant of Jimmie Blacksmith CAST: J i m m ie ................... ............ Tommy Lewis M o r t ....................... ........ Freddy Reynolds Farrell..................... ...................Ray Barrett Rev. N e v i l l e ........ .......... Jack Thompson Mrs. Neville.......... .............. Julie Dawson M c C re a d y ............ ................ Peter Carroll Mrs. McCready. . . .............. Robyn Nevin Newby ................... ................ Don Crosby Mrs. Newby.......... ............ Ruth Cracknel!

Miss G r a f .............. . . Elizabeth Alexander Dowie S t e a d ........ .............. Peter Sumner H e a l e y ................... ............ Tim Robertson Mrs. Healey.......... .............. Jane Harders Dud Edmonds. . . . .............. Ray Meagher H y b e rry ................ .......... Brian Anderson Peter N e w b y ........ ........ Marshall Crosby Young N ew b y . . . . ........ Matthew Crosby Jane N ew by.......... ...................Rosie Lilley Vera Newby.......... ...................Katie Lilley Gilda....................... .............. Angela Punch L e w i s ..................... .................. Rob Steele J o n e s ........ ............ .................Bill Charlton Michaels................ ................ John Jarrett Mrs. M o rg an ........ ........ Barbara Wvndon K noller.................. ................ Kevin Myles W i l s o n ................... .....................Ken Grant English Clerk........ .......... Richard Ussher Australian C le rk .. ...................Alan Hardy M ullett................... ............ John Bowman J. C. T h o m a s ........ ........ Michael Carman

Production Supervisor. . . . . Roy Stevens Production Designer .. . Wendy Dickson First Asst. D irector. . . . . .. Ken Ambrose Second Asst. Director . .......... Greg Allen Transport Manager .. .. ........ John Chase Production Secretary .. . . . Andrea Way, Pam Stockley C on tinuity....................... .......... Jan Tyrrell Production Accountant . . . . Lynn Barker Focus ............................... . John Swathfield Clapper-Loader.............. .......... Alan Cole Sound Recordist............ .......... Bob Allen Boom O perator.............. Chris Goldsmith Wardrobe Supervisor... . Bruce Finlayson Standby W ard ro b e ........ . DaroGunzberg Make-up........................... . Deryck Deniese Hair................................... . Cheryl Williams Casting D irector............ Rhonda Schepisi E d itor............................... . Brian Kavanagh Property M a s t e r ............ . Mark Rochford Construction Manager. . . . . . Ray Pattison G affer............................... . . . Brian Adams Best Boy........................... .. , Paul Gantner Chief W rangler.............. .......... Ken Grant S tills................................. . . . . John Pollard Acting T u t o r ................ Michael Canefield Publicity D irector.......... . Geoff Freeman International P.R. Consultants ... D.D.A., London & L.A.

The s hoot i ng s chedul e of “ Jimmi e B l a c k s mi t h ” was double that of “The Devil’s Play­ ground” . Was it double solely because of logistical problems?

No, because it was a bigger film.

On Jimmie we also had the logis­ tical problem of travelling to many locations, while Devil’s Play­ ground was essentially on one location where we all lived.

An interesting thing happened on Jimmie Blacksmith in that when the same number of slates that we did on Devil’s Play­ ground — 700 odd — came up on Jimmie Blacksmith, we were into the same number of shooting days. We shot nearly 1200 slates on Jimmie Blacksmith, so it was just that the film was bigger. ★ Cinema Papers, January — 249

T h e b ig shot A dynam ic “ S H O T G U N ” m icroph one with iobar d irectio n al p attern . N arro w a n g le pick-up even at g re a t distan ce from th e sound source and elim ination of u n w an ted re ve rb e ratio n and handling noise. Built in tw o position bass-cut switch ( - 7 - 20 dB at 50 HZ).

R e c o m m e n d e d for use in TV and film studios or on location.

AKG

Revox adds something special to a reel of tape

.

'

Experience and reliability — THE well known reliability of the A77 tape deck is a result of a professional design concept which successfully combines the advantages of a solidly constructed tape transport mechanism with an advanced electronic circuit design.

■ Stability under heavy use ■ Mechanicalprecision ■ Off tape monitoring ■ Track to track recording ■ Echo and multiplay effects ■ Vertical or horizontal operation ■ Editing and remote control facilities Revox fulfils your professional requirements.

For further information on the REVOX or AKG Systems Contact

Amalgamated Wireless (Australasia) Limited NEW SOUTH WALES Phone: 797 5757.

Victoria Phone:5604533-

Canberra A.C.T Phone: 95 3431.

South Australia Phone: 272 2366

Queensland Phone: 44 1631

Western Australia Phone: 71 0888.

Tasmania Phone: 34 5266,34 5412

Photsyn 206

PRODUCTION SURVEY 35mm PRE-PRODUCTION

THE BATTLE OF BROKEN HILL Prod C o m pa ny........The Independent A rtists Dist C o m p a n y ... G UO Film D istributors P/L D irector............................ ....... Donald Crom bie S cre e n p la y............................... Ayten Kuyululu, Ralph Peterson, M ichael Craig P rodu cer.................................. Ayten Kuyululu Exec P rodu cer..........................Ilhan Kuyululu P h otog rap hy.................................. Peter Jam es E d itor............................................ Tim W ellburn Prod M anager........................ G regory Tepper Art D ire cto r.................................. B ruce Barber Prod D e signer..........................Owen W illiam s Prod S e cretary........................ Barbara G ibbs C o stu m e /W a rd ro b e ............... Judith Dorsm an A sst D irectors............................ M arkE gerto n, M ark Turnbull, Keith Keygate C am era O perator..............................John Seal Focus Puller........................ David W illiam son Boom O perator.................... * Joe Spinelli C la p p e r/L o a d e r............................ Jan Kenny C a sting C o nsultant................ G eorge W haley G rip ................................................. Ross Ericson H a ird re sse r...................................Jenny Brown M a ke -u p ...................................... Peggy Carter, Jill Porter B udget................................................ $73 9 ,0 0 0 Len gth.................................................... 100 min P rogress....................................P re-Production C a s t: To be finalized.

S y n o p s is : A featu re about a real historical event. It a c tu a lly happened on New Year's Day 191 5 at Broken Hill. Tw o Turks, Mullah A b dullah and Gool M oham med, declared w a r on Australia.

B u d g e t...

L e n g th ...

Progress.

........ $ 7 6 2 ,0 0 0 Approx 110 min . Pre-P roduction

24 FRAMES A SECOND OR IN LIKE FLYNN Prod C o m pa ny.................... S cim itar Pictures A ustralia P/L D irector......................................... Allen B ickford S cre e n p la y................................ Allen B ickford P rodu cer.................................... Allen B ickford Exec P rodu cer.......... Simon Sm ith-P eterson A ssoc P roducer............................Yvette Rees P rogress.................................... P re-Production (shooting M arch 1 978) Release Date.................................... Late 1978 Cast: Steve Renyon, Sean Myers, Roberto O c c h ip ln t i, L is a D o m b r o v s k y , E m m a Binassi, Ralph Kurl, Alan Hale Jnr., Ken Hunter, John Feathers.

Synopsis: Based on extensive research carried out in Australia, the film is an actionadve nture-com edy. It traces Errol F lynn’s early life in Australia, to his final exit from th is country. Several of Flynn’s close frien ds are featu red in the cast.

For details of the follow ing 35m m film s in pre-p ro d u c tio n consu lt the previous issue:

C rocodile Doctor Wanted Gallipoli The Last Run of the Kameruka Palmer Street Rusty Bugles

W e e ke n d o f S hado w s

PATRICK

Sound R ecordist....................... Ken Hammond Sound E ditor................................................. Bob Cogger Prop M aste rs.......................... M artin M cAdoo, Neil Angwin Asst D irectors............................................ M ark Egerton, Penny Chapman, Scott H icks Camera O perator........................... John Seale Focus P u llers......................David W illiam son, Jan Kenny Boom O perator............................................ Joe Spinelli C lap p e r/L o a d e rs............................................ Jan Kenny, Andre Fleuren G a ffe r................................................ Ton yT egg C o ntin uity................................. Lyn M cEncroe Set D resser............................... Annie Bleakley Set C o n stru ctio n ....................... H erbert Pinter Chief G rip .......................................................RossErikson A sst G rip ...................................... Dennis Smith Asst Editor....................................Zsolt Kallanyi A sst Sound E d itor................ S hirley Kennard Edge N um berer.............................................. Guy Hodson Still P h otography......................... David Kynoch Technical A d visor.................................... Dawn Fraser Research.............................................. Sue W ild Hairdresser................................... Jenny Brown Best Boy..................................................... Craig Bryant M akeup......................................... Peggy Carter Standby W ardro be................... Fiona N icholls Asst W ardro be........................... Joyce Stokes Standby P rops................................................ Ken James Asst P rops................................. Ann Brow ning Prod A cco u n ta n t........................................ Jean Findlay E le ctricia n ..................................... Ralph Storey R unner......................................................... M ark Piper C a terers.......................John and Lisa Faithfull B udget.................................................. $762,391 Len gth.................................................... 115 min Color Process...................................... Eastman Progress............................... P ost-P roduction Release Date................................................. A p ril 1978 C a s t: B ro n w y n M a c k a y - P a y n e , Tom Richards, Bunney Brooke, Ron Haddrick, G abrielle Hartley, John Diedrich, Ivar Kants, David Cameron, John Clayton, Bill Charlton, Lyndall Barbour, Kevin W ilson, Reg Gillam, Stuart Finch, Diana Davidson, Judy Farr, John Arm strong.

S yn o p sis: Drama based on the personal life sto ry of A u s tra lia n sw im m ing cham pion Dawn Fraser.

Prod C om pany.................Patrick Productions for A ustralian International Film Corporation Pty Ltd Dist C om pany......................................Filmways D irector................................... Richard Franklin S creen play........................... Everett de Roche Producers........................... Antony I, Ginnane, Richard Franklin Exec Producer............................... Bill Fayman 35mm IN PRODUCTION M usic................................................. Brian May BLUE FIN Photography......................... Donald M cAlpine Prod C o m pa ny...................................... S.A.F.C. E ditor......................Edward M cQ ueen-M ason S cre e n p la y...................................... Sonia Borg Prod M anager.............................. Barbl Taylor P rodu cer..........................................M att Carroll Art D ire c to r................................... Leslie Binns NEWSFRONT Prod S e cretary.............................Jenny Barty B u dget................................................ $ 5 2 0,00 0 Prod C o m pa ny— Palm Beach Pictures P/L WEEKEND OF SHADOWS Len gth....................................................... 90 min C ostum e/W ard rob e....................Kevin Regan Dist C om pany.................... Village Roadshow C olor P rocess........................................Eastman Standby W ardro be............A phrodite Jansen Prod Com pany............ Samson Film S ervices D irector.............................................................Phil Noyce P rogress..................................... P re-Production Sound R e cord ist.............................Paul Clark Pty Ltd, S.A.F.C. S creen play......................................... Bob Ellis Release Date..........................D ecem ber 1978 Asst D irectors................................................ Tom Burstall, D ire cto r..............................................Tom Jeffrey P roducer.......................................................David Elfick Synopsis: Snook Pascoe is a young Point Jam es Parker S creen play............................... Peter Yeldham A ssoc P roducer................... Richard Brennan Camera O perator....................................... DanBurstall Linco ln schoo lboy w hose fathe r runs a tuna From novel The Reckoning P h otography........................... V incent M onton Focus Puller........................ Peter van Santen b o a t, B lu e Fin. C lu m s y , g a u n t a n d P rodu cers....................................... Tom Jeffrey, E d itor................................................... John S cott Boom O perator................,............ Phil Stirling som ething of a m isfit at school and in the M att Carroll Prod M anager....................... Richard Brennan C lapper/L oader...................... A ndrew Lesnie com m unity, he has his finest hour when Assoc P roducer........................... S u eM illiken Art D irector................................................... Larry Eastwood G affer......................................... Stew art Sorby Blue Fin, far out at sea is w recked by a M usic................................. Charles M arawood Prod D esigner............................................ Lissa Coote C o n tin u ity................................. Fran Haarsma w a terspou t and the rem ainder of the crew Photography..............R ichard W allace A.C.S. Prod S e cretary........................................... Lynn G ailey lie dead or injured.

2 4 F ra m e s a Second or In Like Flynn. Casting C o nsultant..................... Barbi Taylor E d itor................................................................ RodAdamson C o stum e/W ard rob e............ Norma M oriceau Set D ecorator................................Peter Kendall Prod M anager............................... S u eM illiken Asst W ardro be........................................ Susan Bowden Key G rip...................................................... NoelM oodie A rt D ire c to r................. C h risto p h e r W ebster Sound R e cord ist......................................... Tim Lloyd G rip....................................... G eoff Richardson Unit M anager...............................................Ralph Storey DIMBOOLA Prod A cco u n ta n t............................. Penny Carl Asst E ditor.................................................. M ark Norfolk THE NIGHT THE PROWLER Prod A cco u n ta n t......................... Treisha Ghent Prod C om pany............................................. Pram Factory Sound E ditor...................................... Greg Bell Standby Props..............................................John Powditch Prod S e cretary............................................Cathy Flannery Prod C om pany..............Chariot Films Pty Ltd A ssistant D irectors.....................................ErroliSullivan, Productions Pty Ltd Prod A cco u n ta n t................................. M ichael Roseby C o stum e/W ardrobe.................................... Anna Senior D irector........................................ Jim Sharm an D irector........................................................ John Duigan C hris Maudson, C a tering............................................. D&R Prod Sound R e cordist.............................................Ken Hammond S creen play.................................. Patrick W hite S cre e n p la y.................................................. Jack Hibberd Steve Andrews, Still Photography........................ David Parker M ixer.............................................. Peter Fenton Producer................................Anthony Buckley Danny Torsh P rodu cers...................................... John Timlin, Best B oy.........................................Ian Dew hurst Sound E ditor........................................Greg Bell M u s ic......................................... Cameron Allan Cam era O perator..................................... Louis Irving John W eiley M akeup............................................. Jose Perez Asst. S ound E d ito r................................ Helen Brow n Photography........................ David Sanderson A sso c P roducer.............................................Max G illies Focus Puller.............................. David Brostoff Special E ffe cts.................... Conrad Rothman Asst.

D ire cto rs............................. M ichael Lake, Editor............................................

Sara Bennett Boom O perator.............................................Jack Friedman M u sic..........................................G eorge Dreyfus R unners..........................................Paul Hallam, Tovio Lember, Prod M anager.....................

Pom O liver P h otog rap hy.................................. Tom Cowan C lapp e r/L o a d e r........................ Steve Dobson Craig Emanuel Ralph Storey Prod D esigner...........................

Luciana Arrighi Prod M anager............................................... Vicki M olloy G affer..................................... Brian Bansgrove B udget............................................... $4 0 0 ,0 0 0 Camera O perator.........................................

John Seale Unit M anager............................................. Brian Rosen Prod S e cretary.................... Laurel C ram pton C o n tin u ity................................. A drienne Read Length................................................... 120 min Focus Puller........................ David W illiam son Prod S e cretary..........................

Su Arm strong C o nstruction M anager............................... BillHowe S ound R e cord ist...................................... Lloyd C arrick Color P rocess............................................. Agfa C lapp e r/L o a d e rs...............................Jan Kenny, C o stum e/W ard rob e................................. Anna Senior G affer......................................Brian Bansgrove C a rpe nte r.................................. Danny Burnett Progress..................................... In Production Steve Dobson Sound R e cord ist........................ Don Connolly S econd Unit Photography.......... Peter Moss, B u dget............................................... $ 4 2 0,00 0 Release Date.................................... May 1978 Boom O perator............................................. Jack Friedman M ixer...........................................................

Peter Fenton Length. . ............................................... 120 min Frank Hammond, (foreign), G affer...........................................

T o n yT egg Sound Editor............................... Paul M axwell Progress....................................P re-Production O scar Scherl July 1978 (dom estic) C o ntin uity...................................................... LynM cEncroe Asst D irectors...................... Elisabeth Knight, Asst Art D irector.............................................Lee W hitm ore S y n o p s is : A co m e d y th a t tra c e s th e C a s t: Susan Penhaligon, Robert Helpm ann, Location C a sting........................................

Hilary Linstead Keith Heygate, unusual social history of a sm all coun try Set D ecorator............................................ Sally Cam pbell Rod M ulllnar, B ruce Barry, Julia Blake, Second Unit P h o to g ra p h y.. . . Bill Grimmond Brian Rosen Chef G rip ....................................................... Ray Brown tow n over the three days that lead up to the H elen H e m in gw ay, W a lte r Pym, M aria Prop Buyer...........................

Harry Zettell Camera O perator........................... Kevin Lind G rip ............................................... Stuart Green m arriage of M aureen D elaney and M orrie M e rce d e s, Frank W ilson, P eter C uipan, Property M aster....................................... Harry Zettel Focus Puller....................................... David Burr M cAdam .

Stunt C o -ordina tor..................................... Max Aspen M arilyn Rodgers, Peggy Nichols, Carole-A nn C o nstruction M anager............H erbert Pinter Boom O perator.....................

C hris G oldsm ith Asst E ditor..........................Frans Vandenberg Aylett.

Standby P rops........................... Bruce Barber C lap p e r/L o a d e r........................ M ik e G a m b rill S tand-by P rops.................... Peter G lencross S yn o p sis: W hat was P atrick's secret? What G rip ........................................... Graham M ardell G affer.............................................................Peter W ood H a ird resser......................................Irene W alls was the strange influence he possessed?

A Asst. G rip ....................................................Dennis Smith THE MONEY MOVERS C o n tin u ity ..............................Caroline Stanton Best Boy..............'........................ Paul G antner hospital, a relationship, a sense of the usual C asting C o nsultants................

M & L C a s tin g Prod C o m pa ny...................................... S.A.F.C. M akeup......................................... Sally G ordon are turned upside down in a thrilling emotion Props B uyer............................................. B ruce Barber D irector.................................. B ruce Beresford C a tering....................................... Richard Ford charged experience.

Asst Props B u yer...................................... Jenny Green S cre e n p la y............................ B ruce Beresford Still P hotographer.................... M ike G iddens S tand-by Props...........................................Harry Zettel P rodu cer..........................................Matt Carroll Unit M anager....................................... Bob Hill G rip ........................................... Paul Am m itzbol B udget................................................ $50 0 ,0 0 0 E le c tric ia n .....................................................Peter Moyes Prod A cco u n ta n t..............G eoff Cameron Len gth....................................................... 90 min R u nners......................................... Sandy Beach Asst E ditor.......................................................Ted Often P rogress..................................... P re-Production B udget................................................ $ 5 0 5,00 0 Still Photography..........................................Brett Hilder35mm POST-PRODUCTION Synopsis:C o ntem porary th rille r dealing L en gth................................................... 110 min H a ird resser..................................Trish C unliffe w ith the arm oured car business.

C olor P rocess............................ E astm ancolor Best Boy........................................................ PatHagen Progress..................................................... Editing M akeup.............................................................. Jill Porter Release Date................................... May, 1978 E le c tric ia n ................................. Roy M ajew ski DAWN! SIMMONDS AND NEWCOMBE C a s t: Bill Hunter, W endy Hughes, Gerard R unner............................................... Rosie Lee Prod C om pany.......................Aquataurus Film Prod C om pany........Verite Film Productions, K e n n e d y , C h ris H ayw ood, John Ew art, B udget............................................... $ 4 0 0,00 0 Productions Pty Ltd, M. & L. Pty L td Angela Punch, Bryan Brown, John Clayton, Len gth................................................................ 90 min South A ustralian Film Corporation D irector............................................. Phil Noyce Don Crosby, John Dease, Drew Forsythe, C olor P rocess............................ Eastm ancolor D irector........................................

Ken Hannam S cre e n p la y................................ Ken Cameron, Tony Barney, Bill Lyle, Paul Jones, M ark Progress..................................... In Production S creenplay..........................................Jo yC a vill in associa tion w ith Les Newcom be Holden, Rob Steele, B ruce Spence, Les C a s t: Ruth C racknell, John Frawley, Kerry Include your current and future Story E ditor.....................................

M oya W ood P ro d u ce rs................................ H ilary Linstead, Foxcroft, Brian Blain, Lana Lesley, Sue W alker, John Derum, Maggie K irkpatrick, p ro je c ts in ou r p ro d u c tio n P roducer..............................................Joy Caviil Phil Noyce W a lk e r, J o h n n ie Q u ic k s ilv e r , B u n n e y Terry Camilleri.

Exec P roducer....................................

Jill Robb survey listings. Forward details A sso c P rodu cer...................... Ross M atthew s Brooke, G erry Duggan, Denise Otto, Anne S y n o p s is : Exploiting the furore surrounding Assoc Producer................. Sandra M cKenzie P h otog rap hy................................R ussell Boyd and stills to: Haddy, M arshall Crosby, Alex Archdale, h e r a tte m p te d ra p e , a y o u n g w o m a n Prod A ss o c ia te ...........................

G loria Payten E d itor............................................David Huggett K e n B e rn a rd , J a n e W in c h e s te r, A la n e m erges from th e c la u s tro p h o b ia of a Photography................................. Russell Boyd C a sting C o n su lta n ts.............. M. & L. Pty Ltd Penney, Peter Pilcher, Jude Kurlng, Berys w e alth y conservative fam ily and tu rn s from Production Survey, E ditor................................................................Max Lemon M arsh, Slim de Grey, Kay Ekiund, Kit Taylor, victim to crim inal, stalking the streets of Prod M anager............................................ RossM atthew s Don Philps, Peter Carroll, G raem e Smith, Cinema Papers, Sydney by night in a relentless p ursuit of Art D irector.................................................. Ross M ajor R obin M oase, F ra n c o V a le n tin o , B rian her own liberation.

143 Therry St., Prod S e cretary......................... Jenny Tosolini Anderson, Ray M arshall, Tessa M allos, Ray, Cinema Papers cannot and does not accept Melbourne 3000.

Prod A ssts......................... Graham McKinney, M e a g h e r, C h a d M o rg a n , J o h n F lau s, any responsibility for inaccu racies resulting Jack Zalkans Stephan Bisley, George Till.

Telephone: (03) 329 5983 fro m w r o n g ly c o m p le te d o r u n ty p e d Costum e D esigner.....................................Judith Dorsman production survey details.

Location M anager...................................Beverly Davidson

PRODUCERS, DIRECTORS

and

PRODUCTION COMPANIES

Cinema Papers, January — 251

___ PRODUCTION SURVEY Asst. E d ito r........................... A n dre w Prowse Still Photography................... David Kynoch Dog T rainer................................... RayW inslade Hairdresser................................. Jenny Brown C a te re rs ............................... M ovie M unchies 2nd Unit Asst. D ire c to r.......... Steve Connard Best Boy............................. George Harrington M ake-up....................................... Peggy Carter E le ctricia n ........................... Roland McManus T itle D esign................................. Kevin Brooks B u d g e t.................................................. $500,000 Len gth...................................................... 95 min C olor P ro c e s s .: ....................... Eastmancolor Progress.................

Post-Production C a st: John W aters, M elissa Jaffer, Graeme 8lun dell, G raham Rouse, W yn Roberts, Kit Taylor, Keith Lee, Barbara West.

S yn o p sis: An action drama involving a hunt for a murder suspect by a group of men in a sm all country town.

their eggs and young through the early stages.

C o n tin u ity ......................................M oya Iceton C asting C o n su lta n t.....................Liz M ullin a r S tandb y P rops........................... C lark M unro Props A sst................................... Ian Jam ieson FAR WEST Key G rip ................................ Noel M cD onald Prod C om pany................Film Crew Facilities A D irector.................................................. Sandra Cleary sst E d ito r......................... M ichael A tkinson N u m be ring A s s t.........................Nigel G ooden S creenplay............................. Brian Anderson Still photography........................ Corrie Ancone P roducer................................................ Sandra Cleary Best B o y ..................................... Keith Johnson P hotography........................... David Etherton M a ke-up....................................... Lloyd James E ditor.........................................................Damien Morath Sound R ecordist.....................................G ordon BrownG rap hic A rtis t....................... Ann B row ning C a rp e n te r................................. J o h n T ra ffo rd M ixe r.............................................Norkhil Films B o ok-ke eper............................... Betite V ivian Camera A sst............................................ Steve Dobson A cco unts S u p e rvisio n .................Stan Green B udget...................................................$1 2,000 Location C a te rin g ...............M ovie M unchies Len gth.......................................................25 min M ark II Color Process............................... Ektachrom e B u dget................................................... $150,000 S ynopsis: An exa m in a tio n of the role L en gth......................................................75 min played by the Royal Far W est C h ildren’s G a uge..........................................................16mm Home in m odern society.

Progress...................................Post-Production C a s t: Kris M cQuade, D ennis G rosvenor, SKI AUSTRALIA L eo n C o s a k , M ic h a e l A itk e n s , M o y s e THE GRAVEDIGGER AND THE GIRL Kedem, John O reslk, Richard Meikle.

Prod C om pany___Aranda Film Productions S y n o p s is : A young couple is captured by D irector............................................. M ark Ruse D irectors— , ............... Bruce M cNaughton, terrorists train ing in the desert.

S creenplay..................................... M ark Ruse Mai Bryning Producer........................................... M ark Ruse P roducer......................... Bruce M cNaughton Photography..................... M ichael Pattinson M u s ic ....................................... Bruce Rowland, Editor.............................................................C hris Batson Mike and Guy, THE IMPORTANCE OF KEEPING Art D irector............................... M ichael Rogers Maggie Kershner Th e Last B ullet Sound R ecordist............................. Bill Baxter P hotography....................Bruce M cNaughton PERFECTLY STILL Asst Cam era...............................................Roger Bayley S ound R ecordist.....................John Mulligan, Prod C o m pa ny................ K o o ka b u rra Prods.

C o ntin uity....................................... JuttaG oetze Ross Genat, b e c o m in g a b a lle t d a n c e r a n d h is G rip ............................................. M orrie Rogers Length...........................................................8 min D irector................................................. M ichaelPattinson David H ipkins relationship with one of the girls.

Stunt C o -ordina tor............................M axA spin Color P rocess....................................... Eastman Screenplay........................................... M ichaelPattinson Camera A ssts........................................... Robert Powell, Still P hotography....................... Peter Kurnik Progress........................................... In Release Producer........................................... M ark Ruse Peter van Santen M usic..................................... The Third M ilitary Best Boy................................... Sam B ienstock BASIC SKILLS - MATHEMATICS Cast: Frances Corby, M ichael Rogers.

Length...............................................60 min (TV), M ake-up..................... Cherie R aw son-H arris District Band, Synopsis: A sm all girl, a m ouldy grave­ 30 min (Cinema) (W orking Title) Additional Arrangem ents: Special Effects......................... Peter G ronow digger and an old cem etery are mixed Release date........................... December 1977 Prod C o m p a n y .. Instructional Media Centre, John Clifford W hite.

B udget............................................... $10 5,00 0 together, and tim e disappears . ..

C a s t: Sally Rodd, Bill Bachman, Maria Canberra C. A. E. Length...................................................... 75 min Photography................................................ Chris Batson Beyen, David M itchell, M ichael Hudson, Dist C o m p a n y ... Instructional Media Centre, Color P rocess........................................... Atlab Editor...................................................... M ichaelPattinson Laurie Peterson.

Canberra C. A. E. Progress................................................ Shooting Prod M anager................................. M ark Ruse S y n o p s is : A one hour television special Director...................................................Ian Hart HANSFORD THE COMPETITOR Release Date.............................................

1 978 A rt D irector............................. M ichael Rogers featuring the snow fields of Australia.

S creenplay........................................... Ian Hart M usic D irector.................. CaptairrB.H. Bignell C a st: John W aters, Fred Steele, Keith Lee, Prod Com pany................Film Crew Facilities P hotography..................... John Houldsworth Donald Macdonald, Belinda Giblin, Vincent Producer...................................Graham Cooper C ostum e/W ardrobe....................................Jutta Goetze Anim ator................................. Mairi M cGregor Ball.

Photography............................................ David Etherton Sound R ecordist..............................................BillBaxter Length...................................................... 20 min Asst. D irector.......................................... Roger Bayley S y n o p s is : An ex-international courier for E ditor........................................................ Damien Morath Color P rocess........................... Eastm ancolor the British Home O ffice is reluctantly wooed M ix e r............................................ Norkhil Films Camera O perator............ ............Chris Batson 35mm AWAITING RELEASE Progress................................................ Scripting back into service by his form er superior for Budget..................................................... $ 8 0 0 0 Camera A ssts.......................... Jam ie Gordon, Release Date.......................................M id-1978 David Collyer one last job. This turn s into a nightm are of Length...................................................... 24 min S y n o p s is : A film fo r p rim a ry s c h o o l attacks and doublecrosses as he discovers Color P rocess.................................Ektachrom e Boom O perators.............................Paul Elliott, teachers on innovatory m ethods of teaching S y n o p s is : A film study of the life of Beamish Elliott that his enem ies far outnum ber his friends.

For details of the follow ing 35m m film s m athem atics.

As he takes each step further into the abyss Australia's top bike racer, Greg Hansford.

Key G rip.................................................... David G ornall aw aiting release consu lt the previous issue: of distru st he's betrayed not only by his Stunt Co-ordinator................ M ichael Rogers Fantasm Comes Again superiors but also by his lover.

Still Photography........................... Jack W olfs In Search of Anna BLUEPRINT FOR SURVIVAL HARVEST OF HATE Post Prod Supervisor................... Alan Dobie Solo S cript Consultant.................. Brian Robinson Prod Company.............. Mantis W ildlife Films Prod C o m pa ny..................

South A u stralian The Irishman A DROP OF ROUGH TED M ake-up......................................... Sandra Olln D irectors...................................

Densey Clyne, Film C o rpo ration Long Weekend Prod Company................ Nomad Enterprises D ire c to r...............................M ichael T h o rnh ill T itle s/G ra p h ics........................... Shieia Shee Jim Frazier Mouth to Mouth D irector.......................................David Roberts Length.......................................................22 min P rodu cer......................................... Jane Scott S c rip t........................................... Densey Clyne Best Each Way Screenplay............................... David Roberts, Exec P ro d u ce r............................................. M att C a rroll Color P rocess..................................... Eastman P ro d u c e rs ................................. Densey Clyne, The Tree ■ Ted Egan P h otog rap hy..................... D avid Sahderson Progress........................................... In Release Jim Frazier Producers.................................

David Roberts, E d ito r.....................................

G. Turney-S m ith M usic......................................... Derek Strahan C a st: Liddy Clark, Janet Lord, Frederick Sandra Richardson U nit M anage r.......................Penny Chapm an Photography.............................. Jim Frazier Parslow, Peter Sardi, Frank Thring, Frank M usic................................................... Ted Egan A rt D ire c to r................................................ D avid C opping Editor........................................... Jim Frazier W ilson, Debbie Beckefeld, Susan Cameron, Photography................................................G eoff Burton Prod S e c re ta ry ......................... B a rbara Ring Special Photography Bob Hicks, M ichelle Kidd, Harry Lister, Jason 35mm IN RELEASE Prod M anager.................. Sandra Richardson W a rd ro b e ................................... Helen Dyson Effects..................................... Jim Frazier P a rs lo w , A lv in R e n d a ll, Rod S p ra g u e , Sound Recordist.................................... Robert W Sound ells R e cord ist.............................Tim Lloyd N arrator.......................................Densey Clyne Presbyterian Ladies College School Choir, Budget................................................... $80,000 Sound T ra n s fe rs ....................... Rod Pascoe Length...................................................... 20 min The Third M ilitary D istrict Band.

Length....................................... approx.

50 min Sound E d ito r.................................

K erry Regan Color Process............................... Ektachrome S y n o p s is : C h a r le s is a y o u n g m a n For details of the follow ing 35m m film s in Color P rocess............................ Eastman 7247 Sound A s s t.................................................. Jim C u rrie Progress....................................... In Release apprenticed to a high society pho tograph er release consu lt the previous issue: Progress.................................Post-Production Special E ffe c ts ......................... Ian Jam ieson Synopsis: Non-social insects — the growth around the turn of the last century. W hen The Mango Tree Release Date........................... February 1978 Asst D ire c to rs ..................... John Robertson, of the young through a series of m onths and his boss receives a vice regal appointm ent Inside Looking Out S yn opsis: A music special shot prim arily in Scott Hicks, the developm ent of adult characteristics. to p h o to g ra p h th e g o v e rn o r’ s fa m ily , Summer City docum entary style. The film follows the C h ris W illiam s Two different paths to m aturity are depicted: C harles ca n 't quite handle the strain of this journey of Ted Egan and his 18 year old son Focus P u ller.............................D avid Forem an Blue Fire Lady through incom plete m etam orphosis as with and a love a ffa ir at the sam e tim e. H aving Mark in their travels around the Northern C am era A s s t.......................... D avid Forem an .

