Cinema Papers February-March 1980 by UOW Library

.....-

You begin w ith a great idea. A dd th e perfect sound track. A n excellent cast. < A nd an even better director. T he results will be gratifying. B ut if you com m it all this effort to K odak film you can enhance your great idea. A dding polish and finesse. W ith K odak m otion picture film youâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;ll get it in the can. A nd m aybe even in the awards. M otion Picture Markets D ivision KODAK (Australasia) PTY. L T D .

FIRST EVER EXPORT DEDICATION AWARD WON BY FILM MAN Allan Morley proudly holds his Export Dedication Award, a new Award created by ’ the Department of Trade and the Trade Development Council in Australia to provide recognition to employees who have con tributed to a successful export effort by an Australian Company. Allan Morley says he’s got great satisfaction that his efforts have helped bring trade with the overseas markets. Allan has been employed by Colorfilm for 29 years and has been Head Technician of the Optical Effects Department for the past 15 years. Allan recalls the early days of black and white cartoons, newsreels, shorts, the introduction of black and white television and the change to colour television with the ever-increasing striving for new and more complex optical work. “ Although, there are mind-boggling effects done with video today by the mere press of a button,” Allan goes on to say, “ they still can fall short of individuality. Every optical

effect,” he says, “ is the technical solving of a producer’s individual creation.” Allan proudly feels the optical effects com ing from Colorfilm Australia rank among the best in the world owing to the painstaking care and quality control in all contributory stages. “ There are no short cuts,” he says. Regarding film as opposed to video, Allan sums up by saying, “ I recognise the full importance of video and I see both film and video living together, but I still see film as the main originator for quality television and for a long time yet—35mm film has its own par ticular quality.” Two com m ercials im m ediately came to Allan’s mind as his most challenging works: one a black and white Milk commercial produced by Mike Browning Productions. The second a colour Amoco commercial produced by the late John Railton, so invol ved it required 3 months to complete with exhausting tests and pre pa ra tio n . Both commercials used multiple mattes.

MAGNA-TECH TRONIOS

<5>

(AUST.) PTY. LIMITED

Major suppliers to the Australian Television, Broadcast, Film and Technical Industries

The MTA product range includes these worldrenowned manufacturers:

The Australian Film and Television School's

Open Program

American Data Corporation Studio and O.B. Production Video Switchers, Master Control Switchers and Automation Systems.

Arvin/Echo Video Discassette Frame Store Recorder/Reproducer for PAL Colour.

Autocue

wishes you a very happy entry into the 1980's, and would like to announce some of the projects we shall be undertaking in the near future. The Open Program conducts a wide range of courses, seminars, workshops and public lectures, for those working in the industry, including: —

Television Prompting Equipment Caption Scanners.

CEI Broadcast Colour Cameras for EFP and Studio Applications.

CMX Computer Assisted Videotape Editing System, Time Code Generators and Readers.

Conrac Inc. An excellent range of Monochrome and Colour Picture Monitors.

• • • . •

PRODUCERS AND ASPIRING PRODUCERS PRODUCTION MANAGERS DIRECTORS LABORATORY TECHNICIANS VIDEO EDITORS, ETC. ETC.

We also produce films,videotapes and publications on many aspects of film and television production, marketing and financing.

Consolidated Video Systems Inc. Digital Time Base Correctors.

Datatek Corporation TV Transmitter Colour Phase Equalisers and Waveform Correctors, Envelope Delay Measuring Sets. Sweep Generators.

Dolby Laboratories Inc. Audio Noise Reduction for Single and Multi-Track Recorders, VTR, Cassette Production and FM.

If you would like more information about courses and resources - dates, costs, venue, etc. please write to: Open Program Australian Film and Television School PO Box 126 NORTH RYDE N.S.W. 2113

Dynamic Technology Ltd. Solid State Lighting Control Systems, Distribution Equipment.

Electronic Visuals Ltd. Television Waveform and Vector Monitors.

Engineering Designs and Supplies Limited TV Caption Scanning Equipment.

Link Electronics Ltd. Specialised Colour TV Test Equipment, Monochrome and Colour Cameras and OB Vans.

MTA (Aust.) Television and Radio Traffic, Scheduling and Accounting Computer System.

Magna-Tech Electronic Co. Inc. World-famous Film Sound Recorders, Dubbers and Post Synching Equipment.

Microwave Associates Television Mobile, ENG and STL Microwave Equipment.

Moseley Digital Remote Control Systems for AM, FM and TV Transmitters.

Pyral Audio Tapes and Film, Cassettes, Computer Tapes and Discs.

RCA Corporation Broadcast Television Camera Tubes, Power Tubes.

Neve Electronics International Ltd. Exceptional Audio Consoles custom-built or standard ‘S’ range for all applications.

W. R. Royle & Son Ltd. Excellent Colour Camera Grey Scale and Registration Charts, Special Transparencies and Colour Monitor Grey Scale Reference Units.

Telemation Inc. A large range of Television Colour Studio Equipment including Delegation Switchers and the Compositor Graphics Generator.

For further information and enquiries contact:—

MAGNA-TECH tronics (a u s t .) p t y . l im it e d P.O. Box 1 5 0 , Crows Nest, N.S.W. 2 0 6 5 . Phone: 4 3 8 3 3 7 7 Telex: 2 4 6 5 5 . Cables: Magna, Sydney

1980 Australian Film Awards The Australian Film Institute wishes to advise that to be eligible to participate in the judging and voting for the 1980 Australian Film Awards, all voters must be members of the Institute. Members of the industry, guilds and unions, on becoming members of the Institute, will still be entided to vote in their specialist categories in addition to voting for Best Film of the Year. Members with no other accreditation will be eligible to vote for the Best Film of the Year only. Membership of the Institute is $12.00 a year, and includes, amongst other benefits, subscribership to the National Film Theatre of Australia and concessions to the Institute’s cinemas. To ensure your eligibility to vote in this year’s competition, your application for membership should be received no later than 5.00 pm on Wednesday, 30 April, 1980. For further information and application form, please contact the Australian Film Institute, 81 Cardigan Street, Carlton, Vic. 3053 Ph: (03) 347 6888

Nevil Shiiteâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s

Now in Production

Henry Crawford

David Stevens

Producer

Director

Mariner Films Pty. Ltd.

Production Office: 33 Riley Street, Woolloomooloo, Australia 2011 Telephone: (02)33 6085, (02)357 4612

$ Tasmanian Film Corporation Now Represents

□ 16/35 P rod uctio n f a c ilit ie s

Dale McLean Candy Raymond

□ Film and Video P ro d u c e rs

Ros Wood

□ B ro a d c a st q u a lity v id e o □ S t ill P h o to g ra p h e rs and au d io v is u a ls

Lynda Stoner

□ Stu d io and equipm ent hire Brian Moll

Tom Richards 1-3 BOWEN ROAD, M O O NAH, T A S M A N IA 7009, PHONE: 30 8033 TELEGRAMS: T A S F IL M , HO BART

Michael Caton

Ric Herbert

Phil Avalon Karen Petersen

Ian Strutt

Brian Evers Imby Pilt

Also In Australia

Filming has been completed on “The Earthling” . I wish to thank the supporting Australian cast and the entire Australian crew for their help in making it all happen.

Peter Ford

Arnold Schwarzenegger

the earthling

Jim Mitchum

Elliot Schick Producer Todd Everett

Suite 1/245 Pacific Highway North Sydney NSW 2060. Telephone: (02) 92 0363

Music in Australia? Hmmm... Music in Australia is showing good form these days and Film Australia has some real winners for you to see and hear.

You’d have to be mad to like opera A film for young people taking the grand out of grand opera and starring Isobel Buchanan and m em bers of the Australian O pera on tour. 23min. Colour.

Incredible Floridas Richard M eale, Australian composer, talks about and performs a section of ‘ Incredible Floridas’, a work inspired by the poetry of Rimbaud. T his award winning film was directed by Peter W eir of ‘ Picnic at H anging Rock’ fame. lOmin. Colour.

The Fifth Facade A stunning film from the producer and director o f'C a d d ie ', covering the construction of the Sydney O pera House. Artists appearing include Birgit Nilsson, Charles M ackerras, Edward Downes, the Sydney Symphony O rchestra and the Australian O pera. M usic by W agner and Prokofiev. 40min. Colour.

Chorus and Principals on stage please T he staging of Delibes ‘L akm e’ from planning, costumes, set designs, rehearsals to opening night perform ance with Joan Sutherland and m usical director Richard Bonynge. 61min. Colour.

Images for string quartet An insight into the lives and work of the m em bers of a string quartet in Australia. T he string quartet is led by Carl Pini and performs the music of Debussy. 20min. Colour.

A Balinese gong orchestra T he Balinese G am elan O rchestra comprises 30 m usicians playing a rich and unique variety of exotic instruments. T he sounds produced have inspired western composers such as Benjamin Britten. T his film very simply takes you through the orchestra and lets you hear the instrum ents by themselves and in groups. lOmin. Colour.

Concerto for orchestra T o a background of Bartok’s music, this film takes an intim ate look at the work of the Sydney Sym phony O rchestra under its one-tim e M usical Director, the late D ean Dixon. 27min. Black & white.

Something to think about from Film Australia. Film Australia, P.O. Box 46 Lindfield. N.S.W ., 2070. Australian Film Com mission, C anberra House, 10-16 M altravers St., Strand, London W C2R3EH . U.S.A. & Canada. M rjim Henry, City National Bank Building, 4229 Sunset Boulevarde. Los Angeles, California.

Artransaprovidedeventhing exceptthepyxis.” For our latest commercial shoot we needed the works. Everything from a cherry picker to a Corinthian pyxis as a prop. We found everything wp needed at Artransa. Weil, almost. They didn’t have a pyxis in our size. But here’s what they did have: Equipment: Elemack Dolly. Jonathon Jib. Glmbol Arm. 4' wide White Translucent ‘S’ Board. Black Drapes stage 1. White Cyc. McAlister Crab Dolly. 12' rise Crane. Apple Boxes, 2-4-6’s. Wedges, Pancakes. Not included in stage hire

Lighting: 71 x 2K’s. 37 x 5K’s. 4 pups (1,000 watt). 6 x inkies. 14 fixed cyc lights .. . (approx 150 foot candles). Double broad lights. 4 x 5K Hamilton Baker soft light. ‘ TV Gels. 8 x 4K soft big blues. Special Equipment: * 2 x 5K Spots. 20' rise Cherry Picker. * Assorted Rises and Flats. * Black Tiles (1 metre sq.). for whole cyc area. ‘ White Tiles (1 metre sq.) for whole cyc area. * Wind Machine (with operator) available on location. * Rain Machine (with operator) available on location. ‘ Fog Machine (stage use only). 4' x 9' Scrims on Frames. * 1 x 16mm Arriflex BL with zoom. Facilities: * 110V Generator 500 Amps.

Hot Water. Cold Water. Power Outlets: 110 and 240V 5KV and 3-pin. Floor only Joy outlets. Vehicle Access and Staging. Full Stage Airconditioning. Stage Dimensions: Stage 1: 90' x 62' x 22' high. Stage 2: 70' x 50' x 16' high. (Australia’s largest airconditioned stages to provide year round comfort during shooting.) Client Facilities: Stage 2 includes a plush client and conference booth on stage. Dressing and Make Up Rooms. Dark Room. Staging Assistant included in hire charges. Security: A receptionist is on duty at all times, day or night, when facilities are in use. A complete 24 hour security service offers full protection for all client products, shoots, film crew equipment, and personal vehicles.

Corinthian pyxis, 7th cent. B.C.

ArtransaM i Film Studios

T elevision Centre, Epping, N.S.W.2121. Telephone (02) 858 7607.

T he Australian Film Commission is proud to be a m ajor investor in the following films completed or in post production. BREAKER MORANT HARLEQUIN CHAIN REACTION MANGANINNIE Z MEN FINAL CUTS TOUCH AND GO THE LITTLE CONVICT FATTY FINN For details regarding entry forms for MIP-TV, April 18-24, Cannes please contact the Director of Public Relations, the Australian Film Commission. For assistance with marketing and distribution, please contact the Director of Marketing and Distribution, the Australian Film Commission. Copy deadlines for synopsis stills for TV trade papers supplied with information is 20 February and for feature films 31 March.

jphistmfian^ifm Commissiotv Trrrwwvwrl*

Articles and Interviews David Puttnam: Interview

Peter Beilby, Scott Murray

Chain Reaction

Graham Shirley

Janet Strickland: Interview

Scott Murray Broadcasting TribunalAnnual Report Film and Politics

Adrian Martin

21 24 26

Everett de Roche: Interview

Paul Davies

Peter Faiman: Interview

Brian Courtis

Everett de Roche Interviewed: 30

Features

The Europeans Reviewed: 67

The Quarter Film Censorship Listings Mannheim Fiimweek

Mari Kuttna

34 55 63

Production Survey Box-Office Listings Obituary: Merle Oberon

Brian McFarlane

Production Report Stir: Richard Brennan Bob Jewson

46 50

Picture Preview The Russians Reviewed: 68

Touch and Go

David Puttnam Interviewed: 10

Film Reviews Apocalypse Now

Keith Connolly

The Marriage of Maria Braun

Inge Pruks

The Europeans

Brian McFarlane

The Russians and The Human Face of China

Peter King

Book Reviews Pappy: The Life of John Ford

Stir Production Report: 45

Richard Franklin Mervyn R. Binns

Managing Editor: Scott Murray. Editorial Board: Peter Beilby, Scott Murray. Contributing Editors: Antony I. Ginnane, Tom Ryan, Basil Gilbert, Ian Baillieu. Design and Layout: Keith Robertson, Andrew Pecze. Business Consultant: Robert Le Tet. Office Administration: Nimity James. Secretary: Lisa Matthews. London Correspondent Jan Dawson. Advertising: Sue Adler, Sydney (02)31 1221; Peggy Nicholls, Melbourne (03)820 1097 or (03)329 5983. Printing: Progress Press Pty Ltd, 2 Keys Rd, Moorabbln, 3189. Telephone: (03)95 9600. Typesetting: Affairs Computer Typesetting, 7-17 Geddes St, Mulgrave, 3170. Telephone: (03) 561 2111. Distributors: NSW, Vic., Qld., WA., SA. — Consolidated Press Pty Ltd,

168 Castlereagh St, Sydney, 2000. Telephone: (02) 2 0666. ACT, Tas. — Cinema Papers Pty Ltd. Britain — Motion Picture Bookshop, National Film Theatre, South Bank, London, SE1, 8XT.

•Recommended price only.

Recent Releases

Chain Reaction A Location Report: 15

Cinema Papers is produced with financial assistance from the Australian Film Commission. Articles represent the views of their authors and not necessarily those of the editors. While every care is taken with manuscripts and materials supplied for this magazine, neither the Editors nor the Publishers accept any liability for loss or damage which may arise. This magazine may not be reproduced in whole or in part without the permission of the copyright owner. Cinema Papers is published every two months by Cinema Papers Pty Ltd, Head Office, 644 Victoria St, North Melbourne, Victoria, Australia, 3051. Telephone (03) 329 5983. © Copyright Cinema Papers Pty Ltd, Number 25, February-March, 1980.

Front cover: Two stills from Ian Barry's Chain Reaction.

Cinema Papers, February-March—7

■ JS

T IT L E FEV E R One curious sidelight of recent Australian production has been the penchant for changing film titles. No sooner has the definitive title been listed in a magazine or newspaper than a new title renders the ear lier obsolete. Some of the recent changes are: The Min ister’s Magician to Harlequin; The Promo tion of Mr Smith to Stir; The Man at the Edge of the Freeway to The Man at the Edge to Chain Reaction; Friday the 13th to Touch and Go; Manganinnie to Darkening Flame and back again; Letters to a Friend to ... well, we’ll have to wait and see. Not only do these incessant title reversals confuse the public, but they greatly hamper the important work of the publicist. One day — if it hasn’t happened already — large sections of the filmgoing public will be waiting around for a given film to turn up, only to find it was released six months ago under a different and quite unrelated title. Producers should take note.

easily broken and Spielberg's latest film, the 540 million 1941, looks like being a major box-office failure of 1979/80. Of the Top Ten, only one film (Superman) was released in 1979. But the year, probably the best in history, had many surprises. Rocky II, at the time the chart was compiled, had grossed $43,049,274, only $7 million behind the original Rocky. As Rocky Il's run was continuing, Rocky II will become the most successful sequel ever. Other highlights were Moonraker, which grossed 533,934,074 and became the most successful Bond film; The Muppet Movie, whose $32 million proved people will pay to see television in a cinema; and Star Trek, which took an extraordinary $35 million, after opening in December. The complete listing for 1979 is: 1. Superman 581,000,000 2. Every Which Way But Loose $48,049,274 3. Rocky II 543,049,274 4. Alien $40,086,573 5. The Amityville Horror $35,000,000 6. Star Trek $35,000,000 7. Moonraker 533,934,074 8. The Muppet Movie $32,000,000 9. California Suite 529,200,000 10. The Deer Hunter $26,927,000

AUSTRALIAN FILM AWARDS

Manganinnie.

Following industry meetings held in Melbourne and Sydney in December to dis cuss the conduct of the Australian Film Awards, the Australian Film Institute has an nounced the following changes for 1980: 1. People wishing to participate in the judging screenings and vote for awards in the feature film categories must be financial members of the AFI. 2. Attendance will be compulsory at the screenings of all films entered in the feature film competition, irrespective of whether a film has been commercially released. Voters having already seen one or more of the films during their cinema release will be able to get ex emption from attending the relevant screenings. 3. Awards in the non-feature film categories, selected by a Jury Panel, have been redefined. The awards available will be: Best Documentary Film, Best Short Fiction Film, Best Ex perimental Film, and Best Animated Film. Prizes will be given every year to the best entry in each category. The Jury also has the option of awarding up to three Honourable Mentions.

TOP TENS In the January 9, 1980, edition of Variety, the annual listing of the “all-time film rental champs” is printed. The listing Is based on U.S. and Canadian rentals paid to the dis tributor; figures do not include “foreign” ren tals. 1. Star Wars 5175,849,013 2. Jaws 5133,429,000 3. Grease 593,292.000 4. The Exorcist 588,100,000 5. The Godfather 586,275,000 6. Superman 581,000,000 7. The Sound of Music 579,000,000 8. The Sting 578,889,000 9. Close Encounters of the Third Kind 577,000,000 10. Gone with the Wind 576,700,000 The next 10 is: Saturday Night Fever, National Lampoon Animal House, Smokey and the Bandit, One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest, American Graffiti, Rocky, Jaws II, Love Story, Towering Inferno and The Graduate.

The most successful director, in terms of position, is Steven Spielberg with two films in the Top Ten (Jaws and Close Encounters), but George Lucas with numbers one (Star Wars) and 15 (American Graffiti) has a higher taking. Reputations are, of course,

8—Cinema Papers. February-March

TELEVISIO N PROFITS If ever the film industry should tremble at the thought of the amount of moneys in volved, it should take a look at the television industry. In 1978/79, total revenue was $ 3 3 3 ,2 2 3 ,7 5 6 , e x p e n d itu re was 5267,561,576, and the resulting net profit, before tax, was a staggering $65,662,180. Over this period, 50 television stations were in operation and 49 made a profit — a 98 per cent profit rate. Of course, the Federal Government didn’t • do badly. Tax came to 515,612,621 and sta tion licence fees 512,721,372, giving the Government more than $27 million.

AFI ELECTIONS The Australian Film Institute is about to hold its second election within the past six months for all seven positions on its Board of Directors. The most recent election was a special one called as a result of its takeover of the

National Film Theatre of Australia. Members and subscribers of the NFTA were given time to become members of the AFI and were eligible to participate in that election. The next election is the result of a tran sitionary clause in the new Articles of As sociation adopted by the AFI at its annual general meeting in March, 1979. The Articles changed the membership structure to a oneclass system open to the public. Nominations for the elections have been called for and ballot papers will be issued in February. The results of the election will be declared at the AFI’s annual general meeting on March 22.