The Last Wave p ra y in g m antises, s u c k in g bugs, c o c k ­ d ou bts in her m ind, his lady frie n d Nora Territory. Ted has w ritten songs about the C la p p e r/L o a d e r.............................................KajLindstrom roaches etc., or through com plete meta­ in sists that she m ust have a ‘s ig n ’ from characters and places in the N.T., so his G a ffe r............................................. C raig Bryant m orphosis with resting periods, such as heaven befo re a m arriag e may take place. music provides the links in the journey and moths, butterflies, beetles, true flies etc. introduces many of the unique people they 16mm PRODUCTION SURVEY meet.

THE BUSINESS OFCOOPERATION AFTER THE BREAK Prod C om pany................Bill Gill Productions S c rip t.................................................Geoff Gare Photography......................................... Bill Gill, Hans Stammel N arrator................................................... Bill Gill E d ito r/T itle s............................. Hans Stammel Length.......................................................24 min Color Process............................... Ektachrom e Release Date......................... December 1977 S p onsor....................... The Grain Pool of W.A. Synopsis: Tracing the operations of the G rain Pool of W.A. in connection to the local producer of grain and the international m arkets.

THE BALLET DANCER (W orking Title) Prod C om pany................................. Oval Films S creen play..................................... John Floyd Producer......................................... John Floyd Assoc Producer........................ David Young Editor...................................... : ___ John Floyd B udget....................................... Approx $ 60 00 Length.......................................................25 min Color P rocess................... Eastman Negative Progress................................... Pre-Production Synopsis: A story of a shy, young boy who g o e s "th ro u g h th e v a rio u s s ta g e s of

THE CHANT OF JIMMIE BLACKSMITH See Production Report, pages 243-49.

252 — Cinema Papers, January

THE END OF THE SCHOOLS

Prod Com pany................Bill Gill Productions S c rip t........................................... Robin Binder, Keith Saggers Exec Producer......................................... Bill Gill P hotography......................................... Bill Gill, Stan Jeffrey N arrator................................................... Bill Gill E d itor/T itle s....................... ..

Hans Stammel Length...................................................... 15 min Color P rocess........................

Ektachrom e Release Date....................... Septem ber 1977 Sponsor............... W esfarm ers C o-operative Synopsis: D ocum entary on the m arketing services of the W esfarm ers Co-operative at home and overseas.

(W orking Title) Prod C o m p a n y .. Instructional M edia Centre, Canberra C. A. E. Dist C o m pa ny... Instructional Media Centre, Canberra C. A. E. S creenplay...........................................Ian Hart, David Swain P roducer............................................... Ian Hart Length...................................................... 40 min Color Process........................... Eastm ancolor Progress................................................ Scripting Release Date.......................................M id-1978 Synopsis: The governm ent finally decides to close the schools. W hat happened?

DEMOLITION

EVERY CARE BUT NO RESPONSIBILITY

Prod C om pany........Gemini P roductions P/L Prod Com pany.............. M antis W ildlife Films D irector.......................................Kevin Dobson D irectors......................... ......... Densey Clyne, S creen play......................... B ruce A. W ishart Jim Frazier Producer................................. Robert Bruning S cript........................................... Densey Clyne Exec P roducer............................. Steve Kibler P roducers................................. Densey Clyne,j P hotography................................. G ary Hansen Jim Frazier Editor............................................. Henry Dangar M usic......................................... Derek Strahan Prod M anager............................. Terrie Vincent P hotography................................................. Jim Frazier Art D irector................................... John Carroll Editor....................................... : . . . Jim Frazier Prod C o -ordina tor...................................... CarolW illiam s Special Photographic Prod S e cretary................................... Ann Hall C o stum e/W ardrobe...................................CarolBerry E ffects....................................................... Jim Frazier N arrator......................................... Densey Clyne Sound R ecordist............................................PhilJudd Length...................................................... 20 min Asst D irector........................... Peter Appleton Color P rocess............................... Ektachrom e Unit M anager............................................ Hugh Cann Progress........................................................... InRelease Focus Puller................................................. Bob Hughes Synopsis: N on-social insects — egglaying Boom O perator................... Julian M cSwiney techniques of the females of various orders.

C lapper/L oader........................... Sim on Mers The film show s the selection of suitable G affer............................................. M ick M orris plant or anim al food to lay eggs on: provision C o ntin uity................................. Anne M cCleod made for support and protection of young; Props B uyer........................... Robert Flaherty exam ples of fem ale insects that stay with S tand-by Props........................................... Doug Kelly

.X

H a rv e s t o f H ate

l

" 1.

.....,.... j *

...

PRODUCTION SURVEY JOURNEY INTO PARADISE B udget.................................................. $104,850 D irector....................................................... David SumLen ptergth...................................................... go nnin Color S creen play...................................................David Sum pter P rocess........................... Eastman 7247 rogress................................. Post Production P rodu cer....................................................... David SumPpter C ast: A n th r o p o lo g is t Dr R h ys J o n e s T e ch n ica l D irector................. Phillip Shefford supported by past and present natives of B udget................................................... $ 1 5 ,0 0 0 Tasmania, with some French and English P rogress.................................... Pre-Production appearances.

Release Date........................ December, 1 978 Synopsis: The exte rm in a tio n of the T as­ Synopsis: Surfing in Australia, Hawaii, Bali, m anian A b originals is the only case in featu rin g the pro-surfers of the I. P. S. A recent tim es of a genocide so sw ift and total. story of a young Australian surfe r settin g out A search to rediscover these unique people for the big money in the pro-contests.

Producer................................... Frank M organ, Ian Hart Photography...................... John Houldsw orth Editor.......................................................Ian Hart Art D irector........................Anne Linton-Sm ith Sound R e cord ist......................... Allan Walsh Length....................................................... 20 min Color Process............................ Eastm ancolor Progress..................................... In-P roduction Release Date.......................... February, 1978 Synopsis: The lite ra c y deb a te — are children becom ing less and less literate? Is the education system to blam e? How is reading taught? Some innovatory ideas in the teaching of reading.

THE LAST BULLET

Prod C om pany........ Cellar Film P roductions A MILL OF HOOKS D irector......................................................... PaulElliott Prod C om pany....................................... Nomad Enterprises THE THIN EDGE S cre e n p la y.................................M ichael Bolton D irector......................................................Sandra R ichardson Prod Com pany........ Kookaburra Productions P rodu cers................................... Andrew Jones, S creen play....................... Sandra Richardson D irector.........................................

Roger Bayley Paul Elliott Producer........................... Sandra Richardson S creen play................................... Roger Bayley P hotography............................................Andrew Jones P hotography................... M atthew Flannagan, Producer............................................M ark Ruse E d itor............................................................. PaulElliott Geoff Burton Photography....................... M ichael Pattinson Prod A ssts..............................A ndrew de Groot, E ditor............................................. Leo Sullivan E ditor............................................................. Chris Batson Jacqueline Fine Prod A ssts............................. Jenny Nussinov, Prod M anager................................. Mark Ruse Sound R e cord ist............................................ Tim Sm art Leonie M cG uire Art D irector................................................... Jutta Goetze A sst D irector.............................. G raham Irwin Sound R e cord ist.......................... Leo Sullivan Sound R ecordist.............................................. BillBaxter Cam era A sst.................................David Col Iyer Boom O perators............................Steve Hope, Asst D irector...........................M ichael Rogers Boom O perator............................ Adrian Bruch Craig K ershner The Touch of Love C am era A s s ts ......................... C h ris Batson, C o n tin u ity................................... Jutta Goetze, M ake-up....................................... Sue Leonard, D avid C o llyer Lucy M aclaren Linda Bridgewood Boom O perator............................... Paul Elliott Second Unit C am eras............ M ark M cAuliffe, B udget..................................................... $ 7 0 0 0 production, Soldiers of the Cross, made by G affer..........................................Beamish Elliott Unit M anager.................................................

Nick Cockram Dave Connell, Peter Arm strong Length....................................................... 40 min Joseph Perry for the Salvation Arm y in C o ntinuity............................. Andrew De Groot A rt D irector.................................................. David Copping G riP............................................... Dave G ornall C olor P rocess........................................Eastman Key G rip........................................................David Gornall 1 8 9 9 /1 9 0 0 .

Reg P erry rem e m be rs his Prod S e cretary....................................

Barbara Ring Still Photography......................... David Staley Progresss.............................. Post-Production fa th e r’s w o rk, and his own, as m agic Prod A s s t...................................

Jutta G oetze S pecial E ffe cts............................... John Elliott W ardro be................................... Barbara Gibbs Cast: A m ber R odgers, J u lie M cG regor, lanternist and lim elight operator prior to Still Photography...........................

Paul Elliott Sound R ecordist............................. Leo Sullivan Incidental M u sic ................... Richard Zatorski Robyn Moase, Alex Pope, Gia Careedes, 1910. Includes surviving fragm ent of 1906 T itle s/G ra p h ics ............................Shane Cargill Sound Transfers........................... Rod Pascoe T itle s............................................... G raphix Inc Scott Hudson, Bill Bubetly.

Length.......................................................20 min Kelly G ang film (in part film ed by Reg and Len gth....................................................... 32 min Sound A sst.................................................... Jim Currie Synopsis: The air is a mill of hooks — brother O rrie Perry) and other archive Color Process..................................... Eastman Asst D irectors...............................................

Pat Clayton, Progress............................................... Shooting que stion s w ithou t answers, glittering and footage, as well as the surviving magic Progress........................................... In Release Toivo Lember, C ast: D avid T re g a s k is ,. V in ce L u k a itis , d r u n k , a s f lie s w h o s e k is s s t in g s lantern slides from the Soldiers of the C ast: Juliet Bacskai, Trevor Hunter, Janet Ruth De La Lande M artin West, Robyn Rosenfeldt, George unbearably.

C ross le c t u r e p ro g ra m . S o u n d tr a c k Lord, David M itchell, Mark Tim son, Len Focus Puller............................. David Foreman Vidalis, Nigel Freeguard, Bill Aulton, Barry inclu des specia lly played passages from the 'N o ddy" LittlechiId. Brian LittlechiId. Camera A sst...............................David Foreman M erton, Roger Bayley, Peter Kilby, M urray o rig in a l B ioram a O rc h e s tra score. Live S yn o p sis: The relationships w ithin a family, C lapper/L oader............................................John Foster Brown, S tuart Beatty, Drew H errick, Bill sequences on M elbourne and Adelaide trying to make ends meet on a sm all dairy G affer....................................... C hick M cDonald M illar, David Jones, Dave Arm strong, John NOT ONLY PIPES locations. farm in Gippsland. Relationships come to a Mole.

C ontinuity..................................................... Moya Iceton Prod C om pany........ C ellar Film Productions head as each one reaches out.

Casting C o n s u lta n ts.............. Hilary Linstead, S yn o psis: An a c tio n dram a set in a Dist C om pany............................... M erton Film nam eless war, involving the m urder of eight Anne Peters RITUAL D irector........................................... B arry Merton Props Buyer/D resser................................. Neil Angwin soldiers and the apparent suicid e of their S creen play................................. Barry Merton Prod C om pany......................Illum ination Films com m anding general.

Standby P rops.......................................... Clark Munro ULTRA SOUND Producer..................................... Barry M erton D irector......................................Paul Cox Key G rip....................................................... NoelM cDonald Exec Producer................................... Tim Kelly (W orking Title) Producer....................................... Bernard Eddy Stunt Co-orindator....................................... IanJamieson (for Humes Ltd) Exec P roducer............Tony Llew ellyn-Jones Prod C om pany................Bill Gill Productions Asst Editor............................ M ichaelAtkinson Director of Photography............................ Tim Sm art P hotography............................ Paul Cox P rodu cer/D irector...................................

Bill Gill THE LAST OF THE LEVIATHANS Numbering A sst........................................ NigelGooden Prod M anagers............................................ Tim Smart, Editor..........................................Paul Cox P hotography.............................. Hans Stammel D irector......................................................... C hris Batson Still P hotography..................... C o rrieA ncone A ndrew Jones FTod M anager...............................

Roma Egan Editor.........................................

Hans Stam mel S cre e n p la y................................. C hris Batson H airdresser................................................... Judy Lovell Location M anager..................... A ndrew Jones Art D irector............................. M eredith Davis N arrator.................................................... BillGill P rodu cer........................................... M ark Ruse Best Boy................................. Graeme Shelton Sound R e cordist...........................................PaulElliott Prod C o -ordina tor.......................

M urry W hite Prod A sst.....................................

Janet Prance P hotography.............................................. C hris Batson M ake-up..................................................... Judy Lovell Camera A s s t..................... , . . . Andrew Jones C o stum e/W ard rob e.................. Janet Vernon Asst E ditor............................... Gale Johnsten E d itor............................................................. C hris Batson Runner..................................... A ndrew Marshall Boom O perator..................... M ark M cAulliffe Sound R ecordist........................................ Bryan Gracey Length.................................................................12 min Prod A sst............................ M ichael Pattinson B ook-keeper...................................Betite Vivian C o ntin uity................................... Jutta Goetze, Camera O perators................................. Bryan Gracey, Color Process..................................... Eastman Sound R e cord ist........................................... BillBaxter A ccounts S upervisor...................................Stan Green Lucy McLaren, Andrew Vial, P rogress............................................... Shooting C o n tin u ity................................ M ichael Rogers Location C atering......................................Movie M unchies John Elliott, Paul Cox Release Date........................... February 1978 Best Boy................................................... Roger Bayley B udget.................................................. $150,000 Andrew de Groot Choreography..................... Graham M urphy S p onsor............Metro Industrie s/U ltrasoun d Len gth......................................................... 5 min Length...................................................... 75 min Key G rip....................................... David Collyer M ake-up......................................... Roma Egan S y n o p s is : The docum entation of rail flaw C olor P rocess............................... Ektachrom e G auge........................................................ 16mm G rip................................................................David Jones Length.......................................................10 min detection by means of com puter technology Progress........................................... In Release Progress................................... Post-Production S till Photography......................... Heinz Brandt, C olor P rocess...........................Eastman from a moving vehicle.

Synopsis: A short film conce rne d with C a st: Celia De Burgh, John Jarrett, John Tim Kelly, Release Date....................... December, 1977 w h ale survival in A ustralian waters. It takes W alters, Jack Higham, Marie Darcy, Zev Andrew Jones Cast: Graham Murphy, Janet Vernon, Alida a blun t look at the exploitation, destruction E le fth e r io o , A n d re w M a rk w e ll, S tu a r t M ake-up................................... Lois H ohenfels Chase.

A YOUNG GIRL DREAMS OF THE and ultim ate extinction of the earth’s oldest Leggett, David Hursthouse, Rob George, Budget.....................................................$30 ,000 Synopsis: Ritual is based on Graham living animal.

LASTCOWBOY Isbael Kirk, Glenys Sazez, Tony Allison, Length.......................................................35 min M urp hy's ballet “ Sequenza” . Insects defend M ichael Shead, W ayne Anthony, Renfrey C olor P rocess....................................... Eastman D irector............................................. Bill Baxter their territory w ith wit, im petuosity and Ansell, Anthony Serradura.

S creen play....................................... Bill Baxter Progress..................................... In-P roduction com passion.

S yn opsis: A young car m echanic deafened Producer........................................... M ark Ruse Cast: W alter Pym, Helen Hemingway, Clare THE LAST TASMANIAN in an accident, falls in love.

Binney, Paul Glen.

Photography..................... M ichael Pattinson THETOUCH OF LOVE Prod C o m p a n y .. . . ARTIS Film P rodu ction s Synopsis: A dram atized docum entary for E ditor......................................................... Roger Bayley Pty Ltd in asso cia tio n w ith Tasm anian Art D irector............................................... C hris Batson Hum es Ltd on its range of products and their (form erly “ Sound of Love” ) TEACHING READING D e partm ent o f Film P rodu ction and Société C o ntin uity......................................................Jutta Goetze influence on life throughout Australia.

Prod Company.

-Française de P roduction (W orking Title) South Australian Still P hotography.................. M ichael Rogers D ist C o m p a n y .. . . ARTIS Film P roductions Film C orporation Length.........................................................5 min Prod C o m p a n y .. Instructional M edia Centre, D irector............

Pty Ltd . . . . John Power Canberra C. A. E. Progress........................................... In Release P roducer..........

D ire cto r......................................................... Tom Haydon ........ Jane Scott Dist C o m p a n y ... Instructional M edia Centre, Cast: Toni Vernon, Jam es Reyne.

PORT OF FREMANTLE Exec Producer.

S creen play..................................................... Tom Haydon, . . . . Matt Carroll Synopsis: A dream w ithin a dream. A short Canberra C. A. E. P h o to g ra p h y ..

Rhys Jones .. . G eoff Burton WESTERN AUSTRALIA film with a warning for every teenage cutie D irector........................................Frank Morgan P rodu cer...................................................... Tom Haydon M usic................ ........Peter Best w ith stars in her eyes and a throb in her (W orking Title) S creen play............................... Frank Morgan, A ssoc P roducers........................................ RayBarnes, E ditor................

G. Turney-Sm ith heart.

M ax Kemp Prod C o m p a n y .. . . : ___Bill Gill P roductions Roger Fauriat S c rip t............................................... John Aitken P h otog rap hy................................................ Geoff Burton D irector..................................... H ansS tam m el E d itor............................................. Charles Rees Producer................................................... BillGill Prod C o-ordinator...................Roz Berrystone Photography........................................... BillGill, TASM ANIA E d ito r ....................................... H a nsS tam m el For details of the follow ing 16mm films Location M anager............ Graham M cKinney Prod A s s L ................................... Janet Prance consu lt the previous issue: Prod A s s t...................................... Gillian Leahy Len gth................................................................ 26 min Apostasy Prod S e c re ta rie s ... ............. Adrienne Elliott, Color Process........................................Eastman Australia’s Own Beef Breed Rosanne Andres-B axter Release Date..........................December 1 978 Balance Sound R ecordist........................... Robert W eils Progress..................................... Pre-Production Dreams Cam era O perators....................... G eoff Burton, S p onsor.................. Frem antle Port Authority Dream Doors Gert Kirchner Synopsis:H is to ric a l d e v e lo p m e n t and A Drop of Rough Ted C a m era A s s ts ................... Russell G allow ay, operations today of the Frem antle Port Earth Patrol G illia n Leahy Authority.

First Things First C o n tin u ity................................. Roz Berrystone Heydays Second Unit Photography........ Gert Kirchner Holiday at Sea Still Photography............................. W ilf Elvey REG PERRY REMEMBERS Image of Death G rip ............................................ Gary Clements Know Your Beef E le ctricia n ..................................

Lem bit Laats Prod C om pany................ Adelaide College of The Last Tasmanian A dvanced Education FRANCE The Legend of Yowie D irector........................................................... BillM enary Prod M anager.............................................Pierre Robin Love Photography................................................... Guy Macou P roducer......................................................... BillM enary Mind Sound R e cordist...................................... M ario Vinck P hotographer............ Graham Dimm itt A.C.S. Mortimer E ditor............................ C h ristopher Cordeaux Cam era A sst............................................ Adrien Fortis The Murray Grey Breed C o ntin uity................................. Roz Berrystone Sound R e cord ists........................... Ray Beale, Peter Henshaw, W ayne Lowen The Newman Shame S till Photography............................. Jean More E le ctricia n ................................... Jean Mouton M ixer............................................................Trevor W ilkie The Night Nurse Our Living Past Asst Editor........................ C ecilia Cm ielewski BRITAIN R esearch...........................................................BillM enary Plunge into Darkness P hotography........................................M ike Fox Quartet Sound R ecordist........................... Edward Tise B udget.................................................... $ 6 0 0 0 Rainbow Way Len gth....................................................... 23 min Cam era A sst.............................. Steve Haskett Red Dog S till Photography................... Eileen Tw eedie Color Process..................................... Eastman The Restless Years G rap hics D esigner................. Bernard Lodge Progress........................................................... InRelease The Scalp Merchant Cast: Reg Perry, M urray M atthews, Bill Rostrum Cam era O p e ra to r.. . . . . Ken Morse Sound E d itor................................. M ic k A u d le y Menary.

Three Lovers Synopsis: D ocum entary on Reg Perry, born Ways of Seeing Asst. E ditors.............................. Kate Grenville, Anna Am brose 1 8 9 0 , w h o r e c a lls e a r lie s t A u s tra lia n

A Young Giri Dreams of the Last Cowboy

533

3

Cinema Papers, January — 253

SOUND STUDIO FOR HIRE

THE POSITIVE APPROACH ROB HENDRIKS

NEG CUTTERS

JOHN SKINNER

2nd floor, suite 32,62 alfred street, milsons point 2061 phone: 922 7474

Suitable for Film, Video and Stills at.

FILM SETS

88 Warrigal Road, Oakleigh, MELBOURNE 3166

HEÇATiVE TtÎoOçtbs?

Kfe. fhe.'hYrie. l öogiye.v3 a call f o r ^oaliTu öervfce..

Studio 75' x 46' with 14' to lighting grid.

Large three sided paintable fixed cyce.

Good access to studio for cars and trucks.

Design and set construction service available.

Dressing rooms, wardrobe, and make-up facilities.

STUDIO BOOKINGS, PHONE: Alex Simpson, (03) 568 0058, (03) 568 2948 AH (03) 25 3858

Mike Reed’s Post Production Company Pty Ltd 274 Ferrars Street South Melbourne 3205 Phone 6 9 9 1 3 9 3 or 6 9 9 1395

m

m

m

p r o d u c t io n

s

W

)

H o u s e ftm> k e ^ T f u - s

yner

O

p t ic a l s

14 Whiting Street Artarmon, NSW 2064

(02) 438 2993 Co

Ro o m s

t

/6 mm Ka.-'i fo Purre.

Steemseck

16mm & 35mm Optical Effects 16mm Blow-Ups — 35mm Reductions Wet Gate Facilities

MotoRisso Pic Sytfcs

CAMERA fin» Soont> (LotAPt-BTB / 6 m m O uT F lT Pi C l !$ W

it »

400* fA(\<>S

dRY$TftL Syrvc

f irs t "Floor—

475 P & ü jic . H 'ijkuja.jj

35mm & 16mm Negative Cutting

CHRIS ROWELL

Creojs Hezt} Opposite-

ôr\4M a. leJejïhrae- (c&J 4 3 /6/5*

Chris Rowell Productions, 139 Penshurst Street, W illoughby, NSW 2068

- .

Phone: (02) 411 2255

PRODUCTION SURVEY W ardro be.......................

Dorothy Rosemund, Ruth Aldrich M ake-up..................................... Bozena Zurek First A s s t....................................... D ennis Kiely C a s t: M ichael Aitken, Carol Burns, Rod M u llin a r , B a rb a ra S te p h e n s , C h a rle s Tingwell, M argo Lee, Bill Kerr, Vincent Gill, L ou ise Pajo, Ray B a rrett, Don Pascoe, W alter Sulliveii, Ian Dyson, David Cahill, M arion Johns, Noel M itchell, Jenny McNee, Ray M eagher, R obert D allas, Deborah Masters, Russell Kiely, Joanne Kiely, Bill Ayers.

S y n o p s is : A six-part m ystery thriller by Peter Yeldham. An accountant discovers discrepan cies in a com pany’s books and asks too many questions. He is fram ed for a m u rd e r and fle e s the p o lic e and th e com pany men as he tries to gather evidence to prove his innocence.

D irector........................................... B ruce Petty CAMPING AND BUSHCRAFT S creen play..................................... Bruce Petty S creen play................................. Peter W e lch / Producer................................. Suzanne Baker Eric Fullilove Photography................................. Kerry Brown Exec Producer............................................ Peter Dimond Editor................................................. Ian W alker Length.......................................................25 min Unit M anager............................Rod Freedman G auge....................................................... 16mm Prod Asst......................................... Sue Doring S p onsor................................. General M otorsArt D irector........................................... Bob Hill Holden’s Lim ited C o stum e/W ard rob e.............. Susan Bowden S y n o p s is : Series for com m ercial television M ixer................................... Julian Ellingworth starring G eorge Hamm.

Camera A ssts................................. Peter Levy, Tony Gailey WHEN IT COMES TO THE CRUNCH G affer........................................... Bruce Gailey Still P hotography..................M ichael Rubetski S creenplay.................................................. Rob G eorge Anim ator......................................................... Film G raphics Exec Producer.............................................Peter Dimond Length.......................................................15 min T itles............................................................. Film G raphics Length......................................................18 min G auge....................................................... 16mm S p onsor............................. C olgate-Palm olive G auge....................................................... 35mm Color P rocess....................................... Eastman S yn o p sis: G eneral preventive dentistry.

Progress....................................... Final Editing Release Date....................................Early 1978 ACTIVITIES OF AMDEL C a s t: A n n e S e m le r, as “ A r t " , R o ry S creenplay............................... ' . . . . K. M ethold TWENTY GOOD YEARS Dot and the Kangaroo O ’Donohue, John Bell, Anna Volska, John Exec P roducer..................... Lesley Hammond Prod C o m p a n y .. . . Australian Broadcasting G aden, Ton y S heldon, REG Liverm ore, Length.......................................................20 min Gulpilil.

Comm ission G auge....................................................... 16mm Location M anager..............Rhonda Sallaway D irectors............................. Norman Johnson, S y n o p s is : B ruce Petty at his innovative Sponsor....................................... Departm ent of W ardrobe............................. C aroline Suffield David Zweck, Robin W ischusen, best has created a film that prom otes the M ines and Energy Sound R e cordist............................... Bob Peck M argaret Greenwell notion that the arts are for everyone. The S y n o p s is : To illustrate the broad range of Asst D irectors............................ Russell Webb, S c rip tw rite rs.............................

Sandy Ringer, film is original, funny, entertaining and a testing processes w hich Amdel carries out David Le M aistre Judith Colquhoun, Brian W right, w ork of art itself. The story starts as art for the m ining industry.

Cam era O perator................Daniel Batterham Oriel Gray, Alan McCoy, desce nds to earth in a hang-glider, the Ligh ting..................................... Jack Kendrick action takes place around a Telecom hole at Richard Lane C o n tin u ity................................. Carolyn Gould FIFTH BIRTHDAY ADMISSIONS DOT AND THE KANGAROO (series devised by Sandy Ringer) Chatswood. A film to be seen rather than Key G rip ................................. Brett M cDowell S creenplay............................... Russell Porter Prod C om pany...............................Yoran G ross describe, it tells how art transform s ordinary S cript E ditor....................... Judith C olquhoun C o nstruction M anager............................. Stan Exec Producer..................... Lesley Hammond Film S tudio P/L Exec P roducer...............................Keith W ilkes things into w o rks of art.

W oolveridge Length.......................................................20 min D irector......................................... Yoran G ross Prod M anager...........................Lorraine Collett M ake-up..................................................

Robert Wasson, G auge.......................................................

16mm S c rip t..............................................John Palmer, Prod Designer............................................. Peter Redman Bozena Zurek S p onsor..........Education D epartm ent of S.A. Yoran G ross Length............................................. 21 x 50 min Special E ffe cts.............................................Jack Armitage R. A. A. F. TRAINING S y n o p s is : The film aim s to show teachers Based on the book by Progress............................... Pilot com pleted.

C a s t: Keir Dullea, Karen Black, Tom Oliver, th a t c o n tin u o u s e n try a d m issio n s are Ethel Pedley (W orking Title) Production resum es M arch 1978 Don Reid, M ichael Long, Tom M cCarthy, Ray desirable because this procedure caters for P roducer..........................................Yoran G ross C a s t: Harold Hopkins, Anne Pendlebury, Prod C om pany.............................Film Australia M e a g h e r, W a r w ic k P o u ls o n , B a rb a ra individual differences in children.

M u sic............................................................ Bob Young John Diedrich, Julia Blake, Jonathan Hardy, Dist C om pany........................... Film Australia S t e p h e n s , A d a m G ib s o n , M a t t h e w L y ric s ........................... Marion von Alderstein John M urphy, Leila Blake, Sandy Gore, D irector...............................................Dennis Hill O’Sullivan, Charles Tame, June Salter, Jack FORESTS Additional L yrics......................................... Bob Young Anne Phelan, Peter Cummins.

S creenplay.........................................Dennis Hill Thom pson, Tony Wager, Louise Cullen, Beth Anim ation Photography___ Graham Sharpe S creen play.................................. Peter Clarke S y n o p s is : T w e n ty G ood Years is a series P roducer......................................................... DonM urray Seach.

Live A ction P h otog rap hy,., Frank Hammond Exec Producer..................... Lesley Hamm ond dep icting 20 years in the life of a fam ily and Exec P roducer............................. Ron Hannam S y n o p s is : A fe a tu re length telem ovie.

E d itors................................................. Rod Hay, Len gth............................................... 10-1 5 min their fam ilies, and exam ining the principal Photography............... M ick Von Bornemann Drama of c ris is in a m arriage as husband Klaus Jaritz G auge....................................................... 35m m e ven ts w h ic h o c c u rre d , n a tio n a lly and E ditor................................................................. IanW eddell and wife adjust to their move to Sydney from C h ara cters Design and Sponsor...................................... Departm ent of internationally, in each of the years from Unit M anager................................... Ian A dkins Canada and of their changing problem s as S toryboard........................... Laurie Sharpe W oods and Forests 1956 to 1976.

It also aim s at m aking the Length................................................................ 15 min their retarded son reaches puberty.

A n im ators..................... Sue Beak, Cam Ford, S y n o p s is : T o in c r e a s e th e p u b lic 's audience remember what they were doing in G auge.................................................... 16mm Peter G ardiner, Lowl Greehalg, aw areness of wood and its uses in our any one of those years.

Color P rocess..................................... Eastman Athol Henry, Greg Ingram, e v e ry d a y liv e s and its v a lu e to th e Progress..................................................... FinalEditing KIRBYS’ COMPANY Richard Jones, Wal Logue, environm ent.

Release Date............................. January, 1978 Peter Luschwitz, Vivienne Ray, Prod C om pany..................................... ABC-TV S y n o p s is : A recruiting film for the R. A. A. F. Laurie Sharp, Richard S lapczyriski.

Producer....................................................... John M artin REGENCY PARK For details of the follow ing TV series and to attra ct young men into tertiary education P a inters............................... Susan Anderson, D irectors....................Sue Willis, Jim Roberts, film s see the previous issue: Exec Producer..................... Lesley Hammond and a career in the services.

Miriam Cortez, Anna Gudgion, Chris Thompson, David Cahill Photography........................... G eoff Sim pson C h o p p e r Squad Elizabeth Lane, Rebecca W riters.......................................................... David Boutland, Length...................................................5 x 5 min G lenview High M ilstead, Helen Palmer, Charles Stamp, M argaret Kelly, G auge....................................................... 16mm N a tural H is to ry URBAN TRANSPORT Adrienne Smith Judith Bell, Don Catchlove Sponsor..................... South A ustralian State Pig in a Poke T racers...................... Sue Davies, Gail Engel, (W orking Title) Cam era..................................... ....... Dick Bond, Planning A u thority S c h a e ffe r ’ N’ Slade Carol Laird, Helen Prod Com pany...............................................Film Australia M ichael Osborne, M ike W ooler S y n o p s is : Historical record of building at T his Rugged C o ast M cCarthy, Robyn Sharpe, Ligh ting..................................... John Wharton, Dist Com pany........................... Film Australia Regency Park Recreational Centre.

T ru c k ie s Olga Zahorsky D irector....................................... David Barrow Samuel Chung, Roy Jeffrey Young R am say Asst. A n im ators....................... Ingrid Calstrom, S creen play................................. David Barrow Prod M anager...............................................M ike Collins SCULPTOR The Young D o c to rs Carolyn Davis, Maggie Geddes, Producer......................................................... DonM urray Prod S e cretary............................................. Lyn Knight S creenplay............................. Terry Jennings Alex Nicholas, M aurie Orr, Asst P roducer................................................RonHannam T echnical Producers.......... Bruce Valentine, Exec Producer...................

Lesley Hammond M ike Stapleton, M arilyn Ted Reynolds, Peter Knevitt Photography............................. John Hosking, Length........................................... 10-15 min Taylor, Milan Zahorsky D esigners.............................................. Barbara Major, Ross King G auge.......................................................

35mm FILM AUSTRALIA Additional Art W ork..................... Jan Green, Editor............................................. Sue Horsley Dennis Gentle Sponsor..................................... Art G allery of Sandra Gross, Sue Villani Unit M anager.............................................. Roy Bissell Videotape Editors..................................... John Cameron, South Australia C olor D esigner........................ Annette Sharpe Sound R ecordist................ Don M cC onachie John Patrick, Mike Aw dcent S yn o p sis: To introduce the w ork of Bert C h e cke rs......................... Cheryl Breakspear, Camera A ssts............... '. .........Andre Fleurin, Vision M ixers............................................. Bruce Wilson, Flugelman.