SAFC ANNUAL REPORT The 1978/79 Annual Report of thè South Australian Film Corporation has been released. Chairman Jack Lee in his introduc tory statement writes: “ . . . In the past year a number of film makers have seen their films come and go in the cinemas without making any boxoffice impact. Many will not recoup their investments. And if some of the SAFC films have shared this same fate, it is little consolation to note that during this past financial year no Australian film made any significant profit. Indeed, the SAFC’s film Storm Boy was the last In the line. "It is accepted that our domestic market is too small to recover the investment of a large-budget film. Even an average-size budget cannot be expected to be recovered in this country alone. Therefore we must look for markets abroad. “ However, the average-size budget does not permit the deployment of those forces necessary for a film’s acceptance and sales overseas, particularly in that most enviable market, the U.S. The factors necessary for such acceptance and sale are well known: the appearance In a film of a recognizable overseas star or stars, con siderable financial involvement and some creative input . . . “The road to International success and profitability will not be easy; It will be long and hard, but in the end it will be exciting and rewarding. "Meanwhile, Australian filmmakers must

turn their backs on middle-of-the-road films and come forward with ideas of such originality, such daring and such enter tainment value that cinemagoers in this country will once more applaud them as they did a few years ago.” For the 1978/79 period, the SAFC sustained an operating loss of $757,576: “This result was reached after taking Into account payments and accruals of interest totalling $353,968 and receipt of a $65,000 grant for interest acrrued to June 30, 1978, and a $450,000 perpetuity grant. (In 1977/78 the loss was $193,169 after taking into account in te rest paym ents of $245,478 which were recouped by treasury.) . . . “In response, the SAFC is expanding Its ef forts in overseas markets. In 1978/79 the Corporation’s own productions and others in which it has invested generated overseas revenue of $562,000 (1977/78, $367,000) . . . “ Because of the comparative failure of 1978/79 cinema releases, the unamortized values of the SAFC's investment In features currently in release was adjusted at June 30, 1979, so that no Investment was valued at higher than its estimated future revenue. The net write-down of in vestments, in excess of the standard amortization rate, totalled $190,376 and this contributed to the 1978/79 loss.” Revenue for 1978/79 was $812,000, com pared with $1,192,114 for 1977/78 — a 31 per cent drop. The 1978/79 break-up of the revenue sources was: Australian — $170,000 or 21 per cent; Overseas — $641,956 or 79 per cent. In 1977/78 the break-up was: Australian — 78 per cent; Overseas — 22 per cent. The report states: “ Because of the box-office failure of several of the SAFC's releases their gross film hire was barely enough to pay adver tising and print costs, let alone return revenue to investors. In these instances, exhibition terms had to be kept at the base minimum and extended seasons were not possible.” As for the foreign sales, the report states: “The SAFC has found that traditional buyers are becoming fewer and it is now necessary to seek out new distributors. In many instances these new buyers are ma-

has joined ' the ranks of the illustrious readers of

SUBSCRIBE NOW AND SAVE 3 YEARS $40.50 (SAVE $4.50) 2 YEARS $ 3 0 1 YEAR $1 5 I will take a 1 □ 2 □ 3 □ year subscription

Delivered to your door FREE

Please □ START □ RENEW my subscription with the next issue Find cheque/money order enclosed for $ ................ made out to Cinema Papers Pty. Ltd., 644 Victoria Street, North Melbourne, Victoria, Australia, 3051 The above listed offer is post free and applies to Australia only. For overseas rates see form inside back cover. Please allow up to four weeks for processing. Offer expires 31 /3/1980

Name....................................................... ................. Address..................................................................... ................................................................. Postcode Office

O K

Use only

IS S U E

No.

& CL (c te tù tÿ âCOft a

t ù

t . . .

Please send a special gift subscription for 6/12/18* issues of Cinema Papers t o ......... Address Postcode Please enclose a card from

Message

Please make your cheque or money order payable to: Cinema Papers Pty. Ltd., 644 Victoria St, North Melbourne, Victoria, 3051, Australia. 'Cross out whichever is inapplicable. See subscription form for current rates overleaf. For overseas rates see form inside back cover.

THE QUARTER

jor television networks in countries such as Britain and Japan. “The cost of advertising, promotion and film prints for overseas markets has in creased very substantially over the past couple of years and now has a major in fluence upon which films overseas dis tributors are prepared to risk money in purchasing. "Experience in the market this year has confirmed the need for Australian films to include at least one overseas star. Much of the success in the U.S. of The Last Wave can be attributed to Richard Chamber lain's appearance in the film.” This turnabout of foreign rental outgrossing domestic is reiterated by Lee’s comments about poor domestic response. In his in troduction he says: “ . . . 1978/79 can be said to be the year when cinemagoers here ceased patroniz ing the Australian film simply because it was Australian. The warm reception of our films of a few years ago has been replaced by a cool and critical response or, even worse, by indifference.” Other areas of the SAFC did better. In 1978/79, 43 documentaries were completed and 17 were still in production as of June 30, 1979. The report states “ documentary production and sales were profitable in 1978/79.” Sales revenue totalled $173,372 and cinema revenue $2353 (down from $17,479 in 1977/78). The Film Library loaned 117,868 films (as opposed to 93,980 last year), at an operating expenditure of $517,883 and an income (grant) of $510,000. The excess of expen diture over grant was $7702 which was well down on the $16,208 in 1977/78. Overall, 1978/79 was a disappointing year for the SAFC, and almost entirely due to its feature division. Its hopes for 1979/80 — and for its future — seem to be hinging on

in six state capitals. It will show a crosssection of documentary films made in Aus tralia and overseas during the past few years. The Director of Creative Development, Lachlan Shaw, said that the seminars were aimed at encouraging some new thinking about documentary filmmaking in Australia: "There is a need for some innovative and creative ideas in documentaries. We are par ticularly anxious to encourage younger film makers in this area.” The seminars will be held in February and March: Hobart — February 22-24; Adelaide — February 29-March 2; Perth — March 7-9; Brisbane — March 14-16; Melbourne — March 21-23; and Sydney — March 28-30. Each session will run from Friday night through the weekend, and will be based around a number of documentary genres: e.g., e th n o g ra p h ic , cinem a ve rite , propaganda, video, etc. Some sessions will include discussions with filmmakers whose work has been shown. Films to be shown include Tattooed Tears (Nick Broomfield and Joan Churchill), Solzhenitsyn’s Children (Mike Rubbo), Sons of Namitjira (Curtis Levy) and Wolloomooloo (Pat Fiske and Denise White). There will be no admission fee, but tickets will have to be booked in advance.

COMPLAINTS, COMPLAINTS Letter writers have for many years been delighting newspaper and magazine readers with their neatly-packaged outbursts of dis pleasure. By scanning the daily, or monthly, offerings, the alert reader could intuit what was motivating at least one section of society to take voice.

THE ACS AND MILLI AW ARDS, 1978

FILMS BOARD OF REVIEW On January 13, 1980, the AttorneyGeneral, Senator Peter Durack, Q.C., an nounced the appointment of three new members to the Films Board of Review: Gavin Souter, a journalist and author, of Sydney; Rowena Danziger, headmistress of Ascham Girls’ School, Sydney; and Val Smorgon, a voluntary community worker, of Melbourne. Senator Durack said the Government had reappointed Dudley McCarthy as chairman of the Board, Caroline Jones as deputy chairman, and Professor A. G. Hammer as a member. He said the Government appreciated the contribution made to the work of the Board by the retiring members, Dr Margaret Mid dleton and David Ditchburn. It was the Government’s view that, from time to time, there should be some change in the membership of the Board. The Attorney-General said the Films Board of Review had established a high professional standing, and had proved to be responsive to community attitudes. He said it was important to maintain that reputation.

Television viewers have not been so for tunate — that is, until the Australian Broad casting Tribunal, in its latest report, published statistics on television’s ink phan toms. (Details are published below.) Interestingly, the ABT replied to all these complaints. One can only hope the ABT publishes their replies, for they no doubt make spirited reading.

Breaker Morant. Subject

1977-78

1978-79

85 140

70 52

82 40

12.0 5.8

7 17 42 55 190

19 17 42 40

12 12 40 36

0.1 1.7 1.7 5.9 5.2

_ _

23 10 5

3.4 1.5 0.7

9.4

14 11

2.1 1.6

—

0.7

578

277

355

52.1

2.5

3 130 29

4 27 4

7 12

1.0 1.7

0.2

—

0.1

—

0.1

249

5.9

1976-77

1977-78

1978-79

CENSORSHIP NEWS In the September-November period, five films were refused registration: Personals, Lay-by Lovers (surely such a witty title deserved a better fate), Pro-ball Cheer leaders, Love in Hot Pants (all for sex), and Dawn of the Dead (violence). Four film s accepted cuts to gain registration: the average deletion was 13 secs. Three films were cut for excessive violence and one for bad language. The latter was a children's film (C.H.O.M.P.S.) which took an eight-second cut to ensure a more lenient rating. The Films Board of Review considered three appeals; predictably, they were all turned down. The Hottest Show in Town and Dawn of the Dead (soft version) remain ban ned, while Apocalypse Now retains its ab surdly restrictive “R" classification.

General Bad taste (sex, violence, general moral standards) Sex or indecency (specific programs) Censorship (opposition to cutting films) Violence (specific programs) Language (including blasphemy) Repeats and poor programs generally News and current affairs (bad taste) News and current affairs (bias or misleading items) Too much sport Not enough sport Opposed to the showing of ‘R’ films on television Comments about station’s performance — public submissions to inquiries Self-regulation, ABT's role Objections to cancellation of specific programs

NATIONAL FILM THEATRE OF AUSTRALIA Verina Glaessner has been appointed manager of the National Film Theatre of Aus tralia, and Paul Harris program assistant. Glaessner is a film journalist who has con tributed to such publications as the British Film Institute’s Monthly- Film Bulletin and Sight and Sound; Ecran\ Jump Cut, Inter national Film Guide; and Cinema Papers. She was a founding member of the editorial board of Time Out (London), and was for some time the editor of its film sec tion. For the past two years she has been working as a Teaching Fellow at Griffith University, Brisbane. Paul Harris is a former Victorian branch manager of the NFTA, and a long-serving member of the Melbourne NFTA committee. The appointments follow the takeover of the activities of the NFTA by the Australian Film Institute. The takeover was legally effec tive from July 1, 1979, but, until recently, the former management of the NFTA continued to take day-to-day responsibilities for its operations. This was while the AFI underwent various processes required following the takeover — including a special election for a new Board of Directors, appointment of an executive director, and the establishment of new premises in Melbourne to accommodate NFTA staff.

RECENT DOCUMENTARIES The Australian Film Commission will hold a series of open seminars on documentary filmmaking early in 1980. The series, entitled “ Recent Documentary” , will be organized by the Creative Development Branch of the AFC

_ _

Family and Children’s Time

Unsuitable programs or advertisements Seeking extension of family and children’s viewing time Promotional material for adult programs Quality of amount of programs Opposition to advertising in children’s time Pre-empting of children’s programs by sport 4 p.m. to 5 p.m. ‘C’ time too early for country children

Subject

Advertising Objection to depiction of sex (including cinema film trailers) Violence High sound level of advertisements Excessive amount Taste and safety aspects Intimate products ‘Anti-inflation’ Campaign Uranium Producers’ Forum Alcoholic liquor Subliminal type advertising

percentage of all complaints 1978-79

1976-77

percentage of all complaints 1978-79

The 1980 Australian Cinematographers Society Awards for cinematography will be presented on March 8, at Film Australia in Sydney. There will be awards for 11 categories, culminating in the Milli award for best cinematography of all the 11 categories. Entry application forms have been sent to all ACS members and production houses. This year the ACS is planning to videotape the awards so that a copy may be circulated to all state branches. As customary, the federal annual general meeting will be held the following day with interstate delgates pre sent.

IN Q U IR Y IN T O T H E ABC A body has been formed in Sydney to ex amine the record of the ABC in showcasing independently-produced Australian films. Called the Film Industry Submission, it is preparing a report which will examine such questions as: “Why the ABC does not have a more specific obligation to show independent Australian production, rather than the somewhat limited obligation to provide ‘adequate and comprehensive programs’ (Division 3, 59-1, Broadcasting and Televi sion Act 1942-73); “Why the ABC commissioners are people from various walks of life — industry, academa, the sports world, etc. — yet not one is a film or broadcasting industry representative; “Why the ABC devotes its production funds to produce in-house work to the almost complete exclusion of independent productions and co-production with Aus tralian filmmakers; “Why the ABC programs such a large out put of overseas product, much of it of in different quality and relevance to the Aus tralian public, yet screens little indepen dent Australian work; and “Why the ABC is so concerned with ratings when it should be providing the Aus tralian public with quality that is relevant to Australians?” People interested in the submission have been invited to attend a public meeting on February 13, 1980, at the Paddington Town Hall Cinema, Sydney. Direct inquiries can be made to: The Film Industry Submission, 39 Palmer St, Cammeray, 2062, NSW.

MELBOURNE ACCESS VIDEO The 1978/79 annual re p o rt of the Melbourne Access Video and Media Co operative has been released. The year was a success, with a $219,781 surplus of income over expenditure ($23,191 in 1977/78). Income for the period was $274,227, up 427 per cent on the $52,052 in 1977/78. This big increase was due “ largely to significant contracts for facilities utilization from OCP Ltd” . Expenditure was $270,146 ($116,871), giv ing an operating profit of $4081 (compared to a loss of $64,809 in 1977/78). This operating profit was lifted by grants of $97,000 (operational) and $118,700 (capital) from the Australian Film Commission. In 1977/78, the AFC grant was $88,000. Assets have increased from $218,257 to $453,125 (108 per cent). Current assets have declined dram atically, however, from $167,334 to $25,910 (85 per cent). This has left a situation where the liabilities of $166,979 outnumber the assets at 6.5 to 1. Given that $103,400 of the $166,979 is a fouryear loan from the AFC, the remaining liabilities are $65,599.

PRODUCERS AND DIRECTORS GUILD OF AUSTRALIA

19 20 7

17 1 4 29 39 9

2.5 0.1 0.5 9.2 5.7 1.3

—

2 9 —

1 8 2

0.1 1.2 0.2

348

110

16.1

79 1 8 61 130 36 33

_ _

37 3

The Victorian chapter of the Producers and Directors Guild of Australia has an nounced the results of its election for office bearers. They are: President: Chris Muir Vice-presidents: Mai Bryning, Ross Dimsey and Bruce Kerr Secretary-treasurer: Harold Baigent Executive: Tim Burstall, Franco Cavarra, Russell Hagg, Terry McMahon, Ian Macrae, Naomi Marks and Charles Tingwell Co-opted members: Robb Copping and Antony i. Ginnane.

Cinema Papers. February-March—9

Sue Adler

I left school at 16 and, having failed to get into the film industry, became a messenger for an adver tising agency. I was very lucky, because I joined Collett Dickenson and Pearce at its inception, and as it grew we did by far the best work in Britain in the early 1960s, I hung on for nine years, but after that I couldn’t see any reason for staying in advertising^ So, using the contacts I had made, I became an agent for photographers. There was no such being in those days and I did very well: I represented Richard Avadon, David Bailey and David Montgomery, among others. I was also fortunate, in that I moved into this vacuum at a time when the Germans were rediscover ing their own advertising. They liked to use British photographers, so I was able to do an enormous ex port business into Germany, for a very inflated Deutschmark price. The net result after two years was that I was making a lot of money — more money than I have made at any other time — but I was feeling suicidal. It was such a miserable, boring, dreary business. There were only three or four basic deals one could do, and the only initiative was in trying to shoehorn in extra jobs. I still had illusions of evolving something a little more creative and serious, so I suggested to Sandy Lieberson — his wife was an old friend — that we go into business together. I offered to help fund us, keeping the photographic agency running as a cash-flow business. At this time, Sandy was in the process of leaving CMA. He had got hold of Donald Cammell’s script of Performance, put Cam med together with Nicolas Roeg, and tied up Mick Jagger. So, when Sandy and I went into business as Goodtimes Enterprises, he was in pre-production on Perfor mance and I was developing Melody, which was being written by Alan Parker, who had been a copywriter with me at Collett Dickenson and Pearce. Performance got badly thumped. Warner, Bros, hated the film and wouldn’t release it. They also wouldn’t pay Sandy the balance of his fee. The financial importance of the photographic agency, therefore,

One of the most dynamic film production companies to emerge in Britain in the 1970s was Goodtimes Enterprises. Founded by David Puttnam and Sandy Lieberson, it produced, as its first film, the controversial “Performance” (1970). This was followed by “Melody” (1971), “The Pied Piper” (1972), “That’ll Be The Day” (1973), “ Mahler” (1974) and “Stardust” (1974). In 1973, Puttnam and Lieberson set up another company, VPS, largely to break into the video cassette market. Programs produced include “Swastika” (1973), “The Double Headed Eagle” (1973), “Brother Can You Spare a Dime?” (1975) and “Lisztomania” (1975). The last VPS film was the highly successful “Bugsy Malone” (1976), after which Puttnam formed his own company, Enigma Productions. Its first venture was “The Duellists” (1977). Puttnam then went on to produce the boxoffice hit “Midnight Express”, and, more recently, “Foxes” (1980). Puttnam was in Australia recently as a script consultant to the Australian Film Commission, and he spoke with Peter Beilby and Scott Murray. The interview begins by tracing Puttnam’s career over the past 20 years and closes with a spirited discussion on the state of filmmaking in Australia.

features were an un reliab le medium. It was 1968, and the Americans were basically pulling their finance out of Britain — quite reasonably, because a lot of singularly lousy films had been made. So, Sandy and I decided to concentrate on the television educational programming area. We commissioned a research document from The Economist on the poten tial use of cassettes, which came out rather favorably. Using this as a calling card, we were introduced to the Rothschild Merchant Bank, and were given a limited amount of equity capital to form a new company, VPS. The equity capital was stepped up a cou ple of years later, but it was always inadequate. The most we ever had was about £80,000. The rest of the money was loaned. So, even in the good years — we had several very good years — the biggest thing we were paying back was the interest on the loan. In that sense, you could say the company got off' on the wrong foot. We did the Kenneth Clark series (Romantic Versus Classical Art), a historical program with A.J.P. Taylor on the Versailles Peace Conference, and others. Basically, we were making programs for im mediate television use which we felt had long-term cassette value. Why did you move back to features?

David Essex (left) and Ringo Starr in That’ll Be The Day, which Puttnam produced, with Sandy Lieberson.

became paramount during our first two years. Sandy was disillusioned by what happened with Performance, and I think it has had tremendous effect on his career. He thought he had the hottest film around; so did I.

Melody, on the other hand, got made more by luck than by judg ment. It was financed by Seagrems and spun off quite a bit of money, which helped keep us going. After the lessons of our first two films, Sandy and I decided that

Due to the success of Melody, Seagrems came back in for another film: The Pied Piper. Originally we were going to use Milos Forman, but I made the mistake of showing Seagrems a rough-cut of Taking Off, and they hated it. They then met Jacques Demy and fell in love with him, I, in my naivety, went along with everything, having liked Les parapluies de Cherbourg (The Umbrellas of Cherbourg). The Pied Piper was made and, although a marvellous working experience, was a very poor film. At the time I was producing The Pied Piper, I spent — and this is where Sandy was wonderful — the only £10,000 we had in the world buying film rights to Albert Speer’s Inside The Third Reich. We then made a deal with Paramount, who

Cinema Papers, February-March—11

DAVID PUTTNAM

bought us out and gave us a fee. We spent a year developing a screenplay, but it was never filmed because we couldn’t agree on a director. We wanted Nicolas Roeg, and they wanted Peter Yates. But while that film never happened, it did beget Swastika, which was con ceived as a film on the making of the Speer film. Various other things were hap pening at this time. Alan Parker had fallen in love with films as a result of w riting Melody and directing second unit on it, and he was getting a lot of experience writing and directing commercials. I also became involved with a friend of mine, Ray Connolly, a jour nalist. I had two properties I wanted to develop, both of which I gave to Alan. He opted for one (Calf Love), which left the other one for Ray. It was then called 1941, and was kind of a biogra phical piece that ended up becom ing That’ll Be The Day. From my point of view, VPS began to make sense with That’ll Be The Day. It was a very solid film, which we did with EMI. It was a complicated deal to put together, and involved a pre-sale to a record company. In return for that pre sale, we got a guarantee of a moun tain of television advertising. That’ll Be The Day established me as a producer, because the film worked and, more importantly, the entire marketing approach worked. We had set the film up on the basis of a marketing concept and it had jelled. Was it an expensive film? No, £232,000. But it made a lot of money — more than £1 million. As a result of its success, EMI were prepared to do Stardust, which was a bigger effort. It cost about £500,000, and was also very successful. Alan was then working with the BBC, doing The Evacuees, and he ap p ro ach ed me ab o u t Bugsy Malone. Because of the success of Stardust, and the fact that Rank had tried to get it and failed, we were in a position to sell them prac tically anything.

12—Cinema Papers. February-March

As the feature film side grew stronger, did the cassette side drop off?

Why did you want to work with Rus sell?

Yes. I only really did the initial stuff. Sandy was very much respon sible for the production of Swastika and Brother Can You Spare a Dime?. Double Headed Eagle was an accident, because the material for Swastika was too long and we split it into two films. The only one I really did after that, with Ray Connolly, was James Dean — The First American Teenager. It’s a nice film, and it did okay. At this point we also became in volved with Ken Russell, whose career was not nourishing. We put together Mahler, half the finance of which collapsed on the first day of principal photography. Ken, to his credit, made the film for half the money.

Ken represented a type of filmVery little. It is easy with hind making which I hadn’t been in sight to say you had a position in volved with before. Stardust, something, but we were so busy Melody and That’ll Be The Day earning a living that we really were commercial, mainstream, didn’t consider our position in rela narrative films, whereas Ken had a tion to British filmmaking. We background in a different type of even made a film called Flame film. Mahler was a very good ex simply because Chas Chandler gave perience for me and it helped me us £30,000 for doing it — and we greatly when I came to do Midnight desperately needed that £30,000 to Express. prop up the overages on Marcel When Alan and I were discussing Ophuls’ Le chagrin et la pitie (The the type of film he wanted to make, Sorrow and the Pity). I was able to bring to the discus I think we spent nearly seven sion a lot of what I had learnt from years chasing our tails, learning by Ken. That was partly why we trial and error. I felt like the Dutch gravitated towards making a film boy with his finger in the dike, only influenced visually by Seven there were 10 fingers and 11 holes. Beauties. We deliberately set out to get a slightly surreal edge. During that stage, were you ap proached by American studios for

What was happening in the British film industry at this time?

DAVID PUTTNAM

co-production deals or were you primarily interested in making British films for the British market?

ownership of VPS was Rothchilds 43 per cent, Sothebys 10 per cent, and Sandy and I 47 per cent.

The la tte r. I now have a philosophic attitude towards mak ing British films, but at the time it was just necessity. I didn’t know many people, and on the odd occa sions we tried to sell things abroad, we had terrible experiences. Twen tieth Century-Fox promised to buy Mahler, for example, but dropped out under appalling circumstances. We were always pinch-hitting, even when we got $300,000 from Columbia towards the cost of Stardust, and $300,000 from Paramount towards Bugsy. I don’t apologize for it. I have always sold on the basis of trying to offer a bargain which is irresistible. This way, I could win a certain level of freedom. Even with The Duellists, it wasn’t a question of Ridley Scott and I sit ting around with our fingers on the bridge of our noses deciding to make The Duellists; it was the ques tion of which of three or four pro jects we had in mind we could get made. There was nothing remotely philosophic — or even particularly creative — about it.

Were you ever in a situation where having only a minor share was a problem?

Were you getting any finance by way of advances from British dis tributors, like Rank? Not advances, they were proper production and distribution agree ments. But, again, they were bargains. That’ll Be The Day is a good example. Nat Cohen of EMI used to do a very sensible thing, and any Australian distributor would be wise to copy, which was to only work out what his downside risk was. Consequently, he would never turn down a project that was remotely interesting. What he would say was, “ I’ll give you £150,000” knowing that the film cost £250,000. It was your problem how you found the other £100,000. Fortunately, on That’ll Be The Day, EMI Records, who had right of first refusal on the album, turned the album down, which gave me the right to go elsewhere. And that is where we came up with Ronco. The age of the television-promoted

Not really, because when you are running a company you can be very difficult. Were “Swastika” and “Brother” conceived as experiments in making theatrically-viable documentaries?

album is basically over, but That’ll Be The Day happened at the very beginning. We sold 600,000 double albums in Britain alone. In your deal with Cohen, did you get rental over and above the advance? Yes. I think on That’ll Be The Day, Sandy and I had 28 per cent, which seemed fantastic. VPS did very well out of it, indeed. If you take Stardust, That’ll Be The Day, Bugsy and the rest, revenue to VPS was well over a £1 million.

we had stock in the company. When we left, all the revenue went to VPS. Did you have private backers in VPS as well as Rothschild? No, though Rothchilds did syn dicate some of their shares private ly, but not directly. Basically the

I don’t ever remember thinking that rationally about it. We were always making films that we thought would do okay theatrically, knowing there was a television market. Take the James Dean film. I remember specifically working out that we couldn’t lose money because of television. When it did well theatrically, I had a real shock. It cost us £60,000, and I think we sold it on for more than £120,000. Everyone came out very well. Looking back on the five compila tion documentaries you have done, do you think this concept is really the domain of television and not cinema?

Were these films successful anywhere except Britain? They were all successful in odd territories here and there. We made an American sale on That’ll Be The Day, while Bugsy was enormously successful in South Africa, Scan dinavia and France. The American sale on Bugsy also brought us in money because it was a gross deal. Paramount put up $300,000 against a big slice of the gross. Is “Bugsy” still a successful Film? Yes, though not to us, unfor tunately. Sandy and I were, in ef fect, employees of VPS, although

Cinema Papers. February-March—13

DAVID PUTTNAM

Alan ParkerA Midnight Fxpress

Yes, sadly. Even a film like “The Sorrow and the Pity” . . . The Sorrow and the Pity was w onderful televisio n and, to Ophuls’ credit, I don’t think it was ever conceived of as a feature. Talking heads are the great televi sion discovery. What caused the demise of VPS? Let’s deal with Bugsy Malone, which was the last VPS film. Bugsy was a weird situation because there were five different investors: Rank, the National Film Finance Cor poration, Paramount, Polydor and Alan Parker personally. The five investors clocked up to a little more than SI million. Unfortunately, there were far too many investors, none of whom was VPS corporately. And it was this situation that led to my disenchant ment with VPS. I was hassling around, raising the money privately from different sources, when the people who had a large equity in the company weren’t prepared to come up with some of it. It was the fight for the last £50,000, eventually put up by Polydor, that really crazed me. I was running all over the place when the directors of the company, who had millions and millions, didn’t have the courage to come up with £50,000. So I split. Were your feelings also shared by Sandy Lieberson? I think so, though it was more personal to me because Bugsy was my project. Sandy had other, equal ly legitimate gripes. Did your disenchantment coincide with a desire to get out on your own? At the time I had these problems with Bugsy our contracts came up for renewal, so I decided not to renew. I don’t think I handled it particularly elegantly, because it was done in a state of anger. I then formed a company called Enigma Productions, and began to develop several projects. The first that got made was The Duellists.

14—Cinema Papers. February-March

When Peter Guber resigned or whatever from Columbia, he got one of those golden handshake deals, which, as I understood it, he then parlayed into a part ownership in Casablanca Records. I have never found out how much, but it was probably around 20 per cent. Neil Bogart badly wanted to get into the film industry, so they kind of cross-fertilized. I went into rather a strange situa tion. I had a deal ostensibly with C asablanca, but in fact with Columbia, because Columbia were paying 90 per cent of the money, as the producer of Midnight Express. When I finished Midnight Ex press I wanted to do one other film in Los Angeles, and I tried to do one about teenage suicide. I found What was the Casablanca Records it very interesting that Beverly and Film W orks C olum bia Hills, which is probably the apotheosis of 2000 years of human relationship?

During the shooting of The Duellists, Peter Guber called me at a public phone box on a Scottish ski slope and asked if I would be in terested in doing Midnight Express for Columbia. I didn’t take it too seriously, and said he should call a friend who represented me. A cou ple of days later my friend called me and said they were serious. The weird thing was that at the same time they were trying to get Alan Parker to direct the film. Once I heard this, Alan and I kind of corralled them, Alan saying he would definitely commit himself if I did, and I saying the reverse. This left us both in very good negotiating positions.

striving, should have the highest level of teenage suicide in the world. It soon became clear, however, that no one was going to fund that film. But in looking into it, I stumbled across a tough script about children living in single parent homes (Foxes). I worked on that for about four months, and after several false starts got it off the ground. But again I found myself in that old situation. I was working with Casablanca, who had a ‘special re la tio n s h ip ’ w ith C olum bia. Columbia after dickering with the film didn’t want to do it, and Casablanca didn’t have the nerve to. So, I was left cobbling together a half-arsed deal with United Ar tists, having got the script in turn around from Twentieth CenturyFox. It was the VPS thing all over again. What the fuck was I doing raising funds for a film, when I was supposed to be having my salary paid and working with a company that had money? And that’s been my constant experience. Either you do it yourself or you don’t, and the worst thing is to get trapped in a situation with people who in theory should be doing it, but who don’t have the nerve to bite the bullet. What was lacking at Casablanca was nerve, what was lacking at VPS was nerve, what is lacking in Bri tain is nerve, and what is probably lacking in Australia is nerve. Did you ever have British govern ment investment in your films? The National Film Finance Cor poration did come in on several of our films: Stardust, Bugsy Malone, The Duellists, and James Dean. It seemed important that we should hedge things away from EMI, so we made them accept the NFFC as a co-investor on Stardust. This turned out to be a very good move, because when the management changed at EMI we already had another hand to play. Was the NFFC’s role different then to what it is now? Continued on P. 74

Chain Reaction, formerly titled Man at the threat to the genetic structure of all living Edge of the Freeway, is David Elfick’s second species.” Audiences will find no simple extension of The dramatic feature as producer, and Ian Barry’s first as director. Budgetted at $450,000, the film China Syndrome, but a science-fiction specula .was largely shot on a remote location at Glen tion conceived long before The China Syndrome Davis, New South Wales, from where film and the nuclear melt-down at Harrisburg. Now historian and researcher Graham Shirley sent that Harrisburg and The China Syndrome have played their part in raising the public’s this report: awareness, Ian Barry felt free to take a stylized, less documentary approach to the nuclear Chain Reaction is a com bination of theme. cautionary tale and nuclear thriller. From a The Director storyline on uranium mining, it developed via a stage dealing with reactor problems to what was, in scriptwriter and director Ian Barry’s eyes, the “ more horrific” consequences of storing nuclear Barry began his film and television career as a liquid waste. At the time of scripting, the local press was studio hand with the ABC in Sydney. After 18 debating the possibility of Australia taking back months he became an assistant film editor, and burying liquid waste from the uranium it progressing to dubbing editor and film editor. had sold. A sizeable earth tremor in '"astern While a studio hand, he made a 25-minute, 8mm Australia led Barry to speculate on t pos science-fiction film called The Trudgants, which sibility of geological instability in an area where he remembers as “ ambitious, with plane crashes nuclear waste had been buried. The basis of and animated rocks with tentacles” . It was an Chain Reaction is the result of such a tremor, early expression of his interest in “ projecting our and of a leakage into the massive artesian water existing reality forward. Chain Reaction is a basin out of which our primary industry is fed. stylized interpretation of the forces that already As Barry says, “ We are talking about a total exist.”

Following The Trudgants, and now into his Him editing career, Barry wrote and directed the short film. Waiting for Lucas (1973), which showed an apparently normal man’s manipula tion and destruction by the fantasies of American television programs. Ian Barry says: “ If there is any underlying theme that runs throughout my films, it is the manipulation of the average non-power freak, the man who tries to live his life as best he can, and becomes a puppet.”

Director lan Barry.

Cinema Papers, February-March—15

CHAIN REACTION

In contrast to the Sparks experience, Chain Reaction attracted full investment within months. First conceived as a $375,000 produc tion on 16mm, it soon expanded to a 35mm film budgeted at $450,000. Investment was entirely from the industry, with partners being the Vic torian Film Corporation, Hoyts Theatres, ATN Channel 7, Spectrum Films, Voyager Films and the AFC, which financed the script through its three drafts. Before completing Chain Reaction’s third draft, Elfick arranged for Barry to work and consult with two established directors, Phil Noyce (Newsfront) and George Miller (Mad Max). Barry edited the N oyce-directed documentary Bali, while George Miller was ap proached to become associate producer on Chain Reaction. Miller’s involvement followed his earlier enthusiasm for Sparks and The Sparks Obituary. Although Miller was to direct two stunt sequences for Chain Reaction, his greatest contribution was during pre-production. After Miller, Barry and Elfick had conferred on an approach to the third draft, Miller discussed

such aspects as Barry’s shot listing and story boarding, the film’s emotional flow and the use of time on set. The discovery of the Glen Davis location, 80 km north-west of Lithgow, NSW, brought further script changes. Dissatisfied with other locations he had seen, Barry visited Glen Davis on a friend’s advice and found that it had the right “ sheer, rugged, boxed-in, aggressive sort of feeling. It fitted almost as a jigsaw piece of the script.” Between 1939 and 1952, Glen Davis served as an oil-shale mining and processing centre. Since the mine’s controversial closure by the Menzies Government in the early 1950s, the Glen Davis population has dwindled from 1700 to 21. The industrial ruins, while not a component of the first two drafts, served the purpose of “ an omen in the premonition angle of the film” . Where the valley narrows to the east, Barry found a location for the weekender at a point that could be filmed as a box canyon. Adjacent to the former Glen Davis Hotel (now the Painted Horse Ranch), the remains of the town’s main street offered potential for reconstruction as the script’s Little Lower Woodbine. If the township, industrial ruins and weekender had not been within a radius of five km, Barry said it would have been impossible to shoot most of the film out of Sydney. Casting began on July 26, and from August 27 six days’ rehearsals followed at Elfick’s Palm Beach Studio. Barry aimed to have his cast “ well on the way to being the characters, so that any on-set discussion would be an exchange of mutual knowledge” . The Palm Beach phase for the actors was also one of getting to know each other and rigorously testing the script. Steve Bisley recalls: “We really attempted to pull the script apart, and everything held. We found that in no way did we have to compromise or feel unsettled about any particular scene.” Four location surveys took place from the beginning of July. Meanwhile, the production organized the contra-deal supply of vehicles, wardrobe and props, including scientific gear. Vehicles ranging from cars through landcruisers, convoy trucks to a semi-trailer were loaned by City Ford, Ford Trucks, Toyota and Fruehauf, while a custom-built $24,000 Holden Supertruck was loaned by Trick Pickups as the central car of the film, the so-called Beast. (Needless to say, the Beast had a stunt double.) On the wardrobe side, designer Norma Moriceau faced her biggest task on the film with the making of 12 WALDO squad suits from white-bonded plastic. The suits’ intricate head dresses consisted of Phantom comic-inspired helmets fronted by moulded, evil-snouted facemasks with dark blue visors. During the final three weeks of preproduction, special effects co-ordinator Rhys Robinson prepared and rigged his biggest' challenge, a multi-pipe bursting and water

George Miller, who was engaged to direct two stunt sequences.

Russell Boyd (director of photography) and Nixon Binney (camera operator) near Glen Davis.

Filming at the Capertee River: Brian Bansgrove (left), Ian Barry, Arna-Maria Winchester, Nixon Binney and Russell Boyd.

Fighting the ABC’s system of public service typecasting, Barry set his sights on television direction. After 18 months as an assistant direc tor on ABC-TV drama, he resigned to take up the position of film editor and on-set adviser for Sandy H arb u tt’s feature Stone (1974). Afterward, he began to write his first feature script, Sparks, which tells of a prominent film director blinded and subsequently exploited through a mind filmmaking process. Barry claims that his three years of study with actor and drama teacher Brian Syron have been crucial to his writing and his work with actors. He says: “ I think Brian is an incredible teacher. For performance, he has given me the understanding of not acting but reacting.” Barry’s writing has gained from his editing ex perience and the drama classes — “ the Brian Syron work for getting to a character; the editing thing for construction. I find that they both feed back on each other.” After further editing at the ABC in early 1975, Barry directed a dramatized promotional film for Conzinc Riotinto. He now regards it as a “ Disneyesque” concept designed to instil in nine-to-twelve-year-olds a high regard for min ing. Curious to learn more of the nuclear in dustry, Barry did much private research after the film was complete and was appalled at his previous jgnoranc,e. As_a result^ he began to write Chain Reaction. Barry expects that Chain Reaction’s prime audience will be the 14-to-early-20s age group: “One of the reasons I am really happy about this is that the other film was unleashed on the audience not much younger than that. They are the people who are going to be deciding a lot of the nuclear safety standards and regulations in the next decade.” Work on Sparks continued. In early 1978, Barry made a 20-minute promotional film for a project called The Sparks Obituary, telescoping the feature script to highlight the mind film ele ment. Among those impressed by the film was David Elfick, who offered to produce the feature, but private investment remained elusive. In late 1978, Elfick showed The Sparks Obituary to several American independent producers. Intrigued, they nevertheless were reluctant to invest in a big-budget feature by an unknown „director. Elfick, along with the 16—Cinema Papers, February-March

Australian Film Commission, was convinced of the viability of the more recent Chain Reaction script, and decided to channel his and Barry’s energies into that as a low-budget starter.

Pre-production

gushing effect to be filmed in tunnels under Macquarie University.

The Shooting Production began with the tunnel sequence, the film’s opening, on Monday, September 10. Director of photography Russell Boyd and gaf fer Brian Bansgrove lit the tunnels with Warm White De Luxe fluorescents, which in Boyd’s words, “created quite a badgery sort of feel, where there would be pools of light followed by pools of darkness. It was quite effective for what we were doing because Ian asked for fast tracking shots on a 16mm lens, following Heinrich on his way to search for the break.” Rhys Robinson, having run lines for four separate pipes from a fire hydrant and manifold, was able to increase his water pressure so that the pipes broke away to douse the panicking Heinrich. Five weeks later, Robinson’s second biggest job was night rain effects for the Little Lower Woodbine main street. Footage of the multi-national WALDO waste disposal complex was completed with interiors at Custom Video and exterior shooting at the Kurnell oil refinery. The unit then travelled to Glen Davis on Wednesday, September 19, where production resumed the following day. Accommodation had been arranged through the Painted Horse Ranch, with the overflow spread into 10 caravans and several of the Glen Davis houses. Few of the cast and crew would leave Glen Davis for the next six weeks, reinforcing for most the isolated, eerie feeling of the location and its relationship to the script. While production got underway at Glen Davis, Miller, assisted by Elfick, spent three days shooting the film’s first major car chase near Rylstone. Fellow crew members were stunt co-ordinator Max Aspin and cameraman Peter Rogers, assisted by Paul Murphy. The chase’s ‘hairiest’ stunt work for Aspin was to drive the Ford FI00 tracking vehicle at high speed for a point-of-view shot from Gray’s LTD as it kept pace with Larry Stilson’s Beast. Second only to this was Aspin’s having to drive the LTD, with a flat tyre, into a broadside. The principal Glen Davis location was the isolated weekender, a three-roomed bush hut designed by art director Grace Walker and built from local materials for $400. The weekender’s skylights allowed the valley cliffs to dominate in side action, and gave Boyd scope to light through the roof. As his script had not specified who owned the weekender, Barry accepted Walker’s suggestion that it belonged to a spray painter in Larry’s Parramatta workshop — “a bit crazy and into cars” .. In the best panel van tradition, Walker had an upright piano and refrigerator elaborate-

The T-bone stunt which climaxes the second car chase. Chain Reaction.

REACTION Heinrich (Ross Thompson), a nuclear scientist, seriously injured when an inland earth tremor releases nuclear waste into an artesian water table, escapes the Security of WALDO, the nuclear company, to break the news. But his means of es cape ironically land him in a dead-end mountain valley which contains the first tangible evidence of contamination. Pursued by the WALDO security team, consisting of the malevolent Gray (Ralph Cotterill) and Oates (Patrick Ward), and their sinister plastic-suited decontamination workers, the WALDO squad, Heinrich is defended by a holiday ing motor mechanic, Larry Stilson (Steve Bisley), and his wife,-Carmel (ArnaMaria Winchester).

Top left: Carmel (Arna-Maria Winchester) and Larry (Steve Bisley) tend to the injured Heinrich (Ross Thompson). Top right: Gray (Ralph Cotterill). Above: Larry and Carmel discuss Heinrich (background). Chain Reaction.

Cinema Papers, February-March— 17

CHAIN REACTION

Carmel and Larry soon after their arrival at the weekender. Chain Reaction.

restore the LTD to an outward semblance of normality within four days. Other tasks assigned to Thomas included restoring a Ford after collision with a kangaroo, numerous repairs to the Beast, unblocking dust from carburettors and air cleaners, and restoring life to a succession of flat batteries. Runner vehi cles traversing the valley’s 35 km of dusty, winding road, frequently faced a spin-off into the scrub, either propelled there by a loose and rutty surface, or a swerve from intrepid wombats and kangaroos. Vehicles travelled daily to Sydney with film for processing, returning with rushes, extra equipment, actors and extras. For production manager Lynne Gailey and production secretary Mandy Forster, an inability to shoot the daily call-sheet m eant a massive task of re organization along the one available telephone line. A series of unpleasant incidents included a hepatitis scare, gastric infection, two crew members falling from the roof of the weekender, a broken shoulder for Patrick Ward, and, the most serious of all, Barry’s heavy fall from the semi-trailer. Through the long hours and spells of bad luck, cast and crew morale remained high. Much of it stemmed from a belief in the script and the crew’s loyalty to Barry. Boyd says: “Often features are run with an extreme amount of tension, and I consciously try and break that down if it’s possible. This film happened to have a crew that really sparked well together. I think people were interested in the idea and the plot of the film, and were right behind it. This made it easier for their fellow actors and fellow crew members.”

ly air-brush mural painted. The living room and the white-clad WALDO squad marching in for main bedroom were decorated with as many mation along the base of one enormous wall, the bizarre car chassis and chrome fixtures as buyers on-set scene resembled the industrial scienceLisa Coote and Sally Campbell could lay their fiction of Fritz Lang’s Metropolis (1926). Other big night set-ups included the progress of a con hands on. Walker says: While Barry kept mostly to his concept of the “I knew much of the lighting would be low-key, and voy of WALDO trucks. film, he was receptive to fresh ideas: In the second week at Glen Davis, filming of the walls, being made from dark wood, would go “I really believe that if you have hired the best peo down a lot. I wanted highlights, and I thought the first convoy scene was interrupted by the in ple for your film, to dictate the concept all the way chrome would be a good idea.” trusion of a drunken driver, who four times down the line is cutting yourself off from their lurched his car at speed through extras, crew and To give the film a hard-edged, deep-focused' talent. 1 believe that one of the director’s functions and dramatic look, Barry and Boyd had settled convoy trucks before colliding with a production is to encourage and filter that flow of ideas and in on the predominant use of wide-angle lenses. vehicle. put. and blend what works into a cohesive spine.” It was the first of a series of off-screen acci The intention was to sustain location mood and Wherever possible, Barry rehearsed the actors allow the actors freedom of movement. On loca dents which again rivalled events of the scripts. through their day’s scenes on location before the The biggest of these, en route to a location, was tion Boyd observed: a head-on collision in blinding dust between arrival of the crew. In this way he established “Just about every master shot involves a track. Gray’s LTD and the semi-trailer being used in blocking for most of the major weekender Ian’s idea is to constantly keep the audience aware of movement, almost pushing the story onwards. So the film. Fortunately, no one was injured, and scenes, after that his intention being to rehearse, where time has permitted, we have set up extensive the unit mechanic David Thomas was able to and by improvization “to explore the situation tracks which may cover two minutes’ screen time. As Ian's main market is the cinema, he’s using as many of the tools of the trade as he can.” Boyd acknowledges that Barry’s approach to the lighting of Chain Reaction is influenced by the 1940s black and white films of Hollywood: “ In the back of my mind, I am trying to com bine the more natural lighting that I prefer with the touches that Ian likes to introduce.” To cover the story’s progress to more Gothic elements, Boyd has consciously advanced lighting style and mood from high-key early scenes" to the WALDO invasion of the weekender where “the shadows start to get heavier.” On several key days, the weather raced through a bewildering display of extremes. One afternoon’s rain and the on-going demands of the schedule forced the postponement of the se cond half of one of the biggest WALDO squad scenes for nearly a fortnight. Special effects rain was needed for all night coverage of Larry and Carmel’s arrival in the valley, complicating the already rigorous third of the film being shot night-for-night. Boyd’s biggest-ever night lighting set-up oc curred on October 12. Chain Reaction was the first film on which Boyd had used the new lightweight, high intensity HMI lamps. Cover Carmel is hindered in her attempted escape by car. Chain Reaction. ing a distance of 100 metres, he used four 4K and four 2.5 K HMIs to illuminate some of the largest of the Glen Davis industrial ruins. With 18—Cinema Papers, February-March

CHAIN REACTION

and cement the scene in the minds of the actors only hours before shooting” . Between takes, Barry would communicate constantly. To him every moment of work with actors was crucial for “fine-tuning, probably the hardest thing of all. As you get further into fine-tuning, it’s harder and harder. You have to know just how much to say, and not say too much.” During the fifth week, complex coverage in tensified with the deployment of mass extras through the industrial ruins and at the weekender. These scenes included car stunts and the operation by the squad of WALDO’s por table decontamination unit (an art director’s triumph of huge spacecraft-style perspex spray chambers, machinery and flashing lights, all for $ 2000 ).