Gail Brown, M atilda Thompson COUNTRY TOWN Peter Viscovich M ichael Flint Sound R e cord ist............................... Phil Judd S ound.......................................................... NoelCantrill, Length.......................................................26 min Prod C om pany...............................................Film Australia THE NEEDS OF YPUNG M usic R ecordist.................... M aurie W innore G auge....................................................... 16mm John Segal Dist C om pany............................................. Film Australia AUSTRALIANS C a sting...................................... Richard M eikle W ardro be......................................... Jim M urray D irector................................... Phillip Robertson Color P rocess....................................... Eastman D irector of V oices...................M ary M adgw ick Progress....................................................

Editing M a ke-up........•.......................... C hristine Ehlert S creen play........................................

John Dick S creen play......................... Phillip Robertson Asst. C am era......................... Kim H um phries C asting....................................... Jennifer Allen Exec Producer................... Lesley Hammond Producer................................... M alcolm Otton Release Date................................. Early, 1978 C o -o rd in a to r........................... Janny Schowe S y n o p s is : A study of new steps being taken C a s t: W illy Fennell, Ted O gden, Ken Length.................................................- 2 x 1 5 min Asst Producer................................................RonHannam A d m inistration............................. S u eJ. Field, in all Australian states to upgrade urban Blackburn, M argaret C ruickshank, Peter de G auge....................................................... 16mm P hotography..................................A ndy Fraser Elizabeth Johnson transport.

Salis, Louise Howitt, Vince M artin, M argaret Sponsor..........Education D epartm ent of S.A. Editor........................................................... Phillip Robertson Negative C u tting.................. M argaret Cardin Nelson, Tom Burlinson, O livia Brown.

S y n o p s is : To prom ote d is c u s s io n w ith Sound R e cordists..................................... John McPhail, B udget.......................... $ 2 5 0,00 0 S y n o p s is : Three generations of the Kirby groups of young people aged 11 -1 3 years Rod Simmons Len gth....................................................... 80 min fam ily live and w ork in the Sydney subu rb of about aspects of life w hich concern them.

G affer.........................................................Charlie Donald C olor Process..................................... Eastman Balmain.

Asst Editor................................. M ilena Damian SOUTH AUSTRALIAN FILM P rogress...................... In Release (UPDATE) WESTLAKES - A Length.......................................................90 min C a s t: As ch a ra cte rs’ voices: Spike Milligan, G auge....................................................... 16mm CORPORATION PLACE TO LIVE, WORK AND PLAY Lola Brooks, Joan Bruce, Barbara Frawley, Color P rocess....................................... Eastman NOLAN AT SIXTY Prod Com pany....................... M ilton Ingerson Peter G wynne, Ron Haddrick, Ross Higgins, Progress.................................................... Editing Prod Com panies......................... .

A B C -TV/ Film and TV Productions R ichard M eikle, June Salter.

Release Date...............................

March, 1978 S creenplay................................... Biran Bergin RM Productions, S y n o p s is : Dot, the little daughter of a settler S y n o p s is : A specialized sociological film M unich'/BBC Television, London Exec Producer...................

Lesley Hamm ond CRISIS CARE SERVICE in the Australian outback, becom es lost in about m em bers of the com m unity of a D irector......................................................... Brian Adams Length....................................................... 20 min the bush. She is befriended by a big S creen play...................................................... PatHudson c oun try town in New South Wales.

S creen play.....................................

Elwyn Lynn G auge.......................................................

16mm kangaroo w ho helps her find the way home.

Exec Producer............................. Peter Dimond Producer. ...................................Brian Adams Sponsor............................. W estlakes Lim ited Dot travels in the kangaroo’s pouch and Sponsor............................... .

D epartm ent for Assoc P ro d u c e r...................................

Kenneth Gordon S y n o p s is : U p d a te film to W e s tla kes’ has m any adventures. She m eets the bush Com m unity W elfare GOLD ON BLUE Photography.............................................. O scar Scherl, present stage of developm ent. anim als and w ith their help fin d s her way Prod C om pany.............................Film Australia S y n o p s is : An inform ation film for staff.

Les Seym our home.

Dist C om pany........................... Film Australia Editor..............................................................M ark W aters WOMEN ARTISTS OF AUSTRALIA COMMUNITY AIDES Prod A sst................................. Jennifer W urth D irector....................................... Cecil Holmes S creenplay.................. C hristobel.M attingley Sound R e cord ists..................... G aryG leeson, S creenplay................................. Cecil Holmes S creen play...................................................... PatHudson Exec Producer................... Lesley Hamm ond C hris Moore Producer................................... Peter Johnson Exec Producer............................. Peter Dimond Length....................................................... 50 min Sponsor................................... D epartm ent for C om m entary.............................. Kenneth Clark M usic........................... Royal Australian Navy G auge....................................................... 16mm Com m unity W elfare Len gth.......................................................6 0 min P hotography............................. John Hosking S p onsor....................................... Art G allery of S y n o p s is : D o c u m e n ta ry fe a tu rin g A u s ­ Editor...............................................Vincent Kent S y n o p s is : An inform ation film for staff.

South Australia tralia’s distinguished painter, Sidney Nolan.

Prod M anager....................... L. W illis Davies S y n o p s is : A film about Australian women HUMANITY AND HARMONY Sound R ecordist.......................... Rod Pascoe P roducers of television series and film s are artists from the beginning to the present.

Camera A sst..................................... Jim W ard Exec Producer............................. Peter Dimond requested to forw ard com plete details of G affer............................................... Ian Plummer Sponsor........................Mobil Oil Australia Ltd productions to: Production Survey, Cinema WOMEN AND SUICIDE Length.......................................................15 min S y n o p s is : To im prove m an’s understanding Papers, 143 Therry St.,'M elbourne, 3000.

RUN FROM THE MORNING S creen play................................................. AndiSebastian G auge....................................................... 16mm of man and prom ote tolerance and racial Exec P roducer................... Lesley Hammond Prod C om pany..................................... ABC-TV Color Process....................................... Eastman harm ony — perhaps where harm ony did not Length....................................................... 50 min P roducer....................................... Carl Schultz Progress.................................................... Editing exist previously.

BECAUSE HE’S MY FRIEND G auge....................................................... 16mm Exec Producer............................. Eric Taylor Release Date......................... February, 1978 Prod C om pany..................................... ABC-TV S p onsor....................... Prem ier’s Departm ent Photography............................... Julian Penny S y n o p s is : A film for R. A. N. R ecruiting for LIFE. BE IN IT D irector....................................... Ralph Nelson (Women Adviser) E ditor......................................... Neil Thompson young men to becom e office rs in the Royal S creen play............................. Richard Yeeles P roducer..................................G eoffrey Daniels S y n o p s is : To reveal the state of wom en in Prod M anager........................... John M oroney A ustralian Navy.

Exec P roducer............................. Robert Kline Exec Producer............................. Peter Dimond A ustralian M ental Hospital, to question the Unit M anager...................... Ken Richardson Photography............................... Peter Hendry S p onsor........................ Prem ier’s Departm ent role of these institu tion s in our society and D esigner............................. G eoffrey W edlock E ditor.......................... Richard F rancis-B ruce S y n o p s is : A film to interest com m unity the pressures on women w hich very often Sound R ecordist.................... G unther Ericoli MAGIC ARTS Prod M anager.................... M ichael Baynham groups, local governm ent bodies and private are the cause of their being hospitalized..

D esigner...................... Kenneth M uggleston Prod C om pany............................Film Australia enterprise in the spon sorsh ip of the fitness Unit M ariàgèi.T . . .....................

Val W indon Dist C om pany.......................... Film Australia cam paign.

ANIMATED FILMS

TELEVISION SERIES

Continued on P. 257

Cinema Papers, January — 255

BRIAN KAVANAGH Editor LONG W EEKEND FradScheplil'i

The Chanl » of Jimmie •Blacksm ith

KAVANAGH PRODUCTIONS PTY. LTD.

(03) 699 9749 London Representative: Leon Boyle Ltd, 6 Victoria Square, London. SW1W OQY UK. 01-834 7939

Correspondence: 104 Erskine Street, MIDDLE PARK VIC 3206

BERKEY COLORTRfìfl IfìTRODUCES HEW UGHTIflG KITS FOR WORLDWIDE LOCfìTIOfl LIGHTIfiG

ROSS DIMSEY is an

INDEPENDENT Director, Writer, Producer of

FILM Commercial, Documentary, Feature

(0 3 ) 9 6 1 1 0 9 CINE SERVICE PTY. LTD. 235 MORAY STREET, (PO BOX 328), SOUTH MELBOURNE 3205.

TELEPHONE (03) 699 6999 it if it it it it it

documentary film productions sound recording, dubbing editorial service, titling theatrette video service & telecine facilities . kinescope recordings

if ic

it it it

it

16mm color & b/w processing and duplicating super 8 mm & standard 8 mm duplicating super 8 mm b/w processing 16mm to super 8 mm reduction printing, sound or silent magnetic striping ail gauges

Victorian agents for tuscan reels and cans suppliers of UMATIC %” KAREX video tape

^

¿Colorir;

Lighting Kits must be portable, lightweight, rugged and durable.

They are your studio in a suitcase — and must respond to everchanging location shooting needs, over and over again.

Colortran’s new, Mark 2 Kits have been redesigned to respond to today's requirements — worldwide. The Mini-Pro Kit and Pro­ Kit IV are now packaged in a rugged aluminium carry case. Both are lighter. Our Flight Kit is streamlined and now includes the lightweight, hi-performance Mini-King with removable barn­ doors. These are a few of the changes.

Colortran offers 14 different kits in 120 and 240V versions.

Berkey C d o rt ran, CONTACT YOUR LOCAL OFRCE

Filmtronics

N.S.W. Dick King. 33 Higginbotham Road, G ladesville 2111. Phone 807 4 6 0 6 or 807 1444.

VICTORIA. G eoffrey Hamilton. Unit 2, 3 3 -4 5 The Centreway, Mount. W averley 3149. Phone 233 5 3 7 5 or m essages on 233 5929.

A.C.T. Peter Mars. Unit 31, Paragon Mall, G ladstone Street, Fyshw ick 2609. Phone 95 1088.

QUEENSLAND. David Pugh. 477 W aterw orks Road, Ashgrove 4060. Phone (07) 38 4447.

WESTERN AUSTRALIA. Frank Evans. Shop 3, Broadway Fair, 88 Broadway Nedland 609 9. Phone 86 8095.

SOUTH AUSTRALIA and TASMANIA. C lients please contact Victorian O ffice (03) 233 5375.

PRODUCTION SURVEY ■ Continued from P. 255

m ethod of wool purchase by Australian W ool Board. Specialized release.

audience. Sponsored by Steel M ains P/L to have a re c o rd of th e ir w o rk on the reconstru ction of the Tasm an Bridge and specialized processes involved.

Projects recom m ended for funding:

THE MANTON PLAN

TASMANIAN FILM CORPORATION CARING FOR JEANINE Prod C om pany.....................

Tasm anian Film C orporation Dist C om pany....................... Tasm anian Film C orporation Prod Company. Tasm anian Film Corporation Dist Company. Tasm anian Film Corporation D irector....................................... Edwin Moses S creen play................................. Edwin Moses P roducer..................................... Norman Laird Exec Producer........................ M alcolm Smith Photography............................... Gert Kirchner E ditor............................................... Peter Davis Sound Editor........................... Peter M cKinley Camera A ssistant.................. Gary Clements C lapper/L oader..................John Jasiukow icz T itles............................................... Gudrun Hey Length..............v.............................. 15-20 mins G auge....................................................... 16mm P rogress....................................... Final Editing Synopsis: Prom otional and educational film on the care of children up to five years.

S ponsored by the D epartm ent of Social W elfare. Intended for local and m ainland use.

IS fe r V ery

very Very very

çaaiï+y-

is for fasf ■fosf 6*Sf fasf service

(b

Prod Company. Tasm anian Film Corporation Dist Company. Tasm anian Film C orporation D irector..................................... Don Anderson P roducer................................... Don Anderson Exec Producer....................... M alcolm Smith P hotography............................. Gert Kirchner, C hris Morgan Camera A sst..............................G ary Clem ens Length...................................................... 15 min G auge....................................................... 16mm Color P rocess........................................... 7547 Progress.................................................Shooting Synopsis: A record of constructio n of H obart’s Eastern O utlet Expressway.

INFANT EDUCATION

-fo r

loving. loving.

loving loving Cafe, f/eforinn film Labor*if°rit^ *r Film h our

Me harwe.

Prod Company. Tasm anian Film Corporation TASMAN BRIDGE Dist Company. Tasm anian Film C orporation Prod Company. Tasm anian Film C orporation D irector....................................... Sherry James Dist Company. Tasm anian Film C orporation S creen play......................................... S. C ollins D irector....................................... Don Anderson P roducer...................................................... DonAnderson P roducer.................................... Don Anderson Exec P roducer........................ M alcolm Smith Exec Producer....................... M alcolm Smith P hotography............................... Gert K irchner Photography............................... Gert K irchner Editor............................................... Peter Davis E ditor................................... M argaret Beakley Sound E ditor................................................Peter M cKinley Prod S ecretary....................... Adrienne Elliot Camera Asst.......................................... RussellG alloway Sound Editor........................... Peter M cKinley C la p p e r/L o a d e r................. Russell G alloway Camera O perator..................... Gert Kirchner, G rip.............................................................. G ary Clements R ussell Galloway Still P hotography............ Brendan Bannister C lapper/L oader................. John Jasiukow icz T echnical Advisor........................... Alan Beer Still Photography............................. W ilf Elvey Length.......................................................15 min T echnical A dvisor................ John Chudacek G auge....................................................... 16mm Length............................................... 2 0 -3 0 min Color P rocess........................................... 7247 G auge....................................................... 16mm Progress......................... Shooting Completed Color Process........................................... 7247 Cast: Tristan Rogers, Ken Sharpe, Bob Progress.................................................... Editing Larkins.

Synopsis: A record of the reconstru ction of Synopsis: Produced for State Em ergency the Tasm an Bridge. Made for Restoration Service, to show procedure in establishing a C om m ittee of Tasm an Bridge. disaster plan for a m unicipality.

NOISE POLLUTION

Prod Company. Tasm anian Film C orporation Dist Company. Tasm anian Film C orporation D irector..................................... Ron Saunders S creenplay............................... Ron Saunders P roducer.................................... Don Anderson Exec P roducer....................... M alcolm Smith Length.......................................................20 min DENTAL HEALTH G auge........................... .-......................... 1 6mm Progress................................... Pre-Production Prod Company. Tasm anian Film Corporation Synopsis: Sponsored by D epartm ent of Dist Company. Tasm anian Film C orporation Environment.

Director.......................................Sherry James S creenplay....................................................John Edwards, S. C ollins PEDDER - GORDON POWER Producer................................... Don Anderson SCHEME Exec Producer....................... M alcolm Smith ProdayCompany. Tasm anian Film C orporation P hotography.......................................... RussellG allow Dist Company.

Tasm anian Film C orporation Editor...................................................Jane Bale D irector...................................... Don Anderson Sound E ditor................................................Peter M cKinley Producer....................................

Don Anderson Camera O perator...............Russell Galloway Exec Producer....................... M alcolm Smith Camera A sst..................... John Jasiukow icz P hotography............................... Gert Kirchner Still P hotography............ Brendan Bannister Editor............................................... Peter Davis Len gth........................................................ 6 min Sound Editor........................... Peter M cKinley G auge....................................................... 16mm Length.......................................................20 min Color P rocess........................................... 7247 G auge...................................................... 16mm Progress...................................... Final Editing Color Process........................................... 7247 Synopsis: Sponsored by Health Services.

Progress................Final Shooting Completed Instructional film on dental health with Synopsis: A record of the Pedder-G ordon em phasis on danger of high sugar foods.

Developm ent and the associated tourist G eneral Release. potential of Tasm ania’s south west. G eneral release made for Hydro E le ctricity Com ­ mission.

EASTERN OUTLET

Prod Company. Tasm anian Film C orporation Dist Company. Tasm anian Film C orporation D irector..................................... Ron Saunders S creen play................................. Ron Saunders Producer................................... Don Anderson Exec P roducer........................ M alcolm Smith Photography............................... Gert K irchner SAFETY IN CONSTRUCTION Sound R ecordist................... Jackie G ardner Prod Company. Tasm anian Film C orporation Sound Editor.........................................

Peter M cKinley Dist Company. Tasm anian Film Corporation Camera A sst............................................ RussellG alloway D irector....................................... Edwin Moses C lapper/L oader..................John Jasiukow icz S creen play................................. Edwin Moses Still Photography............ Brendan Bannister Producer..................................... Norman Laird Length.......................................................20 min Exec Producer....................... M alcolm Smith G auge....................................................... 16mm Length...............................................

1 0 -1 2 in in Color P rocess........................................... 7247 G auge....................................................... 16mm Progress................................... Final Shooting Progress................................................

Shooting Synopsis: Sponsored by the Education Synopsis: Sponsored by the Departm ent of D e oartm ent. A c ritic a l lo o k at c u rre n t Labour and Industry — to prom ote building teaching practice. Specialized release. and construction safety for w orkers in Tasmania.

LIM ITED OFF TO PURCHASE TRIAL Prod Company. Tasm anian Film Corporation Dist Company. Tasm anian Film Corporation D irector....................................... Sherry James S creenplay.................................. P. Austern Producer................................... Don Anderson Exec P roducer........................ M alcolm Smith Photography............................... G ert Kirchner E d itor............................................... Peter Davis Sound Editor........................... Peter M cKinley Camera A sst........................... G ary Clem ents Second Unit Photography. Russell Galloway G rip.......................................John Jasiukow icz N a rrator................................. Gerard M cGuire T itles...............................................G udrun Hey L e n g th ....................................................... 7 min G auge....................................................... 16mm Color P rocess........................................... 7247 Progress.............................................Completed Synopsis: Produced for Australian Wool C o rp o ra tio n . P rom otional film d e ta ilin g

TASMANIAN ARCHITECTURE Prod Company. Tasm anian Film Corporation Dist Company. Tasm anian Film C orporation P roducer..................................... Norman Laird Exec P roducer....................... M alcolm Smith Len gth.................................................. . . 2 0 min G auge...................................................... 35mm Progress................................... Pre-Production Synopsis: To be made for the Departm ent of C onstruction.

TRANSPORT SERVICES Prod Company. Tasm anian Film C orporation Dist C om pany.............. Tas Film Corporation Producer................................... Don Anderson Progress....................................... Researching Synopsis: Sponsored by Departm ent of Planning and Development, aim ing to show T a s m a n ia ’ s e f f ic ie n t t r a n s p o r t lin k s in te r s ta te and in tra s ta te . S p e c ia liz e d audience.

VICTORIAN FILM CORPORATION

The V.F.C. has invested in the follow ing projects:

SCRIPT DEVELOPMENT

THE PEOPLE MOVER Prod Company. Tasm anian Film Corporation Dist Company. Tasm anian Film Corporation D irector..................................... Don Anderson S creenplay................................ John Edwards P roducer................................... Don Anderson Exec Producer....................... M alcolm Smith P hotography............................... Gert Kirchner Editor............................................... Peter Davis Sound Editor........................... Peter M cKinley C lapper/L oader..................John Jasiukow icz Second Unit Photography. Russell Galloway Length.......................................................10 min G auge...................................................... 16mm Color Process........................................... 7247 Progress....................... Sound Mix Complete Synopsis: Promotional film illustratin g the advantages of a catam aran type ferry.

Specialized audience. Sponsored by Dept of Planning and Development.

STEEL MAINS

CREATIVE DEVELOPMENT „ BRANCH

Bert D eling/Rod Bishop, Night Work $ 2 3 0 0 C hris F itchett/John Ruane, Yesterday’s Hero $ 1 5 0 0 Barry Klemm, Mother and Bold John $30 0 0 Southern Cross Film s/P hillip Adams, The Dean Case $70 0 0 Nutritional Education, Audio Visual W orkshop $ 2 3 0 0

DOCUMENTARY C h ildbirth Education Association/D oug Stanley, C hildbirth Docum entary $16,541 David Bilcock Jnr., Burma Siam Railway $15,000

FEATURE FILMS An additional $15 ,000 was invested in the film Patrick (total V.F.C. investm ent now $65,000).

GENERAL The V.F.C. agreed to assist in the purchase and installation of double head facilities for the A.F.I. A grant of $ 5 0 0 for a Screenw riters' C o n fe re n c e to th e T e r t ia r y S c re e n Education Society.

AUSTRALIAN FILM COMMISSION

ì»UMWttiw»wiiMiiiiiB«BMagBiaMaBBM ìgaai PROJECT DEVELOPMENT BRANCH

(W orking Title) Projects recommended for funding: Prod Company. Tasm anian Film Corporation Dist Company. Tasm anian Film Corporation John Sanford, Eden Cove $ 4 0 0 0 D irector........................................................ DonAnderson Ian Barry (Paradise Pictures), The Man on S creenplay...............................Stephen Collins the Edge of the Freeway $53 8 3 Producer...................................................... DonAnderson Tim Burstall (Hexagon P roductions Pty. Exec Producer....................... M alcolm Smith Ltd.), The Last of the Knuckle Man $89 5 0 P hotography............................... Gert Kirchner E ditor................................... M argaret Beakley Sound Editor................................................Peter M cKinley Camera A sst........................Russell Galloway ERRATA and ADDENDUM C lapper/L oader..................John Jasiukow icz Asst Editor.................................Posie Jacobs Technical Advisor.............. Graeme Goddard The Editor w ishes to apologize to Eleanor W itcom be, tor any em barrassm ent caused Length................................................... 20 mins by typographical errors appearing In the last G auge....................................................... 16mm issue. The c o rre c t d e ta ils are: S crip t Color P rocess........................................... 7247 Developm ent approval — Eleanor W itcom be Progress.................................................... Editing Daisy B a tes $7070.

Synopsis:T e c h n ic a l film fo r s p e c ia lis t

EXPERIMENTAL FILM AND TELEVISION FUND Robert W yatt (Qld), Suburban Windows $6 0 0 G eorge G ittoes (NSW), Point Omega $ 5 0 0 0 Paul Jansen (NSW), First Things First $4852 M onique Jolivet (NSW), Merry in the Night $ 90 5 Stephen Jones (NSW), Tai Chi/ Stonehenge/Moorman and Paik S578 Am anda King (NSW), J.A.C. $5 2 6 Glen Lewis (NSW), Brisbane Passion Play

$1120

C hris Plowright (NSW), Depravity $28 0 5 Roger Bayley (Vic), The Thin Edge $ 1 3 2 9 Andria C onnell (Vic), Ra-Tat-Ta $ 13 64 C ynthia Connop (Vic), Re-Turning $1 583 M ichael Farrelly (Vic), Arthur’s Bus $25 4 5 M ichael K araglanidis (Vic), The Face of Greekness $90 7 Jason Pickford (Vic), Rocklife (with

Airships) $251 1 Ian Pringle (Vic), The Cartographer and the

Writer $2937 Robert Scott (Vic), Newspaperman $ 2 9 6 6 Craig Lahiff (SA), Labyrinth $3721 Alan Love (SA), Call+S $625 Livia Ruzic (SA), Going Nowhere $17 8 5 Geoff Tanner (SA), Bolin $2251 Brian W ells (SA), Brothers $98 5 Victor Soucek (WA), The Weekend $1 908 Jam es Bradley (Tas), The Forbidden Room $9 1 8 M argot O liver (NSW), Charlene Does Med at Uni $ 2 6 0 0 Pat Fiske (NSW), Woolloomooloo $50 0 0 Carol Kostenich (NSW), The Selling of the Female Image $10 2 2 Jam es Stephens (NSW), Working the Alternatives $27 4 0 Roger Bayley (Vic), The Thin Edge $22 9 4 Robert Cohn (Vic), Moon in Aries $1 595 M ick Glasheen (Vic), Uluru $ 1 1 9 0 Alan Ingram (SA), Love $26 37 C laire Jager (Vic), Fresh Ruins $4 1 0 Peter N icholson (Vic), Mr Thumpalong $ 20 66 Ian Pringle (Vic), The Cartographer and the Waiter $ 3 0 0 0 M adelon W ilkins (Vic), Woman Scene $23 37

FILM PRODUCTION FUND Philip Bull (WA), The Pensioners $ 2 0 0 0 G eoff Burton (NSW), Ritual Sri Lanka $33 ,080 Ken Cameron (NSW), Temperament Unsuited $35,400 Essie C offey/M artha Ansara (NSW),

Aboriginal Survival $1 2,808 G odfrey Philipp (NSW), Children’s TV Pilot $35,000 Jam es Ricketson (NSW), Quartet $35 ,600 David Roberts (NSW), A Drop of Rough Ted

$10,000

SCRIPT DEVELOPMENT FUND Bruce Allen (NSW), 3 3 Days $ 10 00 Jam es Carter (NSW), The Dudders $60 0 M ike Chojecki (NSW), The Kids $1 250 Jude K u ring/V irginia Bell (NSW), Nelly Kelly and the Passionfruit Saloon $ 1 5 0 0 M elissa M itchell (NSW), Katherine’s Story $6 0 0 George Pavlu (NSW), The Birth of Nicholas $25 0 0 C hristina Stanten (NSW), A Most Attractive Man or The Total Eclipse of the Sun $ 1 6 0 0 John Synott (NSW), Waltzing Matilda $2500 Colin W addy (NSW), The Split $800 M ichael Duncan (Vic), Daruk $800 G wenda M cDevitt (Vic), Other People’s

Rainbows $1000 Ruben M ow (Vic), The Island $1 250 Brian Rennie (Qld), Undertow $80 0 Denise Roach (Qld), Just Lucky $ 2 5 0 0 Kevin B rew er/G us Howard (SA), * Pumpkinhead $ 2 5 0 0 David S tocker (SA), Devonshire Tea $1 200 Jon W atts (WA), U ntitled $ 80 0 M arsha Bennett (NSW), Two Seventy Year Old Portraits $ 2 0 0 0 .

George M unster (NSW), Childe Makes Himself $ 3 0 0 0 O liver Robb (NSW), Down the Road $ 1 0 0 0 Salem Sharah (NSW), The Sheilas $ 80 0 Bill Taylor, You’ve Got It Too Easy Boy $ 70 0 M ichael Duncan (Vic), Dauk $ 2 0 0 0 Rogert G eorge (SA), Rusty Walker’s Final Ride $25 0 0

Cinema Papers, January — 257

n in e c e n la Purveyors of quality film s to discerning audiences, presenting the current array.

Now Showing, Center Twin Melbourne.

^ *

The Most Genuinely Erotic Filrp Tbu'11 Ever See"

'

¡6 ’

— SOHO W EEKLY NEWS

The Bea?I Is ATruly Beautiful... And Artistic Rendition Of That Fabled Sex Passage Between Map And Bea?I — NEW YORK POST

The Bea?t Is The “Work Of Waleriai) Borowczyk..

Who h One Of The Master Film Makers Of The World... An Erotic Fable..."

— NEWSWEEK

WALERIAN BOROWCZYKS

THE starrin g SIR P A LANE / LISB E TH HUMMEL ELIZA BETH K A Z A / GUY T R E JA N ROLAND ARM ONTEL

Starts Dec. 1 6th Academy Valhalla Twin Sydney.

Dec. 29th Center Twin Melbourne.

“Si mj)h( 1lively... lyi ^11 toohuman comedy ...graceful,delightful. Director Robert’s triumph is that heis blessed with an excellent cast.” ji di ihcrisi “BRILLIANT1...TANTALIZING...DELICIOUS. THE FILM LITERALLY DRIPS WITH STYLE. IT IS A FILM WITH A BIG FAT HEART.” R t \ R K H ) - M \ \ VORKOAII.Y S K « S “HILARIOUS...A DELICIOUSLY REFRESHING COMEDY ...ROCHEFORT IS WONDERFUL’.’

K \ l ll l. l I N ( A R R O l.l.-N K tt YORK DAIIA M AYS

Coming up for 1978, and sure to be adjudged the best film for the year.

.H ER M A N N HESSE'S. H

t H

K

m

fG

FOR MADMEN ONLY!

THE LAST WAVE Jack Clancy Perhaps the most welcome thing about The Last Wave is the evidence it brings of

consolidation and continuation of achievement within the Australian film industry.

The McElroy-Weir team have behind them the solid commercial success, locally and internationally, of Picnic at Hanging Rock and the (at least) interesting semi­ success of The Cars That Ate Paris. Their latest and most ambitious venture is very evidently a building on the solid foundations of these earlier films.

The McElroy brothers have already d escrib ed how th e ir accum ulated experience has gone into the setting up and selling of The Last Wave “ package” *.

Equally interesting is the question of what the film shows us of director Peter Weir’s development.

The thematic links between The Last Wave and Picnic are, at first glance, obvious; less obvious are the connections between the new film and The Cars That Ate Paris, and the combination of the two provides a very strong sense of a filmmaker acknowledging, and at the same time pushing beyond, his previous work.

The Last Wave, despite an opening sequence in a remote country town that is

by Drysdale out of Wake in Fright, is set, most unusually for an Australian film, in contemporary Sydney. This opening sequence, as though on a deliberate movement away from the langorous summer of Picnic, sets up the film’s central atmospheric motif, of nature out of joint. The summer dryness is violated by Middle-class lawyer David Burton (Richard Chamberlain) asking for an explanation of the murder of a “tribal” Aboriginal.

With Gulpilil (left) and Nandjiwarra Amagula. The Last Wave. an unnatural hailstorm out of a clear sky.

The body of the film is dominated by torrential rains, showers of mud and a dominant place of the motor car in rational elements (elements which this much more devastating comment. sense of menace just as strong as that in Australian life, and the obsessions, particular rationalist temperament finds Finally, one must note the use the film Picnic, but expressed in polar opposites — fetishes and neuroses that surround it. difficult to accommodate, but which he makes of the element of family — wetness and dark as against Picnic’s hot, In The Last Wave, two contemporary succumbed to completely in Picnic) and something which six or seven years of dry light. issues force th eir way into our the fine sense of structural polarities which Australian films suggest is worth closer The film’s central figure is a youngish consciousness through all the teasing give the film a rewarding density: the attention than it has yet been given. middle-class lawyer, David Burton, mystery — the place of Aboriginal culture busy, dirty civilization of the city against W hile family series abound in e ffe c tiv e ly played by R ichard in a materialistic, rationalist, Christian the constant threat of overpowering Australian television, Australian cinema Chamberlain, who is called to defend a culture, and the uneasy sense (again an natural forces, the formality and sterility of has presented us with limited, incomplete group of urban A boriginals on a echo of Picnic) of a physical and spiritual a dreamtime culture, the trappings of or substitute family groups. (Think of environment violated by that materialist, white man’s law and justice (the court manslaughter charge.

Caddie, The Fourth Wish, Bazza and He becomes convinced that the rationalist, white culture. room with barristers’ wigs, oaths taken on Aunt Edna, the institutional families of Aboriginals’ story of tribal ritual accounts Much of the film’s sense of menace, of the Bible, a Latin inscription above the Picnic, D evil’s Playground, and then try for the victim’s death, but is caught in an imminent, apocalyptic doom, comes from judge’s head, a jury of 12 possibly good to find a film which presents anything like opposed pair of dead-ends. His white the very strong feeling of disjuncture, of but very ordinary people) against the a complete family group.) associates insist that there are no tribal white civilization as no more than a power of ancient tribal law, and above all The Last Wave opposes the tribal Aboriginals in Sydney, and thus the story historical pimple on the vast, timeless the feeble reed of rationalism against the family of the Aboriginals to the classic will not, as it were, hold water; the body of the ancient continent. power of dreams and the darkness of the urban middle-class husband wife and Let it be said that in purely technical subconscious.

Aboriginals refuse to admit him to the child. But while the tribal family is held evidence of tribal practice — taboo to terms, The Last Wave is a marvellously The Last Wave, as well as assaulting the together by the strength of cultural bonds, outsiders — which would enable him to accomplished achievement. The special audience’s nerve ends and sensitive spots, David Burton sends his family away; he is prove their innocence on terms acceptable effects*, the control of atmosphere and the should provide a field-day for structural reduced to the characteristic state of the tricky negotiation of those delicate analysis. The film makes great play with protagonist in the Australian film — to the white man’s law.

He is thus forced into the area which moments where disbelief might refuse to the various senses of the term ’dream’. utterly alone, and searching for a clearly fascinates Peter Weir, the area of suspend itself; all these are done with While the Aboriginals hold precariously to redemption which his own civilization is their dreamtime myths, and preserve their unable to provide. the psychic and the super-rational; he is assurance and authority.

On a budget of $800,000, this culture in a sacred place in the caught at the conjunction between the reality of dreams and the illusion of the considerable feat is something that is underground, the sewer of the great city, real world, a world whose reality dissolves, immensely gratifying. And one must add the white lawyer is told by one of them, THE LAST WAVE: Directed by: Peter Weir.

Producers: Hal and James McElroy. Screenplay: to that an unfailing level of excellence in “ You lost our dreams” . almost literally, as he confronts it.

Peter Weir, Tony Morphett, Petru Popesu.

Weir makes very little overt social Where The Last Wave represents a acting, from Richard Chamberlain, Olivia Director of Photography: Russell Boyd. Editor: development beyond Picnic is precisely Hamnett, Gulpilil and an extensive comment; a barman’s remark about Max Lemon. Music: Bruce Smeaton. Art Director: Neil Angwin. Sound Recordist: Don Aboriginals in his pub is enough to where we find the echoes of The Cars supporting cast.

What is more impressive about The represent standard white responses to the Connolly. Cast: Richard Chamberlain, Olivia That Ate Paris, because the neat allegory Hamnett, Gulpilil, Frederick Parslow, Vivean Last Wave is the balance Weir manages to “ Aboriginal problem” . It is the film’s of Cars enabled Weir to touch on matters Gray, Nandjiwarra Amagula MBE, Walter hold between a flirtation with the super­ exploration of the deep gulf between the of immediate social concern — the Amagula. Distributor: United Artists. 35mm.

106 min. Australia. 1977. spiritual richness of one culture and the sterility of the other which provides a * C in e m a P a p e r s , No. 14, pp 148-50, 183. * See account in C in e m a P a p e r s , No. 14, p 151-3.

Cinema Papers, January — 259

ANNIE HALL

Alvy (Woody Allen), dropping in on his childhood, talks to a young Alvy. Annie Hall.

psychiatrist, or neither. The humor depends above all on timing; on that John O’Hara moment in which different conversations, different intentions, come together and reflect on each other. Lor instance, as Alvy Woody Allen tells awful jokes. At the and Annie wait in a cinema queue they are beginning of Annie Hall he is speaking assailed by a loud-mouthed psuedofrom the screen, like a performer without intellectual behind them, who is berating an audience, reminding us of Groucho his girlfriend with his opinions about Marx. “ I’d never like to belong to a club,” Fellini, whom he regards critically as an he says, “ that would have me for a indulgent filmmaker. member.”

The obnoxious critic moves on to So life’s like that; one struggles on McLuhan and expounds, at tedious despite the bad jokes. They are just one length, the differences between hot and more attempt, along with the psychiatrists cold media. At this point Woody Allen and stage performers, to screw some sense drags McLuhan from behind a screen and out of experience. has him tell the bore that he knows Like Lenny Bruce, Woody Allen exists nothing about his writings. Again, Woody on a precarious balance, hung up over his remarks how nice it would be if life were childhood, sex and death. He is anxious like that. about his Jewishness, about living in New The comic point of the episode though York, about his relations with a succession is not the put-down of a bore, but the of women, including two wives, and the sense of anxiety and futility in the ways inimitable Annie Hall. different conversations intersect. “ So,” Annie is played by Diane Keaton in a says Alvy to Annie, “ does everyone in the warm, bubbly performance; her own self­ queue have to know our rate of mockery infiltrating her Chippewa Tails intercourse?” accent, her manic driving, her slow and “ Samuel Beckett” , starts up the bore wistful singing {It had to be You). Woody behind him. Woody grapples with Allen plays himself as Alvy Singer, fragments, with repetition, and at the comedian and television performer, same time is paranoid about seeing films fighting off the cast of The Godfather in in their entirety. If it’s not possible to grasp the street (“ Say buddy, didn’t 1see you on some central meaning, then one might as TV last night?” ). well insist on something that doesn’t Both Alvy and Annie exist in a city of matter. strang e e n co u n ters and unstable Alvy was brought up in Brooklyn, in relationships, darkness and garbage. New what appears as a series of running gags.

York appears as a hot-house routine of His father worked the dodgem cars in a shuffling academics, publishers and carnival, and little Alvy lived in a shack journalists and of artists dragging their beneath the big dipper. Each time the fetishes around parties (The long-hair has trains went overhead, the house shook; sandwiched the girl against a wall. “ Put and we see Alvy trying to eat his soup as it your foot on my heart.” he says). vibrates on the table.

Alvy is taken to a party by his wife; he Alvy literally drops into his childhood, then retires to a bedroom to watch football appearing as a middle-aged man while his on television. His wife finds him and he family life is re-enacted in the household. tries to pull her down on the bed, attracted Allen repeatedly uses this technique of by the idea of fucking while the PhDs next bringing together his different perceptions door discuss modes of alienation. She is of an event or situation. He returns to his horrified. “ There are people here from the school-room, and six-year-old kids get up New Yorker,” she says. and announce what they became in later The kind of assurance represented by life: president of a rail-road, a little girl the cool prose of the New Yorker — and its who’s “ into leather” , a reformed heroin incredible length — contrasts with Alvy’s addict who is now a methadone addict. Or hesitant, compulsive style. His timing during a conversation with Annie, just after he has met her, they indulge in the depends on the breaks betw een paragraphs, the uncertainty of beginning usual abstract conversation piece, while their thoughts are flashed in sub-titles. and not knowing how to finish.

While he expounds his views on art, His humor depends on playing around with the chances of making life something and she is listening respectfully, Woody is different, while recognizing that one never thinking, “Christ, 1sound like FM radio.” will. One needs the jokes as well as the He summarizes forcefully one’s own

ANNIE HALL

260 — Cinema Papers, January

LA BETE

Annie (Diane Keaton) and Alvy with Grandma Hall. Woody Allen’s Annie Hall.

antagonism to the relentless stream of people pronouncing about almost anything.

It’s a great film for critics. Although a practised performer, Alvy retains an astonishing and engaging innocence. He is appalled by the practice of inserting recorded laughter into a television show, he is sickened by pretentious criticism of films, and he attacks the whole desperate charabanc of adult education. Yet he is pathetically nervous about going on stage himself, buys his girlfriend books on death, and urges her to take courses to improve herself.

His comic routines derive from his insecurities about women and sex, about performing, and about living in a place like New York. He has nothing to do with the kind of comic that depends on standar­ dized jokes and hearty insincerity; the patronizing, good-humored approach of the stand-up comedian who bursts onto stage in a twinkling soft shoe routine (although he could hardly wrap his feet round a microphone) and tells the audience how great they are all looking.

The audience will sympathize with Woody’s dilemmas, or they won’t laugh at all. As he savs at the beginning of the film: “ Life is full of loneliness, unhappiness, misery and suffering.” He is oppressed by the weight of his own culture, just as he suffered as a child because he knew the universe was expanding.

But he needs the oppression, and the shift to Los Angeles drains his comic energy. The people of Los Angeles appear bleached by the sunlight, and they live in houses like a cake decorator’s dream.

They eat health foods and play tennis, apparently for the purpose of eating health foods and playing tennis. Their garbage is recycled into television programs, the women appear like pictures from Playboy, and the applause is built into cocktail parties like the soundtrack from situation comedies.

Activity is limited to the endless circle of self-congratulation. The film industry is worse than its audience or critics. As one executive remarks, he can take a notion and work it up into a concept and finally parade an idea.

Los Angeles is an image for Woody Allen — and one he is not happy with; at least in New York things happen. The sex life may be curious, or subject to curious fantasies, but it goes on. As Shelley Duvall remarks, sitting with Alvy in bed, exhaling on a cigarette, and looking more like a tortoise than ever: “ Sex with you is really

a Kafkaesque experience.”

Still, despite Annie’s move to Los Angeles, Alvy writes a play out of his latest bust-up. He addressess the camera again, as the actors rehearse the ending, where the lovers are reconciled. “ Wouldn’t you like life to come out like this,” he says, and remarks, rather irrelevantly, that it is after all his first play.

And like the film itself, his performance is memorable for its creation of a neurotic little man who will persist with his oneliners against the whole catastrophe.

ANNIE HALL: Directed by: Woody Allen.

Producer: Charles H. Joffe. Executive Producer: Robert Greenhut. Screenplay: Woody Allen, Marshall Brickman. Director of Photography: Gordon Willis. Editor: Ralph Rosenblum. Art Director: Mel Bourne. Sound: Jack Higgins.

Cast: Woody Allen, Diane Keaton, Tony Roberts, Carol Kane, Paul Simon, Colleen Dewhurst, Janet Margolin, Shelley Duvall, Marshall McLuhan. Distributor: United Artists.

35mm. 93 min. U.S. 1977.

THE BEAST Inge Pruks “ Our fitful dreams are in fact a momentary madness.” — Voltaire.

This epigraph heralds the fable told by Walerian Borowczyk in La Bete (The Beast). The beast-in-man motif has been with us since Ancient Greece, and it has found its elaboration in literature, painting and film. We could draw up a random list of artists and writers who have given us their version of the beast in man: Spenser, Shakespeare, Zola, Chabrol, Freud, Cocteau, Nabokov, Resnais-David Mercer, Colette, Remy de Gourmont — not to mention many of our childhood fairy tales which still slumber in our subconscious.

The Beast was to have been a part of Immoral Tales, but it grew too complex for a mere short and it was expanded into a feature length film. It was to have been accompanied by a short on the painter Bona de Mandiargues, who it appears had a passion for drawing snails and spirals.

The background text was taken from Remy de Gourmont’s Physique of Love, and the documentary would perhaps have made a nice additional comment on the snails and spirals in The Beast. As it is, L’Escargot de Venus does not-accompany

LA BETE

LOVE LETTERS

The Beast in Melbourne, and we must

forego this added dimension.

The film centres on the crucial marriage between Beauty and the Beast, or more specifically here, Lucy and Mathurin. Lucy Broadhurst (Lisbeth Hummel) is an American heiress, and Mathurin (Pierre Benedetti) is the last son of a French aristocratic family.

Mathurin lives in an old chateau with his father, the Marquis of Esperance (Guy Trejan), and his great-uncle, the Duke Rammondelo de Balo (Dalio). The former is very anxious to bring the marriage to a happy conclusion, the latter is doing all he can to prevent the event taking place.

There is a condition laid down by Lucy’s father in his will: Lucy and Mathurin must be married by a certain Cardinal at the Vatican who is Mathurin’s other greatuncle, and the Duke’s brother. One catch leads to another: the Cardinal is hard to contact, but in any case Mathurin cannot be married by the Cardinal unless he is first baptized by the village priest. And he cannot be so baptized because — well, there is the final catch — Mathurin is not human; he is a satyr, the Beast.

T h e re are som e h e a v y -h a n d e d moments in the film: the stilted dialogue between Lucy and Aunt Virginia, the treatment of the Beast in the dream sequence, and some exchanges between the Marquis and the Duke (the blackmail scene, for example).

However, there is humor and irony in Borowczyk’s toying with the climactic Beauty and the Beast story. And Boro­ wczyk’s habit of isolating his characters into solitary units by brusque effects of montage takes us away from the central Beauty and the Beast fable — which hovers on the edge of becoming a tired old cliche — and we are invited to linger over each separate part of the collage.

The parish priest, for exam ple, accompanied by his two young proteges, Theodore and Modeste, is a superb portrait of civility, well-integrated to the general structure of the film. He is there to do his job (baptize Mathurin — which he doesn’t do), but he is also enjoying the interlude as a sort of holiday.

He has to be sociable and priestly and paternal, and his affability works ironically against the pretensions of the Marquis: “ Spring is the cause of our excitement. We others, poor humans, are like the animals, we are subject to the laws of nature, alas!’’

The Marquis replies: “ But fortunately we have this intelligence, this divine gift which allows us to fight our instincts.”

The priest seems to have found a way of dealing with his instincts: he offers his boys a sweet each and they settle down to a recital of Scarlatti by Modeste.

Lucy and Aunt Virginia’s arrival in the Rolls-Royce is similarly handled tonguein-cheek. The chauffeur first loses his way and drives them to the back entrance; this gives Lucy a chance to use her Polaroid and snap-some quick shots of Mathurin’s horses mating. Aunt Virginia, the eternal killjoy, reprim ands Lucy and the chauffeur, and their final arrival at the main entrance is framed with pompous symmetry by Borowczyk.

Aunt Virginia has had her way this time, but Lucy is not to be daunted. In the house, she weathers several encounters with bestial erotica and says to her host, the Marquis : “ I love forests and I love animals.” The Marquis is not giving anything away, and we chuckle at his reply: “ You will find a kindred spirit here.”

If the centre of the film is the marriage between Mathurin and Lucy, it is obvious that the centre is not stable — the marriage (or the execution, as the Duke would have it) will not take place. There is a centrifugal force at work which is threatening to split the central kernel into

many isolated fragments. So it is that the whole structure, editing and mise en scene of the film is working against the unification planned by the Marquis.

Thus Clarisse, the daughter of the house, has almost nothing to do with the other characters. After speaking to her father she moves away from the film’s “ centre” — in fact she slips away through a rear exit. She and Ifany, the black servant, are forever being interrupted in their love-making, so that they too function as isolated units which come together only now and then. The page­ boy and flower-girl are also locked up in a cupboard room. The Duke is locked up in his room to watch over the telephone — and lovingly caress the remains of Mathurin’s beard. Lucy and Mathurin are kept apart, despite all of Lucy’s efforts.

Mathurin and his father are at one stage locked up in the bathroom.

The Marquis wants to send away the priest and his proteges, but the priest stands his ground. It would seem that he has overcome the forces of dispersion, but since his presence is no longer organic, he may as well not be there; and anyway, the forces working in his group of three are also deflected — in the offering of the sweets, in the gazes of the characters, even in the playing of the harpsichord which further disperses into the dream sequence.

Forces do not gather, they are forever being deflected outwards, and all the characters end up as solitary units.

Eroticism might distinguish humans from beasts, but it is not without its attendant ills. There seems to be a solipsist menace weighing on the whole film, and nowhere is this better illustrated than in the sequence where Borowczyk cuts from one sleeping figure to the next, each lost to each other, each dreaming his dream.

When the Cardinal finally arrives (an inward movement), it is too late, the whole force system has disintegrated.

Dreams, dispersion, separateness, as opposed to unity and oneness, are important in any discussion of eroticism.

And The Beast is also very much concerned with this, as is much of Borowczyk’s work. I do not mean that it

sets out to create erotic images — it may do this as well — but it carries on a discussion already initiated in earlier films.

Lucy’s encounter with Mathurin is paralleled with the story of the mysterious beast which attacked the Marquise Romilda some 200 years before. Both maidens follow the same itinerary through the forest, the pillar, the bridge, the pond.

In fact, of course, it is suggested that the beast episode in the forest is really Lucy’s dream, and it is to this dream that the Voltaire epigraph refers.

Once Mathurin-the-Beast is uncovered (by Aunt Virginia — who else?) Lucy echoes the other woman’s hysterical cries.

The dream may have been a moment of madness for Lucy, but she is called to denounce it in public. It persists though, even as they drive back to civilization and the car horns merge into the Beast’s roar.

Still, what seems to have started as a woman’s fantasy soon transforms itself into a misogynist’s version of Beauty and the Beast. Mathurin, relaxed and absorbed as he watches his beloved horses mating in the opening shots of the film, soon changes into a nervous, cowering and unwilling bridegroom-to-be.

It is obvious that for Borowczyk Lucy, a'nd not poor Mathurin, is the insatiable beast. Mathurin may have been cured by a vet, and he may shy from human contact, but Lucy is the killer. Our young maiden, a false Beauty, parades in her thick fur beast-like coat, and Mathurin ends up dead on this very coat. The beast in the forest dies too, and not the demure and pale Romilda, playing Scarlatti and throwing loving looks to her pet lamb.

In Cocteau’s version, Beauty’s father steals a rose for her, and she pays for this with her freedom. In Borowczyk’s version, Lucy too receives a rose, but she greedily devours it, and her freedom is by no means at stake.

As a final touch, it is of interest to follow the movements of the beautiful Persian cat in The Beast: we first meet it on top of the cabinet which displays Romilda’s claw-marked corset; we hear its cry when Lucy sweetly asks, “ Is it true that ghosts visit this chateau?” And the

cat is (appropriately) in the arms of little Marie, who with Stephane (appropriately doomed by his name) would have attended the ill-fated wedding.

In Cocteau’s version the Beast is resuscitated; not so in Borowczyk’s (or is she?). The Beast dies, but the Woman lives on. There may be a moral in that.

LA BETE: Directed by: Walerian Borowczyk.

Producer: Anatole Dauman. Screenplay: Walerian Borowczyk. Director of Photography: Bernard Daillencourt, Marcel Grignon. Editor: Walerian Borowczyk. Art Director: Alain Guille.

Cast: Sirpa Lane, Lisbeth Hummel, Elisabeth Kaza, Pierre Benedetti, Guy Trejan, Dalio, Armontel. Production Company: Argos Films.

Distributor: Cinema Centre. 35mm. 98 min (uncut version, 102 min). France, 1975.

Love Letters from Teralba Road and Backroads Keith Connolly These short features provide an interesting, and instructive, contrast.

They are, broadly speaking, about similar themes — alienation in contemporary Australian society. Both were made on minuscule budgets by directors who display a refreshing, inventive capacity for conveying ideas.

The disparities, however, are equally marked. Apart from obvious differences of story and narrative technique, they are widely dissimilar in tone — Stephen Wallace’s Love Letters from Teralba Road being as restrained as Phillip Noyce’s Backroads is rambunctious.

Noyce examines racial intolerance — primarily as it affects Aboriginals, but also in its corrosive influence on whites, particularly poorer whites.

Backroads begins with anarchic zest.

Jack, a loud-mouthed white dropout (Bill Hunter) and Gary, a resentful black (Gary Foley) steal a car in outback New South Wales. They recruit an older Aboriginal, Joe (Zac Martin), a French hitch-hiker Cinema Papers, January — 261

BACKROADS

Bryan Brown as Len, the Newcastle storeman.

Stephen Wallace’s Love Letters From Teralba Road.

Jean-Claude (Terry Camilleri) and a disenchanted divorcee Anna (Julie McGregor) and head for the coast, conning and stealing the things they need.

The uneasy leaders of the group are not sure where they are going, or why — only that they must now flee the environment that has rejected them. Suspicious, snarling insularity slowly thaws to a wary

mutual respect — until the outside world again intrudes.

The script, by Noyce and John Emery, suggests this rather deftly, helped by what appears to be apt ad-libbing. Less convin­ cing is the relative ease with which the travellers con supplies from credulous tradespeople (except one belligerent store­ keeper who bars blacks).

Jack (Bill Hunter), the loud-mouthed, white dropout in Phil Noyce’s Backroads

262 — Cinema Papers, January

Kris McQuade as Len’s brutalized wife Barbara. Love Letters From Teralba Road.

The tentative camaraderie starts to come apart when Jack, his seething xenophobia brought to the surface by innocent questioning, angrily ejects the Frenchman. It declines further once the others reach the coast. The girl, aware that they are heading for trouble, slips away with the car.

This might have been a good point for Noyce to stop, with the three original travellers driven closer together by their situation. Instead, the final reel is a confused tumult of bloody action, with other issues bobbing fleetingly into view.

Joe, reacting ingenuously to an unaccustomed taste of power, shoots the owner of a Mercedes they are about to steal and the sketchily-depicted police chase has the predictable end.

Backroads is by •no means a failure, even if it does lose its way. Its chief weakness is a want of cohesion. The most telling sequences are those in which car and passengers speed across the outback.

Noyce effectively compares the alienated neuroticism of the individuals inside the car and the aloof, timeless composure of the landscape, hypnotically captured by Russell Boyd.

The film falters when Noyce detours into a segment of talking-head discourse by shanty-camp blacks. This presumably is intended to background an ongoing debate betw een the p rin cip als, but the documentary-style sequence is such an abrupt change of pace that it blunts rather than reinforces the polemic about the plight of the Aboriginals.

Back on the narrative track, Hunter and Foley argue the racial toss far more effectively. Their dialogues help to convey

the sense of social rancor blacks and poor whites have in common.

Hunter, as Jack, gives savage expres­ sion to the attitudes of deprived whites who, contemptuous of their passivity, misunderstand the Aboriginals’ greatest strength: a sense of community. Abor­ iginal activist Foley lends ironic edge to his portrayal of a young man who thinks he can survive by hanging loose, but finds the dictum easier to preach than practise.

Noyce attempts too much in 60 minutes. A better-defined application of limited means would have made the whole more meaningful.

Wallace’s film, eight minutes shorter, also is about the effects of environment on personality. His quieter way of expounding it works effectively through simple under­ statement.

The well-publicized story of how Wallace based his film on letters found in a Sydney flat, and how he later met the woman to whom they were addressed, should not obscure the sheer inventive perception of his achievement.

He uses the flat tones of Bryan Brown reading banal lines from the letters as an aural frame for his visual delineation of a troubled, frustrated couple struggling to define what they want from life.

Wallace shows a promising facility for pointing up complex issues with subtle, but simple, images. Modern industrial society, muffling its helots in puerility, limits their capacity to formulate or express ideas and emotion.

Wallace inserts several illuminating scenes in which alcohol, rage and violence provide escape hatches from the

LOVE LETTERS

inhibitions of ignorance. The letters of the film’s title are written by Len (Brown), a Newcastle warehouse storeman, to his wife Barbara (Kris McQuade). She has left him and returned to Sydney to live with her boozy father (Kevin Leslie) and young sister (Gia Carides) after being beaten up by a drunken Len. His humbly apologetic messages form a voice-over contrast to scenes of himself at work, trying to control his temper, and Barbara in the pub with a girlfriend. Both live in depressingly rumpled surroundings, nagged by their single parents.

Barbara agrees to a weekend visit from Len so they can “ talk things over” — the very thing they find most difficult to do effectively. They certainly talk, from their first meeting at Sydney Central and throughout the weekend.

Wallace’s capacity for felicitous image­ making shows up strikingly when the couple call at a grimly utilitarian milk bar.

He is drawn to a battery of slot machines and they falteringly question each other while operating one of them.

The dialogue is inconclusive, in contrast to Len’s assured handling of the coin-inthe slot target game (Noyce, incidentally, uses a sim ilar d ev ice). F ru itle ss discussions continue throughout Len’s stay. The words go round and round, ricocheting woundingly.

Len, back in Newcastle with tentative agreement that he join Barbara in Sydney, swallows humiliating reproof from his mother and his boss over the move.

The film ends on an indecisive note, Len’s despairing account of his efforts to arrange the transfer echoing over Tom Cowan’s soaring shots of vast, impersonal industrial monoliths. This final visual lyricism, coming after eloquent glimpses of the principals’ tawdry lifestyles, seems to say that society does expect the ordinary man (and woman) to live by bread alone.

LOVE LETTERS FROM TER ALB A ROAD: Directed by: Stephen Wallace. Producer: Richard Brennan. Screenplay: Stephen Wallace. Director of Photography: Tom Cowan. Editor: Henry Dangar. Music Director: Ralph Schneider.

Sound Recordist: Lawrie Fitzgerald. Cast: Bryan Brown, Gia Carides, Kris McQuade, Stuart Green, Kevin Leslie, Ashe Venn, Joy Hruby, John Flaus. Distributors: Sydney Co-op./ Vincent Library. 16mm. 52 mins. Australia.

1977.

BACKROADS: Produced and Directed by: Phillip Noyce. Screenplay: John Emery. Director of Photography: Russell Boyd. Editor: David Huggett. Music: Zac Martin, Robert Murphy.

Sound Recordist: Lloyd Carrick. Cast: Gary Foley, Bill Hunter, Zac Martin, Terry Camilleri, Julie McGregor. Distributor: Sydney Co-op./ Vincent Library. 16mm. 60 min. Australia. 1977.

STAR WARS Freya Mathews Star Wars is a film that should be seen and not talked about. It is a wide-awake dive into the deep, dark, wide collective unconscious, and as such, the experience is all — there is nothing but banality in the telling.

It is not a film of ideas; one does not come away provoked or edified. Instead, one surfaces blindly, charged with a sense of power — one that results from access to the collective unconscious. It is the sort of power one sometimes suspects or dreams to be locked within consciousness, such that, if only the secret of its releasemechanism were known, it would come surging out through our fingertips to rend the sky and transfigure worlds.

Luke Skywalker (Mark Hamill), hero of Star Wars, learns that secret. But the mysterious achievement of the film is that

STAR WARS

The duel to the death between Obi-Wan Kenobi (Alex Guiness) and Darth Varder. Star Wars.

it does not merely portray the release of this power, but also somehow actively plugs the audience into (the illusion of) it.

The viewer walks out into the drab world beyond the cinema illuminated with a sense of the glamor and grandeur, not merely of our lives, but of the universe itself, of sheer existence, and of the portentous consciousness in.this cosmic arena; he is aglow with the Force, and carries the majesty of deep space out into the street with him, as a dreamlike recollection of his native habitat.

One hesitates to sermonize over the theme of Star Wars, because it is manifestly intended as a space frolic, as opposed to odyssey: a children’s film, director George Lucas affirms. But how can one explain the fact that it has clamped the psyche of the English-speaking world under its ingenuous spell if it is merely a piece of nonsense?

Nor is there, in any case, any reason not to expect a children’s film to treat, in its innocent fashion, solemn or sublime themes. On the contrary, children’s vehicles are peculiarly well-adapted to portray archetypes — simple, primitive, innocent and immense. Lucas has cannily harnessed naivety to achieve immensity.

The story of Star Wars — by now sadly over-rehearsed — is set “ long ago and far away” , in a distant galaxy. It’s about the young man, Luke Skywalker, who abandons his home on a remote desert planet in a quest for the Rebel Princess Leia (Carrie Fisher). The Princess has been kidnapped by Grand Moff Tarkin (Peter Cushing), the evil Governor of the Imperial Outland Regions, and Darth Vader, Dark Lord of the Sith (played by David Prowse but with the voice of James Earl Jones). Luke is accompanied by, and initiated into the religion of the Force by Ben Obi-Wan Kenobi (Alec Guinness), the last of the Jedi Knights, who were the guardians of peace and justice in the old Republican days, before the advent of the new ‘dark’ regime of the Galactic Empire.

Darth Vader is the Fallen Angel, who

Star Wars, a consumate exercise in myth-rendering. A battle sequence.

killed Luke’s father, a Jedi Knight, and betrayed the Jedi Order by employing the Force in the service of evil. Luke and Obi­ Wan Kenobi team up with Han Solo (Harrison Ford), worldly, macho captain of a pirate starship. With their winsome robots, See-Threepio (C-3PO) and ArtooDetoo (R2-D2), they track down the princess.

After an eclectic collage of chills and thrills, they spearhead the rebellion against the Galactic Empire in a seemingly gnat-like assault on the massive man­ made planet destroyer, Death Star — stronghold of Tarkin and Vader.

The story is evidently an unremarkable melange of myth and fairy-tale. But our response — already involuntarily potent — to its mythic content is reinforced by its setting, as created by the very remarkable special effects team.

The heroes and villains of this fairytale are natives, not of fairy land, but of an entire galaxy. They act out our human

myths on a cosmological scale. It is this which does the trick, and which explains the film’s psychic impact: for myth, which is already heady stuff in almost any form, is here writ large — inscribed right into the face of the universe itself.

By setting the story in space, and by skilfully creating for us the experience of space, or the cosmosphere, the film excites in us a deep and awed emotional response which it then harnesses for its story.

In particular, this use of outer space as the vast vista within which the action is located, helps the film to convey that the drama fought out among the characters is not merely a chauvinistic affair — restricted in its significance to the human sphere.

The human sphere has already been visually assimilated to the cosmosphere, and this visual ploy is clinched by the central narrative motif of the Force. The Force is clearly conceived as a property of Cinema Papers, January — 263

A town of amazing people.

A story that crowds a lifetime into a few, short years.

And a young man who experienced it all

G E R A L D IN E F IT Z G E R A L D

THE M ANGO TREE with

ROBERT HELPMANN CHRISTOPHER PATE GERARD KENNEDY GLORIA DAWN M usic by MARC WILKINSON Written a n d P ro d u c e d by MICHAEL PATE D irected by KEVIN DOBSON FILMED IN PANAVISK)N® -(ClI)/

FOR

RELEASE

JANUARY

'78...

the

ideal

movie

for

the

whole

family:

W h e n y o u ’re y o u n g , w h e n y o u ’r e f r e e . . .w h e n y o u ’v e still g o t t i m e t o b e lie v e .

Starring

CATHRYN

H AR R ISO N „„ti MARK HOLDEN

Co-starring PETER CUMMINS-JOHN EWART •GARY WADDELL - MARION EDWARD

Produced by ANTONY l.GINNANE ■Directed by ROSS OIMSEY THE LANDLADY

Written by BOB MAUMILL

...her heart ruled her head.

THESTABLEBOY ...no g irl was going to do his job.

BILITUS

STAR WARS

the universe at large. hypnotic appeal: it displays some of our Yet, it also informs human actions. It is most cherished archetypes precisely in the as though the universe were actively environment which, we instinctively feel, expressing its own nature, or tensions in threatens to de-animate them, and then its own nature, through the conflict, exploits this very environm ent to between the humans. Thus, in the clash gloriously re-animate them. between Good and Evil, when Darth Vader and Obi-Wan Kenobi duel, and the outcome is uncertain — the contestants are evenly matched — it is as though the STAR WARS: Directed by: George Lucas.

Gary Kurtz. Screenplay: George fate of the universe itself hangs in the Producer: Lucas. Director o f Photography: Gilbert Taylor balance.

BSC. Special Photographic Effects: John Human moral contests are thus lifted Dykstra. Editors: Paul Hirsch, Marcia Lucas, Richard Chew. Music: John W illiam s. out of their parochial context and infused Production Designer: John Barry. Art Directors: with a transcendent significance. It is the Norman Reynolds, Leslie Dilley. Cast: Mark central, almost tangible presence of space Hamill, Harrison Ford, Carrie Fisher, Peter throughout the film which conveys this Cushing, Alec Guinness, Anthony Daniels, Baker. Distributor: 20th Century-Fox. sense, underlined by the explicit theme of "Kenny 35mm. 121 min. U.S. 1977. the Force, that the universe itself is an immanent participant in the conflict between the Galactic Empire and the Rebels. Surely this is the quintessential BILITIS aspiration of myth.

Star Wars, then, is a consummate exercise in myth-rendering. It is not, as I Scott Murray remarked, a film of ideas, because while it David Hamilton’s B ilitis, while hardly immerses us in the myth and intoxicates us with it, it never steps back and assesses an unconditional success, is considerably it. It is not concerned with the truth or more accomplished than one might falsity of the Force hypothesis. It in no way expect. And in taking a cycle of love queries the precepts of the myths that it poems by Pierre Louys, Hamilton has deploys. It does not raise the poignant created a delicate (perhaps overly so) question whether these precepts are still series of images on the awakening of a tenable in the wider world in which it is sexual innocent.

Bilitis (Patti D’Arbanville) leaves her inscribing them.

It is thus not a courageous film, in that it schoolfriends, one of whom is tantalizing does not reach out for new, unfamiliar and her with erotic advances, to spend a unloved archetypes suited to this larger vacation with an older girl, Melissa (Mona scale. Yet it is this which explains its Kristensen), and her husband (Gilles

Kohler).

At their villa in Southern France, she becomes intrigued by the couple’s loveless bond and games of sexual brutality.

Confused, Bilitis finds her desires for men ambiguous and in consequence resorts to the ‘safer’ caresses of Melissa.

This, however, is abruptly halted by Melissa who introduces her to a young p h o to g ra p h e r, Lucas (B ern ard Giraudeau). But Lucas is ignorant of her virginity and is too blunt in his approaches, and Bilitis is frightened into returning to Melissa.

To prove her devotion, Bilitis then offers to give Melissa a new lover. This precipitates the climactic party scene where Bilitis’ inability to understand the sexual innuendo leaves her adrift in an adult world she cannot yet control.

The slightness of the story is strained somewhat by extending it to feature length, and at times sequences are introduced which add nothing to the plot.

The predictable scene where Bilitis finds a couple copulating in her bed, is one such example.

But, overall, there are sufficient moments of nicely detailed observation to reward the viewer, and the final scene is an excellent set piece.

As Bilitis, D’Arbanville is, despite her age, excellent; she manages to convey well Bilitis’ conflicting desires and impulses.

Her moments of spontaneous giggling, for example, are quite infectious and tie in neatly with Lucas’ final remark that behind Bilitis’ laughter lies a purity of trust.