The seventh week contained material formerly scheduled for the previous six. David Elfick recalls: “ 1 had agreed to give Ian six weeks and a top crew to make a feature, and I gave him that. At the end of the sixth I said, ‘In the seventh we’re in trouble’.” Barry says: “ Knowing at the beginning of the seventh week that we had an impossible week ahead wasn’t the dawn ing of a new reality, because we’d come out of the first week two days behind schedule. During the seventh week icwas necessary to get as much as we could, so that we could leave the valley and not in cur the expense of having to go back. That was our base objective.” On the final two days of location shooting, the first and second units, under Barry and Elfick respectively, filmed the landing of a Hercules and its truck convoy, further scenes at the weekender, and the finish of the second car chase. George Miller returned to direct a further three days of stuntwork for the start of the se cond chase. Ensuing material was directed by David Elfick, who, with its principal cameraman Peter Rogers, had worked with Miller on the first chase weeks before. Barry praises the con tribution that Rogers, a former racing car driver, brought to the visual pacing of both chases, and the continuity between the two:

Producer David Elfick and Ian Barry.

“The basic challenge of the second chase was to top the first and give it quite a different flavor. We also had to resolve our major characters in an action se quence without dialogue.” Climactic stunts were the demolition of a telephone box and a T-bone collision that finished with the LTD jammed across the roof of the Beast. For the T-bone, Max Aspin built a ramp enabling the LTD to launch and hit the Beast just above its centre of gravity. Both stunts were covered by six cameras, including a high speed Mitchell. The final day of location work was Saturday, October 27. The week’s objective — completion of essential country work — had been achieved, and 90 out of the film’s final estimated 95 minutes had been shot. But another week was re quired to complete shooting of the weekender’s ‘second bedroom’ sequences, along with pick-up

Larry makes a bid for outside communication. Chain Reaction.

shots for stunts, and no further money remained. Any decision to complete the film rested with the investors. Overall, production had been far more com plex than anticipated. Elfick admits: “The style of film we made was wrongly budgeted. It’s as much a criticism of me as it is of Ian Barry. We raised a certain budget and made the film in a style that increased that budget. But in terms of production value, it’s still a very modest budget for what you see on screen.” Barry agrees that in logistical terms Chain Reaction has been over-ambitious and that “some of the reasons we have gone over budget have nothing to do with the artistic ambition . . . “ From the very beginning it became quite ob vious that the sort of film we wanted to shoot was going to be impossible in six weeks. Every day I was faced with the prospect of either compromising to the point where we had something stylistically not much better than a tele-feature, or reaching beyond that and paying the price of falling behind schedule. “ I wanted to reach beyond for a number of reasons. One, I suppose, was for my own ambitions as a filmmaker. And I thought that the film, if it was going to stand a reasonable chance at the boxoffice, had to have thè appearance of greater quality than a tele-feature. All the way down the line, we knew that the schedule battle had been lost, but the idea was to go for a film of the style and quality that we hope we’ve got.”

Post-production Editor Tim Welburn had the bulk of the film rough-cut by the time Barry returned to Sydney, and they raced to make an investors’ screening on November 12. This screening saw the film’s first unbroken run-through, save the missing scenes. Barry attempted to assess his film while feeling the film was “almost on trial. There were 20 people there, all vitally interested in the quality of the film, its marketability, and how their money had been spent.” Bill Gavin of Hoyts opened the investors’ meeting with a statement of faith in the film’s marketability. An additional week of shooting was approved, starting on Monday, December 3, with interiors to be filmed at Palm Beach. The fine-cut was to be complete by December 22 and the mix to take place at the end of February. Hoyts are to release the film in early May 1980. In the light of what Barry and Elfick have achieved with Chain Reaction, Elfick reflects that while “it is not hard to bring in film on budget, it is hard to make a hit. Backer confidence is mostly engendered with films that do well at the boxoffice. not with films that come in on budget. And the history of the industry is that a lot of films came in on budget because they were easy to make. If you are going to push everything close to the edge in terms of talent, effort and exhaustion, you may end up with a catastrophe, or you may end up with an exciting film,” Barry feels that “ all films should be overambitious. If your concept is easily within reach, it’s not that much of a challenge.” Judging from rushes, Chain Reaction is an ex citing and imaginatively-made film. Even without its nuclear issue, it lends itself to being publicized in many ways, and certainly one tips for its action-horror elements, accessible characters and underlying implications that will chill the mind of the filmgoer to varying degrees. There may be people who scoff at the liberties which Barry feels filmmakers could (and should) now take with the nuclear theme, but many more should be entertained as well as set think ing by its prophecy. ★ Cinema Papers. February-March—19

FILM CENSORSHIP LISTINGS Reprinted from Australian Government Gazette SEPTEMBER 1979

Published by the Australian Government Publishing Service

October 23 - November 27 - January 8 FILMS REGISTERED WITHOUT ELIMINATIONS General exhibition (G) Bambi: Disney, U.S.A. (1948.00 m) Cap Horn: La Guevilie, France (2468.70 m) The Children of Theatre Street: E. Hock, U.S.S.R. (2537.81 m) Crossroad (16 mm): Moral Rearmament. U.S.A. (831.00 m) Don’t Knock the Poor (16 mm): Not shown, Greece (883.92 m) The Eternal Love (16 mm): Mei Chang Ling, Taiwan (1350.00 m) The Europeans: I. Merchant, U.S.A. (2459.62 m) Gurismos Tov Stratioti (The Return of a Soldier) (16 mm): Not shown, Greece (987.30 m) Haanet (Nahabed): Not shown, U.S.S.R. (2620.03 m) Jack in the Box: Renn Prods., France (2542.20 m) Men of Brazil (16 mm): Moral Rearmament, U.S.A. (788.00 m) Mol Tintin: Pierre Films, Belgium (2429.00 m) The Story of a Small Town (16 mm): Tai Chung Motion Picture Co., Taiwan (987.30 m)

Not recommended for children (NRC) Avalanche Express: M. Robson, U.S.A. (2426.26 m) Cactus Jack: M. Engelberg, U.S.A. (2398.37 m) Daqqa Ta’ Plnzell! (16 mm): F. Farrugia, Malta (976.33

Fairy Fox: T. P. Shing, Hong Kong (2304.00 mm) Hullaballoo Over George and Bonnie’s Pictures (16 mm): I. Merchant. U.K. (921.48m) Insaaniyat: J. & S. Varma, India (3500.00 m) Just You and Me, Kid: J. Zeitman/I. Fein. U.S.A. (2565.70 m) Juvenile Liaison (16 mm): N. Broomfield, U.K. (1020.21

La Portatrice Di Pane: M. Cloche, Italy (2598.00 m) Passaporto Rosso: Terrenia Films, Italy (2413.84 m) Rain in September: Not shown, Taiwan (2299.-21 m) Running: Cooper/Cohen, Canada (2621.47 m) Shalimar (a): S. Shah. India (2809.00 m) Something Short of Paradise: Gutman/Berman U.S.A. (2482.03 m) Steel: Davis/Panzer. U.S.A. (2816.69 m) The Trans Siberian Express: Kazakh Film, U.S.S.R. (2513.09 m) Unkissed Bride: J. H. Harris, U.S.A. (2258.93 m) (a) Videotape version running 35 minutes Jonger shown on May. 1979 List.

For mature audiences (M) Aci Pirinc: U. Aybelk, Turkey (1978.39 m) A Nous Deux: Les Films 13. France (3123.46 m) The Cheat: P. Khanha, India (3850.00 m) City on Fire: C. Heroux, Canada (2900.35 m) Defiance: Gilmore Jnr/Brockheim er, U.S.A. (3047.79

Hurry Tomorrow (16 mm): R. Cohen, U.S.A. (877.60 m) Laki Laki Pilihan (16 mm): T. Mutia, Indonesia f l 151.85 m) Monty Python’s Life of Brian: J. Goldstone, U.K. (2539.82 m) More American Graffiti: H. Kazanjian, U.S.A. (3021.05

North Dallas Forty: F. Yablans, U.S.A. (3262.90 m) The Proud Twins: M. Fong, Hong Kong (3047.79 m) The Shaolin Invincibles: Hai Hua Cinema Co., Hong Kong (2352.68 m) Shaolin Mantis: M. Fong, Hong Kong (2621.47 m) Sixteen: Taylor/Bernhard, U.S.A. (2620.03 m) Teenager: A. Z. Hodshire, U.S.A. (2426.26 m) Une Histoire Simple (A Simple Story): C. Berri, France (3039.79 m) The Who — The Kids Are Alright: Klinger/Curbishiey, U.K. (2726.97 m) Winter Kills: F. Caruso. U.S.A. (2621.47 m)

OCTOBER 1979

Restricted exhibition (R) The Ceremony: G. Dimitreopoulos, Greece (2839.80

The Cycle Savages: M. Smith, U.S.A. (2231.04 m) Delilah: Distrupix Inc., U.S.A. (1756.94 m) Dona Flor and Her Two Husbands: B arreto/R ique/ Serrador, Brazil (2967.58 m) Farewell Scarlet: H. Winters. U.S.A. (2031.86 m) The Love File: A. Maltz, U.S.A. (1737.77 m) Miss Nude America: J. Blake, U.S.A. (2019.80 m) Pourquoi Pas! (Why Not): New Line Cinema, France (2509.92 m) Van Nuys Blvd: M. Tenser, U.S.A. (2537.81 m) The Wanderers: M. Ransohoff, U.S.A. (2860.64 m)

Special conditions For s h o w in g n o t m o re th a n tw ic e at 1979 SYDNEY/ MELBOURNE/ BRISBANE/ PERTH and/or ADELAIDE Film Festivals and then exported. Cruel Love (Kruta Lobost): Slovak Film Studios, Czechoslovakia (2300.00 m) A Room With A Sea View: Film Polski, Poland (2623.00

A Strange Role: Hunnia Studio. Hungary (2700.00 m) The Tree of Wooden Clogs: Rai/Co Productions, Italy (4800.00 m)

FILMS REGISTERED WITH ELIMINATIONS Restricted exhibition (R) Fist of Fury Part II: J. Shaw, Hong Kong (2733.02 m) Eliminations: 11 m (24 secs) Reason: Excessive violence Prey: Tymar Film Prods., U.K. (2314.70 m) Eliminations: 6.4 m (14 secs) Reason: Excessive violence

FILMS REFUSED REGISTRATION Personals: H. Winters, U.S.A. (2095.80 m) Reason: Indecency Lay-By Lovers: (8 mm silent) Not shown, U.K. (60.96

Reason: Indecency

FILMS BOARD OF REVIEW

Scene from Francis Coppola’s Apocalypse Now. An appeal was lodged against its “ R classification but was turned down.

20—Cinema Papers, February-March

The Hottest Show in Town (a): P. & E. Kronhausen, Denmark (2277.50 m) Decision reviewed: Refusal to Register by the Film Censorship Board. Decision of the Board: Uphold the decision of the Film Censorship Board. (a) Previously shown on August. 1979 List.

FILMS REGISTERED WITHOUT ELIMINATIONS For General Exhibition (G) Academy Prize Winners: Ukrainian Documentary, Film Studio, U.S.S.R. (1550.00 m) Five Evenings: Not shown, U.S.S.R. (2780.44 m) The Flat with Child To Let: Mosfilm Studio, U.S.S.R. (2193.00 m) The Fourth Height: Mosfilm Studio, U.S.S.R. (2184.00 m) In New Place: Mosfilm Studio, U.S.S.R. (2455.00 m) Leopold Le Bien Aime (Leopold the Good Friend) (16 mm): Not shown, France (833.72 m) Live In Joy: Mosfilm Studio, U.S.S.R. (2083.00 m) Mutiny on the Western Front (16 mm): Brian Morris. Australia (1097.00 m) Off To Success (16 mm): Hua Min Hsing, Taiwan (1066.00 m) Painters Painting (16 mm): E. De Antonio, U.S.A. (1306.00 m) The Pirate (16 mm): Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer. U.S.A. (1118,00 m) The Present of Black Magician: Gorki) Film Studio, U.S.S.R. (1743.00 m) Several Personal Interviews: Gruzia Film, U.S.S.R. (2566.56 m) Solzhenitsyn's Children . . . Are Making A Lot Of Noise In Paris (16 mm): National Film Board of Canada. Canada/France (921.48 m) Track on Earth: Leningrad Film Studio, U.S.S.R. (2283.00 m) Welcome The River: Mosfilm Studio, U.S.S.R, (1749.00

Yang Men Nu Jiang (Women Generals of the Yang Family): Peking Film Studio. China (3031.00 m)

Not recommended for children (NRC) The Bag Collector: Lenfilm Studio, U.S.S.R. (2535.00

Bang the Drum Slowly (16 mm): M. & L. Rosenfeld, U.S.A. (1053.12 m) Bear Island: Selkirk Films, U.K./Canada (3208.20) The Black Birch: Belarusfilm Studio, U.S.S.R. (3963.00

Centurions: Mosfilm/Bulgarian Studios, U.S.S.R. (3810.00 m) Encounter/When Winter is Over: Belarusfilm Studio, U.S.S.R. (2363.00 m)

The Fantastic Spot in China: Not shown, China (2352.68 m) Heroes Behind The Enemy Lines (16 mm): M. ChangLing. Hong Kong (1129.91 m) Kiss In/Attack of the Phantom: T. Morse Jr, U.S.A. (2398.37 m) La Chanson De Roland: Z. Prods/FR 3, France (2807.17 m) Lady Oscar (16 m m ): K itty M u s ic /J . D em y, Japan/France/U.K. (1316.40 m) The Left-Handed Woman: Road Movies, W. Germany (3123.46 m) The Lord of the Rings: S. Zaentz, U.S.A. (3653/33 m) Mrs Nikanorova Is Waiting For You: Mosfilm Studio, U.S.S.R. (2376.00 m) My Kung Fu 12 Kicks: Not shown, Hong Kong (2426.26

Northern Lights (16 mm): J. Hanson/R. Nilsson, U.S.A. (1053.12 m) Paul Jacobs and the Nuclear Gang (16 mm): J. Willis, U.S.A. (625.20 m) Poitin (16 mm): B. Quinn/Cinegael, Eire (713.05 m) Rebellious Barricade: M osfilm Studio, U.S.S.R. (2035.00 m) Regain (16 mm): Not shown, France (1402.00 m) Rich Kids: Lions Gate. U.S.A. (2620.03 m) Rocky II (Reduced version) (a): l. W inkler/R. Chartoff, U.S.A. (3201.62 m) A Stranger: Lenfilm Studio, U.S.S.R. (2165.00 m) To Fight The Wild (16 mm): R. Oxenburgh/R. Percy, Australia (1019.24 m) Willie Nelson’s 4th July Celebration: Kratochvill Jones, U.S.A. (2459.62 m) (a) Reduced by importer's cuts from 3262 metres (July 1979 List).

For mature audiences (M) Amerlcathon: Lorimar Prods., U.S.A. (2314.70 m) And Justice For All: N. Jewison/P. Palmer, U.S.A. (3262.90 m) Bartleby (16 mm): Antenne 2, France (987.00 m) Comptes a Rebours (Count Down) (16 mm): Filmel Cine Azimut. France (1097.00 m) Dance Hall Racket: G. Weiss, U.S.A. (1684.30 m) Ein Ganz Und Gar Verwahrlostes Madchen (How Low Can A Girl Sink? (16 mm): Z.D.F., W. Germany (800.81

Escape to Athena: D. Niven Jr/J. Wiener. U.K./Greece (3234.93 m) The Evictors: C. B. Pierce, U.S.A. (2379.41 m) Fists of Bruce Lee: Woo Ka Lehi. Hong Kong (2566.56

The Great Santini: C. Pratt, U.S.A. (3123.46 m) Heaven Sword and Dragon Sabre: Shaw Bros/M. Fong. Hong Kong (3039.79 m) Heaven Sword and Dragon Sabre Pt II: Shaw Bros/M. Fong. Hong Kong (2766.76 m) L’Afflche Rouge (The Red Poster): (16 mm) Z. Prod. INA. France (987.00 m) Monkey Kung Fu: R. Shaw/M. Fong, Hong Kong (2638.00 m) Once in Paris: F. Gilroy, France (2705.00 m) Papa Les Petits Bateaux (Papa The Little Boats) (16 mm): Not shown, France (1066.80 m) The Pocket Lover: B. Queysanne, France (2565.70 m) A Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man: Ulysses Films, U.K. (2482.03 m) Promises in the Dark: J. Heilman, U.S.A. (3181.46 m) Raphael Ou Le Débauché: Parc Films, France (2872.46

The Rose: M. W orth/A. Russo, U.S.A. (3681.22 m) The Supreme Kid (16 mm): B ryant/Thom pkins, Canada (976.33 m)

Concluded on P. 78

The canine hero of C.H.O.M.P.S., a children’s film which lost 8 secs of “ bad language” .

In an interview in “The Naked Bunyip” (John B. Murray, 1970), avant-garde filmmaker Aggy Read suggested that the only fate befitting the Commonwealth Censorship Board would be for its Imperial Arcade escalator shaft to be poured full of concrete. That was 1970 and the public’s attitude to film censorship has changed significantly in the interim. No more is it a subject of heated controversy, despite the fact that many films are still banned or heavily cut (94 banned from January 1977 to August 1979). In December 1979, Janet Strickland was appointed by the Attorney-General, Peter Durack, to replace Richard Prowse as Commonwealth Chief Censor. Strickland is a former Deputy Chief Censor and was a foundation member of the Australian Broadcasting Tribunal, a position she resigned early in 1979. To find out what Strickland’s appointment would mean to film censorship in Australia, Cinema Papers sent Scott Murray to interview the new Chief Censor.

CHIEF COMMONWEALTH CENSOR How do you see the state of film great believer in public participa censorship in Australia at the tion in the media and media issues, and I include film censorship as a moment? media issue. If the Censorship I am not sure, after only two Board is to reflect community months back, that I can accurately attitudes and opinions, one thing it assess that. People tend to forget can do is to feed out information to that I have been out of the censor the public to get some feedback. ship area for three years, which is a I aim to do three things in 1980. fairly long time. It’s certainly not One is to publish an information just a matter of coming back to an brochure which will explain how the film censorship process works. old job. Secondly, in January, I shall be I don’t think that the classifica tion and censorship of films has publishing, along with the deci changed that much in the interim, sions on classifications for films, a but my attitude has. For too long, codified reason for that decision. I censorship has been shrouded in think this is a very important step mystery: not enough information and will open up censorship to has been given to the public or the public scrutiny. It will inform the public and the importers why a importers. decision was made, and it will give What is your role in relation to importers a chance to see a con sistency in the decisions. censorship? Also, by publishing the reasons To open up the censorship for decisions, one gets better process to public scrutiny. I am a decisions in the first place. We may

get a few brickbats thrown at us, but I don’t think they are as impor tant as the new philosophy. The third thing we plan to do is p ro d u ce an an n u a l re p o rt, containing inform ation on all theatrical films, trends in film censorship and perhaps trends on television censorship. There hasn’t been one of those done before. How will you publicize the codified explanations for classifications? They will be gazetted in The Commonwealth Gazette, as well as reproduced once a month in Aus tralasian Cinema. I was talking recently at a conference of sta te o fficials involved in censorship and many of the officials expressed an interest in undertaking to contact the news papers and get the information widely circulated. I would investi gate the possibility of using local

newspapers here, as well. At a censorship conference in Toronto, in November 1979, the chairman, Professor Richard Roud, suggested that censorship decisions, re classification and cuts, should be displayed outside cinemas as that was one way of achieving public accountability. Has such a move been considered here? That would be something for the industry to take on, I am not sure that the states would legislate for it, and it is a state matter. Obviously, I would be for as much dissemination of information as possible. But I think you could run into some political problems if you tried to suggest to the state ministers concerned that this was something they should consider enforcing legally. Given that there has been some Cinema Papers, February-March—21

JANET STRICKLAND

breakdown in the censorship degree of visual explicitness, the concepts expressed which places it agreement between the states and degree to which violence or sex is as an “ R” film, but it wouldn’t just the Commonwealth, specifically in justified in the context of the film, be language. I can’t think of any Queensland, how will that affect the use of language, the overall film where one scene would take it material you publish? theme, and so on. All these things into a certain classification. add up to a classification. There is no actual breakdown of the agreement. Certain states may There are no hard and fast rules, In contrast to language, which you not choose to publish the informa particularly in regard to coarse see as having becom e more acceptable, many commentators feel tion, but I can’t see how the two language . . . that visual sexual explicitness has things are related. become increasingly censored by the No, because language is con Board. Do you agree? What if a film is passed federally, stantly changing, and only proves but banned in Queensland? Surely that what is unacceptable one year your codified reasons for passing the is acceptable the next. Community I can’t agree or disagree; I don’t film would not be welcome in standards are always changing, and know. I left in 1976 and came back Queensland? language is probably changing the in October 1979. In the two months fastest. I have been here, I have not seen That’s their problem. When I joined the Board, the evidence of what you say. You may first fight I had was over how many be correct, but I don’t get the feel There has been considerable “bullshits” should be cut out of ing you are. discussion in industry papers about Love Story (“ NRC”). That sort of possible new classifications. Is this thing wouldn’t happen today. I was At the time you weren’t at the something the Board is looking at? much younger than the rest of the Board, did you feel community Board members, and I just couldn’t standards changed in regard to Yes. I must state, though, that believe my ears as they sat there visual explicitness of a sexual any decision to rew rite the deciding whether they should take nature? classification system is a matter for “bullshit” out of here or “bullshit” No. I don’t. I think the move the states. I put up a proposal at the out of there. I don't think bad language alone ment. if there has been a shift in recent conference for a change in the classification system, and the would today place a film in an “ R” emphasis, has been in the com officials present will be briefing certificate. You may get sexual munity concern about violence. their ministers before a ministerial conference this year.