Mona Kristensen and Mathieu Carriere (as the enigmatic sailor) are equally good, though Mona’s classical Swedish features — she often resembles a young Greta Garbo — are too often called upon to look sultry. And in the party scene, her innum­ erable vampish glances at available men tire by their repetition. However, given a suitable role and intelligent wardrobing in, say, Cerutti instead of flimsy cotton, she could be an actress of note.

Hamilton’s direction is surprisingly assured. However, Hamilton was not the sole director on Bilitis; he used Henri Colpi as technical adviser. Though Hamilton oversaw each scene, choosing the actresses, costumes and the way light was to be used, Colpi handled the crew and directed the actors.

But despite this dual responsibility, B ilitis is a film that is visually very closely attuned to Hamilton’s photographs.

Photographic style images are continually achieved and rarely appear static — each image editing well with another.

The same is true of Hamilton’s use of lighting: the soft diffusion of natural light, the balancing of colors and areas against each other, the tension between flared and sharp areas, and so on. And, most spectacular, the same playing with line and space that distinguish the best of Hamilton’s photographs.

Two examples stand out: one is the visit to the photo shack, its blue weatherboard walls, sloping roof and sharp edges cutting the image into defined areas of gold sand and the twin blues of sky and water. The other is where Bilitis sits on the grass, an orange straw-like fence running on an angle behind her, twisting in on itself on one side.

Hamilton’s photography, by its very prettiness, verges on the twee. This Hamilton has partially overcome in his recent work (Private Collection, for example) by abandoning the coyness of his early books.

Organizations and individuals in Aust­ ralia have felt the need to attack the eroticism of his work, but it is its very freshness and honesty that make it note­ worthy. After all, Hamilton’s world is only a fantasy one to those who cannot accept that such a world does in fact exist.

BILITIS: Directed by: David Hamilton.

Technical Adviser: Henri Colpi. Producers: Sylvio Tabet, Jacques Nahum. Screenplay: Robert Boussinot, Jacques Nahum, Catherine Breillat. Director of Photography: Bernard Dailencourt. Editor: Henri Colpi. Music: Francis Lai. Cast: Patti D’Arbanville, Mona Kristensen, Bernard Giraudeau, Gilles Kohler, Mathieu Carriere. Production Company: Ectafilms.

Distributor: Roadshow. 35mm. 95 min. France.

1977.

APOLOGY

In printing Brian McFarlane’s review of The Getting of Wisdom in the last issue (No. 14, p. 175), the last paragraph was in­ advertently omitted. It is printed below.

The romantic eroticism of David Hamilton's Bilitis.

There’s a tough-minded story trying to get out of a woolly-minded script here.

Bruce Beresford can at least make films move: it’s a relief to find an Australian film not lingering over the beauties of nature or nostalgic bric-a-brac. I applaud the courage he has shown in tackling a difficult enterprise and am grateful for the frequent but incidental pleasures of the film. But it remains the sum of its parts rather than an achieved whole. As in Don’s Party, he still doesn’t seem to have found a personal style strong enough to stamp the product as his own.

Cinema Papers, January — 265

NEW FILMS from

South America Including:

India

Africa

Australia

Boesman 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

Sharmill Films Personalised distribution of connoisseur films . . .

Proudly Announces O utstanding Film s For H ire Hester Street ( 16mmand 35mm) Bernice Bobs Her Hair ( 16mm; non-theatrical hire only) Antonia, Portrait of a Woman ( 16mm) I Can Jump Puddles (16mmand 35mm) Wives (35mm) 27A

(16mm)

Many BuĂąuel Classics

For full catalogue, write or phone: Natalie Miller, 27 Stonnington Place, Toorak, Vic 3142, Australia.

Telephone: (03) 20 5329. Cables: Sharfilms Melbourne.

FREE PUBLIC SCREENINGS Festival of Sydney Music Room, Sydney Opera House 8-15 January (presented with the assistance of the NSW Division of Cultural Activities)

Festival of Perth PIFT Cinema, 92 Adelaide Street, Fremantle 29 January-4 February (presented in association with the Festival of Perth and the Perth Institute of Film and Television Inc)

Adelaide Festival of the Arts â&#x20AC;&#x201D; focus New Little Cinema, Adelaide University 27 February-6 March

Moomba Festival State Film Centre Theatre, Macarthur Street, Melbourne 3-8 March (presented with the assistance of the State Film Centre, Victoria)

National Film Theatre of Australia Limited

CHILDREN AND TELEVISION John O’Hara Perhaps nothing about television is so constantly debated as the question of its effects on children. There have been many research studies on the subject, turning up different and often conflicting results.

The most obvious differences in this discussion are illustrated in two recent studies.

One of them is a book, The Plug-in Drug, by Marie Winn, just published in Britain. The other is a submission by the Lintas Advertising Agency on television’s effects on children to the recent public inquiry into self-regulation of broadcasting.

The Lintas report tries to play down the significance of television for children. “ C hildren,” it says, “ obviously regard te le v is io n as ju s t a n o th e r form of entertainment. It has always been there and it appears no more important to them than their cassette recorder, their radio, their bike, etc.”

On the other hand, The Plug-in Drug presents a picture of a society dominated by television: of children with poor verbal skills, an inability to concentrate, and a disinclination to read; of parents who are ‘'hooked’ on using television as a sedative for their pre-school age children.

The d ifferen ce betw een th ese two approaches to television and its effects on children becomes even more extreme. The Lintas report is in effect a justification of the present system of commercial television. The authors devote a lot of space in their 34-page report to stress that advertising on television doesn’t do children any harm, and is in fact really necessary to them.

But before coming to the section on advertising, it is interesting to see the ways in which the Lintas advertising agency report regards television itself. “ Children,” we are told, “ look upon television as yet another form of play” .

To support this sweeping assertion, the authors describe how boys and girls use the same language as the Fonz in Happy Days, and how girls pay a lot of attention to the ways the girls look in Charlie’s Angels.

The Lintas report also rem arks that “ television provides children with a common ground which they can use to communicate with each other. In this situation, it allows children to forget about the competitiveness that happens at school.”

Television may allow children to forget about a lot of things, but the authors give us no specific evidence about the ways in which children in fact behave after watching it. They discuss the debate over television violence and quote at some length a research study that indicated that children exposed to such violence became less aggressive than children who watched non-violent programs. The lesson is clear: we have no need to worry about high levels of violence on television shows because it helps children drain off their own aggression. " This kind of simplistic quoting of convenient research findings is characteristic of the Lintas

report. In the same way, the report falls back repeatedly on the authorities whose views are well regarded by commercial television and by advertising agencies.

The report quotes at length from the work of Dr Wilbur Schramm, who has been described by one of the best-known British media researchers, Jeremy Tunstall, as “ the travelling salesman of the American media circus” . The Lintas report also relies on the work of Dr Grant Noble, who wrote the book Children in Front of the Small Screen. And here we have only to recall a comment from researchers at Sydney Teachers’ College who have put out several reports on television and children: “ The Australian television industry appears to rely heavily on selected aspects of the writings of Grant Noble for its attitude towards television violence. Policies are based on evidence which represents neither the totality of Noble’s work, nor the totality of wider research.”

The failure of the Lintas report to come to terms with any of the criticisms made of television is quite evident in the way they put them. The report says it wants to refute three arguments: that television turns children into zombies; that violence on television upsets and turns them into delinquents; and that television advertising exploits children, particularly the very young.

You can, after all, put criticisms in such extreme terms that nobody takes any notice of them; and the word “ zombie” is a fairly emotive term.

What does the submission have to say about advertising for children, bearing in mind that the people who wrote this report worked for an agency whose business it is to make advertisements? This even-handed research concludes its section on children and ad v ertisin g with a large, u n d e rlin e d

The Fonz (Henry Winkler), one of the most popular identity figures offered to children by commercial television.

heading: The Benefits of Television Advert­ ising. These, we learn, are as follows: “ It teaches a child to become more critical, not to believe everything he sees and hears.”

This is an extraordinary admission, as tho u gh to say that ad v ertisin g does misrepresent products, does give children expectations that no product can fulfil, and after they have been disappointed a few times they will become more cynical. This, in the eyes of the Lintas researchers, is how children become more critical: by learning through bitter experience that television advertising does not deliver the goods.

The second so-called benefit of television advertising is that “ it helps prepare the child for adult life when important decisions have to be made about matters concerning money.”

The important decisions are presumably what kind of fantasy experience you expect to buy along with the product.

The third benefit of television advertising is that “ it tells a child what is available to buy” .

And finally, television advertising “ begins to help a child to decide how best to spend his or her money.”

There is nothing said in this Lintas defence of commercial television about the ways in which children learn, about the needs children have for play experience, about the ways they learn language skills, about the ways they relate to each other.

We are simply told that children regard television as a form of play, that it gives them common ground for talking to each other, that it introduces them to “ rom antic and glamorous experiences” and that advertising on television is necessary to their own growth.

But for the advertising agency that commissioned this so-called research there are really no critical problems. At the end of the report the authors cheerfully endorse this conclusion: “ For most children, under most conditions, television is probably neither p articu larly h arm fu l, nor p articu larly beneficial.”

Now the television companies and the advertising agencies can have it both ways. If television isn’t really bad for kids, then there is no need to worry about criticism; if it isn’t really good for kids, then there is no need to try and make programs better.

In the end, the report simply used children as pawns in another political argument. The final conclusion is a plea for self-regulation of the television industry, rather than govern­ ment regulation.

When we are confronted by this glib, self­ interested pastiche that is served up as a substitute for research, it’s all too easy to forget the real problems in trying to determine the effects of television on children. In the first place, how do children look at television, and what do they see?

This problem is taken up in a new book called The Box in the Corner. It’s written by Gwen Dunn and sub-titled “ Television and the under fives” . The book will be available shortly from Macmillan for about $8.

Concluded on P. 269 Cinema Papers, January — 267

U

LO W BUDGETS, HIGH Q U A LITY IN LO C A L FILM M AKING" National Times, July 25, 1977

Robyn Nevin and Steve Spears in Ken Cameron's Temperament Unsuited.

(Made with assistance from the Film Production Fund.)

THE CREATIVE DEVELOPMENT BRANCH of the

AUSTRALIAN FILM COMMISSION Provides assistance for filmmakers to: - INNOVATE - DEVELOP FILMMAKING SKILLS AND TECHNIQUES - MAKE THE FILM THEY REALLY W ANT TO MAKE All Filmmakers are eligible to apply â&#x20AC;&#x201D; whether employed in government/commercial production or independents; whether fully professional or less experienced.

If you have a film project that you want to get off the ground discuss your proposal with a Project Officer from the Creative Development Branch before submitting an application. 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. Melbourne applicants for all funds should contact Greg Tepper at the Australian Film Commission Office, 8th Floor, 140 Bourke Street, Melbourne (03) 663 4795.

Application forms and guidelines for the funds are available from: The Chairman Australian Film Commission GPO Box 3984 Sydney, NSW 2001 FILM P R O D U C T IO N FUND provides assistance to experienced filmmakers for - innovative projects which have potential to further the applicant's development as a filmmaker.

SCRIPT DEVELOPMENT FUND assists 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.

EXPERIMENTAL FILM AND TELEVISION FUND provides assistance to filmmakers with lots of promise but limited experience.

The fund favours projects which are innovative in form, content or technique and supports experimental and avant garde work.

TELEVISION

THE CHANT OF JIMMIE BLACKSMITH

Television

Continuedfrom P. 267 In talking about the under-fives, Gwen Dunn asks: How do moving images of things and people on the front of that box relate to real people and things? And how do we find out?

She points out that assessment of what is called “ attention” is extremely difficult. In one experience she watched two three yearolds in front of a television. One kept his eyes fixed on the screen, and the other fidgeted constantly. She said both children appeared to understand and remember about the same amount, in both cases more than they could properly express.

Beyond these precise questions of investigat­ ing what television means to children, there is the overall question of what the television experience means to us. This question is raised very forcefully by Marie Winn in The Plug-in Drug.

This book argues that the traditional concern about the content of programs is misplaced, and that the television experience itself is the vital factor. Marie Winn lists the following questions and her book is an attempt to answer them: “ What are the effects,” she asks, “ upon the vulnerable and developing human organism of spending such a significant proportion of each day engaging in this particular experience?

How does the television experience affect a child’s language development, for instance?

How does it influence his developing imagination, his creativity? How does the availability of television affect the ways parents bring up their children? Is the child’s perception of reality subtley altered by con­ Fred Schepisi

Continuedfrom P. 246 When this is over we are going to see, as an exercise, whether it would have been better to pick one area and build all exteriors there. That will be very interesting because our transport costs were astronomical. All our vehicles ended up travelling 250,000 km and our petrol bill was around $20,000. The accommodation was also astounding.

stant exposure to television unrealities? What happens to family life as a result of family members’ involvement with television?”

The main argument of the book is that television-watching is completely passive; the child learns to absorb without thinking or in fact responding very much at all. This is one description of a small child watching television: “ My five-year-old goes into a trance when he watches television. He just gets locked into what is happening on the screen. He’s totally, absolutely absorbed when he watches, and oblivious to anything else. If I speak to him while he’s watching television, he absolutely doesn’t hear me. To get his attention I have to turn the set off. Then he snaps out of it.”

Marie Winn describes this trance-like state of prolonged television watching: “ The child’s facial expression is transformed. The jaw is relaxed and hangs open slightly; the tongue rests on the front teeth (if there are any). The eyes have a glazed vacuous look.”

From this beginning, the book goes on to describe television-watching as a kind of addiction; that people watch anything on the box. In some cases, when the set is broken, children still stare at it, or even just listen to the sound when there is no picture.

If this analogy to drug addiction holds up, as Marie Winn believes, then television is clearly altering patterns of behavior on a vast scale.

She traces the ways in which children learn to communicate, the ways in which they learn to read, and how children’s reading habits have been changed with television. Children now turn to what she calls, “ non-books” , like The Guiness Book o f Records.

So the argument whether children read more or less with television is beside the point. The

top distributors.

All of this has generated such an awareness that I have already had seven inquiries from overseas.

Overall, publicity will cost us about $80,000 — that is less than 10 per cent. So it has to be worth it.

Do you intend to premiere the film at Cannes?

question is: what kind of books do they read?

Marie Winn says: “ Like television, a non-book makes no stretching demands at the start. Composed of tiny facts and snippets of interesting material, it does not change in any way during the course of a child’s involvement in it. It does not get easier, or harder, or more exciting or more suspenseful; it remains the same. Thus there is no need to ‘get into’ a non-book, because there are no further stages to progress to. “ But while the reader of a non-book is spared the trouble of difficult entry into a vicarious world, he is also denied the deep satisfactions that reading real books may provide.”

In similar sorts of ways, Marie Winn goes through different areas connected with television-watching by children. She talks about patterns of family life, the ways families are organized and disciplined — if that is the right word — and the real need that children have for time of their own. A need that television effectively cuts across, because it always fills up the time for a child.

Her arguments about what she calls the^ “ television generation” undercut the facile' optimism of the Lintas report with its cheery assum ptions about the normal use of television by the normal child.

The Plug-in Drug may be right about television as an addiction, about it providing a world that is “ bled of color and life” . But at the very least, the book attempts to ask real questions about television and children; unlike the Lintas report, whose value is just as doubtful as any so-called social science research co m m issioned by te le v isio n companies and advertising agencies. ★

successful out of this. Devil’s Playground so far has been a marketing failure overseas.

I have always had a philosophy that you should get an inter­ national reputation for your film because it helps in Australia.

There is no question that awards and festivals helped Devil’s Play­ ground locally. In fact, I am sure they were responsible for it being released.

We are aiming for the Compe­ tition and everything is geared for You don’t agree with Ken Hall that. We will have a fine cut at the that the Directors Fortnight is How have your p u b lic ity beginning of January and a print the kiss of death . . . arrangements worked out so far? by the second week of March.

Sure the film has to be good No. We were shown late in the Fantastically. (Schepisi lifts up a enough, and if it is, we will festival, and as we were not able to sell or show it before the copy of the December Films and capitalize on it.

If it i s n ’t a c c e p te d in to screening, that disadvantaged us.

Filming.) For example, here is the front cover, plus a double page Competition or the Directors But probably we would have been spread inside, of Films and Filming. Fortnight, either because it is not disadvantaged anyway — that is We are likely to get four pages in good enough or because we are what I have to work out.

1976 was my first time at The Los Angeles Times in March too late, then we won’t show the Cannes and I was experimenting and there is going to be an article film at Cannes.

There were some experiments with everything because I didn’t about Australia, which is in fact spearheaded through The Chant done, through Dennis Davidson, merely want to sell that film, I also of Jimm ie Blacksm ith and with a Canadian film at Cannes wanted to learn.

If I had gone with Jeannine Summerfield, in the London last year, and they got better Sunday Times’ Color Supplement. inquiries by not competing in the Seawell it probably would have That has to be worthwhile I would market place, where you have dills been sold in every area that Picnic have thought, but the AFC didn’t running in and looking at your and Caddie were, and probably for films for 10 minutes and then a third less — which is why I pay — Pat Lovell and I did. didn’t go with her.The agent I We have been in a lot of the disappearing. picked, however, was a big trade m agazines, particularly Screen International. As well, the How important is recognition mistake.

Devil’s Playground was the December issue of Films and overseas to a film’s release here? kind of film that nobody thinks is Filming has been sent to the 30 top I think The Last Wave is the commercial until it goes on. For distributors in the world, and at Milan we gave out kits to the 50 one that stands to be the most example, the treatment Columbia

gave it in Britain wasn’t the greatest, yet it ran nine weeks at the Warners West End. Will you see anything back from it?

I don’t think so. It grossed around 18,000 pounds, but they spent nothing on advertising. Nick Tate drove them mad till finally something was done for the radio, and the film’s box-office went up immediately. We think we are treated badly overseas, but it is just that we are not treated specially, and I think you are led to believe you are going to be. So you have to find people to look after you, and at the moment I have people looking after me very well in Britain and elsewhere.

What ratio do you envisage between the Australian and the world-wide grosses?

On D e v il’s Playground I thought we would get three quarters of our money back here and end up with double our money back from overseas. It turned out that we got all our money back here and nothing from overseas.

With Jimmie, Hoyts are doing a fantastic job. The effort, energy and imagination they are putting in is extraordinary. I think the film is going to be a boomer. ★ Cinema Papers, January — 269

AUSTRALIAN FILM AND TELEVISION SCHOOL OPEN (EXTERNAL)PROGRAM

THE PROJECTED MUSE

Open (E x te rn a l) Program a c tiv itie s are w id e ly varie d. Som e are run sp e c ific a lly fo r th e film and te le v is io n in d u s try on advanced p ro d u c tio n te c h n iq u e s f o r fu lltim e professionals. O th ers are reserved fo r teachers and lectu rers in volve d in te a ch e r­ tra in in g . M any are available to th e w id e r c o m m u n ity , m a in ly c o n c e n tra tin g on the use o f v id e o , S uper 8 and basic 16 m m p ro d u c tio n .

Extracts from six A ustralian film scrip ts Com piled by Peter M cFarlane

R egular w o rk s h o p s and courses are held in th e S c h o o l's prem ises at N o rth R yde, w here several s tu d io s and tra in in g ro om s have been designed fo r tra in in g purposes.

Increasing ly, how ever. Open Program a c tiv itie s are being exte nde d to all States, and to m a ny centres aw ay fro m c a p ita l cities.

FILM AND TELEVISION INDUSTRY

SEMINARS

* C ontinuity— c o v e rs th e ro le a n d fu n c tio n o f c o n tin u ity ; em phasis on pra ctica l exercises.

The Open (E x te rn a l) Program is o fte n h o s t to in te re s tin g v is ito rs b o th in fo rm a lly and fo r m a lly . Several w e ll-k n o w n and in te re s tin g v is ito rs are expected in 1978.

* Understanding Motion Picture Equipment — fo r p ro d u c tio n managers and p ro d u c tio n assistants to becom e fa m ilia r w ith c u rre n t film e q u ip m e n t.

Excerpts from P i c n i c A t H a n g i n g R o c k , C a d d i e , S t o r m B o y , T h e D e v i l ’s P l a y g r o u n d , T h e F o u r t h W is h , T h e C a r s T h a t A t e P a r i s . There are thoughtprovoking reviews of two of the films, and author Colin T hiele reveals his feelings about the film of S t o r m B o y .

Illustrated w ith stills. Recom m ended retail price $4.95.

ANIM ATIO N SUMMER SCHOOL '78 January 1 6 —27

From leading educational booksellers.

* Camera Assistants Certificate Course F o r assistants c u rre n tly em p lo ye d in th e in d u s try , cove ring film and te le v is io n th e o ry and practice.

* Introduction to Television F o r experienced film and tele visio n professionals w is h in g to gain experience in profession al use o f no n-broad cast vid e o e q u ip m e n t.

M a ny o th e r courses in specialized areas are o ffe re d .

MANAGEMENT COURSES * BusinessManagement —an in tro d u c tio n to business p rin c ip le s and p ractice;

* The Law in Relation to the Media — to help produce rs a n tic ip a te and th e re ­ fo re avo id legal problem s. * Production Management — th o ro u g h tra in in g in all aspects o f p ro d u c tio n m anagem ent.

S oon to be o f f e r e d .............

* Investment and Finance * Marketing

T h is course is designed to cover all aspects o f a n im a tio n , w ith p a rtic u la r em phasis on S uper 8, and e m p lo y in g sim ple tech nique s. I t w ill also exp lo re advanced and so p histicated tech nique s u n der th e guidance o f skille d tu to rs .

V is its w ill be made to a n im a tio n studios and m any a n im a tio n film s w ill be view ed and discussed.

© RIGBY

THE FILM LIBRARY P.O. Box 49, Harbord, N.S.W., 2096, Australia.

film book specialists

COMMUNITY AND EDUCATION TRAINING —we run tra in in g orogram s in th e use o f film and video e q u ip m e n t fo r people n o t d ire c tly concerned w ith broadcast te le visio n o r professional film p ro d u c tio n . W orkshops in clu d e : * P ortapak O pe ratio ns and P ro d u c tio n * O p e ra tio n s o f c o lo u r cameras, recorders and e d itin g e q u ip m e n t * S tu d io o p e ra tio n s; sound; lig h tin g * In tro d u c to ry and m o re advanced w o rk ­ shops in S uper 8 ; basic 16 m m film p ro ­ d u c tio n .

B roch ures giving m o re in fo rm a tio n a b o u t in d iv id u a l courses, and de tails o f d u ra tio n , fees etc. are available. If you w o u ld lik e to be advised a b o u t p a rtic u la r courses or w o u ld lik e to k n o w generally a b o u t o u r a c tiv itie s , please w rite to :

OPEN (EXTERNAL) PROGRAM AUSTRALIAN FILM AND TELEVISION SCHOOL PO BOX 126, NORTH RYDE 2113.

ATA

JGFFN0LD

W j^ W

STILLS PH O TO G RAPH ER

Books about: Actors & Actresses • Directors, Producers & Writers • History • Aesthetics • General • Reference • Animation • Technical • Annuals We also specialize in hard-to-get titles Please write for a free book list.

P.O. Box 49, Harbord, N.S.W. 2096 Mail order service only.

Posted anywhere in Australia or overseas.

Sidecar Racers @ Ride a Wild Pony Caddie $ Harness Fever • Barney Land of the Morning Calm (Korea) C om plete range of equipment, any format.

Can offer processing facilities.

A vailable in B/W and color.

168 PACIFIC HIGHWAY, NORTH SYDNEY 2060. PO BOX 885. PHONE: (02) 929 4848 There’s No Business Like The

SHOW BUSINESS BOOKSHOP 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 YOU’ LL ALW AYS FIND SOMETHING INTERESTING AT

THE SHOW BUSINESS BOOKSHOP York House Basement Arcade, 294 Little Collins Street, Melbourne, 3000

63 7508

Available in all major bookstores Published by:

Recommended Retail Price $5.95

Cassell Australia Limited, 31 Bridge Road, Stanmore, NSW 2048.

(02) 516 2155

Ivan Hutchinson Film soundtracks are still being issued with confidence by record companies the world over — a happy state of affairs for collectors of such music, even if it’s only the rare score which pays off both musically and financially.

For a collector, these are halcyon days.

The era of the “ pop” score for any and every sort of film appears happily dead, the obligatory title song is conspicuous by its absence, and the return to the symphonic score is well and truly with us. Such is the eclecticism and technical skill of the writer for films these days (particularly in the U.S., where the music soundtrack has always been more innovative than anywhere else) that though the majority of great European names of the past who found sanctuary in the film studios are dead, there seems to be a new generation of composers and arrangers ready to take their place.

In addition, re-issues and re-recordings of the scores of Herrmann, Korngold, Steiner, etc., continue unabated. A further addition in recent months has been the importation by W. & G. Records of a number of superbly packaged Italian pressings of film music from that country.

Among the re-issues on Polydor is Miklos Rozsa’s music. Rozsa was 70 on April 18, 1977, and is still very active, conducting his old scores and writing new ones, his latest being for Alain Resnais’ Providence.

Rozsa s output, over nearly 40 years of composing for films, has involved the occasional repetition of themes and aural trademarks. But he has written some deeply passionate and romantic music, along with strongly rhythm ic and unmelodic scores. The numbers of these records (all imported, and complete with stills and detailed notes) are 2383-327, 2383-384 and 2383-440.

The earliest score featured — indeed Rozsa’s first score for a film — is from the 1937’s Knight Without Armour (made in Britain with Donat and Dietrich) and the latest frorh Private Life of Sherlock H olm es (1970), a re-arrangement of themes from hisJViolin Concerto, Op 24.

The discs are highly recommended. They remain, however, suites drawn from various sections of the film to make concert pieces.

More satisfying to the purist are tnose

recordings which try to give as much of the music of a film in its original scoring and shape as possible. The Elmer Bernstein Filmmusic Collection has issued two records — the scores for Young Bess (1953), and The Thief of Bagdad (1940).

Beautifully recorded and well conducted

by Bernstein, they are indispensable if you like Rozsa. The numbers of the discs are Fmc-5, and Fmc-8, and are available on subscription only.

Among the Italian recordings is a Nino Rota collection of themes from a variety of films, including Visconti’s Rocco and His Brothers and White N ights, Vidor’s War and Peace, Zeffirelli’s Romeo and Juliet and Coppola’s The Godfather, all melodic and a touch on the dull side, with the exception of a bit of pseudo-jazz from Fellini’s La Dolce Vita, which is quite horrible. (CAM SAG-9054).

A series of themes from a lesser-known film music writer, Carlo Rusticheili — all written for films directed by Pietro Germi

b&c movie rentals & sales 3 0 in k e rm a n s t. s t. k ild a

phone: (0 3 ) 9 4 48 8 3

— is more interesting. Very romantic in style, Rustichelli’s music features long melodic lines on the violins and wood­ winds. His music was heard in some of the films in the recent Mauro Bolognini retro­ spective held by the National Film Theatre of Australia. The disc includes themes from Alfredo Alfredo, Seduced and Aban­ doned, and Divorce — Italian Style.

(CAM SAG-9059). ' No local distributor seems to be in a hurry to put Fellini’s Casanova on the screen, so it may be some time before we can hear the strange and haunting music which Nino Rota has composed in the context of the film’s visuals.

Rota has not used a large orchestra; this is a delicate score featuring woodwind, piano, harp and electronic sounds to conjure an odd, mysterious mood. A quirky 3/4 theme (first heard on track 2, side 1 called Lu’uccello magico) occurs frequently throughout the disc, and the occasional curious vocal interludes

provide another glance at some Fellini grotesques. Not much substance here, but not uninteresting. (CAM-SAG 9075.)

Ennio Morricone is represented by three discs, one being a collection of themes from a number of spaghetti Westerns (including a couple of excru­ ciating vocals) (RCA. INTI-1338), repre­ senting the “ pop” side of his genius.

The other two are from two of the more recent major Italian films — Bertolucci’s Novecento and Bolognini’s L’eredita Ferramonti.

Bertolucci’s score for 1900 has a particularly beautiful theme, utilizing a wordless chorus, which is used as a basis for a number of variations throughout the record. (RCA-TBC 1-1221.)

More melancholy and tenderness is found in the main theme (called ¡reneDominique) for The Ferramonti Inheri­ tance, Bolognini’s new film with Anthony Quinn and Dominique Sanda. There is a great variety of music throughout the score, including polkas and waltzes.

(CAM-SAG 9067.) These discs show Morricone at his creative best.

John Addison’s music for A Bridge Too Far, released on U.A. label locally (L36281), is disappointing and trite.

Addison has written some excellent music for films (Tom Jones, Sleuth, and Torn Curtain among others), but this is not one of them. The main theme is particularly poor.

An import from 20th Century records, and one certain to be released locally, is Michel Legrand’s score for The Other Side of Midnight, a Charles Jarrot film.

This record represents the commercial side of Legrand with its very Rachman­ inov-like theme for the central character, Noelle.

We are all going to be sick to death of Star Wars before long, but there is no denying the skill and impact of the music John Williams has written for Star Wars.

It’s epic music, martial music, battle music — all well played and recorded. (2T-541.)

The worst of the new discs is the mish­ mash of Italian pop for a film called Tentacles which stars John Huston, Shelley Winters and Henry Fonda. The music by Stelvio Cipriani sounds like an out-of-date Mancini. Whoever dressed up the titles of each segment, must have had a sense of humor: one track is called Happiness Is Having Two Killer Whales as Friends, another My Son’s Friend is a Champion Pisser. I can’t see that getting much air-play locally. (CAM-SAG 9079.)

equipment rentals ★ ★ ★ ★ ★

16 & 35 arri b l’s elem ack & c o lo rirá n dollys full range of ianiro lighting (hire & sales) ' d iscoun t rates fo r features catalogues available Cinema Papers, January — 271

Structural Film Anthology ed. Peter Gidal

British Film Institute 1976

Sam Rohdie The Structural Film Anthology is a collection of essays, interviews, letters, and program notes related to work by North American, British, European avante-garde/experimental/independent filmmakers and which can be described roughly as structural. Some of the film­ makers discussed in the book are Tony' Conrad, Hollis Frampton, Peter Gidal, Birgit and Wilhelm Hen, Ken Jacobs, Kurt Kren, Peter Kubelka, Mike Leggett, Malcolm LeGrice, Paul Shartis, Michael Snow, Joyce Wieland.

Much of the contributions are by the filmmakers; but their names, the nature and extent of their works, are mostly unknown in Australia.

In Melbourne, for example, there is no place where independent/experimental films may be regularly seen and discussed.

The Melbourne Film Festival ignores such films. Instead it seeks out glossy magazine films of gaily accoutred peasants yodelling in the Alps, documentaries on turning a table leg, ecology poems to anthropomor­ phized hippopotamuses, indignant radical films concerned with exploited bulls, m etaphors for hum anity, and the traditional dose of shock charm animation.

The Film Institute Theatre and the State Film Theatre have no place in their program s for c u rre n t in n o v ativ e independent film. The Melbourne Film Co-operative was closed down by the Government. The Experimental Film Fund does not fund experimental films.

The press, the film journals ignore such films. Organizations designed to promote a film culture censor that culture, limit and narrowly define it — they can be identified, not by what they promote but rather by what they deny and suppress.

There are, in Melbourne, a number of independent/experimental filmmakers without the possibility of showing their work, of educating and constructing an audience. Works of new American and European avante-garde cinema, acquired by the National Library in part as a result of pressure from the Melbourne-based filmmakers Arthur and Corinne Cantrill, are seldom viewed, again because of lack of context and understanding.

M ost A u stra lia n e x p e rim e n ta l filmmakers must go abroad, permanently or periodically, for recognition, for funding, for appreciation and stimulus, for the simple opportunity of having their works screened and seriously regarded.

The Structural Film Anthology then is im­ pertinent, not relevant within the traditional and conservative film culture situation in Australia. Its relevance is to point to a lack, to expose an absence and an ignorance, and by implication, to suggest the necessity for transformation.

Peter Gidal, who edited the book, places the structural film within a history of the avant-garde, but oppossed to a history of films thought of as solely as the history of narrative film.

For Gidal, the structural film realizes a development within the avant-garde film towards greater concern with the actual 272 — Cinema Papers, January

material substance of film (“ materialist” ) and with a more clarified, rigorous and objective formalization (“ structuralist” ).

Gidal: “ An avant-garde film defined by its development towards increased materialism and materialist function does not represent or document anything. The film produces certain relations between segments, between what the camera is aimed at and the way that ‘image’ is presented. The dialectic of the film is established in that space of tension between materialist flatness, grain, light, movement, and the supposed reality that is represented. Consequently, a continual attem pt to destroy the illusion is necessary.”

It is this practice which Gidal seeks to realize in his films.