Listening to people talk about things. I get the impression that the depiction of sexual activity really isn’t a matter of such concern. Some people, in fact, believe it could have a beneficial effect on people in a way that the graphic depiction of violence could not. One psychiatrist has suggested that to some people there is some release in seeing sexually-explicit material, but there is no release in seeing ex plicit violence unless you actually go out and commit a crime. Do you see the possibility of the community accepting an “ X” certificate at some stage? I don't think there is going to be a need for one. When it was pro posed several years ago, I thought it was a very good idea. But techno logy has moved faster than the idea. There is no point in having an “ X” certificate with the amount of videotape that is going to be cir culated in this country. People are going to be able to watch the equivalent of “ X”-rated films in their own homes. They will just buy them at a store and put them on their own video cassette. It is extremely expensive, however. A video cassette costs in the vicinity of SI00 and one has to have video machinery to view it. A cinema ticket, on the other hand, costs around $4.50. It is also arguable that a considerable number of the raincoat brigade would not be able to afford videotapes. Your argument, therefore, seems to go back to the days when the Commonwealth Customs Department allowed $80 copies of ‘Ulysses’ to be sold in Aus tralia, but banned the paperback . . .

Can you reveal what you proposed? My proposal was to replace “ N RC” and “ M” with two verysimple classifications: “ 12+ ” for “ NRC” , and “ 15 + ’’ for “ M” . The basis for my proposal is that I don’t b e lie v e “ N R C ” and “ M ” classifications are readily under stood without explanatory notes. A numerical language would immed iately rectify this and directly explain the mental processes whereby the Board m ade a decision.

No. I believe the “ G” and “ R” classification are fairly widelyunderstood.

I don’t think it’s the same thing. I don’t disagree with the concept — in fact, I think it’s a good idea — but I don’t think it is going to be necessary. People who want to see that material are going to be able to see it anyway.

How does the Board make a decision re classification, and how easily can it remain consistent within a given classification?

At present, hardcore sex films are shown in Kings Cross, Sydney, but not in the other capitals. Does this concern you?

Although this is perhaps not admitted, we have to classify according to precedents. If you are seeing a lot of films, reading a lot of books, or assessing any commodity in bulk — and a film is commodity — you can’t operate in isolation. You do tend to say, “ I saw a film last week in which there was an animal shot and a child assaulted and we passed that in ‘NRC’, now why shouldn’t we also pass this film, which has the same degree of explicitness and the same degree of possible emotional disturbance, as ‘NRC’? Or, is there something in it which makes it stronger than the film we saw last week?” We look at a number of differ ent things, which, I think, the code system will elaborate. There is the

That has to do with the vigour, or lack of it, by the state police forces. The exhibition and classification of films is a matter for the states to police.

Are there any other changes?

22—Cinema Papers. February-March

Has the Board considered an “X” certification for violence? I don’t see how one can isolate violence.

“I am a great believer in public participation in the media and media issues, and I include film censor ship as a media issue.”

In the U.S., for example, there has been an attempt to get the “X” re classified into “XV” and “XS”. There has also been talk of similar moves in France . . . Okay, but why not have a “ V” for violence in “ NRC” and “ M” and “ G”?

JANET STRICKLAND

Because the violence at that level is Several producers have been critical not likely to cause offence. After all, of this process, claiming that what one is not going to be offended by they have been told at double-head the violence in an “NRC” film . . . was highly misleading . . . No. In an “X” film it could be different. Many people could, for example, go off to see Pier Paolo Pasolini’s “Salo” expecting to see a sex film and be grotesquely horrified by the violence in it . . . Well, it may have some value, but there are many films where there is a combination of sex and violence. What would you have then? An “ RS” and “ RV”?

I didn’t say “a lot o f ’; I said “sev an expensive rubber stamp for the Censorship Board. What is your eral” . . . relationship with the Films Board? If that is so, then I’d like to hear I see it as a totally independent about it. board, which exercises its functions Can you give some examples of where this has occurred? Things have obviously changed over judicially and which reflects com the past few years, but the Censor munity attitudes in films as they see “Fantasm” is one example. When ship Board did pursue something it. the film was shown at double-head, close to a reign of terror in regard to no cuts were requested. The film was the cutting and banning of films. As Given that Australia is rather mixed, release-printed and sent a result, many people have been unique, in that it has no legal right to appeal a censorship decision, the Board of Review becomes a surro gate Supreme Court. Its role, therefore, is of vital importance . . . Are you right in that? Is there no avenue of appeal?

It’s a possibility. Surely additional classifications would only help create the greater public awareness you spoke of earlier . . .

The censorship act states that a film shall be deemed obscene if in the opinion of the Commonwealth Cen sor it is obscene. There is no right of appeal to that . . .

I agree with that, but it’s not always easy to isolate violence in a film, and I think there would be very few films that would just get “ RV” for violence. But, going back to the other point you made, I believe the code we have devised will in fact show whether a film is classified for violence or sex or language, or all those things.

Well, what about an appeal to the administrative review proce d u re s, w hereby any p erso n aggrieved by a decision of the statutory body can appeal for a review' of that decision? I am not sure if that act has been passed or not. Certainly, it is in the melting pot. I am a great believer in the neces sity for appeal bodies. Every one must have the right to appeal against a bureaucratic decision. You have said that you don’t believe the Board of Review, as presently constituted, performs that function ad eq u ately . I c a n ’t comment on that.

One major concern of the industry is the problem of not being able to get advertising approved before a film is classified. Is there any possibility this could change? That is a legislative matter again. In each of the state acts through out Australia, it says no advertis ing can be shown unless it shows the classification of the film. Again, we are the ones who are hamstrung by state legislation, and any change in the legislation would have to be done th ro u g h th e m in is te rs involved. I can see it’s a problem, and the industry should get together as a group and propose these changes to the state ministers. It is very hard not to advertise your product, and it can be unnecessarily restrictive at times. Yet the purpose of that section in those acts is to advise the public of the nature of the film which is to appear. It protects the public. Does the procedure whereby the Board looks at Australian features at double-head and gives sugges tions as to how it thinks it could be rated still exist? Yes. I think this is an important role for the Board to play — namely, for the Board to see films at double-head, or look at scripts before shooting starts, and give advice without prejudice to the final decision. If people want to utilize the offices of the Censorship Board for this, then I am all for it; it can save a lot of heartache and expense.

But do you know if its role is being examined? I don’t know. Again, that is a government decision; the AttorneyGeneral makes the appointments for the Board of Review. We have nothing to do with the appoint ments or the constitution of the Board of Review, and quite rightly so. I don’t want to see it otherwise. An area of censorship that has caused debate overseas, and even in Australia, is that concerning the use of children in films of a sexual nature. What is the Board’s position?

“I am a great believer in the necessity for appeal bodies. Everyone must have the right to appeal a bureaucratic decision.” back to the Board which demanded an additional few minutes be cut. That meant, clearly, great expense for the producer . . . Well, I don’t know w hat’s happened in the past three years in that area. But I would be very surprised if your statement that a lot of film producers found them selves in the same position was true.

loath to speak out on censorship for fear of victimization . . . I don’t think th a t’s a fair comment, and I don’t know that it is historically correct. That’s your opinion and you are entitled to it, but I couldn’t comment on it. Several commentators have accused the Films Board of Review of being

I think the Board is bound to take note of the concern expressed about child pornography, and the fact that the states, in terms of liter ary publication, are tightening their stance against it. I think the Board will follow suit. How does the Board define a child? Is it 16 or 18? And is an 18 year-old actor who plays a 14 year-old character a child? That is a difficult question, and since I have been back — and again it looks as if I am copping out — there haven’t been any films of this nature. Consequently, I don’t know the answer. * Cinema Papers. February-March—23

Excerpts from the

Australian Broadcasting Tribunal Annual Report 1978/79 Each year, the Australian Broadcasting Tribunal publishes an annual report which details, among other things, television viewing and program patterns. The following are extracts from the 1978/79 report:1

The following table illustrates the popularity of Australian programs with viewers in Sydney and Melbourne. Most Popular Programs — Adults 1 8 + years Sydney and Melbourne — March to June, 1 9 7 9

Programs televised between 6 p.m. and 10 p.m. — Com m ercial Television Stations

Program

Metropolitan stations

Program type Television drama Cinema movies Light entertainment Sport News Children Family activities Information Current affairs Political matter Religious matter The arts Education

1977

1978

1976

1977

1978

46.6 14.6 17.5

44.1 15.6 16.2

47.2 15.0 14.9

46.4 14.0 14.2

47.3 14.7 13.1

13.7

42.3 15.2 17.3 2.3 14.4

0.1

2.0 3.0

2.6

0.1 2.8

5.6

3.9

0.1 0.1 0.1

0.1 0.1

—

100.0

2.2

TOTAL

Provincial stations

19/6

2.8

2.1

2.6

14.4

13.6 0.9

14.0

13.9

0.8 0.2 1.6

0.8 0.2 2.0

5.8

5.2 0.1 0.2

0.1

0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1

100.0

0.2

1.7 4.1 0.1 0.1

—

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20.

Viewers

The Sullivans* Roots Channel 9 News* This Fabulous Century* This Is Your Life* Prisoner* Are You Being Served? Willesee at Seven* Cop Shop* New Faces* Channel 7 News* The Don Lane Show* The Restless Years* Channel 7 Sunday Movie Big League* Channel 0/10 Sunday Movie Amco Cup* Mork and Mindy Ask the Leyland Brothers* The Two Ronnies

955,000 954,000 931,000 927,000 912,000 881,000 866,000 859,000 851,000 420,000 (Melb. only) 816,000 766,000 758,000 757,000 744,000 742,000 358,000 (Syd. only) 700,000 350,000 (Syd. only) 686,000

Percentage

23 23 22 22 22 21 21 20 20 20 19 18 18 18 18 18 17 17 17 16

'Australian

The following table shows an average for all states of Australian content between the hours specified. The following table provides an indication of the programs most viewed by children in the five to 12-year age range in Sydney and Melbourne. The information is derived from audience measurement studies done by McNair Anderson Associates Pty Ltd, between March and June, 1979.

Australian Content — Percentage of all program tim e between: (a)

(b)

(c)

6 a.m. to 12 m.n. (Overall) 1974-75 %

1975-76 %

1976-77 %

1977-78 %

1978-79 %

43.7

38.9

39.5

39.2

41.0

Most popular programs — Children 5 -1 2 years Sydney and Melbourne — March to June, 1 9 7 9

Program

Tim e

Children viewing program

P ercentage all available children

6 p.m. to 10 p.m. (Peak-time) 1974-75 %

1975-76 %

1976-77 %

1977-78 %

1978-79 %

47.0

41.5

41.4

41.2

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9.

10.

4 p.m. to 10 p.m.

11.

12. 1977-78 %

1978-79 %

41.0

43.5

13.

14. 15. 16. 17.

18. 19. 20.

l. The complete report may be obtained from the Australian Government Printing Service. 24—Cinema Papers. February-March

Mork and Mindy The Muppet Show Happy Days 1 Dream of Jeannie The Wonderful World of Disney The Incredible Hulk Chips The Sullivans Get Smart Eight is Enough The Bugs Bunny Show The Flintstones Little House on the Prairie The Porky Pig Show Tabitha Sunday Comics Logan’s Run Willesee at Six Welcome Back, Kotter The Bionic Woman

7.30/8.00 p.m. 7.30 p.m. 7.30 p.m. 6.00 p.m. 6.30 p.m. 7.30 p.m. 7.30 p.m. 7.00 p.m. 5.30 p.m. 7.30 p.m. 5.00 p.m. 5.00 p.m. 7.30 p.m. 5.00 p.m. 8.00 p.m. 7.30 a.m. 7.30 p.m. 6.00 p.m. 6.30 p.m. 7.30 p.m.

246,000 242,000 217,000 217,000

30 29 26 26

205,000 196,000 97,000 (Melb. only) 192,000 187,000 186,000 91,000 (Syd. only) 91,000 (Melb. only) 177,000 87,000 (Syd. only) 87,000 (Syd. only) 86,000 (Syd. only) 85,000 (Melb. only) 79,000 (Syd. only) 157,000 77,000 (Syd. only)

25 24 23 23 23 22 22 22 21 21 21 21 20 19 19 19

ABT ANNUAL REPORT

The following graph shows the percentage and numbers of children, between the ages of five and 12, viewing at each hour of the day for weekdays and weekends. The cut-off times for the presentation of “C” classified programs and for “ G” , “A” and “ AO” classified programs are also shown.

Composition of television transmissions Sunday to Saturday 1 1 .0 0 -1 1 .3 0 p.m.

Sydney commercial stations — hourly average ' ATN Average Sec. Min. Sec. Min 32 47 54 48 Programs 49 16 9 10 Advertisements 1 26 1 Program promotions 30 Community Service 13 20 announcements

TEN

TCN

Min 47 10 1

Sec. 33 21 42

Sec. 36 37 23

Min 47 10 1

Melbourne commercial stations — hourly average Average Min. Sec.

48 9 2

Programs Advertisements Program promotions Community service announcements

09 28 05

Min.

HSV Sec.

48 9 2

33 04 03

GTV Sec.

Min.

47 10 1

39 07 49

48 9 2

Sec. 15 12 22 11 5

ATV

Min.

The following pie-chart summarizes the average amount of advertising and other non-program material televised between 6 p.m. and 10 p.m. by metropolitan commercial stations. M e tro p o lita n C o m m e rc ial T elevisio n S tation s 6 p .m .-1 0 p.m .

The following tables, based on four surveys conducted during 1979, provide a detailed account of advertising content. They are based, for the The following graph has been prepared from information held by the most part, on off-air observations by ABT staff, supplemented by data ABT’s research section to show the popularity of television with supplied by the stations. metropolitan viewers during the past 13 years. Percentage of Tim e Occupied by Television Advertisem ents 11 a .m .-1 1 .3 0 p.m. Station

11 a.m.-4.00 p.m.

4-6 p.m.

6-10 p.m.

10-11.30 p.m.

Overall

ATN TCN TEN

% 1 4 .3 18.1 1 5 .2

% 16.1 1 5 .6 1 8 .3

% 18.1 18.1 1 8 .6

% 1 8 .8 1 7 .2 1 7 .8

% 1 6 .3 1 7 .3 1 7 .0

HSV GTV ATV

1 3 .2 1 8 .2 1 4 .4

1 4 .9 13.1 1 6 .0

1 7 .5 1 7 .8 17.1

1 5 .8 1 6 .9 15.1

15.1 1 6 .9 1 5 .4

BTQ QTQ TVQ

9 .7 1 6 .3 1 2 .5

1 3 .9 1 4 .5 1 5 .2

1 7 .8 1 8 .0 1 7 .6

1 4 .2 1 2 .6 1 3 .0

1 3 .5 '1 6.1 1 4 .8

ADS NWS SAS

1 3 .2 1 5 .6 1 5 .6

1 4 .0 1 4 .7 1 6 .2

1 7 .3 1 6 .9 1 6 .9

1 4 .7 1 4 .3 1 6 .6

1 4 .6 1 5 .5 1 6 .0

TVW STW

1 6 .7 7 .7

1 5 .2 1 5 .4

18.1 1 8 .3

1 7 .4 1 6 .6

1 6 .8 1 3 .2

TVT

5 .9

8 .0

1 4 .2

1 0 .5

9 .4

1966

1967

1968 1969

1970

1971

1972

1973

1974

1975

1976

1977

1978

1979

Cinema Papers. February-March—25

Adrian Martin “I think revolutionary cinema can only be a dif ferential cinema, a cinema which questions all the rest o f cinema.” Jacques Rive tie An unforgettable moment in Patricio Guz man’s The Battle of Chile is when a policeman carefully aims his gun at the camera and fires; the image blurs. The shot is then repeated as the narrator tells the audience that the cameraman involved died filming '‘the true face of fascism” . Unforgettable and certainly stirring, but it raises several objections. The first is: Does fascism (or any other ‘‘-ism” ) have a “ face”? Is it a matter of individuals, revolutionary heroes and repressive villains? A second, more fun damental, objection is: Can a film simply photograph this fascism, the truth of this fascism, and return to the viewer a piece of reality? It is always assumed that while politics is dif The radio station 3RRR. in Melbourne, ficult and complex, it is possible, with the right recently ran a course on “ Film and Politics” intentions, for a film simply to talk about comprising broadcast programs, screenings and politics, to take it as a subject. Film is the con discussion. (See table on p. 29.) The initiative on veyor belt that drops all these hot political the part of those involved in organizing the potatoes in our laps. In itself, it is totally tran course, particularly producer Helen Molnar, sparent and unproblematic, which is why it has should be applauded, appearing as it does in the always been seen as the ideal propaganda desert of Australian film culture. medium, whichever ideology it happened to By a happy coincidence, Andrew Sards’ serve. Politics and Cinema appeared at the same time. But if the cinema were thought to have its own Yet it is an enormous topic, prey to many politics, its own social place, its own history, problems that can too soon defeat people un would it be any longer possible to speak of Bat familiar with the theoretical and practical issues tleship Potemkin or Etat de siege (State of Siege) involved. They are, nonetheless, crucial as being more political than Superman? In con problems. tent, yes, but how little, finally, content accounts A political film is usually defined as one that for. Politics is inside every part of our experience talks about politics. But it is often a very of any film — our looking, hearing, enjoying, restricted conception of politics, beginning and thinking. ending with the class struggle, the great.

26—-Cinema Papers. February-March

anonymous abstractions of the bourgeois and the proletariat. This conception, in fact, suits conservatism very well. Politics belongs to the masses, while life belongs to the individual. Loving, suffering, growing old gracefully — such are the elements of the universal human drama which escapes the pettiness of political transactions. Thus the humanist lesson of Luchino Visconti’s La caduta delgi dei (The Damned), according to Ken Mogg, is that the individual can transcend politics (in this case, Nazism) and find himself.

Battle of Algiers.

why and how such issues might be thought political is forthcoming. Sarris still has his old auteurist axe to grind; a film has a personality behind it or it has almost nothing: “ I would argue very strongly that whereas Triumph of the Will and Olympiad are ‘superb films’ because of Riefenstahl, The Man with the Movie Camera is interesting almost in spite of Vertov.” 1

But what is the “self’, if not the sum of many and varied determinations that have nothing to do with the individual’s choice or action? Fami ly, class, sex, law, economy — all these are in scribed within the cultural and political values of a society at any given time. They put me in my place, and that place is political. The arena of politics spreads wider than the parliament or the factory. It reaches into the words we speak, our relationships, our unconscious. This is why I ob ject to The Battle of Chile when it points a camera at a particular man and identifies him as “ fascism” . An individual does not speak an ideology, as Sam Rohdie in his discussion of Godard’s and Gorin’s Tout va bien pointed out; an ideology speaks the individual, fashioning him or her in its image. If the individual is taken as being ‘constructed’, rather than ‘natural’, then the forces that construct him or her can somehow be changed.

This insight allows us to return to the Hollywood cinema, particularly the 1950s melodramas of Douglas Sirk or Vincente Min nelli. In these films, family relations become power relations, and personal confrontations symbolize the clash of conflicting value systems. The obsessive dilemma in which the Hollywood cinema, across all genres, places its heroes and heroines is the posing of the desperate questions: Who am I? Where do I fit in? The search for the answers, as the films themselves seem dimly to recognize, is not pure ly a personal, individual problem, but a social and political one. In the modern American, cinema, Mandingo and Saturday Night Fever continue this awareness with a refreshing in telligence. As the prostitute in Francois Truf faut’s Domicile conjugal (Bed and Board) remarks: “ If you don’t get into politics, politics will get into you!” As if to heed that advice, Andrew Sarris has published Politics and Cinema. At first glance, it might seem to share the inclusive definition of politics I have suggested, with sections devoted to violence, pornography, semiotics, stars and avant-garde films. Unfortunately, it is a random collection of articles Sarris has written between 1971 and 1978, mostly rather patchy reviews from The Village Voice, and no elaboration as to

Much of the material in Politics and Cinema is witty and suggestive, particularly the articles on Nazism in recent films, and pornography (of which Sarris is a fond devotee), but the underly ing critical method is extremely underdeveloped. This shows, above all, in his adulation o f ‘form’ — the camera movement of an Ophuls or a Mizoguchi, for instance — as purely romantic and expressive, transcending base political con tent: “The ascending and descending staircases of Hitchcock are more meaningful than all the Odessa Steps.”2

Sarris fetishizes such references and removes them from the social and cultural determina tions which in fact create their meaning. No ar tist can stand outside history in search of “beauty and truth.”3 Sarris can only discuss politics on the level of narrative content — those issues a film covers, or, just as importantly, those it avoids. Hollywood is found guilty of glaring “crimes of omission, for not treating the problems of real people, for not fighting the good fight against fascism, militarism, capitalism, and im perialism . . . Many movies were caught in a tug of war between edification and entertainment . . . Under these conditions relatively few films turned out to be overtly political.”4 1. Politics and Cinema: Columbia University Press, p. 108. 2. op. cit., p. 6. 3. op. cit.. p. 8. 4. op. cit.. p. 9.

Cinema Papers, February-March—27

FILM AND POLITICS

Unconsciously reinforcing a stereotype: Paul Mazursky’s An Unmarried Woman. The individual as sexually repressed: Don Siegel’s Dirty Harry.

It does not take long for this line of argument to reach its point of absurdity. A film is progres sive if it packs everything in, represents all sides fairly and reveals the ‘truth' where it has never been revealed before. It is not only critics but also filmmakers who think this way. You have seen a thousand repressive portraits of women passive and enchained, pontificates Paul Mazursky, so let me show you An Unmarried Woman, and never mind if the dominant sexual values sneak in again through the back door. In a similar vein, Rob Jordan during the broadcasts called Ken Loach's Days of Hope “ rich and open" because every political view point gets its two cents worth before the series is over. Worst of all, Mike Richards and John Slavin naively suggest that the only problem with The Battle o f Chile is that the activities of the CIA could not be filmed and put into the work. As if it were that easy: one more piece of film, and then one could have the whole story. The whole story, indeed — where “whole” im plies unity, truth, plentitude, and “ story” evokes narrative with its order, coherence, ultimate reassurance. An analysis of the politics of film must, I believe, begin here, with the notion of films as potential purveyor of truth, and the narrative realist form which supports that no tion. In short, the so-called ‘art’ of film — what Sarris would put on the side of romantic selfexpression — must be interrogated at a fun damental level. Lesley Stern and Barbara Creed, in a very im portant follow-up radio program to the course, were concerned with just this task, finding the course wanting for generally repressing such questions. Stern has commented elsewhere: “ . . . it cannot be assumed that there is a true reality which can be captured . . . Any activity of subverting commonsense notions of reality re quires a dismantling, breaking apart, of the homogenized discourse of patriarchal linguistic structures.” 5 5. “ Independent Feminist Filmmaking in Australia” , The Australian Journal o f Screen Theory, Vol 5/6, p. 113. 28—Cinema Papers, February-March

Presenting all views: Ken Loach’s Days of Hope.

Film language itself — the codes and conven tions that constitute ‘professionalism’ — is, therefore, not innocent, and cannot precede the inclusion or exclusion of politics in any film. Tim Burns' Against the Brain is significant in the Australian context to this extent: it destroys all traces of technical perfection as defined by dominant cinema, leaves the viewer displaced, decentred and unable to grasp any reassuring piece of the real world that enters the film through fragmented references. Its parent is Dziga Vertov's The Man with the Movie Camera, still, more than 50 years since its production, one of the most modern and radical of films. Yet Sarris condescends to find in this Film only “ minor charm.”6 This is because he cannot see. as he further demonstrates in his chapter “ Avant-Garde Films are More Boring than Ever” , that “ eccentric” (non-mainstream) films do not find their own private arty niche, but mer cilessly return to batter the foundations of the type of cinema they criticize.

The very act of telling a story, constructing a narrative, is politically significant, quite regardless of the content of the particular story. Tom Ryan and John Flaus argued that, despite the intelligence of a film such as All the President’s Men which subtly questions the workings of the greatest modern political institu tion in the U.S., the press, the narrative form itself gives the Film a certain ideology. The film presents a closed, coherent world and events follow in an intelligible order — such ele ments work to reassure, pacify, and in a sense, seduce the viewer. This is the problem with a supposedly leftist work like Days of Hope, which effaces its own language and political place to represent certain historical events as real and transparent. Thus, it is recuperated by the very medium it sets out to subvert: the television costume drama. Finally, Days of Hope is no dif ferent from The Six Wives of Henry VIII. The narrative film places the viewer in a cer tain position from which he is granted access to sight, knowledge and pleasure. More important than any political issue being debated in CostaGavras’ State of Siege — and on about the level of a gangster thriller — is its recurrent motif of the camera zooming in to find a character look ing, listening, perceiving the immediate truth of his situation. For this is what the film allows the viewer to do: to receive the ‘whole story’ and be accordingly comforted. To ignore that, as Slavin and Richards did, is to ignore the crucial political questions. This critical approach presumes that all narrative films succeed in what they so pain stakingly attempt to construct: coherence, unity and order. Yet so many films fall short of the mark, and this is where one can begin to in terrogate them. The interest of a film such as Don Siegel’s Dirty Harry, as Jack Clancy pointed out, is precisely in its mis-matching of contradictory cultural tendencies. The ideology of law enforcement is crossed by, at one mo ment, the myth of the individual hero and, at

FILM AND POLITICS

Defining its own politics: Nagisa Oshima’s Empire of the Senses.

Suspect sexual politics: Phillip Noyce’s Newsfront.

another, a code of male sexuality that strives to deny, or even obliterate, the existence of women. Harry Callaghan (Clint Eastwood) rejects the society which represses his individuality; at the same time his righteous anger seems motivated by an intense drive to repress the sexuality of himself and others. The same reading could be applied to Newsfront. On. the content level, the film is amazingly banal — throw in a few references to Coca Cola and Richard Nixon, and, voila, a ‘statem ent’ about American cultural im perialism. But there is another aspect of the film which has been indulgently overlooked: its ex tremely suspect sexual politics. In contrast to the various conservative and repressed women in the film, Amy (Wendy Hughes) is the token liberated woman. Yet her character, as presented, is elliptical and un motivated. She becomes, ultimately, the blank page upon which the two brothers, Len and Frank Maguire (Bill Hunter and Gerard Ken nedy), write their desire. Inexplicably, the film swaps her from one man to the other and back again like a card in a male adolescent sex-game, and it is completely complicit with this patriarchal fantasy. Such are the enlightened politics of the Australian commercial cinema. There are other directions from which one could approach the politics of film: Analysing the industrial framework of production, promo tion and distribution would bring to light the no tion of cinema as an ‘institution’ in itself, which tries to ensure how films are received and under stood. The observation that films are generally in tended for passive consumption extends much further than commercial theatre chains. Film festivals or the National Film Theatre of Australia, under another guise and at a different social level, are similarly devoted to ‘clearing’ films as quickly and painlessly as possible, blur ring the differences between conservative and radical cinema in the name of extolling the vir tues of artistry and personal expression. The basic apparatus of film, its technology, needs to be examined. Historically, the invention of the camera takes over, refines and perfects certain features of the other realist arts, par ticularly painting. Perspective, deep focus, the il lusion of movement: none are neutral, each carry their own political weight, in that they serve to induce a perception of the world con

structed in a film as real, seen precisely as the human eye would see it, coherent and non contradictory. These theoretical considerations, however necessary, would seem to avoid the question of treating specific films and their specific use of cinematic and social conventions. Here one returns to the problem of content — what a film shows or evokes. It can never be, as I have argued, a matter of showing the politically ‘right’ scene, achieving a true content. There is an alternative cinematic practice, ex emplified supremely today by the work of Nagisa Oshima. His films do not simply repre sent the world, or a certain analysis of the world.

They ask the unceasing questions: What should be shown? How does one make the link, in L’empire de sens (Empire of the Senses) or The Ceremony, between political history and a per sonal sexual history? Nothing is fitted together, but the question of that fit is always posed: “Empire of the Senses is not a Film that directly takes up political questions, but by the very fact that it does not deal with politics, it can be seen as very political.”7 Oshima’s seemingly paradoxical statement emphasizes an essential position: a film can only talk about politics by talking about the politics, of its own choices. It can be validly objected that these proposi tions concerning a truly radical cinema ignore a simple fact: that only a small elite group ever gets to see, or would ever want to see, such films — a classic case of preaching to the converted. Yet the mass audience is not given in its nature or fixed in its taste; the sort of filmic pleasures that are offered and accepted can be changed. For the moment, the position espoused by Peter Wollen seems realistic enough: “You can say that the audience for [this] kind of film is marginal, but the problem is not marginal. So you begin with the problem, and you hope that the audience will find it, and enjoy it.”8 ★ 7. Cinema Papers, No. 23, p. 579; cf also Stephen Heath, “The Question Oshima” , Wide Angle, Vol 2, No. 1, p. 48. 8. Interview with Wollen and Laura Mulvey, Screen, Vol. 15. No. 3. p. 132.

FILM AND POLITICS: 3RRR THE RADIO PROGRAMS

THE SCREENINGS

Introduction “ Consciousness Raising” : Class conflict and colliding images

Battleship Potemkin Directed by Sergei Eisenstein

“ Documentary or Family Drama” : Propaganda or factual account of World War 1?

Days of Hope Directed by Ken Loach — four-part BBC series. One episode only

“ Narrative, Press and Politics” : Praised by the Press! Misunderstood by the Press?

All the President’s Men Directed by Alan Pakula

“The Seduction of Totalitarianism/Fascism” : Sexual repression and the pursuit of power

W.R.: Mysteries of the Organism Directed by Dusan Makavejev or The Damned Directed by Luchino Visconti

“The Reality” : Spying on the spies

The Battle of Chile Directed by Patricio Guzman

“ Old Revolutionaries and Young Radicals“ :

La guerre est finie Directed by Alain Resnais

“ American Influence in Latin America” : Political entertainment?

State of Siege Directed by Constantin Costa-Gavras

“ Confronting the Rules” : A case of preaching to the converted?

Tout va bien Directed by Jean-Luc Godard

“ Reinforcing the Rules” : A crusading Angel or fascist devil?

Dirty Harry Directed by Don Siegel

“ Political Films in Australia” : The experimental film

Skin of Your Eye Directed by Arthur and Corinne Cantrill and Carnage Directed by Tim Burns

“Australian History With or Without Politics” : A discussion with Phillip Noyce

Newsfront Directed by Phillip Noyce

The series was presented, and the discussions led, by Jack Clancy, John O’Hara, Mike Richards, Rob Jordan and Ken Mogg, all Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology lecturers; Tom Ryan, film lecturer at the Melbourne State College; and Sam Rohdie, lecturer at La Trobe University.'

Cinema Papers, February-March—29

YOU CAN NEVER BE SURE WHAT PATRICK WILL DO

Ponch Hawkes

Bruce Barry- Julia Blake- Helen Hemingway Maria^lercedes-Walter Pym-Frank Wilson

30â&#x20AC;&#x201D;Cinema Papers, February-March

As the number of Australian films produced since 1970 increases, so does the eagerness of writers to determine what degree directors and scriptwriters have left their auteurist imprints. One scriptwriter who is receiving considerable critical scrutiny is Everett de Roche. Born in the U.S., De Roche emigrated to Australia in the early 1970s and began work as a journalist in Brisbane. He then moved to Crawford Productions in Melbourne as a staff writer. Since going freelance, De Roche has written for television and the cinema. So far, four of his feature scripts have been filmed: “ Patrick” , “ Long Weekend” , “ Snapshot” and “ Harlequin” . In the following interview, conducted by scriptwriter Paul Davies, De Roche talks about his projects and his attitudes to film production in Australia.

Patrick

imagination. When I did get a chance to research it, I found, surprisingly, that there were many How long did it take to write cases which were similar. I then showed the script to a “Patrick”? team of neuro-surgeons at the The initial writing, which I did Alfred Hospital, fully expecting three or four years ago, took 10 them to say it was bullshit. But days. The draft was 3'/2 hours long; quite the opposite happened. They it then became a matter of pruning more or less verified its feasibility, and helped to give the script it down. Once Richard Franklin became technical authenticity. Where I involved, there was even more re had made up the names of drugs, they supplied the real names. writing. How different is the final script from your concept?

The special effects in “Patrick” are quite complex. How circumscribed is a writer by what is physically practical?

Originally it was a mystery where you were in doubt about what was Ideally, you wouldn’t let it happening. Richard made it a suspense-thriller and let the audi influence you, leaving such ence know from the start who the problems to the production crew. But one is inevitably conscious of baddie was. such things because there is no “Patrick” deals with para-normal sense writing a sequence that phenomena. Is that a theme you req u ires an effect you c a n ’t reproduce. have wanted to write about? At the time I conceived Patrick, Four years ago there weren’t I didn’t see it as a special effectsmany films like Patrick — The type film. But once we brought in Exorcist was about the only one. an expert from the U.S. (Conrad B u t b e tw e e n w r iti n g an d Rothman), and found out what he completing the film a whole stack could do, we realized how valuable special effects could be. of occult-type films came out. Did this worry you? Very much, because we knew we would be accused of jumping on a bandwagon. To what degree did you research the script? M ost of it cam e from my

When “Patrick” was shown during the voting screenings for the Aus tralian Film Awards in 1978, many people laughed. Did you expect that reaction? We expected laughs, but not necessarily in the same places. Let’s face it, the Awards voters constitute an unusual audience. They have

had to sit through a lot of films, some good and some bad, and Patrick, as I remember, was shown at the end. Patrick hasn’t had that sort of reaction elsewhere. I was at a screening in Perth where 4000 people jumped where they should jump, and laughed where they should laugh. Is “Patrick” as much a love story as a mystery-thriller? It’s a monster story, and I cut anything that didn’t relate to Patrick as a monster. One of the first things to go was the romantic aspect. The b ig g est p ro b lem was deciding whether to make the monster the threat, or someone people would try and understand. In Jaws, for instance, you don’t understand why the shark goes around attacking people and that’s the frightening thing. O r ig in a lly , I w a n te d to understand who Patrick was and what motivated him, but I ran the risk of it becoming boring. People just want to be thrilled. That is almost a definition of a commercial film: one that offers a thrill, instead of insight to human behaviour . . . To me, commercialism is the ability to make something compre hensible to an audience. You can be subtle to the point of obscurity, which is not only bad filmmaking, but also rude. A painter can paint a picture, and if no one likes it he has only

wasted his time and a bit of canvas. If you do that in films, you have wasted the money of the people who financed it, and of those who paid to be entertained. It’s hard to imagine an Australian producer risking a lot on a film that was obscure . . . It’s a small country, and no one can afford to take chances. I am talking now as if I am very commercially-minded. If I were talking to a network executive, I’d take the other tack and be accused of being aesthetic and arty fartsy. The answer has to be somewhere in the middle. Is it an option to write low-budget films, so that you don’t have to worry as much about returns on investment? Yes. You can write a low-budget film w ithout com prom ise to quality, providing it is written with inbuilt money-savers.

Long Weekend When did you write “Long Week end?” I was writing episodes of Bluey at the tim e, and I w rote Long Weekend as a way of getting out of what I should have been doing. Again, it was written very quickly — 10 days or so. Do you like working on several projects at once? Cinema Papers, February-March—31

EVERETT DE ROCHE

I don’t have any choice, because I can’t afford to knock work back. If I have only two projects going at once, I start getting worried about unemployment. “Long Weekend” is essentially a two-handed piece, though nature could be considered a third reference Yes. Nature is supposed to be the hero of the piece. The two characters, Peter and Marcia, are pretty unsympathetic. They invade the bush, and the bush deals with them.

decide there is no hope. Poetically, they leave it to another man to kill him. Of course, the animals can’t tell you that they are the sympathetic characters. You have to rely on music, and the way things are shot. Again, unfortunately, the music in the opening sequence is very heavy, and there is a sense of menace about the animals. Are Peter and Marcia a typical Australian couple?

Yes. Richard likes to be.in on every aspect of the scripting, whereas Simon prefers to look at the Finished draft and act as a devil’s advocate. With Simon, it might be valuable to work with a script editor as well, because a writer needs someone he can ring up in the middle of the night for feedback. Simon is generally too busy to do this. Did Franklin fulfil this function on “Patrick”? Yes. Richard and I are working on another project (Road Games), and, even though he is on some island in Fiji, he rings me up by radio telephone every second day. He can’t stand to be left out.

Why do you say the bush is supposed to be the hero? Isn ’t it? Perhaps it hasn’t w orked. Long Weekend was experimental, and it relied •on a n u m b er of th in g s to w o rk . Unfortunately, the bush comes across as a threat too early; it should have emerged as a threat only afte r the audience had sympathized with the animals. And I don’t think that sympathy is there. Long Weekend would have been much better if the audience had been told at the beginning that Peter and Marcia were going to die.

You said that one of the things that went wrong with “Long Weekend” was that the couple is doomed. Yet “ S n a p s h o t ” starts with a remarkable scene where any number of things could be happening, and up till the end one still doesn’t know who is going to burn up in the room The premise of a girl being pursued by a killer isn’t strong enough as a story nowadays, I am continually using Chris as a sounding board. By giving her a c re d it on Snapshot, I was acknowledging her continuing contribution. As far as other collaborations go, I am working at the moment with Peter Pinney, which I am really enjoying.

A man (John Hargreaves) and his dog, alone at night, as nature closes in. Colin Eggle ston’s Long Weekend.

No. I think the film could have been set anywhere. We all go camping with the idea of getting closer to nature, armed with cans of Mortein and God knows what else. ' Long Weekend is not supposed to be a h eav y e n v iro n m e n ta l statem en t; it is ju st a very condensed way of saying that nature is capable of looking after itself if man gets too out of line.

Is this for a feature?

Are you happier with “Patrick” or “Long Weekend”?

Ed Jacquard (Rod Mullinar) stares at the harifts he has burnt while holding a casserole. Richard Franklin’s Patrick.

This way, it wouldn’t have had to sympathize with them, and could have concerned itself solely with when this was going to happen. Such is the essence of suspense. The ending, where Peter is killed, comes as a shock. Was there any other way of ending the film? A large slab of the script was omitted because of the difficulty of working with animals. I wrote an enormously complicated sequence for near the end where the animals give Peter a, second chance. They want him to wise up, and he is at the point of doing so when he hears a truck in the distance. He dashes off to the highway, and the animals 32—Cinema Papers, February-March

I think Patrick was a safer story to do; it’s more traditional. You know who the villain is from the s ta rt, and it develops along traditional suspense lines. Long Weekend is far more experimental.

Snapshot The characters in “Snapshot” are far less realized than those in “Patrick”. Is the difference the script or the director? A lot of it has to do with the script. Richard and I worked on and off Patrick for about three years, whereas Snapshot was written in 10 days. I think it is a great credit to Simon Wincer that he got the film off the ground. Was your working relationship with Wincer different to that with Franklin?

The Fire that begins and ends it all. Simon Wincer’s Snapshot.

especially if the audience knows everything is going to turn out okay. . So the idea of the flashforward in Snapshot was to warn the viewer that there might not be a happy ending. This then set up an atmosphere of suspense. It was a bit of a cheat, of course, because it wasn’t her you saw in the beginning. Was Chris de Roche’s contribution largely in the development of Angela’s character? Yes. Chris gave me a lot of feedback on how to write from a female point of view. Do you intend working with Chris again?

No, for a television series. But we are not sure what is going to happen, as it is horrendously expensive. Peter has written a number of novels, and I think he is probably the best Australian adventure writer. The novel we are adapting is based on the life of Frank Jardine who opened up the Cape York area in an attempt to turn it into another Singapore. It’s a good novel, but I am beginning to see the difficulties of adapting a novel to the screen. The script doesn’t capture what is there in the book. That is partially because Peter writes good prose, and prose has nothing to do with scriptwriting.

Harlequin How did the “ H a r l e q u i n ” screenplay come about? I wrote a treatment, on spec., called The Minister’s Magician. I showed it to Simon, who showed it to Tony Ginnane and Bill Fayman, who commissioned the screenplay. It went through several drafts before everyone was happy. I then

EVERETT DE ROCHE

The producers, presumably on the grounds the film would appeal to a broader audience. Tony and I disagree on this. Perhaps he is right — he is the authority on world markets. He is the one who has to deal with the type of mentality that insisted Patrick be dubbed from English into American. I think it’s absurd. But I am only the writer. Is your dialogue also non-Aus tralian? Yes. Again, if concessions have to be made to flog the film over seas, I’d rather make them myself than leave them to some butcher in an American dubbing studio. It’s ironic that for years I had to be careful not to use any Ameri canisms in my Crawfords scripts. Nowadays I have to substitute “ windshield” for “windscreen” , “elevator” for “ lift” , etc.

Yankee Zephyr What is happening with “Yankee Zephyr”?

went off to Mexico, and when I returned the story had been altered to remove the religious element. Why was that? M arketing reasons. Certain overseas investors apparently had cold feet at the idea of a priest who d o e s n ’t behave lik e F a th e r Flannagan. Also, the title was changed. Titles with variations on the word “ magic” are a poor risk according to market research, I am told. How do you feel about alterations being made by the producers? How I feel doesn’t matter. The producer pays his money, which gives him the right to use the script for dunny paper if he wants. Any scriptwriter who worries exces sively about what happens to his scripts after they leave the typewriter is doomed to chronic depression. However, if alterations have to be made, I would rather do them myself.

Father (above) and son (left): Nick Rast (David Hemmings) and Alex (Mark Spain). Simon Wincer’s Harlequin.

connection, which is a great pity. R e lig io n and p o litic s a re historically a volatile duo. Czar Nicholas II would have undoubt edly given Rasputin the boot at the outset had his wife not believed him to be “ a man of God” . I hope audi ences don’t boot out Harlequin for the same reason. But certain similarities survive. Rasputin cured Alexander of haemophilia; Wolfe cures Alex of leukaemia. In the ending, Wolfe’s murder is an exact paraphrase of Rasputin’s. After being shot several times and dumped in a river, Rasputin — according to an autopsy report — in fact died of drowning. Is your interpretation of Rasputin along conventional lines, or is it based on new research: e.g., Colin Wilson’s book'?