Deke Dusinberre on Gidal’s Room Film 1973 says: “ The erratic and often unfocused use of the camera effectively yields a camera uninterested (or, at least, disinterested) in the objects it scans. The camera movement is not mechanical, as is the editing procedure, but appears almost random or arbitrary. So that the film p riv ile g e s the very process of configuration of the image on the part of the recording apparatus and on the part of the viewer; by making the perception of an image on the screen difficult and by rendering those images banal and almost ‘meaningless’, the film rigorously reduces the semantic element and forces the spectator back onto her/his own capacities for meaning-making.”

The Anthology delimits a field of struct­ uralist activity, or strategies, and of practices. It does not define or fix structural film as a precise object, thing, or product or commodity.

It is less of moment in this review to describe that practice (or to criticize it, review it) than it is to sketch some of the concepts generated by the field of structur­ alist activity, and by so doing to value that activity.

1 representing/represented: it fore­ grounds the representing, producing, structuring elements of film as against the represented, the product, the event, thereby reversing, or at least, questioning, procedures characteristic of the narrative film and of most documentaries; 2 form/content: it makes clear the inadequacy of this conceptual pair since it subverts traditional ‘content’ (narrative action, represented objects, events) replacing it with what traditionally has been named as ‘form’ (the rhetoric of film usually thought to be expressive of the content, meaning, message, significance of the film); it is not that form can now be recuperated as a new content but rather that neither term remains intact, in theory, or in filmmaking practice; 3 th e o r y /p r a c tic e : the films deal directly with the problems of the structure of film, the limits of representation, forms of meaning; filmmaking is considered to be a theoretical practice, a discourse on film in film, not an un-intellectualized, un­ thought, un-reflected, un-conscious, intuitive, expressive (mindless?) activity dear to hard-headed practitioners of film; 4 the position of the subject; the films exhibit the fact that all art objects construct a position of perception, understanding, ‘reading’ for a viewing subject; the films attempt to make that position/structure conscious (clear) by placing and displacing the viewing subject

in multiple and often contradictory places, in stressing structuring and process over structure and system, activity as against fixity and definition; the films suggest that the subject itself (“ I” is a structure, constructed by the discourse of the film (“ I” as not the source of language, but its effect, whether of natural language or film language).

The avant-garde/experimental film not only provokes questions about the formation of film, but also about processes of perception, the construction of the subject, the language of film, and the production of meaning. It is the radicalism of the intent and practice of these films which defines their relevance and pertinence to any productive film culture It also explains their marginalization by the dominant film culture which these films critically question and ultimately will displace.

These questions have hardly been posed in Australia. The film culture is doubly conservative (and repressive). For the most part it timidly imitates (sometimes wishes to compete with) foreign models, and these models are deeply traditional — often reactionary.

Books of the Quarter Compiled by J. H. Reid As revealed in this column in the previous issue, the flow of new film books is drying up.

Only one book on film theory has appeared in the past six months, and none at all on animation.

This quarter, there is only one new book on film directors (though three were released here, two were in fact published some years ago).

However, the flood of material orf actors and actresses continues.

Actors and Actresses

by James Robert Parish and Don. E. Stanke. New Rochelle, 1977.

S29.90. The indefatigable Mr Parish’s latest volume surveys the careers of Gary Cooper, Henry Fonda, William Holden, Rock Hudson, Fred MacMurray, Ronald Reagan and James Stewart. A great deal of information is skilfully compressed into very readable biographies of each star, and their filmographies have the usual, admirably fulsome cast lists (and the credits tend to be less sketchy than in previous volumes). , M ic h a e l C a in e by Emma Andrews. London 1977. $2.60. S e a n C o n n e r y by Emma Andrews.

London, 1977. $2.60.

Written in an indulgently biased fan­ magazine style, these little books have little to offer, apart from some attractive stills.

B in g C r o s b y by Barbara Bauer. New York, 1977. $3.95. An elongated piece of newspaper journalism. Discussions on Crosby’s films are limited to synopses of their plots; his personal career is described by an obviously adoring fan.

There are lots of photographs, though the poor quality of the paper does not do them justice.

T h e F ilm s o f D o ris D a y by Christopher Young.

Citadel Press, 1977. $21.95. This is one of the better books in the series. Each film is detailed with credits (including songs), a synopsis, and a wide selection of contemporary reviews, as well as production notes. But the real appeal of the book lies in its portraits and stills — there are more than 400 of them.

J u d y G a r la n d by Brian Baxter. London 1977 $2.60. Mr Baxter knew Judy in her later years. In this brief account of her life he tries to present her as the victim of “ the decline of wit, grace and glamor from the movies” . Unfortunately, his space is so limited — some of her films are passed over in a single sentence — that his argument is not wholly convincing. The stills are adequately reproduced, though many of them are very familiar.

T h e K in d n e s s o f S tr a n g e r s by Salka Viertel.

New York, 1969. $6.95. Salka Viertel is remembered today chiefly as an intimate friend of Greta Garbo and the screenwriter of many of her films. Unfortunately, the book has no index, so one must search for the Garbo material.

T h e A l l- A m e r ic a n s ,

Fortunately, the search is rewarding. Ms Viertel’s anecdotes of writing for MGM are lively and amusing. ‘ M y r n a L o y by Karyn Kay. New York, 1977. $3.95. Somewhat more critical than most of the books in the Pyramid series, though not critical enough to suggest that this is the same Karyn Kay who writes for T h e V e lv e t L ig h t T r a p , J u m p C u t and F ilm Q u a rte r ly . The language is ‘pop’ and while some of her films receive a critical thrashing, Miss Loy herself is painted throughout in glowing terms. As usual in this series, the book has a large number of rare stills.

R o g e r M o o r e by John Williams. London, 1977 $2.60. Fan-magazine stuff, originally published three years ago, now revised and up-dated to cash in on The Spy Who Loved Me. J a c k N ic h o ls o n by Bruce Brailhwaite. London 1977. $2.60. Written in a less gushy5style than most of the other little books in the BCW series, this is a neat scissor-and-paste job with lots of quotes from Nicholson.

T h e R o a d to H o lly w o o d b y Bob Hope and Bob Thomas, New York, 1977. $17.50. This book is most disappointing. The first half is painful reading. If you don’t choke on Hope’s lame wisecracks, you will almost certainly drown in the stilted vocabulary and cliched phrases of Mr Thomas’s contributions. The last half of the book, detailing the films, is slightly better. The cast is listed (but not the characters played in the film), together with the main credits and a short synopsis. Many of the photographs are unflattering and most are poorly reproduced.

T a r a R e v is ite d : T h e I n s id e S to r y o f W h a t R e a l l y H a p p e n e d to th e S ta r s o f “ G o n e W ith T h e W i n d ’

by Malcolm Vance. New York, 1976. $2.45. Brief biographies of not only the stars but even the most minor players, with complete lists of their films. The major filmmakers are also included.

Background notes and 16 pages of wellproduced, if familiar, stills round out this fascinating and scholarly work. In many ways, it is superior to the more expensive and larger books on Gone With The Wind.

Broadcasting Dan Wakefield. New York 1977. $2.75. All Her Children is not only the most popular daytime soap opera in the U .S ., but it is the one which critics single out as the yardstick against which similar attempts are measured. Not only does this book explore the genesis and the actual production of All Her Children in detail, it also has some refreshing things to say about the psychology and the audience involvement of soap operas in general.

Highly recommended.

T h e N e t w o r k J u n g l e by David Levy, Canoga Park, California, 1976, $2.95. A revised and enlarged edition of a novel originally published in 1964. The characters and incidents are based on real life. The morality of television is discussed, though the author is more concerned to point out how corporate in-fighting affects what we actually see on the tube.

O n ly Y o u , D ic k D a r lin g ! by Merle Miller and Evan Rhodes, New York, 1976, $2.95. This one also published in 1964, is now being issued as a paperback. Every word here is true and real names are used throughout. Some of the material has dated and there are some needless digressions, but Miller’s account of the making of a television pilot for Jackie Cooper is the most devastating expose of television programming ever written.

T V A c tio n B o o k by Jeffrey Schrank. Evanston, 1974. $6.95. Designed for school use, this book is almost wholly concerned with bias in television programs, advertisements and news coverage. Students are encouraged to monitor television broadcasts by the use of charts.

AH H e r C h ild r e n b y

Directors

by Victor Scherle and William Turner Levy. Secaucus, 1977. $25.90. Undoubtedly the finest book yet produced in Citadel’s long-running series.

Complete casts, credits and synopses provided for each film with extensive background notes.

What makes the book valuable are the comments on each film made by its original contributors. It’s a Wonderful Life, for example, has commentaries by James Stewart, Donna Reed, Beulah Bondi, Sheldon Leonard, Mary Treen and Ellen Corby. The 400 stills have been superbly selected and reproduced.

T h e F ilm s o f F r a n k C a p r a

T h e D is c ip le ( G a b r ie l P a s c a l) a n d h is D e v il ( B e r n a r d S h a w ) by Valerie Pascal. New York, 1970. $8.95. T h e S e r p e n t 's E y e : S h a w a n d th e C in e m a by Donald P. Costello. Notre Dame,

1965, $5.95. An admirably thorough account of Shaw’s plays on the screen. Pascal figures largely in these pages. His wife’s autobiography gives a much more personal account of his life and his dealings with Shaw.

ALAN WARDROPE

JOHN FAULKNER

History T h e C iv il W a r o n th e S c r e e n a n d O th e r E s s a y s ( N a z i m o v a , E d w in S . P o r te r , L o u is W o lh e im ) by

Jack Spears. South Brunswick, 1977. S24.90. If ever a book was headed for a fast trip to the sale tables, this one is. Mr Spears knows his facts, but his writing is as amateurish as his critiques are superficial. For a book as expensive as this, one „.expects much more than Mr Spears delivers. For a paperback it would get by, but not for $24.90.

T h e K in g K o n g S to r y by Jeremy Pascal!.

London 1977. $6.95. This well-written, concise account of the various King Kong films will satisfy those whose interest in Kong is not deep enough to warrant reading T h e M a k i n g o f K in g K o n g or T h e G ir l in th e H a ir y P a w .

R a y m o n d C h a n d le r o n S c r e e n : H is N o v e ls I n to F ilm by Stephen Pendo. Metuchen, 1976. $19.95.

All the facts you could possibly want to know about the Marlowe novels and their film versions: original reviews of both, comparisons of plots, extensive production notes, etc.

T h e S a m u r a i F ilm by Alain Silver, South Brunswick, 1977. $17.60. A scholarly, detailed survey, somewhat heavy but essential reading for anyone wanting to appreciate this particular Japanese genre.

S lo w F a d e to B la c k : T h e N e g r o in A m e r ic a n F ilm 1 9 0 0 - 1 9 4 2 by Thomas Cripps. New York, 1977.

$7.95. A fascinating, if appalling, account of bigotry, ignorance and faint-heartedness from which David O. Selznick and Gone With The Wind emerge as champions for the negro cause.

Reference 1 9 6 7 edited by Peter Cowie. London, 1977. $56.70. Unless you are really interested in the films made in 1967 in such places as Algeria, Egypt and Turkey, this much-publicized listing of credits is not worth the astounding Australian retail price. The credits of British and American films are not nearly as extensive as those in the American - Film Institute Catalog (or even in “ Film Index” for that matter). While there are plenty of photographs from these two countries, the 94page Japanese section has only six stills. Only directors and the film titles themselves are indexed. Very disappointing.

W o r ld

F i lm o g r a p h y

U n iv e r s a l P ic tu r e s : A P a n o r a m ic W o r d s, P ic tu r e s a n d F ilm o g r a p h ie s by

H is to r y

in

Michael G. Fitzgerald. New Rochelle, 1977. $39.95. The best book on a Him studio ever published and one of the top 10 film books available today. Essential for any library, from the largest to the smallest, from the most general to the most specialized. In concept, research, organization and selection of material, and for sheer thoroughness, this book is unbeatable. Easily the film book of the year.

for everyone.

The potential rewards here are so great that we need them to justify the sort of costs — the p ro d u c tio n costs w hich are emerging in Australia.

You can spend a lot of time and sell Europe, but one sale here in New York or back in Los Angeles will get you the equivalent How important to Australia is amount or more, and that is why it is so terribly important. th eU .S . market?

Alan Wardrope

Continuedfrom P. 229.

Of course, but you have to be geared to service a cinema circuit, to handle publicity materials, bookings, a buying department to keep track of prints moving th ro u g h th e te r r it o r y , an accounting set-up and so on.

It is not critical yet, but it is vital. I say that because our budgets are escalating like every­ where else in the world. Picnic for example, cost $480,000 to make three years ago. The producers said the other day they doubt that they could bring it in today for under $900,000. When you consider that you have to multiply your budget by 4 to to find your break-even point, then you realize that a film which cost a million dollars.has to gross some­ thing between four and five million dollars just to break even.

They are big numbers, particularly for a nation like Australia where there are only 14 million people.

How realistic is it to think we can sell our films to American television ?

In the long term can the Australian film industry exist without the U.S. market?

These are solid offers . . .

We can flog them, but the problem is with the price we get.

The sad fact is th at m ost Americans by tradition don’t pay high prices for off-shore products.

In their view it is good business, but it is not for us.

How do you intend to follow up on the NATO convention?

We are talking to a number of distributors and already we have exhibitors who want to book and play our films.

Yes, but to translate that into something concrete is going to Yes, but not at the level we are take a lot of legwork. If we don’t seeking which would ensure a keep up the pressure, keep viable industry with employment pecking away and wearing out

John Faulkner

Continuedfrom P. 213 The Sunday News which visited one of the hotel locations commented on the bizarreness of filming under 40,000 candlepower of lighting: “ Under such a glare, careful make-up is obviously necessary, and the use of yellow spectacles while rehearsing is essential if one is to retain one’s sight. The grease paint chiefly used is a rich yellow, which does not tend to improve the general appearance of the artists concerned . . . ” 10.

For the scenes in which the twin brothers appeared together, Longford’s regular camera­ man Arthur Higgins achieved remarkable trick photography. In its review of the film, the London Bioscope commented: “ The man, as played by John Faulkner, is extremely interesting, for at times one can almost believe that two distinct persons are acting instead of one playing the dual role.” 11 The unravelling of ‘the mystery’ was done

by Marjorie Osborne, in real life a fashion expert and wealthy grazier’s wife turned actress for this her only film. Sheila Whytock remembered Marjorie Osborne as being a very intelligent person, and this verdict was carried through to critical praise for her performance.

Raymond Longford sowed the seeds for eventual ill-feeling with Faulkner by insisting that he do his own stunt-work on The Blue Mountains Mystery. The story required him to dive — with no safety precautions — from the promenade deck of a liner steaming through Sydney Heads. Faulkner refused.

Longford then offered him an exorbitant sum to reconsider his decision, hut John’s final word was that no money would compensate for a limbless existence or a once-in-a-lifetime chance to play Jonah. It would have been

interesting to see how Raymond Longford, unaccustomed to being opposed, finally got the shot he wanted.

In late 1921, John Faulkner went to New Zealand to appear for a c to r-d ire c to r Harrington Reynolds in the ambitious Birth Of New Zealand, fragments of which have recently been rediscovered by a New Zealand private collector. John played another villain, Patch Mason. His co-star was Stella Southern, with whom he had appeared in The Man From Snowy River.

John’s divorce from his first marriage was complete, and he had devoted his spare time between filming The Blue M o u n tain s Mystery to press for an engagement with Sheila Whytock. For the main part of 1919 to 1921, Sheila had danced at the New York Metropolitan, but she returned several times on holiday to Australia. During one such period she danced for a society party scene in The Breaking Of The Drought.

In the summer of 1922, Gatti, her ballet mistress, gave her leave of absence to marry Faulkner in London. It was planned that Sheila would stay in London until Gatti sent her a telegram to return for the autumn ballet season. After that, she would dance at the Met. for another year, at the end of which she would be eligible for retirement on a generous pension.

John and Sheila were married on August 17, 1922. Her plans for the autumn ballet season, however, did not materialize. Gatti’s telegram arrived while Sheila was out shopping and John had burnt it because he was afraid of losing her.

My father told my mother about it several years later, but she never forgave him. The continued ballet job and its pension could have eased their later financial problems, which

shoe leather and knocking on d o o rs , we w ill n e v e r g et anywhere. It’s starting to happen, but slowly.

What does it take to close the gap between where you are now and the sale?

Let’s take one exhibitor I spoke to from Kentucky. He wanted to take our films, but no way can we have our films premiering in Kentucky with all due respect to that state. We really have to open on the West Coast or north-east, or perhaps south of the New York region. We have to open where there is a structured market place and if the film takes off then phase two begins; the word gets out that something good is happening and you play another segment of the market.

Unfortunately, many of the people who say, “ sure, we will take your films” , don’t represent the doorway.

Is there a danger that we might be too selective?

N o , th e d a n g e r is an d traditionally has been with our films. We must correct that. We m u st get back to a v ery professional appraisement of the market, because if you go off in the wrong direction you can blow it. ★

were ghastly.

For the next two years employment opportunities in London were few, so Oscar Asche persuaded the Faulkners to return to Australia in 1924. Sheila began teaching at Minnie Hooper’s dancing academy, and in 1925 John enjoyed a busy year of film work.

From July, he acted for Raymond Longford in the final feature made by the Longford-Lyell company, Peter Vernon’s Silence. John played another murder victim, this time an upright father who opposes his daughter’s marriage to a man with a shady past. Heavily dramatic, the film was not among the director’s best. And by the time of its release in October 1926, Raymond Longford and Faulkner had fallen out heavily over Faulkner’s only film as sole producer, On The Trail Of The Kangaroo (1925).

This was a documentary made to cover the well publicised kangaroo drives held separately at the Widgiewa and Lake Cowal (NSW) properties from September 1925.12 Finance came from a syndicate of John’s old society friends—Hugh D. McIntosh, Charles Du Val, Lindsay Browne, Percy Stewart Dawson, and the portrait photographer Monte Luke. Arthur Higgins, who had worked with John on his two Longford films, photographed On The Trail Of The Kangaroo, and Longford is known to have directed the sequences filmed at Lake Cowal.!3 While the drive itself was celebrated among shooters — including several imported and world-famous — as an opportunity to return to the unrestrained thrill-of-the-hunt carnage of pioneering times, the documentary balanced its glorification of sporting slaughter with scientific fact on land use and kangaroo by-products.

Concluded on P. 277 Cinema Papers, January — 273

7 SYDNEY FILMMAKERS N COOPERATIVE Distribution The Co-operative distributes over 800 independent films, both 16mm and video, throughout Australia. *

Dramatic Films: Love Letters from

Teralba Road, The Singer and the Dancer, Listen to the Lion, Backroads, Out of It, Pure S......

■ * Women’s Films: Over 100 films by and about women, covering topics such as sexuality, sexism, work, art, childcare, media and education. * Political Films: Prisoners, Under­ ground, Last Grave at Dimbaza, Rush to Judgement, Compañero .... * Films on Black Australia: Protected, Lalai Dreamtime, Sons of Namatjira, Tjintu-Pakani... * Experimental Films: The most comprehensive collection of Australian avant-garde and experimental film in the country. Animated films, including films by Bruce Petty, and more ...

Many of these films are available on video cassette. The Co-op also distributes a growing number of videotapes.

For our Catalogue of Independent Films, send $3 to the address below.

Cinema

The Filmmakers Cinema screens every Friday, Saturday and Sunday.

Programmeachange monthly and details are published in the daily press.

(Subscriptions to Filmnews include concessions on Filmmakers Cinema tickets.)

The 16mm, 100 capacity cinema is also available for hire at an hourly or daily rate.

Filmnews

A monthly newspaper of Australian independent cinema, Filmnews, is published by the Co-op. It contains news and reviews, interviews with filmmakers, technical and production notes, gossip and opinion.

Essential reading for anyone interested in the development of Australian film.

Subscriptions cost $8 per year ($10 per year foreign). Send to: Filmnews, P.O.Box 217, Kings Cross, 2011, NSW.

Ph: 31 3237 Office & Cinema: St. Peters Lane, Darlinghurst 2010, NSW.

The Sydney Filmmakers’ Co-Operative is assisted by a grant from the Australian Film Commission.

Sydney Filmmakers Co-operative Ltd., P.O.Box 217, Kings Cross, 2011, NSW.

APOSTASY a twice told tale in black red white “A claustrophobic chronicle set during the summer of 1975. Against the backdrop of premature elections, two people meet and systematically talk themselves into a separation. Helplessly bound by the verbosity of the educated, unable to match each other’s passionate emotions, they are doomed to cyclic revolts and betrayals, while the outside world eats, dreams and murders despite them.

“One day they must decide.”

Director/Screenplay. . . Zbigniew Friedrich The W oman........................ Juliet Bacskai Executive Producers.. .. Don McLennan, The Filmmaker........... Roderick McNicol David Thomas The Madman.................. Phil Motherwell The Old M a n .......................Alan Money Director of Photography...........Zbigniew Friedrich Chief Grip............................... Gerry Lock Assistant Camera....................Phil Cross, Top left: Phil Motherwell as the madman.

Virginia Brook Above: The Filmmaker (Rod McNicol) turns Additional Photography . . AndyTrenouth a gun on the woman (Juliet Bacskai) after Sound Recordist..................Lloyd Carrick she attempts to shoot him.

Boom Operator....................................TimIsaacson Below: The Woman watches the 1975 Editor..........................Zbigniew Friedrich election returns on television while the Continuity......................... Vivian Mehes Filmmaker reads Wilhelm Reich.

Props................................ Bromwyn Evans

I**»-,

J?*

-*«.

I

- ,

«

i

%

NEWS FLASH

F or All M o tio n P ic tu re P ro d u c e rs

TOTTTTTiTrraFHj

JourneyAmongWomen

CINEVEX FILM LABORATORIES PTY LTD. o f 15 -17 G ordon ST E ls te rn w ic k . VIC.

< B a iU ti 's

-

PS

SPECTRUM FILMS

A n n o u n ce s 7247 & 5247 E.C.N. P rocessing

where the shoot ends and the movie begins

141 Penshurst St. Willoughby N.S.W 2068 (02) 4124055

This L a b o ra to ry P hone

528 6188

PADDINGTON TOWN HALL CENTRE P.O. BOX: 281 PADDINGTON 2021. PHONE (02) 31 9025

v id e o • 4 0 'x 4 0 'COLOR TELEVISION STUDIO WITH SUITABLE LIGHTING FACILITIES ® 2 IKEGAMICTC3X COLOR CAMERAS ® 12 CHANNEL STEREO/MONO SOUND MIXER WITH FULL EQUALIZATION • SOPHISTICATED VISION MIXER • TELECINE 16mm, 35mm SLIDE, AND SUPER-8 WITH FLYING SPOT SCANNER ® TECHNICAL AND PRODUCTION ADVICE ® TECH. & PROD. CREWS BY ARRANGEMENT ® 2" QUAD. VTR FACILITIES ARRANGED CONTACT: MARIO FAIRLIE, JEUNE PRITCHARD

These facilities were created with Commonwealth funds to encourage experimentation in Film and Television, and to develop widespread understanding and use of video as a communication medium.

c in e m a A 350 SEAT RAKED AUDITORIUM COMFORTABLE EQUIPPED WITH 16 and 35mm CABLED FOR VIDEO RECORDING AND P.A. FOLLOW SPOT & VIDEO PROJECTION AVAILABLE SERVICED BY LICENSED BAR & LIGHT FOOD

0PCNING 29 JAN 78 DESTINED TO BECOME SYDNEY’S PREMIER ART HOUSE SCREENING A WIDE RANGE OF QUALITY PRODUCT AND INCORPORATING A CHILDREN’S CINEMA CLUB

MOW BOOKING FROM INDEPENDENT DISTRIBUTORS AUSTRALIA WIDE

JOHN FAULKNER

John Faulkner

Continuedfrom P. 273 Evidently Raymond Longford worked no further on the film after Lake Cowal. John Faulkner wrote the script and supervised the editing, and, running 15 minutes, the film was premiered as a support to John Ford’s The Iron Horse at the Prince Edward Theatre, Sydney, in November 1925. It must have been near to this time that Longford took Faulkner to court. In an old wallet of my father’s I recently found an undated press clipping. Headed “ Kangaroo Hunt Motion Picture” , it read: “ The hearing was concluded of the claim of Raymond John Walter Longford (known professionally as Raymond Hollis Longford), for the recovery of the sum of £250 from John Faulkner . . . for alleged breach of contract respecting a motion picture featuring a Kangaroo hunt. Defendant denied any agreement or any breach.”

Due to his lack of sufficient evidence, Longford was ordered to accept a non-suit. On this rift I can find no more information.

During 1928, John Faulkner appeared in no less than three Australian films — fortuitous indeed in the year before the huge slump in local film output.

The first of the three was The Far Paradise, produced by the McDonagh Sisters, who two years earlier had enjoyed instant success with their first feature, Those Who Love. Though he was well known as a character actor, the McDonaghs asked John to screentest for his role — a practice they demanded of all their actors.14 In 1929, Faulkner appeared for the McDonagh Sisters in his final film, The Cheaters.

In The Far Paradise and The Cheaters, Faulkner played the father of the hero — an honest man resisting the villainy of the father of the heroine. In The Far Paradise he opposed the criminal business dealings of Gaston Mervale, who was undermining the romance of respective son and daughter.

Faulkner was even more the victim of The Cheaters, as the father of a woman seized as a child and trained for a career in crime by the embezzler he had sent to prison. Critics and public alike voted The Far Paradise a notable improvement on the Sisters’ first film, but The Cheaters — as one of the last Australian silent films — was compromised by the arrival of sound and barely released at all.

Faulkner’s second appearance for 1928 was a small role in a film directed by Arthur Higgins.

This was Odds On, a racing drama made for the unbelievably low budget of £2000. It attracted good reviews for its Australian atmosphere and careful attention to detail.

Starring Phyllis Gibbs, Check Hayes and Arthur Tauchert, Odds On was judged by the London Bioscope to have been produced with “convincing realism” and to offer “excellent entertainment for popular audiences” .

Faulkner’s third 1928 film, by contrast, remains a mystery. Nothing is known about its plot, and there is no record of it being granted general release.

Tanami (alternatively known as The Kingdom Of Twilight) was produced and directed by Alexander MacDonald. For Tanami, he took his cast and crew on location for two months to the Chillagoe district of North-Western Queensland.

In 1928, John Faulkner was afflicted by his first stroke. He had suffered high blood pressure, but the intense heat of film lighting had aggravated the condition, and his nose­ bleeding was incessant. He was terrified of being told he was unfit to work, and

The McDonagh Sisters’ last film, The Cheaters (1929).

Marie Lorraine, John Faulkner and Josef Bambach.

successfully hid his illness from the McDonagh Sisters.

Shortly after The Cheaters was finished in 1929, he had another stroke which caused him partial paralysis. The barmaids in the hotels he drank at served him diluted alcohol after his second round, and frequently plain water after the third. For a while his health improved, and hopes for a revived career came from Holly­ wood.

Executives at MGM, impressed with Faulkner’s work in silent films, arranged that he record a screen test. MGM liked his wellmodulated voice, and made plans to import him to the U.S. for a film in 1931. The only obstacle was a medical test, and the results were disastrous. John’s blood pressure was still high, and MGM cabled that they were unwilling to take the risk of his ill-health and age. He was then 59.

It was just before this that Sheila had borne John a son — Ronald, later nicknamed Trader.

I made my only Australian film appearance at my christening, which was filmed for the family’s benefit by Arthur Higgins. . My father drank heavily from 1932 onwards.

For several years he and my mother had awful rows, often because he came home drunk, with his earnings either frittered away or stolen. The last years were tragic and difficult for both, though they had an enormous sense of humor and cared for one another.

In 1933, with Australia suffering the later crises of the Depression, we lived on porridge, the occasional rabbit, bread and cheese. In 1933 and 1934 I holidayed with Dad at Springwood’s famous Bon Accord guest house, which he had previously helped Hugh D. McIntosh to set up and open.

On September 7, 1934, a lunch was planned for him by many of his old friends at the Union Club in Macquarie St. At 12.15 he caught the ferry Baragoola from Manly, and as he walked down the gangway at Circular Quay, he suffered a third stroke. His friends managed to get him home, but he was almost totally paralysed. He was taken to the Manly District Hospital, where six days later, on September 13, he died alone.

The following day, he was cremated. Apart from the usual death notice, his only obituary appeared in Everyones: “ Old-timers noting with regret the passing of John Faulkner at Manly last week . . . Remember John in Ray Longford’s Blue ¡Mountains Mystery and Beau Smith’s The Man From Snowy River? . . . ” 16 My father’s friends later told me that he was a brilliant raconteur and wit, and a wonderful companion. His genius — like that of his old friend Jack Barrymore — had evidently flourished in the bar. If there was tragedy in his life, it was neglect. He was pushed out to fend for himself when he was just 13. Between then and his marriage, he acquired enormous talent, but had no family life, no purpose, no discipline. Like those he helped in Australian films, he had to learn as he went along.

Between 1947 and 1950, I learned much about dramatic technique from the small group of actors who had worked with my father in silent films. Nan Taylor, who conducted lessons at her small house in Woolloomooloo, taught me many of the subtleties of perfor­ mance, and also told me stories about my father. Tal Ordell, who offered me guidance when I was trying to get started in radio, was at that time writing short stories based on his day-to-day experiences and reading them daily on 2UE. To my young mind, he was the Aust­ ralian equivalent of O. Henry.

In that same year, 1947, Robert MacKinnon gave me my big break at 2GB by writing a radio serial for me called Silks And Saddles, directed

by Lawrence H. Cecil, who had done so much for the young Peter Finch in the 1930s. The title was also that of the silent film in which Tal Ordell had played the villain, and John Faulkner and Robert MacKinnon had appeared as father and son. ★ FILMOGRAPHY 1918 1918 1918 1920 1920 1921 1921 1921 1925 1926 1928 1928 1928 1929

The Enemy Within* The Lure Of The Bush £500 Reward.

The Breaking Of The Drought* The Man From Snowy River Silks and Saddles* The Blue Mountains Mystery The Birth of New Zealand On The Trail Of The Kangaroo (Documentary) Peter Vernon’s Silence The Fas Paradise* Odds On Tanami The Cheaters*

* Asterisk denotes that a print of the film is held by the National Film Archive, National Library, Canberra.

FOOTNOTES 1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

11.

12.

13.

14.

15.

16.

Truth, November 6, 1921.

The Picture Show, October 1, 1921.

Sunday News (Sydney), October 2, 1921.

Oscar Asche makes no mention of John Faulkner, or touring with the thermosfridge, in his autobiography, Oscar Asche: His Life (Hurst and Blackett Ltd., Pater­ noster House, London 1929). He does, however, refer to bluffing his own way into the Benson com­ pany by an erroneous claim of cricket skill. See Faulkner’s reaction to the cricket prerequisite below (G. S .).

The only record of the title God’s Prodigal is for a Bri­ tish film made in 1923. John Faulkner was in London during that year, but there is no mention of his name among the published credits for the film.

The Theatre Magazine, December 2, 1918.

No specific information is available on which films and directors this pressure applied to, but Trader Faulkner relates, “ At a guess, it would be those in which Dad either had the lion’s share or featured prominently.”

The Picture Show, April 1, 1920.

Ibid.

Sunday News, August 28, 1921.

Reprinted in Everyones, November 4, 1925.

The completion of the film can hardly have taken two years, as one advertisement claims, when it is realized On The Trail Of The Kangaroo was released only two months after the first roo drive at Lake Cowal.

The Chronicle (Sydney), September 18, 1925.

In conversation with Paulette McDonagh.

Reprinted in Everyones, March 27, 1929.

Everyones, September 19, 1934.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

1. Eric Reade, The Australian Screen, Lansdowne Press, Melbourne, 1975.

2. Hal Porter, Stars of Australian Stage and Screen, Rigby Ltd., Adelaide, 1965.

Acknowledgements: Modesta Gentile, Joan Long, Paulette McDonagh, Andrew Pike, Mrs Charles Du Val, Myles Dewell and the National Film Archive, Canberra.

The stills published with this article are from Trader Faulkner’s own collection. The originals are now held by the National Film Archive.

Cinema Papers, January — 277

ASSOCIATION FOR A NATIONAL FILM & TELEVISION ARCHIVE Filmmakers and film users in Australia have had the opportunity to learn something of the work of film archives and the problems they face in preserving our film heritage. This has partly been possible through the publication of news about the National Library and the Association for a National Film and Television Archive by Cinema Papers.

However, little is heard or known of the Federation Internationale des Archives du Film, the international body, with head­ quarters in Brussels, to which 54 archives and kindred organizations throughout the world belong.