Richard is working at Columbia, and is tied up with other projects. There is a first draft of the script, but neither of us is satisfied with it. The script is based on the true story of an American DC3 military cargo plane which was reported lost while carrying the payroll for the South Pacific fleet. The plane was actually found a few years later by a pearl diver, but I have pretended it hasn’t been found and that there is a race to find it. A lot of different parties are all breaking their necks to get up to Cape York to salvage this money. At this stage we haven’t decided whether it’s to be a land or under water salvage; filming underwater presents a lot of problems unless you have a large tank. All we have is an outline and the vague idea of making it a romp in the tradition of It’s a Mad, Mad, Mad World. Are you planning to use Cape York as the location? It hasn’t been decided. Richard and I did a reconnaissance up there a few years ago, and I am not sure it has all that much to offer which couldn’t be found a lot closer to home. I was expecting dense jungle and tropical beaches, but much of it is the same as elsewhere.

Yes, very different. The story for Snapshot was more or less handed to us on a take-it-or-leave-it basis, whereas Harlequin was a story we both cared about, and wanted to do.

Like most legendary figures, the m yths about R asputin have survived the truth. But I didn’t set out to retell the Rasputin story. What I wanted to do was show that things have changed very little, and that a modern religious-faith healer could still accom plish w hat Rasputin accomplished. Yes, Wilson’s books were helpful.

How close connection?

Who determined that the country in the film be unspecified, and why?

With Patrick, there was a fairly complete draft of the script before I became associated with Richard; he then suggested improvements and changes. With Yankee Zephyr, Richard is much more involved in the initial scripting.

1. Colin Wilson, Rasputin and the Fall o f lhe Romanovs. Arthur Barker. 1964.

David H e m m i n g s said his involvement would mean some

Was your involvement with Wincer different from that on “Snapshot”?

is the Rasputin

W ith th e re lig io u s fa c to r removed, there is alm ost no

Is your collaboration with Franklin similar to that on “Patrick”?

control over its international marketability . . . I believe he would be looking for a story that wouldn’t depend on it being exclusively Australian — that is, a story that could be told in any part of the world. The only thing Australian about the incident is that it happened here, and that Cape York is a fairly unique place because it is possible for a plane to have crashed there and remain undiscovered for 40 years. Hemmings has also said that the international market is the U.S. As an ex-Californian, do you feel you are uniquely placed to understand that market? I hope so. On the whole, American films are blatantly commercial and make no bones about the fact they are out to make money. I basically agree with that approach. Film is a commercial medium. And with a budget of $3.5 million, one doesn’t have much option . . . That’s right. Unless you are a Spielberg, no one is going to take a lot of risks with a big budget. That would mean, I suppose, getting American leads and that sort of thing. What are your feelings about co productions? If they allow us to keep making films, I think it’s all for the good. Certainly there should be room for completely indigenous films as well. How important is a budget to you? Do you often feel there are things you would have liked to have done, but couldn’t? If I were given a multi-million dollar budget, I don’t think I would know what to do with it. Usually, a writer is very aware of budgets, and he can save thousands of dollars before a script even comes off the typewriter. All your scripts are contemporary — almost aggressively so. Now you are doing a film that goes back to World War 2. Is this a new direction for you? No, because Yankee Zephyr is a contemporary film. The crash occurred during the war, but we are picking it up 40 years later. I have nothing against doing period films, it’s just that I started writing film scripts at a time when there was a lot of period stuff around. I went contemporary to be different. Perhaps, I also feel more comfortable with it. Is this because you can more easily relate your personal experience to the present? Continued on P. 76 Cinema Papers. February-March—33

34^Cinema Papers, February-March

Paul Jacobs and the Nuclear Gang

City Farm

Mari Kuttna Mannheim’s International Filmweek has been going for 28 years, drawing its predominantly young audiences from the university, and from the neighboring cities of Ludwigshafen and Heidelberg. Mannheim is as much a cultural as an in dustrial centre, even if, on the Filmweek’s opening day, the welcoming party had to be relegated to the Keller, because up stairs the West German Chancellor, Dr Helmut Schm idt, was addressing a trade-union conference. Filmweek delegates were warned that the police regiments surrounding the building were not to be taken as indica tions of a coup d ‘etat, or even of a police state, but merely as a sign of the neurosis about terrorists. S u c h f l a s h e s of l o c a l c o l o r notwithstanding, Australian fimmakers (and the Australian Film Commission) should not neglect Mannheim; the all-out effort at Cannes cannot be worth the sacrifice of such specialist festivals. Eight of the prizes at Mannheim carry cash en dowments ($5000 with the Grand Prix for a director’s first feature and $3000 with the documentary prize) and, unusually, cinema and television productions are eligible. This means the presence of television buyers from Western Europe and Scandinavia. Yet, the only Australian film to be seen this year was Storm Boy, in the Young People’s Festival.

All the Best Causes Mannheim aims “ to present film s whose content and form display new developments” . Content comes first: in their moral, social and political attitudes, the selection committee is firmly on the side of the angels. Humanism, ecological awareness, racial and religious respect infuse all the documentaries shown. The prize-winners can be picked out in ad vance by their more confident and more effective presentation of “ a message” , which is, however, present in all the con tenders. The largest number of the secondary prizes w ent to Handicapped Love (Behinderte liebe) by the German-Swiss director, Marlies Graf. It is a two-hour 16mm color documentary about a group of paraplegics, who form a discussion/study group by way of self-help towards an emotional and physical lovelife. The film shows the high degree of medical care, comfort and attention available at the small homes for the han dicapped, thus stressing their emotional and sexual deprivation which cannot be helped by legislation or charity. Then, there were three successful American documentaries on related sub jects. The most dramatic, Paul Jacobs and the Nuclear Gang, by Jack Willis, Saul Landau and Penny Bernstein, tells of a journalist’s relentless but doomed crusade to uncover the lethal effects of supposedly “ safe” low-level radiation. Hundreds of civilians living near the Nevada test sites and the Rocky Flats nuclear plant in Colorado, soldiers who were used as guinea-pigs and, finally, Paul Jacobs are shown years after the explosions, dying of leukem ia and cancer. Song of the Canary, by Josh Hanig and David Davis, looks at industrial dis eases caused to factory workers during the manufacture of chemicals and cot

ton. But even more frightening than nuclear fall-out or occupational risks, the uncontrolled and (in the U.S.) perhaps uncontrollable dum ping of chemical waste is examined in Tom Priestley’s The Killing Ground. Decaying containers have, over the past 20 years, released the most dangerous substances into the environment, polluting rivers and earth, and causing serious illnesses to children and adults in the area. Both these films, made p rim a rily fo r te le visio n , won festival prizes, while Paul Jacobs and the N u c le a r Gang was a w a r d e d t he FIPRESCI (Critics) and Evangelical Jury prizes. Two other documentaries of note were Paper Wheat from Canada and A Place for the Stranger (Netherlands). Paper Wheat follows a travelling group, the 25th Street House Theatre of Saskatoon, tour ing Saskatchewan with a musical play about the early settlers, and their fight against the exploitation'by grain dealers by forming a co-operative movement. The play’s success is recaptured in A l b e r t K i s h ’ s f a s t - m o v i n g and beautifully-edited 16mm reportage, which afforded the most cheerful hour of the festival. A Place for the Stranger, by Rudolf van den Berg, is a ‘think-piece’ with welldramatized scenes about such taboo subjects as: What is Jewishness? What is the price of forgetting Nazism to live in Europe, or the dispossession of the Palestinians to live in Israel? Partial and controversial answers are offered by the lay participants, only to be rejected by the opening of further questions.

The Grand Prix S B m

^ H n n B n n n

This year, the main prize was divided, “ ex aequo” , between Family Nest and El Super. Bela Tarr’s Family Nest (Csaladi tuzfeszek) from Hungary is a film of courage and hardcore realism. It was made w ith the q u a s i-d o c u m e n ta ry method seen In several Hungarian films

over the past few years: instead of professional actors, lay people whose personal circumstances resemble those depicted in the film perform a very sim ple story. A young couple's inability to find a place, even a room, of their own leads to illness and alcoholism, until the marriage breaks down. Nine people are shown sharing a room and a kitchen — no hall, bathroom or conveniences. When the young wife desperately begs for a coun cil flat, she is told that there is a waiting list of 12,000 and that it will take at least four years for her to reach the top of the list. Persecuted by the malice of her father-in-law, the girl ends up squatting in a derelict house, deprived of her child and separated from her husband, who hopes that if they could get a flat they could still be happy together. The relentless use of clo se-ups creates a claustrophobic pressure: all external matters, like the state of the house, the street, the district, are left to our imagination. Family Nest was made in 1975 and had been shown at the Hungarian film week at Pecs in 1977; but it could not have been easy for the Hungarian authorities to agree to its ex port. El Super was made by a team of young Cubans living in the U.S. Roberto, the Super (or janitor) of a large block of flats, is unhappy with his job, his family and New York, and dreams of finding hap piness working in a factory in Miami. His best friend dreams of another, and successful, Bay of Pigs; a Puerto Rican mate, who could go home any time, ex tols New York life. The film ’s strength is that it does not generalize, but concentrates on one man’s situation and state of mind. Writerdirector Leon Ichaso and d irectorcameraman Orlando Jimenez-Leal pre sent a personal, idiosyncratic set of at titudes in Roberto, his family and friends. However, as these a ttitu d e s are a response to the realities they know, which are shared by millions of people l i v i n g in f o r e i g n p l a c e s , t h e i r microcosmic vision is a true analysis of the psychology of exile.

Two other first features attracted at tention and prizes: from the Soviet Union, A Nineteenth Century Georgian Chronicle by a Tiflis director, Alexander Rechwiashwili, is the story of a student who tries to protect the woods of a moun tain village from foreign exploitation. The authorities conspire with the foreigners and the student disappears. Soulful, ethnic and acted with enough period sense to turn it into a museum piece, Georgian Chronicle seems to move at a snail’s pace called, by some, its lyrical beauty. The Polish film, Nightmares (Zmory), is b a s e d on a f a m o u s nov el of adolescence — every country has at least one Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man, or Young Torless. In N i g h t m a r e s , by W o y c i e c h Marczewski, a young boy’s sense of per sonal oppression is compounded by Poland's occupation by the Austrian monarchy. He resents growing up into the society of unpatriotic bureaucrats or violent, patriotic rebels; but children are defenceless against growing up. British contribution was somewhat dis appointing this year, though Nick Gif ford's The Pasternaks is a competent and visually rewarding portrait of the painter Leonid Pasternak through his works and the recollections of his two daughters. Perhaps the film ’s sharpest point of interest is that it presents the background of the fam ily’s most famous member, poet-novelist Boris Pasternak. Jerzy K aszubow szki’s Jozef is a portrait of his grandfather; it bears all the marks of a diploma film from the National Film School. City Farm, a short feature by John Davies and Robert Smoth, had some interesting moments, but mostly broke down, like so many British in dependent productions, in the acting and editing.

Seminar on Asia One of Mannheim’s bravest ventures was a symposium, parallel to the festival events, on “ Self-Description in Films — South East Asia and India.” (In 1978, the topic was “ Film in Africa” .) As expected, India dominated the seminar, being the only Asian country with a vast commercial output (more than 600 films a year) and a small band of serious, committed filmmakers follow ing in Satyajit Ray’s footsteps, trying to establish some sort of alternative, artistic cinema. Films and participants from Sri Lanka, the Philippines, South Korea, Thailand and Hong Kong offered comparisons, stressing the similarity of problems in all Asian countries. The difficulties of com munications caused by underdevelop m e n t t e n d t o be c o m p o u n d e d everywhere by a lack of cultural policy on the part of various governments. The other participants, from Western Europe and South Africa, had much to learn. The retrospective series of nearly 30 Asian films were followed by open dis cussions ranging over political, cultural and film distribution problems. The final selection of six films to be recommended for theatrical distribution in Germany, and several more for television networks, was probably the chief concrete gain from the seminar. The friendship which grew out of the discussions, and the in crease of mutual understanding cannot be put on a balance sheet, but it probably matters even more. ★

Cinema Papers. February-March—35

Why did you leave the Nine Network and, more particularly, “The Don Lane Show”? I had been working at GTV-9 in M elbourne for 16 years, and directing for 12 or so of those years — it was an enormous hike. There was a minimum of two shows a week, as well as a lot of other major N in e p ro je c ts . H av in g th e responsibility for them all became very restricting. W hile I was doing the In Melbourne Tonight shows and everything else, I was unable to do what I want to do myself — that is, develop some really high-class television “specials” , turn out the finest quality television and develop new techniques. So the Tonight shows, including the Lane shows, were becoming a burden — as much as I liked doing them. I know my forte seems to be with Tonight-style shows, but I have come to the point where I feel I should put what I have learned into practice on other projects. I am also afraid that the longer I go on, the more restricted I will become in my thinking, the more stale and single-minded. So, all this has led to my decision to get out.

Towards the end of the last television rating year, Peter Faiman, the 35-year-old executive producer of “The Don Lane Show”, announced he was leaving Melbourne’s Channel 9 to set up his own production company. The third musketeer, the unseen operator of Don Lane and Bert Newton’s electronic sideshow, was getting out. It was something of a bombshell to Nine Network executives who quickly moved to persuade Faiman to agree to an ex clusivity deal with the network. Faiman began work at Channel 9, 16 years ago, as a stage hand, carrying small props for Graham Kennedy’s and Noel Ferrier’s “In Melbourne Tonight” shows. He worked his way around the studio to the director’s chair, where he started to make his reputation on “The Graham Kennedy Show”. “Graham alone”, he says, “taught me more about the business than anyone. Working with him was the most valuable experience of my life.” Faiman’s innovative approach to variety soon saw him as the channel’s number one director in that field. He worked on hundreds of shows including, among the more memorable, Neil Diamond’s “Thank you Australia” concert in 1975 and Frank Sinatra’s show from Sydney. But it was with “The Don Lane Show” that he has been firm ly associated and his talents noticed outside the industry. In Melbourne recently he spoke to Brian Courtis about the show and his hopes for the future.

Was it really necessary for you to leave Melbourne? I believe so. You can get into a pattern, and patterns can be killing. I needed to break away and rejuvenate my thinking. Certainly, I have had variety in my work — I have done documentaries, series, specials and worked on programs throughout Australia and the U.S. — but I now need more time for experimentation.

Does the U.S. example worry you at all? Not really. In a way it does set the pattern for what is going to happen here, but that just puts the pressure on us to do better. While I acknowledge that the Americans have in the past turned out some of the best variety programs in the world, I think they have made a lot of errors, too. American variety has forced itself into a very predictable, c a lc u la te d , c lin ic a l s o rt of p re se n ta tio n . Like A m erican television generally, it has lost its spontaneity and attraction. What were the greatest difficulties of producing one of the world’s few live-to-air variety shows? Just that — the fact that it is live. You can’t cut out mistakes or edit out the bits which are flat. Also, one of the most important aspects of any program is pacing — that is, making sure the viewer is kept interested. Now doing a show liveto-air puts an enormous pressure on everybody when it comes to pacing. Another difficulty is guests who don’t work; you are always taking a chance. Physical difficulties are there also, but at GTV they are so much second nature to everyone that they are now minimal. That’s what makes the place so good to work in. Was there a brief time delay on the show for safety’s sake?

The big U.S. networks have largely abandoned variety shows. Even the one-off specials seem to be out of favor. Do you feel there is still a future for television variety here? I feel there is an enormous future for variety. These things run in cycles and, at this stage, variety is not at a peak in public acceptance. The cycle has run in favor of dramas, soap operas and comedies. But the cycle will continue and variety shows will come up as

something else goes down. Music has always been one of the most important aspects of our society’s tastes, so there is no reason to think that variety shows, and all they entail, are gone forever. I think the challenge is there now to make them work.

No. Looking back, what has been the greatest disappointment you have experienced with “The Don Lane Show”?

Graham Kennedy in a dance sequence from The Graham Kennedy Show, on which Faiman started to make his reputation.

The attitude of the press — I don’t think the press has given it a fair go. The show has, after all, broken amazing ground. It’s been unquestionably the singularly most Cinema Papers, February-March—37

PETER FAIMAN

successful variety-talk show this country has seen. It has an amazing ratings history. But the press just doesn’t reflect that. A lot of people have said we are a terrible nation of knockers, and I suppose one has to accept that. But here is a show that has had some of the finest professionals in the business working on it, and I think it has been worthwhile, creative television; I don’t believe it was trite. I u n d erstan d people have d ifferen t ta stes, but I c a n ’t comprehend the press attacks — the constant attacks for illogical, illegitimate reasons. And, worse than that, very little acknowledge ment of the show’s success.

I think there may be a love-hate thing with some of them, but obviously more love than hate. There is no way that the show could be as successful as it is if Don were not a successful personality. How important is Bert Newton’s role in the show?

Bert is obviously a m ajor ingredient and without him the show, as it is, would have enormous problems. I have heard suggestions that he could do the show by himself, but that’s not right. His input has been ex tra o rd in a ry , and he is an extremely talented and popular individual, but it is The Don Lane Show that is successful — i.e., a Nevertheless, you have had more combination of all things. You can’t ask, “Would it be a than your fair share of publicity . . . success without Don, or without Bert?” because what you would Sure. You asked me what was have is a completely different show. the most disappointing factor, and I And you would then have to judge made a very broad statement. We this new show on its own merits. have had masses of publicity, and a lot. of people have been good to us, How vital are the overseas guest but the greatest disappointment has stars? been that there was a time when Immensely important. Without very few would give us a go. One tends to turn a blind eye to it, but it them I think we would have gone is disappointing. the way of every other talk and variety show attempted recently. What was the show’s greatest However much the Australian triumph? television industry would like to think it can stand on its own feet, it Getting The Don Lane Show to does need the injection of overseas work at what was the bottom end of talent. We are a nation of only 14 the variety cycle in this country. When Don first moved in, it was million people; in the U.S. there are generally considered that variety something like 240 million. There is was dead. We had just had the an immense amount of talent Ernie Sigley Show and Graham walking the streets over there. That Kennedy, and although they had doesn’t mean we don’t have extra been successful it was felt that ordinary talent in Australia as well, variety-talk shows needed a rest. but we certainly don’t have it in the Everything was stacked against us, same bulk. We are still a relatively small and yet we struck on a formula that has had five enormously successful industry in this country and the public have the right to see what years. they consider the best from Aus Where does the magic of its success tralia and overseas. lie? Does the use of this overseas talent I wonder about it. I understand, bring the show into conflict with the to a degree, some of the criticisms entertainment unions? levelled at Don — I can’t be hypa-critical on that. But over and above that, I do think he is the best talent of his kind this country has seen. What do you see as his weaknesses? W e ll, I th in k he s u ffe rs sometimes from the pressure of working live and I think he performs, occasionally, in a way he would prefer not to perform. What is working against him in some people’s minds is that he is an American. He understands that there is a weird, illogical bias, and that sort of pressure affects him. Again, the press seems to take great pleasure in knocking him because he is an American. He has been here 16 years and is still not accepted. It is extraordinary. How does his audience see him? 38—Cinema Papers, February-March

Singer N eil D iam ond. Faim an produced Diamond’s Thank You Australia concert in 1975.

Don Lane, star of The Don Lane Show, which was produced by Faiman, fiddles with a monitor image of Henry Winkler.

I think the unions recognize the needs. The input of various crews and stars into the Australian film industry initially helped it, and the industry is now making films and creating its own identity. But it needed that assistance of overseas talent in the first place. The unions’ attitudes have helped television in the same way. There have been areas of questioning, but not of major conflict. There are areas of questioning going on now — and I think that’s healthy. But I hope the mistake is not made where we consider ourselves strong enough to go it alone and ban imports. Equally important, of course, is that we ensure we are not over whelmed by overseas talent. As it is, we are turning out some of the world’s best television, but we still have a long way to go. And we do need the help of people around the world. The U.S., for example, is insular in its thinking — it doesn’t look outside. Australia is fortunate enough to be in a situation where it has to look outside its own boundaries. That’s good; we are living in a sharing world now, not in isolated countries.

buttons, operates the faders and so on as the director calls the shots. But switching is second nature to me now and it’s no pressure — in fact, it’s part and parcel of my directing. I find I am much closer to what I am doing and I can turn out a far better product if I do the switching myself, because the panel becomes very much an extension of me. I try to get on a wavelength with the crew, where we are all thinking as one, and the panel is just part of that process. You talk about getting close to your crew. Were you dictatorial in your running of “The Don Lane Show”?