In Australia, the film archive of the National Library is a full member, while the Association has observer status. Both were represented at the 1977 annual general assembly of FIAF held in Bulgaria — the Library by Ivan Page their London repre­ sentative, and the Association by its president Barrie King.

FIAF was founded in 1938, at the Museum of Modern Art in New York, with four charter members: The Film Library of the Museum, the Cinematheque Française, the British Film Institute and the Reichfilmarchiv in Berlin. It has since grown to 37 full members, one associate and 16 observers, whose aims are to conserve and collect films for aesthetic and historic reasons, to promote and facilitate the international exchange of film, and to provide ressearch facilities and documentation relating to film history.

A Polish photographer and cameraman, Boleslaw Matuszewski, was the first to propose the creation of film archives. He wrote of the cinema as a “ new source of history” , and in fact, the earliest collections, before World War I, were composed mostly of newsreels; films of historic, religious and instructional nature were added in the 1920s. But the real impetus to set up film archives came with the introduction of the sound film, when it became clear that the early masterpieces of the silent cinema would soon disappear.

By 1935 there was a growing movement in Paris, London, Moscow, Berlin and New York, to set up national film archives. This became a reality with the founding of the BFI, the. Cinematheque Française, the Reich­ filmarchiv and the MMA Film Library, all being started about the same time.

The international nature of the cinema made it advantageous to form liaisons which would permit the collections of individual countries to be enlarged by exchanges between archives. The four existing archives founded the International Federation in 1938 to facilitate such exchanges and promote the development of film archives. The same year, films from the MMA collection were exhibited at the Musee du Jeau de Paume in Paris. For the first time film art was welcomed in a famous European museum and placed on the same level as other arts.

Salvaging film records of the past was a concept which was largely unknown at the time. It needed the efforts of such people as Iris Barry, first film curator at the MMA, Henri Langlois, of the Cinematheque, and Ernest Lindgren, at the BFI, to promote and achieve some acceptance of the concept. Today, salvaging and preservation of film remains a major pre-occupation of FIAF. There are still large amounts of inflam­ mable nitrate film in archives throughout the w orld, and because of the cost of transferring them to safety bases, storage and copying will remain a problem until after the turn of the century.

More and more, though, the problems of nitrate film are being replaced by new ones encountered in the preservation of color film and videotapes. The dyes in color films fade, and videotapes have not been found suitable for long-term preservation. The only solutions available now are expensive, and FIAF members are continually looking for new and improved preservation methods.

FIAF p u b lis h e d a book on film preservation some years ago, and is now preparing a more extensive manual on the subject. Another publication is their index to International Film Periodicals, a valuable reference source for libraries, film users etc.

In order to improve archival standards in

278 — Cinema Papers, January

other countries, the older FIAF members provide information and advice to the newer and smaller archives, and undertake the training of staff.

The Summer School on Film Preservation, conducted periodically in East Berlin, is p a rticula rly appreciated by the less experienced archives. Two members of the staff of the National Library have attended these schools.

There is growing consciousness of the problems of archives set up recently in Asia, Africa and South America; ways of assisting them are discussed at FIAF meetings.

Because of the cost of travel, many of these archives are unable to send representatives to the meetings, but their written reports convey some of their difficulties.

Meetings have been held in most of the leading member countries, but inevitably Europe is the venue more often than not it w ould give great encouragem ent to Australian archives, but more importantly to those in neighboring countries, if a FIAF general assembly could be held in this region, Australia is a long-standing member of FIAF, and could provide an excellent venue.

NATIONAL LIBRARY OF AUSTRALIA National Film Archive Bruce Hodsdon of the National Film Theatre recently visited the Archive to arrange the Australian Film Retrospective to start in Sydney in January. It will also travel to the other capital cities. The Film Archive will be arranging an exhibition in the Sydney Opera House to coincide with the film screenings.

In October, two of the Film Archive staff made the yearly trip to the Department of Supply, St Marys, to inspect our nitrate film collection. A number of films will be sent back to Canberra for examination.

The Creative Development Branch of the Australian Film Commission has made a new letter of acceptance of grant conditions for the Experimental Film and Television Fund.

Clause 9 now states: “ To deposit the printing masters of the completed project on trust in the National Film Archive and not remove them without the Commission’s Agreement.”

W hile the Experim ental Film and Television Fund was under the administra­ tion of the Australian Film Institute, negatives of some of the completed projects were deposited at the Vincent Library. These can now be transferred to the National Film Archive for storage if the filmmaker, in con­ sultation with the AFI, so wishes. We are willing to pay the freight to Canberra.

A special staff team has finished the accessioning of the Cinesound/Movietone newsreels 1930-1950, copied from nitrate onto acetate stock. It is now tackling the backlog of 90,000 overseas stills to be filed and made accessible to the public.

Australian films that have been put on deposit are: Demonstrator (1971) dir: W a rw ic k F reem a n; The G re a te s t Advertising Campaign This Country Has Ever Know n (1975), Sydney Media Collective; Brake Fluid (1970) dir: Brian Davies; Nothing Like Experience (1970) dir: Peter Carmody.

The Danish Filmmuseum in Copenhagen has donated another 3000 stills from European and American films.

good quality masters, with added music/ effects tracks.

Several individual titles of note have also been added to the study collection: Peter Tammer's Flux, Will Hindle’s Watersmith and the Halas and Batchelor animated classic, Animal Farm. The Brian Adams/ Graham Shirley ABC production Sunshine and Shadows is the newest compilation film about Australian film history. Additional prints of Peter Watkin’s The War Game and the Valentino classic, Son of the Sheik, have also been added to the collection.

The first edition of the Library’s Film Study Catalogue is at press. Copies are available at the Sales and Subscription Unit, National Library of Australia, Canberra; or telephone the Film Study Officer (062) 62 1494.

APPLIED MEDIA STUDIES Applied Media Studies, as part of the Victorian Education Department’s Audio Visual Education Centre, serves as a creative production and resource centre on the education and application of the mass media, particularly film, television and photo­ graphy. As such, AMS has set up extensive links with the film and television industry and government bodies (eg. Victorian Film Corp­ o ra tio n , A u s tra lia n B ro a d c a s tin g Commission, Australian Film and Television School).

Some of the activities for 1978 include: (i) At the moment, AMS is putting together a series of slide sets which show the different functions in putting a tele­ vision production to air, based on Channel 9’s Hey, Hey it’s Saturday, with Darryl and Ossie Ostrich. These sets will be available from AVEC early this year and are intended for use by primary teachers in junior grades. (ii) From responses gained from the

r

R M T -F M T T a lk in g P ictu res” Interviews, critical analyses, discussions of film theory.

Current focus is on the non­ mainstream cinema.

NATIONAL LIBRARY OF AUSTRALIA Film Study Collection New acquisitions for the Film Study collection include groups of films by three important filmmakers. A range of short and longer films by Stan and Jane Brakhage include Blue Moses, The Shores of Phos: A Fable, Reflections on Black, Flesh of Morning, Deus Ex, Eyes, The Riddle of Lumen. And from Arthur and Corinne Cantrill, Simple Observations of a Solar Eclipse, The Boiling Jug Film and Near Coober Pedy.

From Time-Life, a series of nine Harold Lloyd programs have been acquired. These generally consist of a feature and a short or feature excerpt. Four examples are Grandma’s Boy, The Freshman, Girl Shy and Safely Last. These are new prints from

Student Film Festival held at the Longford Cinema, South Yarra, from November 2 to 4 — more than 70 films were shown with almost 1000 teachers and students in attendance — it appears that there is a need for a continuation of this Festival on an annual or biannual basis. Those interested in more information should contact the convenor, Peter Westfield, at AMS. (iii) Barbara Boyd’s How to Make a Film, a film studies kit for teachers and students at form 2, 3, and 4 levels, should be available from AVEC centres in early 1978. (iv) The “ Student Prints” photographic 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. (v) Three two-week in-service education courses on “ Basic Media Production” will be held this year at Horsham (Term 1) C a rlto n (Term 2) and Gippsland (Term 3). These intensive re s id e n tia l co u rse s have been organized by AMS to introduce media studies to selected teachers in the areas of filmmaking, film studies, p h o to g ra p h y, media and vid eo production. (vi) The Making of In Search of Anna, a d o c u m e n ta ry on fe a tu re film production, directed by Bob Francis from the AVEC Film Unit, is now at the release print stage.

For those in the industry with an interest in educational media, or teachers in the schools interested in using media equipment or even initiating a media studies program, AMS is the resource body to contact for advice and assistance.

Audio Visual Education Centre, 234 Queensberry St., Carlton, Vic. 3053 Phone: 347 3833 Ext. 139

Hosted by Tom Ryan, Nadya Anderson, Sam Rohdie and Jack Clancy.

Tuesdays at 7.00 PM on

FM Band 102.7 L

A

FILM PERIODICALS

Film Periodicals

Continuedfrom P. 239 There was Lindsay A nderson (whose experience at Cheltenham and Oxford was to contribute to the biographical elements in If . . .), Karel Reisz (We Are the Lambeth Boys; Saturday Night and Sunday Morning), Gavin Lambert (scripts for Bitter Victory, Inside Daisy Clover, etc), Peter Ericsson and Penelope Houston.

Sequence com bined scholarship with enthusiasm for the cinema. None of the contributors or editors were paid for their work, but this gave them a liberating independence and a chance to be outspoken when necessary.

Commercial producers must have been surprised to read of their latest production as having “ flat indifferent photography and direction, mediocre acting, flyblown settings, dialogue smug and stagey” , but in general the Sequence team was c o n stru c tiv e and perceptive. The French cinema in particular elicited some of the best writing (George Morrison on the French avant-garde; Gavin Lambert on Carne and Clair), but the journal did not limit itself in this respect.

'One finds a wide range of articles on both American and European cinema, as well as studies of the contributions of cameramen (eg., Gregg T oland), interview s with producers and directors (“ Goldwyn at Claridges” ; “ Bresson on Location” ), and current film and book reviews.

Despite a continued rise in circulation (from 600 in 1947 to 4000 in 1952), Sequence could not cope with the increasing costs of paper, printing, postage and blockmaking; being a specialist journal it could not hope for a further increase in circulation. It ceased publication with the New Year number for 1952. Gavin Lambert and Penelope Houston became editors of Sight and Sound, and Lindsay Anderson contributed to it.

If Sequence fa ile d b e c a u se of its specialization, the success of Continental Film Review (cir: 55,000) probably stems from its unusual blend of image and text to attract a wide public.

At first sight, Continental Film Review appears to have more in common with the girlie magazine than with the serious film journal. The lavish illustrations are often taken from films with titles such as The Fruit is Ripe, Burnt by Scalding Passion and Mondo America, and many of them have a sex education and voyeuristic flavor designed to appeal to the unsophisticated male.

The accompanying text has a wider appeal. It has information on European films and film personalities not obtainable elsewhere.

Continental Film Review, for example, has carried reviews of Mauro Bolognini’s Bubu, Michael Cacoyanni’s The Trojan Women and Louis Bertuccelli’s Paulina 1800, has reported on lesser-known European actresses (eg., “ Bulle Ogier’s Cinema” ), and has even analyzed the economic problems of the Japanese film industry. Even Picnic At Hanging Rock had an extensive review in the journal.

In October 1954, two new film journals appeared simultaneously. They were Film, journal of the British Federation of Film S o c ie tie s, and Films and Filming, an independent film magazine.

In a letter of greetings to Film, Sir Michael Balcon said the number of existing film journals in Britain that they were “ intelligent in content and literate in style” was far too

small, and Paul R otha, then head of Documentary TV for the BBC, welcomed “ an independent forum for theory and criticism, which will steer clear from cliques and cults” .

The idea of Film was that the audience who attended the film societies’ screenings should be given a chance to “ find its own voice” , and considering that the Federation represented more than 100 different societies, there was a variety of voices to be heard.

The early articles are enthusiastic, but generally amateurish. By the beginning of 1960, however, the situation had changed.

Peter Armitage was the editor, and the contri­ butions for the next decade included important articles by Richard Roud (Hiroshima mon amour); Ian Cameron on Franju’s Les yeux sans visage; and Peter Armitage on Visconti’s Rocco. The new journal, which featured excellent visual material, also ran interviews with directors and actors, and had a wide coverage of the goings-on in international film societies, including those in Australia.

When Films and Filming first appeared as a companion to Dance and Dancers, Music and Musicians and Plays and Players, which were illustrated, biographical monthlies put out by Hansom Books, London, and available from newsagents, it had a predictable form. Its main characteristic was a desire to provide some­ thing for everyone.

The first number, which featured Marlon Brando and Eva Marie Saint on the cover, included stu d ies of a star (B rando); personality-of-the-m onth John H uston; “ designer of dreams” Loudon Sainthill; a report on the song and dance season at the National Film Theatre; notes by John Grierson on the making of Man of Africa; pages of stills on the film of the month (On the Waterfront), and a revival (Modern Times); and a number of articles, including Roger Manvell on “ The Battle of the Systems” (Cineram a, Cinemascope, V istavision), reports from overseas, book reviews, etc.

The richness of subject matter gave a colorful, kaleidoscopic view of the film scene.

Today, Films and Filming continues to supply a w ell-arran g ed array of visuals which accompany and illustrate festival reports and genre articles (eg. “ cult movies” ) and the review section is well-organized in a manner somewhere between the shorter entries of Monthly Film Bulletin and the lengthier studies in Sight and Sound.

The criticisms are useful blends of informa­ tion and evaluation by well-known critics — Gordon Gow, Margaret Tarratt, Julian Fox, Alexander Stuart and Derek Elley.

One of the most influential film magazines to appear in the early 1960s was Movie, designed and produced by Ian Cameron, and including such notable contributors as V. F. Perkins (whose published works include the Penguin paperback Film as Film), Paul Mayersberg and Mark Shivas.

Movie had a very sensible review policy — each film was reviewed by the.writer who liked it most. This tended to make the reviews non­ destructive, sympathetic and appreciative. But the Movie team was not neutral in its approach.

The team’s targets were “ Lindgren, Rotha, Manvell and Co.” , who were regarded as placing too much emphasis on editing and cinematic ‘effects’ rather than on the image itself. The team’s members also saw valuejudgement as an individual choice, rather than as an authoritarian delivered opinion.

In an article (“ Movie Differences” , No. 6, 1963), Ian Cameron said: “ We try to explain what we see in a film in order that a reader may

measure that against his own experience of a film, and make his own judgment, rather than providing him with a ready-made judgment.”

As a specialist magazine with almost no advertisements, Movie had problems of survival, but today it seems to be flourishing, and recent numbers have dealt with such diverse areas as American television films, Feminism and The Musical, and discussed directors such as Claude Chabrol, Robert A ltm an , R ichard F le isc h e r, B ernardo Bertolucci and Robert Aldrich.

Screen, published in Britain in 1969, was an educational journal, not as professional in tone as University Vision, which appeared the previous year, and not as school-teacherish as Screen Education, which had started in 1959 as a service to schools.

Like University Vision, whose aim was “ to encourage historians to make more use of film for research and teaching purposes” (and which later was to carry Robin Wood’s fascinating and informative article, “ Film Studies at Warwick” ), the early numbers of Screen had a breadth and seriousness of purpose that made them essential reading for anyone interested in film education.

The debate in the Autumn 1971 number (“ Crisis in Film Education: The BFI and Film E ducation” / “ Experim ent at T yneside” / “ Film in the University” / “ The Wood-Loveli Debate” ) seems particularly relevant to Australian educational conditions today.

By 1971, however, Screen was beginning to take a new tack in the direction of Marxist ideology and theoretical analysis. Its budget was slashed and an editorial complained: “ There is a distinct irony in Screen declaring its intention to develop a politics of film and of education, to devote itself to theory and criticism, only to find its budget cut by the British Film Institute from 6000 pounds to 500 pounds . . . ” The ostensible reason for the cut was that Screen had become .too “ theoretic and academic” , but it had also taken a violent lurch to the left, in a similar manner to many of the French filpa magazines following the political upheavals of May 1968.

The magazine, however, was not deterred by the financial cut. Soon, a special double issue was tackling “ Cinema Semiotics and the Work of Christian Metz” . This was followed by an issue devoted to “ Brecht and Cinema/Film and Politics” . Today, semiotics, psycho­ analysis and historical materialism appear to be the primary concerns of this educational journal.

A linguistic approach to the structure of cinema was also taken by Afterimage, a journal which appeared in April 1970, superseding the Essex University magazine, Platinum.

Afterimage committed itself to “ the develop­ ment and critical examination of independent and avant-garde filmmaking” . Early issues included Godard texts, The New French Cinema, and Structural Film, but recently there have been some discussions of the early pioneers as well. Noel Burch and George Dana made this comment on Wiene’s masterpiece: “ The fact that The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari (1919), the first film to devolve fully and deliberately upon the deconstruction of the then barely instituted codes of transparence and the illusion of continuity, had to resort to the ‘anti-codes’ of theatrical expressionism — already largely ‘co-opted’ and ideologically loaded with cosmogonic idealism — does not in any way detract from the radical nature of the break brought about by this film.”

Concluded on P. 283 Cinema Papers, January — 279

Switar 10mm /1.6

Macro-Switar 26mm f l . l

t

Whether to fit the 400 foot magazine.

And what lens to use. The Boiex H16 is a complete filming system offering the ultimate in precision, yet as rugged as a tank. Profession­ als in all fields, from documentary work to research, recognise it as a basic tool for prod­ ucing clear, properly exposed film. The top quality optical system is only one o f the reasons for its supremacy. Ancillary equipment can be tailored exactly to your requirements — you don’t waste m oney on gear you don’t need. The motor is electronically regulated. Use film speeds o f 10,18, 24, 25 or 50 fps. (24 and 25 fps are stabilised to sync pulse standards.) Reflex viewfinder. Magnification in the eyepiece is 14 x so you can see what you’re doing. When you’ve decided about the magazine, all you have to argue about is your choice o f those superb optics. If you want something more to argue about, take a look at the Boiex RX5, or the Boiex SBM, our spring m otor models.

m

Macro-Switar 75mm/1.9

( s ä * Macro-Yvar 150mm /3.3

»

s

Vario-Switar Compact 17-85 mm A5

Vario-Switar 100 POE 16-100mm f2 multi-coated

Lens above has built-in meter, controlling aperture.

ff Vario-Switar 12.5-100mm 'y 2 multicoated

Angenieux 10xl2C 12-120mm fl.2 For colour brochures, write to Photimport (Aust) Pty Ltd, 69 Nicholson Street, East Brunswick 3057

DEPEND ON IT

IT'S FROM PH0TIMP0RT

SopelemJ Pän-Cinor V, 17-85 mm f3.8

PB09931P

Professionals only argue about tw o things on the fi j Boiex H16 EBM.

THE BROTHERS TAVIANI

possibilities.

Our first e n c o u n te r with spectacle was through music. If we are the sons of Rossellini, then we are also the heirs of Verdi.

The Brothers Taviani

Continuedfrom P. 228 It was in his turning to the science of communication that we found an affinity with our own lives. We chose cinema — also an instrument of communication — as our way of life. Then we read the autobiography he wrote and while it confirmed many of our original impressions, at the same time it forced us to reject things that we felt did not belong to us personally.

The book proceeds in a very linear fashion. We work through oppositions. And we made other changes: Gavino ends the book with him self on the Italian continent. We felt that as we had met Gavino in his own house we should show him at the end of the film in this context.

The implication is that although he has made a massive effort, the struggle continues. The end also says something about the solitude of the man who is neither shepherd nor intellectual.

In the book the relationship between Gavino and his father is one of all-encompassing hate. But as we talked to people in Sardinia about him we came to feel great pity for his character. It is not accidental that we made this film after the death of our own father.

Gavino’s father imagines he has power, but he has only its shadow.

He takes upon him self the attributes of the powerful, but he has only the gestures of authority not the substance. When Gavino explains his situation to him he has a m om ent of in tu itiv e comprehension, but he can only reject it. To do otherwise would mean the negation of his entire life, and that of his father and forefathers.

Very important to the film’s revelation of the mechanics of paternalism and its contradictions is the figure of Gavino’s mother. Her role is small but never peripheral . . .

She was barely present in the book, but we felt that she had to carry a certain burden of injustice and that this sense of injustice places her close to Gavino. Behind her unnaturally harsh laughter there lies a sense of a whole, unexpressed struggle.

What, I think, makes your film so effective and so unique is that it is simultaneously very spec­ i fi c: it is, after al l , the autobiographical experience of one man; and very general, as it documents the universal human experience of the gaining of language, and the political repercussions of this act within the family, and in relation to the power structures outside the family . . .

Compared with “Allonsanfan” , “ Padre Padrone” is visually very stark . . .

The mother (Marcella Michelangeli) dresses Gavino before sending him to the mountains.

We are delighted that people from places like Puerto Rico and Ghana identify strongly with the film, but equally pleased that those in quite different situations to Gavino’s find a rapport with it.

Their family structures may be different but their rapport with power is more or less the same, and Padre Padrone is power.

And language is central to this rapport . . .

It is man’s natural desire to communicate — and his right. But power works to separate one individual from another. Padre Padrone is about a victim who tries to break away and establish a d ia lo g u e w ith o th e r s , and language is fundamental to this struggle.

The central problem is that of silence. The patriarchy interposes silence between one individual and the next.

Your films tend to oscillate a r o u n d t h e p r o b l e m of isolation. . . .

In Saint M ichael Had A Rooster we tried to show how long a man can struggle against isolation, and that alone he is powerless against history. But this is not pessimistic.

It speaks of groups of people who are trying to change the world. While they are doing this, there are moments of anguish and crisis which must be plumbed to the root. Only then can they go forward.

A film is not pessimistic when it poses questions. Only when it gives pessimistic answers. The film we made just before Padre Padrone, for instance, could seem pessimistic if one looked only at the narrative; but one must take into account the film as a whole.

We see it as a force of energy.

One of the reasons we love cinema so much is that it can document as well as interpret

sociological data and extreme fantasy.

Going back to your previous point about the role of silence, one could say that sound, which frees Gavino (his liberation is initiated by the sound of the accordion played by the youth travelling down to the village) also liberates your cinema. I was t h i n k i n g of your us e of music . . .

We believe that cinema is the medium that should inherit music. Music should not just complement a scene, it should become the protagonist. And not just music but sound in general.

Padre Padrone is full of sound used in this way — the sound of wind in the oak trees, for instance; the musical motifs. And there is the sequence of the religious procession in which the music of the patriarchy wars with the German drinking song sung by the young men bearing the statue of the saint. The young men’s song representing the limited freedom offered by the prospects of emigration.

Originally we did a lot of medium shots and close-ups for this sequence, but then we realized that all that was needed was one long shot, and that the soundtrack could accomplish the rest.

Often, in fact, we have the music for a sequence before we have the script. For us the addition of music is the moment when our film becomes cinema.

You find it revolutionary, but it is something we have lived with all our lives.

Our first encounters with theatrical spectacle happened when we were ch ild ren in Tuscany. Our father would reward us for good behavior by taking us to a concert. For us, the red curtain hanging in front of the stage signalled the imminent r e v e la tio n o f b o u n d le s s

We wanted to give a precedence to greens, to the countryside. We shot on 16mm and blew it up to 35mm. The ‘technical defect’ in fact lent a necessary quality to the film.

In Allonsanfan we wanted to give a sense of nicety of historical reconstruction and also of the danger of the attraction of the particular bourgeois life we d escrib ed . We searched for beautiful colors into which the characters would melt, a very refined color so that the public would understand the danger, the treachery, betrayal involved in the retreat to the home.

On the evidence of “ Padre Padrone’’ the relationship between cinema and television in Italy is a highly creative one. . . .

For one year there have been reforms in television — reforms provoked by a long battle with the Left. It is a beginning. We believe that if there is a crisis in the cinema it is a crisis of commercial theatres, not a crisis of the audience. The public asks for more films; for more films to be shown on television. We make no distinction between television and cinema films.

Are you working on a new project?

We are thinking along certain lines, but we have not yet decided.

Normally we will write a hundred pages, then decide whether there is really a film in it or not. At the moment we are on page 20. ★ FILMOGRAPHY DOCUMENTARIES 1 954-9 San Miniato luglio ’44 (San Miniato, July ’44) Curtatone e Montanara Carlo Piscane Pittori in citta (Painters in the City) Moravia Lavoratori delia pietra (Stoneworkers) Car vunara Volterra, commune meridionale (Volterra, a Southern Town) 1 pazzi della domenica (Sunday Madmen) DOCUMENTARY IN COLLABORATION WITH JORIS IVENS L’Italia non e un paese povero (Italy is not a Poor Country) FEATURES 1962 Un uomo da bruciare (A Man Burning) 1964 I fuorilegge del m atrim onio (The Marriage Outlaws) 1967 I souversivi (The Subversives) 1969 Sotto il segno dello scorpione (Under the Sign of Scorpio) 1971 San Michele aveva un gallo (Saint Michael had a Rooster) 1974 Allonsanfan 1977 Padre Padrone (My Father, My Master)

Cinema Papers, January — 281

When it’s time to put scissors to your original negative...

It’s time to call \ .

Marilyn and Ron Delaney

922 3607 NEGATIVE CUTTING 200

SERVICES

ß'touMi Heit. 7$. S .*26. 2065

TKmUah rfOi-@o*ultfio4ted and

/4tt ffleaned ^rewàteà

film m akers........ a new name to remember

nnnc GRAHAm a iu r

service*

(my old name was adina film services) the sam e fast e ffic ie n t neg m atching at reasonable rates contact m e personally at

AAAE GRAHAffl P iim SERVICE! 28 shellcove road neutral bay nsw 20 89 telephone (02) 908.3011 (2 lines)

B tflC K C B O R n

EDWARD McQUEEN-MASON

PRODUCTIOn

"' '

Freelance Film Editor U Credits: : ' . ■ Picture Editing ^ ^ '

siudio of 3D animated films SP E C IA LIS E *

I

IN

i

STORK • ALVIN PURPLE ; •ALVIN RIDES AGAIN • END PLAY • ELIZA FRASER • HIGH ROLLING

|

• P A T R IC K

:.

A N IM A T I O N SPECIAL

A lF O

O f PUPPETS OP 0 8 1 EC TS;

EFFECTS, F I A T

A VAIA8LE

(02)

AN IM ATIO N

F 0 8 S H O PT S. A O U E P T I S I N C .

IN S T P U C T IO N A L

TELEP HO NE

A NO ( i l l

ANO

FE A T U P E

1*7-5667

OP

Anthony Scott’s LOVING MEMORY Great Britain W inner of the SILVER HUGO (Chicago) and the Vivian Leigh Award 1971. Loving Memory tells the story of a w eird couple living out of time in a setting which makes the whole m acabre business quite believable. As with One Of The Missing (Scott's previous film), the them e is death, som ething to be w elcom ed not feared.

Rosamund G reenwood’s perform ance strikes ju s t the right balance between sanity and lunacy.V W-P,

Monthly Film Bulletin

Andrzej Wajda’s THE WEDDING Poland Based on a classic Polish verse dram a inspired by the marriage of a poet and a peasant girl. "The most interesting and typically Polish film of the year, and perhaps W ajda’s b e s t. .. a grand film on Poland and the Poles, their history and social classes. Wajda, in this beautifully made film, has managed to convince the viewer that the play was w ritten not for the theatre at all but specially for the cinem a m edium.” — Ryszard Koniczek in International Film Guide 1973. English sub-titles.

Andrzej Wajda’s ASHES AND DIAMONDS Poland W ajda’s drama of a political assassination. Won the international Film Critics Prize, Venice Film Festival, 1959, and the Silver Bear, Berlin, 1962. “ . .. Ashes and Diamonds is justly venerated as an auteur piece, and indeed as one of the most notable film s to come out of Poland, it is the third and by far the best in director Andrzej W ajda’s trilogy about the Polish state of mind as it was conditioned in the years of the Nazi occupation.” Gordon Gow in Films & Filming. English sub-titles.

Alf Sjoberg’s MISS JULIE Sweden Long regarded as a classic of the Swedish Cinema. “ Miss Julie, w hich shared the top prize with Miracolo a Milano at the Cannes Film Festival in 1950, is an exciting experim ent in adaptation. W hile preserving nearly all the original dialogue of Strindberg's play (which in perform ance lasts only about 50 m inutes), it expands the action of the present with some ingeniously constructed flash backs into the p a s t. .. " G. L. Monthly Film Bulletin. English sub-titles.

Available from the V in cen t Library, 82 Cardigan Street, Carlton, Vic.

■, \ t '

Sound Editing

85-1222

FOUR O U TSTAN D IN G 16mm FILM S NOW AV A ILA B LE

•

'

F l l MS

40 Nicholson Street, Burwood NSW 2134.

. 'V

' 4

.

,

• PETERSEN• END PLAY • THE DEVIL'S PLAYGROUND

r v

PHONE MELBOURNE 690 2420 or 232 1378

EDGE NUMBERING .

• ‘ "Î SERVICE Printed onto Acetate or Polyester Base 35 OR 17.5 M AGNETIC STO CK SLATE and TAKE NUMBERS and SYNCHRONISING NUMBERS PRINTED

FOR QUOTATION PHONE (03) 690 2420

FILM PERIODICALS

■ J M

B

f ly

¡M b

ijl ■ %

I V

y

p ^ n i y GROUP

u

V

MOTION PICTURE EQUIPMENT SALES • RENTAL • SERVICE

If you shoot handheld, you need

Because with STEADICAM, Cinema Products’ revolution­ ary film /video camera stabilizing system, the handheld moving camera finally comes into its own — recording dolly-sm ooth, 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 re d u c in g p ro d u c tio n c o s ts .

105 Reserve Road, Artarmon Sydney, N .S.W . 2064 Telephone: 439-6955 Telex: 24482 AH correspondence: P.O. Box 199 Artarmon, N .S.W . 2064 Australia

Film Periodicals

Continuedfrom P. 279 This passage illustrates how film is being subjected to rigorous theoretical analysis, which, one hopes, will not destroy the delicate “ bloom on the rose” or reduce film criticism to a sterile academic discipline.

Focus on Film, which began in 1970, is one of the more important British contributions for Tthe historian of film as well as the average filmgoer. It is a mixture of painstaking scholarship, facts and figures, combined with detailed, readable analyses of individual films.

Focus on Film has an annoying longitudinal format, which makes it rest uncomfortably in the hand or on the shelf, but that is a minor fault. The reviews are not mere short synopses or exercises in fault-finding, bifi include analyses of characters and script construction, and each film is placed in its historical and social context. The articles dealing with genres (eg., Russian Cinema; American Comedy) are followed by comprehensive check-lists, books and articles, and lists of available scripts.

T his e x ten siv e factual m aterial is accompanied by a good selection of visuals.

Unfortunately, the plethora of stills frequently interferes with the page numbering, and makes access to articles a somewhat slow process.

Films Illustrated, “ one of the brightest film magazines in either Britain or the United States” (International Film Guide), first appeared in July 1971 dedicated to the “ optimistic and rather old-fashioned idea that films are fun” . Films Illustrated is, however, no simple fan magazine. It concentrates on

individual stars and directors (eg. “ Riding High with Warren Beatty” ; “ The Other Otto” ), but there are also reports from inter­ national festivals, reports on the studios, discussions of the censorship problem, and a commendable section, “ Background” , which analyses, evaluates and provides background material on current film releases. There is even a Movie Crossword.

Film Dope is more an encyclopaedia than a film journal. The paragraph-type entries are alphabetical, starting with George Abbott (No. 1, 1972) and arriving at Gordon Douglas in the latest number (June 1977). The entries concern not only directors, but include actors, scriptwriters and composers. Each entry contains a chronological list of their works or appearances. Each number of Film Dope also has a main article, generally a lengthy interview (eg. Daniel Boulanger in issue No. 4, March 1974).

i i i ■

The most theoretical of the newer film journals is Film Form, editorially assisted by film theorists Andrew Tudor and Peter Wollen. Here one finds articles studded with up-and-down arrows and Greek alphabetical sym bols ( ‘‘N orth by N o rth -W est: A Morphological Analysis” ); sociological studies (“ Ideology and Form: Chapayev and Soviet Socialist Realism” ); semiotic summaries (“ Metz’ Grande Syntagmatique: Summary and Critique” ), etc.

Warwick University’s undergraduate film journal, Framework, has so far published three issues. The journal originated from a desire to bring together a wide range of “ different and unco-ordinated” approaches to film and film criticism. There are interviews with Robin Wood (in the role of film teacher); a discussion of the theatre and the Shake­ spearean film; national cinema (“ The Cinema and Poland” ); interviews with younger directors. One can agree with one Framework In April 1971, the Brighton Film Review was writer’s expressed philosophy: “ What is re-named Monogram and given a new format, needed is a good deal more interplay between changing from non-illustrated stapled-together the different disciplines, in order that fuller lithographed sheets to a glossy, highly- understanding both of the actual film and of illustrated journal worthy of indexation by the film criticism in general may be reached. There International Federation of Film Archives is an increasing and correspondingly alarming (FIAF) Periodical Index Project. Monogram’s urge to specialise, and in specialisation carried editor is Thomas Elsaesser, and the journal to excess lies sterility.” includes highly theoretical articles (eg. “ Reflection and Reality: Narrative Cinema in Luckily, British journals give one a choice. the Concave Mirror” ); in-depth director There are the intellectual puzzles of the studies (Erm anno Olmi; Max O phuls); seminologists, the hard political lines of the scholarly reviews of individual films with an historical materialists, and at the other emphasis on filmic structure; interviews with extreme, the industrial fantasyland of trade lesser-known filmmakers such as Ruy Guerra journals such as Screen International, worthy (Os Cafajestes; The Gods Are Dead (1970); successor to such pioneers as The Optical Os Fuzis (1963); and lengthy book reviews.

Lantern and Kinematograph Journal. ★ Cinema Papers, January — 283

What the critics säy

LIG H TIN G FOR ENTERTAINM ENT

HIRE SALES & TECHNICAL SERVICE

‘Nowadays, no film-lover interested in what is going on in this country can afford to miss an issue.”

(ia n iro )

Colin Benno!' - - . r ’T Film Cr>!ic The Age January 22 ,

Q

“ A young, monster-format magazine that captivates with its wealth of articles, reviews, large illustrations, and depth of focus on issues like censorship and production, and that seems to be blossoming in rhyme with the hew Australian cinema.” \

t L

: c

u

a

r tz

- Edited by Peter Cow’ib

o

•

FRESNELS

•

SOFTLIGHTS

•

H.M.I. D A Y L I G H T

I kW

SPOTLIGHTS

to

2 kW

r

5 kW

575 W 1200 W

International Film Guide. 1977 •,

C

.

2500 W

CINEMA /JcM zeM CINEMA PAPERS, 143 Therry St. Melbourne 3000.

STRAND A DIVISION RANK

The Library is operated with assistance from the Australian Film Commission.

V

PTY. LTD.

% H EAD O F F I C E M ELBO UR NE

19 TRENT STREET BURW O O D VIC T O R IA 3125

Looking for information on a film? The George Lugg Library welcomes enquiries on local and overseas films. On receipt of search fee (one dollar for two enquiries) and S.A.E., synopsis and reviews will be supplied for each title, additional material on request.

All enquiries to: The George Lugg Library P.O. Box 357 Carlton South Vic. 3053

OF

INDUSTRIES

AUSTRALIA

FILM REVIEW INFORMATION SERVICE

ELECTRIC

SYDNEY

A R EA

SALES

29 37 24

H IR E

29 2213

SALES

439 7508

HIRE

439 1962

REPRESENTATIVES B R IS B A N E

262 4622

A D E LA ID E

337 7000

LAU NCESTO N

2 5322

PERTH

28 16 08

CENSORSHIP LISTINGS

Censorship Listings Continued from P. 235

AUGUST 1977

FILMS REGISTERED WITHOUT ELIMINATIONS For General Exhibition (G) Aavishkar: Not shown, India (3978.00 m) B an aat E l-Yoom (1 6m m ): Not show n, Egypt (1310.00 m) Duaa E l-Karaw aan (16mm): Not shown, Egypt (11 27.00 m) Games o f the XXI Olympiad (16mm): National Film Board of Canada, Canada (1 261.00 m) II Maestro Di Vlolino: Coralta Cinematrografica, Italy (2748.00 m) K w ong See Wong (16mm): Not shown, China (1100.00 m) The Legend of Purple Hairpin: Golden Phoenix Films Co., Hong Kong (3357.00 m) The L ittle st Horse Thieves: Walt Disney Prod., U K. (2907.58 m) Lupo Goes to New York: M. Golan/Y. Globus, Israel (2304.00 m) Miuchai Wong Jen Tang (16mm): Not shown, China (1100.00 m) Mouaid Garaam (16mm): Barakaat, Egypt (1129.00 m) O ff the Edge: M. Firth, New Zealand (2057.00 m) Saiyok (16mm): Not shown, China (1100.00 m) Seven Alone: Doty-Dayton Prod., U.S. (2643.00 m) Tai P ing Tin Kol (16m m ): Not shown, China (1100.00 m)

FILMS REGISTERED WITHOUT ELIMINATIONS Not Recommended for Children (NRC) Applause (a): Paramount/M. Bell, U.S. (2195.00 m) Ashes and Diamonds (16mm): Film Polskl, Poland (1139.00 m) Echoes o f a Summer (Italian version) (b): R. L Joseph, U.S. (2725.50 m) Emperor Takes a Holiday (16mm): Great Wall Movie Ent., China (1338.00 m) Greased Lightning: H. Weinstein, U.S. (2578.42 m) Halfon Hill Doesn’t Answer: N. Alter/I. Shani, Israel (2523.00 m) J u d o S a g a : Toho In te rn a tio n a l Coy., Japan (2226.00 ml Jump: Cannon Production, U.S. (2660.00 m) Khamushi: H. Kumar, India (3841.00 m) King Kong (Italian version) (c): D. De Laurentls, U.S. (3677.09 m) L A rbitro (The Referee): A. Pane, Italy (3196.00 m) The L ast D inosaur: A. Rankln/J. Bass, Japan (2825.00 m) L e il Wa R aghba (16m m ): Not show n, Egypt (1083.00 m) New York, New York (reduced version) (d): R. Chartoff/I. Winkler, U.S. (3763.00 m) Oh God J. Weintraub, U.S. (2771.00 m) Rocky (Italian version) (e): R. Chartoff/I. Winkler, U.S. (3269.90 m) The Savage Bees: B. Geller, U.S. (2448.30 m) The Spiritual Boxer: Shaw Brothers, Hong Kong (3037.00 m) Tarzan and the Brown Prince C.l.T.A. Films/lnterLagar Films, Spain/ltaly (2466.00 m) (a) Previously submitted in 1930 and rejected. (b) Previously listed In Film Censorship Bulletin No. 4/ 76. _ (c) Previously listed in Rim Censorship Bulletin No. 1 2/76. (d) Previously listed in Film Censorship Bulletin No. 7/ 77. (e) Previously listed in Film Censorship No. 1/77.

FILMS REGISTERED WITHOUT ELIMINATIONS For Mature Audiences (M) Blue Country: J. Tacchella, France (2967.00 m) A Bridge Too Far (reduced version) (a): J. and R. Levine, U.K. (4518.62 m) The Coup De Grace: E. Junkersdorf, W. Germany (2661.00 m) The Dragon Lives Again: Goldig Films, Hong Kong (2963.00 m) Dulscy (The D ulskis): Polish Corp. for Film Prod., Poland (2413.00 m) For A Few Dollars More (Italian version) (b): A. Grimaldi, Italy (3617.00 m) Lipho Ceme (Black Seed): Vardar Film, Yugoslavia (2390.00 m) The lllia c Passion (16mm): G. Markopoulos, U.S. (1151.00 m) Jonas — Who Will Be 25 in the Year 2 00 0 : A. Tanner, Switzerland (3127.00 m) Olum Cemberi: Acar Film Studios, Turkey (1 906.90 m) One Man: National Film Board of Canada, Canada (2442.00 m) Ten Brothers of Shaolin: Great China Film Co., Hong Kong (2568.00 m) Yatik Emine: Baysal Films, Turkey (2450.00 m) Z a n a m i F a m ily : M. G o la n /Y . G lob b s, Israel (2411.00 m) (a) Previously listed in Film Censorship Bulletin No. 7 / 77. (b) Previously listed in Film Censorship Bulletin No. 3 / .. 76.

FILMS REGISTERED WITHOUT ELIMINATIONS For Restricted Exhibition (R) Adventures of A Private Eye: Salon Productions, U.K. (2700.00 m) B lack On White (a): J. Donner, Finland (2605.00 m) C oonskin ( 16 mm): A. Ruddy, U.S. (914.00 m) Exorcist II: The Heretic (short version): R. Lederer/J. Boorman, U.S. (2743.00 m) A Fistful o f Dollars (Italian version) (b): H. Colombo/G. Papi, Italy (2683.00 m) .

The Good, The Bad and The Ugly (Italian version) (c): A. Grimaldi, Italy (4433.60 m) Jumping Ash: J. Yip, Hong Kong (2496.00 m)

Le Frisson Des Vampires: Films Modernes/ABC, France (2669.20 m) The Other Side of Midnight: F. Yablans, U.S. (4552.00 m) Servante Et Maitresse: G. De Goldschmidt/Madeleine Films, France (2468.00 m) This Is America: R. Vanderbes, U.S. (2907.00 m) Toilette: Not shown. W. Germany (2195.00 m) Un Chant D’Amour (16mm): J. Genet, France (240.00 m) (a) Previously listed in Film Censorship Bulletins Nos. 6/71 and 6/72. (b) Previously listed In Film Censorship Bulletin No. 4/ 76. (c) Previously listed in Film Censorship Bulletin No. 2/ 76.

FILMS REGISTERED WITHOUT ELIMINATIONS Special Conditions (For show ing not more than tw ice at Sydney a n d /o r M e lb o u rn e /A d e la id e /B ris b a n e /P e rth Film Festival and then re-exported.)

The Eyes: L. Peries, Sri Lanka (2468.70 m) (That the film be shown only to its members by the National Film Theatre of Australia.) .

Irene Irene: Italnoleggio, Italy (3072.00 m)

FILMS REGISTERED WITH ELIMINATIONS For Restricted Exhibition (R) Beach Blanket Bango: D. Christian, U.S. (2194.00 m) Eliminations: 27.9 m (1 min. 1 sec.)

Reason: Indecency

FILMS REFUSED REGISTRATION Climax of Blue Power: F. Perl, U.S. (1954.00 m) Reason: Indecency Dans L’Empire Des Sens (In The Realm of the Senses): Argos Film/Oshima Prods/Anatole Dauman, Japan (2946.90 m) Reason:Indecency Fantasm Comes Again: A. Ginnane, U.S./Australia (2682.60 m) Reason: Indecency Poor C ecily: Phoenix In ternational Films, U.S. (2349.00 m) Reason: Indecency and indecent violence.

This Violent World: A. Climati/M. Morra, Italy (2653.60 m) ' Reason: Indecent violence.

Through The Looking Glass: J. Middleton, U.S. (2252.60 m) Reason: Indecency

FILMS BOARD OF REVIEW FILMS APPROVED FOR REGISTRATION AFTER REVIEW Nil FILMS NOT APPROVED FOR REGISTRATION AFTER REVIEW The Bite (a): 808 Pictures, U.S. (1684.30 m) Decision Reviewed: Appeal against Rejection by the Film Censorship Board.

Decision of the Board: Uphold the decision of the Film Censorship Board.

Weekend Girls (b): R. Bretwick/P. Balachoff, U.S. (2212.90 m) Decision Reviewed: Appeal against Rejection by the Film Censorship Board.

Decision of the Board: Uphold the decision of the Film Censorship Board.

A Touch of Genie (c): J. Russell, U.S. (1 739.00 m) Decision Reviewed: Appeal against Rejection by the Film Censorship Board.

Decision of the Board: Uphold the decision of the Film Censorship Board. (a) Previously listed in Film Censorship Bulletin No. 7/ 77. (b) Previously listed in Film Censorship Bulletin No. 7/

77-

.

(c) Previously listed In Film Censorship Bulletin No. 7/ 77.

The Last Remake of Beau Geste: W. Gilmore, U.S. (2250.00 m) A Long Returning: M, Perez, Spain (2797.86 m) Money Crazy: Golden Harvest Film Co., Hong Kong (2578.00 m) Necromancy: B. Gordon, U.S. (2394.51 m) The Next Man: M. Bregman, U.S. (2550.00 m) The Pack: F. Weintraub P. Heller, U.S. (2743.00 m) Pardon Mon Affaire: Gaumont, France (2880.00 m) The Secret Rivals Part 2: Seasonal Film (HK) Corp., Hong Kong (2386.00 m) Summerfield: Clare Beach Films P/L, Australia (2605.00 m) Two Assassins of the Darkness: Great China Film Co., Hong Kong (2496.00 m) The Uncanny: Heroux/Dupont/Sabotsky, U.K./Canada (2386.00 m) A Woman at Her Window: Albina/Rizzoli/Cinema 77, France (2935.01 m)

FILMS REGISTERED WITHOUT ELIMINATIONS For Restricted Exhibition (R) Because of the Cats: F. Rademakers, Netherlands (2579.00 m) Blackmail: P.M.R., Italy (2249.00 m) B lu e -B e lle : H. Tow ers, U .K ./H ong K o n g /lta ly (2386.00 m) Delinquent Schoolgirls: M. Smith, U.S. (2386.40 m) Emanuelle and Françoise: Matra Cinematográfica, Italy (2688.00 m) Five Shaolin Masters: Shaw Brothers, Hong Kong (3269.00 m) The Fruit is Ripe: Lisa Film, West Germ any (2550.00 m) Grand Theft Auto: J. Davison, U.S. (2293.69 m) ' The Happy Hooker Goes to Washington: W. Levey, U.S. (2352.00 m) Jet Sex: C o n tin en ta l/C in e Int., West Germany (2523.00 m) Mandinga: Not shown, Italy (2496.00 m) Massacre at Central High: Stacey Productions, U.S. (2358.98 m) 69 Minutes: I. Morrison, U.S. (2057.00m) A Tough Rooster Doesn’t Get Fat: Cine International, West Germany (2139.00 m) The Van: P. Lewis, U.S. (2440.70 m) What’s Up, Nurse?: M. Green, U.K. (2358.00 m) Who Mislaid My Wife: Fida Cinematografics, Italy (2907.00 m)

FILMS REGISTERED WITH ELIMINATIONS For Restricted Exhibition (R) He and She (reconstructed version) (a): New World Studios, U.S. (1371.00 m) Eliminations: 1.6 m (3 seconds) Reason: Indecency (a) Previously listed in Film Censorship Bulletin No 7/77.

FILMS REGISTERED WITH ELIMINATIONS Films Refused Registration Confessions of a Young American Housewife: Sarno/Vaga/Rumberger, U.S. (2260.00 m) Reason: Indecency Deep Love (reconstructed version) (a): S. Bostan, U.S. (1945.00 m) Reason: Indecency Garden of Torments: Stephan Fiims/Alexia Films, France (2459.50 m) Reason: Indecent violence.

Northville Cemetery Massacre: W. Dear/T. Dyke, U.S. (2258.80 m) Reason: Indecent violence S.S. Experiment Love Camp: S.E.F.I. Cinematográfica, Italy (2576.90 m) Reasons: Indecency and indecent violence (a) Previously listed In Film Censorship Bulletin No. 4/77. .

FILMS BOARD OF REVIEW Films Approved for Registration after Review Nil

FILMS NOT APPROVED FOR REGISTRATION AFTER REVIEW

SEPTEMBER 1977

FILMS REGISTERED WITHOUT ELIMINATIONS For General Exhibition (G) A Star is Lost (16mm): National Film Board of Canada, Canada (822.00 m) Fataa Ahlaml (16mm): H. Raflh, Egypt (1341.00 m) Hekayet Hob (16mm): H. Halim, Egypt (1737.00 m) S h a rih E l-H o b (16mm): A. E l-Foukaar, Egypt (1676.00 m)

FILMS REGISTERED WITHOUT ELIMINATIONS Not Recommended for Children (NRC) Ben: M. Briskin, U.S. (2605.85 m) Cross C ountry Wreckers (a): F. Weintraub P. Heller, U.S. (2605.00 m) Joshila: T. Rai, Fiji/lndia (3841.00 m) La Tosca: Not shown, Italy (3100.00 m) M e rrily We Go To Hell (b): Param ount, U.S. (2277.00 m) _ Mohammad Messenger of God: Filmco Int. Prod. U.S. (4828.00 m) , , Operation Thunderbolt: M. Golan, Israel (3511.00 m) Zappatore: R. Amoroso, Italy (2288.50 m) Zeenat: M. Shamsi, India (4266.00 m) (a) Previously listed as Crash in Film Censorship Bulletin No. 11/76. (b) Previously registered in 1932.

FILMS REGISTERED WITHOUT ELIMINATIONS For Mature Audiences (M) Bobby Deerfield: S. Pollack, U.S. (3347.00 m) The Devil’s Rain: J. Cullen & M. Glick, U.S. (2329.00 m) The Devil Strikes: D. Wing, Hong Kong (2304.00 m) Edvard Munch: U. Fjoran, Norway (4608.24 m) Inside Looking Out: P. Cox, Australia (2468.00 m) The Island o f Dr Moreau: J. Temple-Smith & S. Steloff, U.S. (2770.00 m)

Dans L’Empire Des Sens (In the Realm of the Senses) (a): Argos Film/Oshima Prods/Anatole Dauman, Japan (2946.90 m) Decision Reviewed: Appeal against Rejection by the Film Censorship Board.

Decision of the Board: Uphold the decision of the Film Censorship Board, (a) Previously listed in Film Censorship Bulletin No. 8/77.

OCTOBER 1977

FILMS REGISTERED WITHOUT ELIMINATIONS Not Recommended for Children (NRC) Anamika: T. Hussain, India (31 40.00 m) Are You Being Served?: E.M.I., U.K. (2666.00 m) Confused Love: W. C. Hon, Hong Kong (2496.13 m) Death Flight: R. Roth, U.S. (2496.10 m) Devil’s Wanton (16mm): L. Marm stedt/Terrafilm , Sweden (932.00 m) Heart of Glass (16mm): W. Herzog, West Germany (1020.00 m)

La Cosa Buffa: G. Bertolucci, Italy (3087.00 m) MacArthur: Zanuck/Brown, U.S. (3456.10 m) Night is My Future (16mm): L. Marmstedt/Terrafilm, Sweden (822.00 m) Rush It: Just Spokes Prods, U.S. (2251.25 m) The Silver Bears: A. Sellers/A. W initsky, U.K. (3155.00 m) Winners II: J. Rautenbach/E. Nofal, Sth. Africa (2639.80 m) '

FILMS REGISTERED WITHOUT ELIMINATIONS For Mature Audiences (M) Agostino: (a), Baltea Film, Italy (2386.00 m) Anima Persa (Twin Souls): P. Angelletti, Italy (2825.30 m) The Duellists: D. Puttnam, U.K. (2755.00 m) La Premiere Fois (The First Time): Lira Film/Remm, France (2221.83 m) The Magic Blade: Shaw Bros, Hong Kong (2798.00 m) Million Dollars Snatch: Dak Lee Moving Picture Co., Hong Kong (2551.00 m) No. 1 of the Secret Service: L. Shonteff Prod., U.K. (2497.00 m) Off the Wall: J. Gregory/Oz Assoc., U.S. (932,00 m) On Probation: P. Ming, Hong Kong (2710.00 m) Orca: L. Vincenzano, U.S./ltaly (2633.00 m) A Special Day (English dubbed): C. Ponti, Italy (2884.50 m) ' A Special Day (sub-titled): C. Ponti, Italy (2884.50 m) Tunnelvision: J. Roth, U.S. (1837.00 m) Valentino: R. Chartoff/I. Winkler, U.K. (3493.00 m) Why Rock the Boat (16mm): Nat. Film Board of Canada, Canada (1 218.00 m) (a) Previously listed in Film Censorship Bulletin No. 7 /7 7

FILMS REGISTERED WITHOUT ELIMINATIONS For Restricted Exhibition (R) Amour = 2 + 1: M. Urbane, France (2276.00 m) Blue Ecstasy (reconstructed): (a), F. Leroi, France (1645.00 m) Bracula, The Terror of the Living Dead: Not shown, Spain/ltaly (2633.00 m) Casanova and Company: F. Antel/C. Szokoll, Italy/ Austria (2715.00 m) Crazy Bed (Le Plumard En Folie): Europrodis S.A., France (2221.00 m) Girls Who’ll Do Anything: Not shown, U.S. (2277.00 m) La Bete (reconstructed): (b), A. Dauman, France (2701.70 m) The Liberated Woman: R. Chinn, U.S. (1 865.00 m) Naughty Schoolgirls: J. Wheeler, U.S. (2301.00 m) The Nurse: C. Ponti, Italy (2852.00 m) The Pleasure Game: J. Feury, U.S. (2204.00 m) The Swinging Coeds (Madchen. Die Nach München Kom m en): H. Veit/W . Hartwig, West Germ any (2085.00 m) Teenage Hitchhikers: J. Kaufmann, U.S. (1920.00 m) Through the Looking Glass (reconstructed): (c), J. Middleton, U.S. (2085.00 m) Utamaro's World: K. Kuzui, Japan (3079.00 m) (a) Previously listed in Film Censorship Bulletin No. 5/77. (b) Previously listed in Film Censorship Bulletins Nos. 11/76 and 7/77.

• (c) Previously listed in Film Censorship Bulletin No. 8/77.

FILMS REGISTERED WITH ELIMINATIONS For Restricted Exhibition (R) All About Sex of All Nations (reconstructed): (a), Institute of Int'l Research on Sexual Behaviour, U.S. (1947.00 mlEliminations: 11.5 m (25 seconds).

Reason: Indecency.

Highschool Fantasies: D. Christian, U.S. (1837.00 m) Eliminations: 38 m (1 minute 23 seconds).

Reason: Indecency, Naked Came the Stranger (reconstructed): (b), L. Sultana, U.S. (1923.20 m) Eliminations: 6.5 m (14 seconds).

Reason: Indecency. ^ A Touch of S w e d e n 'tre c o n s tru c te d ): C ricke t Productions, U.S. (2002.00 m) Eliminations: 15.3 m (34 seconds).

Reason: Indecency. (a) Previously listed in Film Censorship Bulletins Nos. 2/75 and 5/77. (b) Previously listed in Film Censorship Bulletin No. 10/76.

FILMS REFUSED REGISTRATION FILMS REGISTERED WITHOUT ELIMINATIONS For General Exhibition (G) Beauty and The Beast: Palm Films Prod., U.S. (2586.50 m) Ben Gurion Remembers: Hesera Kay Israel Film, Israel (2441.00 m) ' Devices and Desires or the Diary of the Rev. Giles Moulton (16mm): G. Foster, U.K. (581.00 m) The Edge: R. Brown/B. Corbett, U.S. (2633.00 m) For the Love of Benji: B. Vaughan, U.S./Greece (2362.80 m) Funny People: J. Uys, Sth. Africa (2606.00 m) Gizmo: H. Smith, U.S. (2057.00 m) Glitterball: M. Forstater Prods., U.K. (1563.00 m) Koshish: N. Sippy, India (3429.00 m) The Man Who Skied down Everest: B. Crawley, Canada (2740.00 m) Night Ferry: E. Barnes Prods., U.K. (1646.00 m) One Hour to Zero: C, Barker Films, U.K. (1508.00 m) Paolo II Freddo: A. Pane, Italy (311 2.00 m) Run Lover Run: Wing Sing Film Co., Hong Kong (2591.40 m) Sky Pirates: F. Godwin, U.K. (1645.00 m) Tarzan and the Brown Prince (modified version): Inter-Laga Films S.A., Spain/ltaly (2342.00 m) There’s No Place Like Home: First Film Org. Ltd, Hong Kong (2672.00 m)

Emanuelle in America: New Film Production, Italy (2720.80 m) .

Reason: Indecency.

Greta the Mad Butcher: E. Dietrich, Switzerland (2465.40 m) Reason: Indecency and indecent violence.

Sex and the Office Girl (reconstructed): (a), R. Clark, U.S. (1742.60 m) Reason: Indecency.

Untitled (A Touch of Sweden): Cricket Productions, U.S. (2298.40 m) Reason: Indecency. (a) Previously listed in Film Censorship Bulletin No. 4/74.

FILMS BOARD OF REVIEW FILMS APPROVED FOR REGISTRATION AFTER REVIEW Grand Theft Auto: (a), J. Davison, U.S. (2293.69 m) Decision Reviewed: Appeal against "R" Registration by the Film Censorship Board.

Decision of the Board: Register “ M” .

FILMS NOT APPROVED FOR REGISTRATION AFTER REVIEW Nil. * ‘ (a) Previously listed in Film Censorship Bulletin No. 9/77. *

Cinema Papers, January — 285

BS

THE MEASURE OF COLORFILMES COMPETENCE ¿r

The Age of Consent The Mango Tree Don Quixote The Cars That Ate Paris The Hands of Cormack Joyce Night of Fear The Irishman That Lady From Peking Sidecar Racers Inn of the Damned The Man From Hong Kong Long Weekend Promised Woman Rolling Home The True Story of Eskimo Nell Scobie Malone The Removalists Let the Balloon Go The Great McArthy

Picnic at Hanging Rock Caddie Mad Dog Morgan Oz The Trespassers Deathcheaters The FJ Holden Summer of Secrets Break of Day Eliza Fraser Don’s Party Raw Deal The Devil’s Playground Pure S The Picture Show Man Patrick Highway One Between Wars Weekend of Shadows

Colorfilm ensures optimum quality in grading negatives by using modern Hazeltine Color Analysers. This obviates the need to resort to old fashioned pilot printing methods which endanger your negative whilst printing individual frames. Everybody at Colorfilm realizes “ You can’t do today’s job with yesterday’s methods and be in business tomorrow.”

colorfilm

A SPECIAL KIND OF PERSONALIZED SERVICE

COLORFILM PTY. LIMITED, 35 MISSENDEN ROAD, CAMPERDOWN, N.S.W. 2050.

Telephone: 516 1066. Telex: AA24545.

\

DELPHINE SEYRIG

Delphine Seyrig

Continuedfrom P. 216

The only thing she did say that women were gradually becoming more numerous at was crime.

It was a very in te re stin g program, and we taped it. Then we interrupted the tape and made our own comments. We showed it for five weeks in a cinema in Paris, though this is illegal, because we are not allowed to tape the program and then show it. We got a few threatening letters but it never went beyond that.

We have also started a tape on Valerie Solanas’ SCUM manifesto — we have done 10 pages of it, which is rather funny. And I am doing a big tape on actresses. I have been interviewing them and I am going to implicate myself in it.

From what standpoint are you compiling the work on actresses?

I am asking them the questions I ask myself. Sometimes, I also tell them how I feel about a question, then we discuss it. It is a very big job for which I have got a grant since I cannot finance it all myself.

It’s a personal thing and I don’t want to make it in commercial terms.

So perhaps you don’t have time for much personal life right now. . .

This is personal — nothing is more intimate and personal than that.

What is your next professional step?

Buñuel, “ a male genius with a culture that has past” , with Seyrig and Fernando Rey.

do it.

Of course, that is not making a living, and making a living as an actress is becoming more and more difficult because I am no longer 20 and I am past the age where you are a sex object. All actresses reach this age, and this is part of what I am interested in when I am interviewing actresses — this very short career range beyond which parts get smaller, are less well paid, and so on.

I don’t know. I want to finish the video tape on actresses and that will take me two or three months. Then I would like to write a script with three or four friends of mine; but that’s still only a project. I don’t know if Would you be the same person if anyone will give us the money to you were not self-supporting?

Leon Saunders Photographer P.O. Box 29 Drummoyne Sydney, N.S.W. 2047 Telephone: 81 5533

I cannot even imagine what my life would have been if I hadn’t been an actress earning my own living. I would have been very passive and suddenly I would have been very aggressive.

If whoever was supporting me had money I would have used his money to do whatever I wanted to do. The little money I had from my father I used that way — what else is it for.

If a man doesn’t have money then you in fact have to earn your living. If he does have money and holds you down with it, you have to break away and make a living. I can’t imagine not having a job; it’s the way out.

But you see it’s very interesting when you look at actresses who make such tremendous amounts of money and then suddenly disappear, whereas you have male stars in their 50s who have never made as much money as they do now: eg. Paul Newman. Now where is there an actress in her 50s who makes that much money.

How old are you?

I am 44.

Do you find the different cultures — European, American, etc. — produce any differences in men?

I don’t know. All I can say is that French men, the ones in the

street, are like cromagnons, like petit grand trops of the Stone Age. The ones that are supposedly more evolved, are still from the Stone Age when you come down to important matters. They are very fucked up, and I find them very sick.

They are bewildered by any strength coming from a woman; they should get them selves together and take advantage of the women who are still there and who can accept their kind of backward minds and bodies.

Could it be that they’d had no time to develop in this technol­ ogical age due to the demands of their supportive role?

Not among actors, or artists as they are called. They have had time — it’s part of their art, it should be.

They are very sophisticated.

The very advanced men, the ones who say, “ I’m not like the others” , always turn out to be the same. They think they are all being poets and individualists and idealists, and they are really massproduced. So, why can’t they re v o lt a g a in s t th is m assproduction of their sexuality, their lack of imagination? But they think they are poets, that they are creative sexually and psychologically. Whereas, we are ahead of them. ★ Cinema Papers, January — 287

Fourteen films on India today, a unique insight into one of the world’s most ancient civilisations.

The real stars of this series, one of the most ambitious projects in contemporary 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 twelve-year-old school girl living in an industrial complex 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 14-20 minutes.

In Australia enquiries should be directed to the Marketing and Distribution Branch, Australian Film Commission, 8 West Street, North Sydney. Overseas to the Commission’s representatives: in London, Ray Atkinson, Canberra House, 10-16 Maltravers Street; in New York, James Henry, International Building, 636 Fifth ’ Avenue, or through any Australian Government office.

Produced by Film Australia

Association of Teachers of Film & Video

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 m

m

m

n

It is the quarterly journal of the Federation of Victorian Film Societies now published with the assistance of the Creative Development Branch of 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,

Subscribe: (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.

June, September and December.

1978 SUBSCRIPTION: $16.00 inc. postage from: F.V.F.S., 4 Stanley Grove, Canterbury, Victoria, 3126.

1 \

BACK ISSUES □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ D □

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* 2 at $3.00* 3at$2.75* 5 at $2.75* 9at$2.50* 10 at $2.50* 1 1 at $2.50* 12 at $2.50* 13 at $2.50* 14 at $2.50*

UNAVAILABLE: numbers 4, 6, 7 and 8

I

‘Australia only. For overseas rates see overleaf.

NAM E............................................................................

ADDRESS...................................................................... ................................................................ Postcode . . . .

Total amount enclosed S___________ Cinema Papers Pty. Ltd. 143 Therry Street, Melbourne, Victoria, Please a llo w up to fo u r w ee ks fo r p ro c e s s in g .

Australia 3000

;

VOLUME 3 AVAILABLE NOW BOUND VOLUMES ORDER VOLUME 3 NOW!

EASY BINDER

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)

(numbers 9-12) 1976-1977

Handsomely bound in black with gold embossed lettering.

Each Volume contains 400 lavishly illustrated pages ol • Exclusive interviews with producers, directors, actors and technicians, • Valuable historical material on Australian film production.

• Film and b<x>k reviews.

• Production surveys and reports from the sets of local and international production. ® Box Office reports and guides to film producers and investors.

S TR IC TLY LIM ITED EDITIO N ORDER NOW !

TO PLACE AN ORDER FILL IN THE FORM PLEASE NOTE BOUND VOLUMES OF

numbers 1-4 (Volume I land numbers 5-8 (Volume 2)

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).

TO PLACE AN ORDER FILL IN THE FORM

Please send me d copies of Cinema Papers' 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) NAM E.....................................................................

ADDRESS...............................................................

BINDING SERVICE Cinema Papers will now arrange to have your copies of numbers 1-4 and numbers 5-8 bound in Volumes.

ARE NOW UNAVAILABLE

TO PLACE AN ORDER FILL IN THE FORM

OVERSEAS RATES (including postage)

— SA27.60 Zone 5 (U K Europe. Africa, South America)' Surface — SA11.20; 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:

(A) Subscriptions and gift subscriptions (per year). Zone 1 (New Zealand. Nlugmi): 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): Surface — SA11.20; air

ORDER FORM BOUND VOLUMES

............................................... Postcode................

Total amount enclosed $________ NOTE: Remittances in Australian dollars only.

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

Please allow up to tour weeks for processing.

Surface (all zones) — SA0.80. 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.

An astonishing book... ...a frightening movie The Film starring loanne Woodward and Sally Field is released by Roadshow Distributors Pty Ltd

u n it e d st a t e s

S y b ilis

the true

- ^ ^ S e ^ o d d s . t o r health"and happiness.

Mdon’t kn7 d^ p " rrtrw n eTheSOstor°yVof Sybil from the first scene to the last Freeman •It has extraordinary^nterest both ^ ^ moving psychological documer^ 6ooks human narrative - New r

Flo ra Rheta Schreiber

way’ — Doris Lessing

in Books Australia Limited

Penguin

avourire G\RLTON

w

»tlBOUMl

m