Yes. I wouldn’t accept it any other way; I had to have the final word. There is no question about that. But at the same time I depended enormously on the creative input of the people I worked with. If there is a single thing that might be sorted out as my talent, it is that I am probably more than anything else a catalyst. I am pretty tough to work with, but when something of quality has been turned out then everyone shares in the buzz of accomplishment. If doesn’t become Peter Faiman’s Turning inwards for a moment, can accom plishm ent, it becom es we discuss your role as a director? I something we have all achieved. I w o rk w ith th e m o s t have always been fascinated that professional people you could hope you work the “switches” yourself and don’t use a separate operator. to work with, and I am given the privilege of capitalizing on this Why is that? fantastic team. That’s what I am d ic ta to ria l ab o u t — g etting I think it’s because I am part of everybody working together. the old school. It’s been something of a tradition at GTV. The normal How do you rate yourself as a procedure, as you know, is for a director? director to have a “switcher” , who physically operates the controls on That’s difficult. The only way I the directing panel. He pushes the can answer that is by saying that for

PETER FAIMAN

I think there always is a form of rivalry between programs such as these. The competition and rivalry is healthy, as long as it is seen on a professional and not personal basis. Much of what happens in this business is unfortunately given a personal interpretation; that’s when it becom es d is ta s te f u l and u n h ealth y . The L ane-W alsh situation certainly has its areas of competition, but it is not seen by pros like David Price, Mike Walsh, Don, Bert and myself as personal rivalry. We are working in an industry which I have a hell of a lot of respect for. Because of your obvious devotion to “The Don Lane Show”, have you ever been placed in conflict with network executives?

some reason, whatever it is, the success is there. I can’t tell you what it is, or why, or how. I hear about myself and read about myself as if I am another person. I just consider myself, as silly as it might sound, as a bloody hard worker who just tries really hard to turn out the best product he can. It will be very interesting for me to see how well I go outside GTV. That, I have to find out. There have been some rumblings about the way you turned down the opportunity to direct several Nine Network shows last year . . . Very simply, I didn’t have the time to do them. I suffered three major disappointments during the year. One was pulling out of the Paul Hogan shows, the second was having to decline the Goodbye

Sure. I have to take other things into account, obviously, but my total and absolute commitment is to the particular project I am w o rk in g on. In tu rn , I am responsible to other executives and the network, but I will fight to the death for the success of a product and the well-being of the people who work with me. Sometimes I think I am looked on as being something of an angry ant, a bit of a demagogue, and I am sensitive to that. But there is a proven track record.

Seventies Goodbye special, and, thirdly, after going through all the preparations, having to drop out of the Ronnie Corbett shows. I assure you I was very disappointed, but my priority was always The Don Lane Show. That required my time, so there was no hesitation in giving up those other programs for Don and Bert and the show.

Where do you see your future — in television variety specials or in feature films?

Was there any bitterness over, say, your decisions to turn down the Corbett shows?

A lot of people assume that the next step from television is into films.

No bitterness. The reasons were fully understood.

But you have expressed interest . . .

Reflecting on the “ Goodbye Seventies Goodbye” show brings up the relationship between the Nine Network’s two variety teams: those with Mike Walsh and those with Don Lane. Is it a healthy rivalry?

Oh, I haven’t really. I went through a period thinking that film was the next, natural step, but I am changing my mind about that now. There is so much in television that’s unexplored that I think I’ll be devoted to television for the time being — although you never know what may come up. What about documentaries? I am v ery in te r e s te d docum entaries because I television very much as information medium. I would to combine entertainment education into a package that make the box worthwhile.

in see an like and will

Will you be hiring people to work for you on a freelance basis, or forming your own production team?

John Cornell and Paul Hogan in a skit for The Paul Hogan Show, a program Faiman was forced to turn down in 1979 because of The Don Lane Show commitments.

How long will it be before you start getting results? It will take a little time — possibly all of 1980. And that’s why I am delighted the situation has been set up in conjunction with Nine. They are prepared to give me the backing and the time. I hope we will get something together that is really worthwhile and innovative for the industry. I hope that’s not too idealistic. Sounds as though it could be costly. Has the Nine Network financed you? Yes. They trust me, and I have a lw a y s fo u n d th e m to be progressive in their thinking. They want to develop new areas, new product. Kerry Packer is very entrepreneurial and the major success of the network must, I believe, be attributed to his attitudes. He obviously enjoys television and is not conservative when it comes to spending on projects which he thinks are worthwhile. He has shown he is prepared to give this thing a go, and I hope in turn to make it work. How does the arrangement work? Basically, I am under contract to develop product for Nine. I can’t tell you for how long. The alternative was to work totally freelance but I am delighted with this agreement. Has your personal relationship with Done Lane changed following your decision to leave the show? Not at all. Don has been very understanding. We are the best of friends and have the greatest respect for each other. However, the decision to go hasn’t been free of a lot of personal pressures. The show is my baby, if you like. I conceived it, started it, and have seen it through five years of growth. It is also an enormous wrench for me to leave GTV. This is singularly the most important decision I have made in my career, and it hasn’t been easy. Will you in any way retain an attachment to “The Don Lane Show”? Whenever I am asked to be involved with The Don Lane Show on a personal or professional basis, I will always 'be available because that is where my heart is. But I hope everything can run smoothly.

I will be forming a team and, depending on their commitments, Do you consider 1979 a wasted will bring others in. Nobody can year? stand alone, and I think I am a N ot at all. It was a very pretty good judge of talents. I also know how to draw out these talents. important one because I came to a What I hope to see is something lot of decisions during it. I never of a brains trust; a centre of stop learning — never. And I learnt a lot in that year. ★ creative, expansive thinking. Cinema Papers. February-March—39

¡ I ll

*/?& '•»<£*■'.V « -4.’®^ -^ V**'-''* ■■'

-*0^ *J^L* <CiV. 4 O '

0»

,4jt

'v"*•. O

x C#C. f^v c^l *^ #AK t <^ ^ *.««

&r¥ ^ J g «

- ^ Xi

s» ^ •c <?v" CO

T < ^ d ^ i ‘^ o O- CV *t%# <C^Vt^ V C^ .oe x# —o1 0OV - * d ^ x ^°'

f t M > V f ^ S 0* ^>^v x * o ^ v‘~v«> .«A , ^ m..,M* ^*€F^ %

<g»3m ^

:s& £ ^

v o ¿ jy ¿ASr *0 ^ ^ L o v ^ 0^ '

^ fV ^ I o ^ J x ^

'¿¿a*!

%%■

*<» ^

°‘ ' ^ v' M®'r \Xf\& v ^ \x ^^ ed& ^ ';L& x^ \we s^ S i g ^ ^ S t *

A ov ^ W C v '” - VA 2 00 *4*- \>$ -x^vCS^^ <>A

^. A t ■^XS»‘: <c-V* * • * ,*

V4 A * * N x T > ^t tf<U ^* ^ o'^A ^ C^V0<^A OT~%«' * 'l V ^ 'V ‘^ s c : ! « » l ^ C S « 9?

^ ^ *2T ^ V * " ^

-v * ,0^

«.OC^

id^JgEjfc. \0 ^A«•.^¿ft^W C <0 ^ * « * V<rX»v'' *£> ¡s$# " V<^ *>& **& . f « * t

L S C ^V

M»W

-<3i>

£ # i^

&iL

V© :; ■&> vo ^ ^ a ^ v .e,«\ \ ^ # VAi^’ v ^ V \®»* X<A « e '^ ' X0*,, «.v & . ^c?

«P^vfio

,.t^i

jVL«^ ' gA1^ s .>vO _o^' ..i'V'.^S'i^v. W VrtHr' - u. V ^n\v

v*e rAS rtS Te^-A® d S ^. AOx ^VO ..e'i'' „ „<rfsj. » ^ v ?X

2 8 cm x 2 0 .5 cm

**81*® !® ■ ;-:.\--;;e;..;..! « ■

■H

o * ¿0$*

r ;

■

w #^v T «!

(ii" x 8 ")

, The chapters: The Past (Andrew Pike), Social Realism (Keith Connolly), Comedy (Geoff Mayer), Horror and Suspense (Brian McFarlane), Action and Adventure (Susan Dermody), Fantasy (Adrian Martin), Historical Films (Tom Ryan), Personal Relationships and Sexuality (Meaghan Morris), Loneliness and Alienation (Rod Bishop and Fiona Mackie), Children’s Films (Virginia Duigan) and Avant-garde (Sam Rohdie). ■"

■ ip

is pleased to announce the publication of THENEW onbyKenG-Hafl

Edrted by S co tt Murray

PorewordW

In this first major work on the Australian film industryâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s dramatic rebirth, 12 leading film writers combine to provide a lively and entertaining critique of the films. Illustrated with 265 stills, including 55 in full color, this book is an invaluable record for all those interested in the New Australian Cinema. Published by Thomas Nelson Australia, in association with Cinema Papers, the book will be published in April 1980 at a recommended retail price of S i 4-95- By filling in the form, you can secure a copy at the special pre-publication price of S i3-95, post paid.

phfMipAdams

ORDER FORM I wish to order Q copies of The N e w A u s tr a lia n at Si 3 .9 5 a copy. I understand my order will be mailed to me in April 19 8 0 . C in em a

N am e..................................................................... Address................................................................ Enclosed: S

Above: Eva (Wendy Hughes) and Fiona (Chantal Contouri) in the school bus, which they use as a getaway vehicle. Below: Eva, Fiona and Millicent (Carmen Duncan, right) con Julia (Barbara Stephens, centre right) to loan them the school bus. Touch and Go.

§s§

“Touch and Go is a comedy-thriller about a group of attractive young women who take to crime to financially support a school for under-privileged children. A series of mix-ups causes the women to lose the loot, their dignity, but not their freedom.” CAST Eva ................... Fiona.................. Millicent............ Gina .................. Frank ; .............. Anatole.............. George .............. Helen ................ Sue ................... Julia ..................

............... Wendy Hughes ............Chantal Contouri ..............Carmen Duncan ............. Jeannie Drynan ..................... Jon English ................... John Bluthal ..................... Brian Blain ................... Liddy Clark ............. Christine Amor ............ Barbara Stephens

CREW Director ........................... Producer ........................... Screenplay ....................... Photography ..................... Editor ............................... Sound recordist............... Production designer ........ Composer.........................

. Peter Maxwell . . . .John Pellatt . Peter Yeldham . . John McLean . . .Sara Bennett . . .Brian Morris . David Copping . . . . Jon English

Above: Millicent, Fiona and Eva relax before the “job” . Right: Millicent prepares to make a late withdrawal from the island’s Post Office. Below: Sue (Christine Amor) and Gina (Jeannie Drynan) stealthily approach the island resort. Touch and Go.

Cinema Papers, February-March—43

SHOOTING FILM IN PERTH??

SOUND STAGE STUDIO 356 FOR HIRE

SAVE A LOAD ON EXCESS FREIGHT CHARGES, BY HIRING THE “ HEAVIES” IN THE WEST.

■LIGHTING TRUCK, Fully equipped with lights for most location assignments. Includes basic grip gear, 2 way radio, loud hailer, camera platform, etc. •TRIPODS Hi-hats, mounts, etc. •ARRIFLEX 35 mm & 16 mm BL and Nagra etc. available for SELECTIVE HIRE.

•BUMPED GENERATORS. 31 & 70 kVA & battery Packs. •LIGHTING HIRE. Mini-brutes', H.M.I’s, Red Heads, Blondes, 5 K’s to Inkys, etc, etc. •W.A. DISTRIBUTOR “TUSCAN”. Reels, cans, cores, etc. •CREWS arranged.

for further in fo rm a tio n c o n ta c t DARYL BINNING a.c.s.

Suitable for video — stills — film clips or rehearsals for orchestras. * * * * * * *

15 DENNY WAY, ALFRED COVE W.A. 6154 Ph 09 330 5070.

UNITED AUSTRALASIAN FILMS WESTERN AUSTRALIA'S GRIP SPECIALISTS • E lem ack Dolly w ith Tracks • J ib Arm • Lim pet M ount • Tripods a n d S preade rs • Platform Dollies • L o ca tio n Truck • H and-H eld C o m m u n ic a tio n System • G rips a n d Runners Phone Karel A kkerm an (09) 342 2674 7 W interton Way, G irra w h e e n . 6064 Perth W.A.

* * * *

53' x 35' — 12' to 14' ceiling height Fixed lighting grid w ith power points in ceiling Fixed cyclorama (gyprock) Acoustically treated Air conditioned Hot and cold water in studio Make-up room w ith hair washing basin and hot and cold water Kitchen, cafe-bar, fridge, stove and toilets Loading dock access to studio Drive-in ground level to studio floor Ample parking for trucks, semi-trailers and O.B. vans

For bookings and information, please phone Sydney 799 3424, 798 6782, 798 5647. Telex - AA 27732.

CASH-MORE ENTERPRISES INCORPORATED 356 Liverpool Road, Ashfield, NSW 2131

SAMCINE SALES 27 Sirius Road, Lane Cove, Sydney 2066. 428 5300. Telex 25188 25 Lothian Street, North Melbourne 3051. 329 5155. Telex 35861

AATON CAMERAS IN USE French Television

BBC Swedish TV

35 13

Belgian T V

German TV Australian TV

2 ?

THE A A T O N H A S N O W BEEN ACCEPTED IN EUROPE AS THE MOST VERSATILE PRO D U CTIO N /D O CU M EN TARY CAM ERA AVAILABLE. WE N O W HAVE STOCKS OF TH IS FINE ■CAM ERA FOR IMMEDIATE DELIVERY IN A U ST R A LIA .

PRODUCTION REPORT “Stir” is director Stephen W allace’s first feature and follows the critically-acclaimed “ Love Letters from Teralba Road” and “ Conman Harry and the Others” . Written by Bob Jewson, “Stir” examines the build-up of tension and ultimate confrontation between the ‘crims’ and the ‘screws’ in an Australian gaol. Produced by Richard Brennan on a budget of about $ 5 0 0 ,0 0 0 , “Stir” is expected to be completed in time for release at the 1 9 8 0 Cannes Film Festival.

Cinema Papers. February-.VIarch—45

RICHARD BRENNAN PRODUCER I became involved with Stir at third-draft stage. Steve Wallace had come and read one scene to me and asked whether I was inter ested. We’d had a very enjoyable relationship on Love Letters From Teralba Road, so I said yes on that basis. When I read the rest of the script, I was rather disappointed. Why were you disappointed?

“Stir” is producer Richard Brennan’s second project with director Stephen Wallace, the first being “Love Letters From Teralba Road”. Brennan, after a one-year stint as director of the Australian Film Institute in 1973, has been involved with many recent Aus tralian films, as either producer or associate producer. Titles include “Newsfront”, “The Removalists”, “Long Weekend”, “Mad Dog” and “The Great MacArthy”. In the following interview, conducted by Barbara Alysen, Brennan begins by discussing his involvement on “Stir”.

Certainly there were no threats of cut off. They were very patient and this went on over a two-year period. We were encouraged to take our time and get it right. Finally, we got to a crunch as to just what the film was worth. It’s a fairly controversial subject matter, and the language makes it unlikely that it will be sold to television — at least within the English-speaking world. This means it doesn’t have the same sorts of advantages as My Brilliant Career, for instance, which isn’t going to have censorship problems anywhere and which has obviously strong production values and so on. The NSW FC’s cut-off point and the figure I thought we could shoot it for were $60,000 apart. They weren’t trying to beat me down to their figure; they were just saying if you can do it for that, the money is there. But I wasn’t prepared to try and do it for that, so I raised some private money and it was finalized amicably.

I thought that it was too diffuse. There wasn’t a strong enough at mosphere of the prison. I couldn’t really believe in Norton (Max Phipps), the sympathetic warder, and I didn’t think that the in evitability of the riot was there. People who are sympathetic to a social situation may assume that such occurrences will appear in evitable to an audience, when they don’t. In The Chant of Jimmie Blacksmith, for instance, you had a lot of middle-class whites coming out and saying, “ Well, I’ve been ripped off and I’ve never taken an axe to anybody.” You’re just as likely to get an unsympathetic reac tion to a group of hooligans ripping a gaol apart. Finally, Bob Jewson did about 10 drafts. He was an extremely easy person to work with, which is not to say that he always accepted sugges tions. He is quite analytical.

Was the ATN-7 investment in lieu of television sales?

Once you agreed to become producer, how much say did you have in subsequent script develop ment and casting?

Channel 7 has an equity in it. I think they are trying to diversify and become more involved in feature production.

I am not trying to pose as a good fellow, but working relationships where the director has a stated final say, or where the film is the producer’s possession, just don’t seem to work. Although it sounds like unworkable anarchy, I have found making a film by mutual agreement a fairly swift process. Teralba Road went that way and it didn’t hold things up. If I made a suggestion, it was listened to. I wouldn’t say it had more strength than “ listened to” ; some sugges tions were incorporated, others weren’t. We argued fairly heatedly over some things, but neither of us tried to pull rank.

Was it hard to sell the project to them?

Was the money already there when you joined the project? It was rumoured that the New South Wales Film Corporation was prepared to back any Wallace project . . . T h a t’s not quite true. The NSWFC was very keen to invest in genuine low-budget films, like Mouth to Mouth. 46—Cinema Papers, February-March

How much private money? It was $60,000. It came from Channel 7 (ATN-7) and a group of solicitors.

Not really. Was that because it was a small in vestment, or because they had some other interest in the film? Was their idea of low-budget under $300,000? At that stage they were thinking of $200,000 and shot on 16mm. It wasn’t a silly idea; it was a good idea which proved impractical at the time. There weren’t other scripts of the Mouth to Mouth type around — and I don’t mean its quality, as much as the elements. For $200,000 you have to have cer tain elements, such as mostly in door settings and few central characters. I read the script of Stir, and when I heard that $200,000 was the figure in mind, I said it was a waste of time persisting with it. The budget

was then raised to $325,000. I don’t know that that was altogether foolish. Perhaps 18 months ago you could have made the film for $325,000, provided you found a gaol somewhere near Sydney. But we started with the disadvan tage of not knowing who the cameraman would be, or where to find the gaol we were going to inex pensively burn to the ground. The key elements were missing. But you had a guaranteed invest ment of $3 25,000 from the NSWFC. . . Yes, provided various drafts of the script continued to please them.

They didn’t read the script; they were'only interested in the cast and c re w . G e o f f B u r t o n , th e cinematographer, shot Storm Boy and Blue Fin, which were processed by Atlab, so they knew his work. They knew Stephen, had seen Bryan Brown and were prepared to take a punt on those elements. Did they realize it might never be televised? I made it very clear that I didn’t believe it would be shown on televi sion in an E n g lish -sp eak in g country, but Ray Beattie said he had heard that about The Adven tures of Barry McKenzie, Jimmie Blacksmith, The French Connec-

PRODUCTION REPORT

The Night The Prowler when it opened the Sydney Film Festival by saying that the Festival opened with a 90 min 16mm film. It was a 35mm blow-up,, of course, but that’s how people look at them. Did representatives of the NSWFC visit the shoot? Jenny Woods came over three times. She was very supportive. She looked at the rushes, passing com ments on them. The NSWFC has told us that they would like to see it moving very swiftly when it is being cut, and they are trusting us to do that. What was your pre-production period? Stephen worked on it for nearly two years. I have been involved for 18 months. For most of the key crew, it was 10 weeks. You didn’t have a unit publicist. Why not? We wanted to keep a low profile about the film. It is obviously going to be controversial, so it is not go ing to be difficult to attra c t publicity or interest in the film, although this might be horrified in terest or total rejection. At any rate, it won’t be released in Australia until August. We’ll see what sort of attention it attracts at Cannes. tion, Sunday Bloody Sunday and The Last Tango in Paris, and they had all turned up on television. I think it was quite far-sighted of -him, actually. I can’t picture it on television, but I am sure it will be. How much control does the NSWFC have over the project? They are entitled to a great deal, but they haven’t been dealing in a ham-fisted manner at all. They have sought our opinion, expressed theirs and the two have coincided fairly well. What does “a great deal” mean?

recordist, editor and production ac for two reasons. When you are countant. Of those six positions, shooting night sequences, or they took a punt on four. It was the anything below about 2.8 on 16mm, first feature for the production you do tend to get grain. When the manager (Barbara Gibbs), produc NSWFC did their tests for The tion accountant (Digby Duncan), Night The Prowler, they felt they first assistant (Mark Turnbull) and had eliminated the problem, but editor (Henry Dangar). Geoff they hadn’t. The other thing about 16mm is Burton (cinematographer) and Gary Wilkins (sound recordist) are, that it hampers overseas sales. Peo of course, very experienced. ple do tend to say it’s a 16mm film. Mike Harris (Variety) reviewed Was Tom Cowan originally slated as cinematographer?

Is it useful to put Cannes before the Australian release? I think it will be useful for this film because we have had such a honeymoon with the overseas press since 1976, which was the year of Picnic at Hanging Rock, Caddie, Mad D og an d The D e v i l ’s Playground. I thought 1977 at Can nes was a pretty poor year overall: Don’s Party and Storm Boy were

No. Stephen has always worked with Tom, and has a really good relationship with him, so they did discuss the film. But Tom had a commitment to a project of his own and things stayed at the discussion stage.

If they wanted to, they could point out that they put up three quarters of the budget and they are entitled to have things done their way. But they have been acting very How far did the NSWFC go in much as an American studio. They checking budgeting details? have decided to invest money, and I did several budgets for the film. if it was a bad decision initially it can’t be retrieved by saying, “ We One cost $550,000, which was unac ceptable, and another $400,000, but want more close-ups.” that was for a four-week shoot on What specifics did the NSWFC 16mm. I don’t think we could have finished the film in four weeks. As want to approve? it was, we shot 110 minutes in five They wanted approval of the key weeks, which is 22 minutes a week. crew and asked us if we were sure I don’t think we could have shot 27 about a couple of people in the cast. minutes a week. We said we were, and they were Did the NSWFC have any feelings happy to go with that. They wanted to be satisfied with about 16mm? the production manager, first assis I don’t think they were keen on it tant, lighting cameraman, sound Cinema Papers, February-March—47

PRODUCTION REPORT

the pick, and they wouldn’t stand out in a stronger year. And yet there was no criticism in the inter national press. We continued to be a strong, innovative industry. 1978 was another good year with Jimmie Blacksmith, Newsfront, The Getting of Wisdom and The Last Wave. 1979 was pretty poor, but again there was a very positive press reaction. The only hint of trouble that has crept in has been that we’ve had such a lot of films dealing with the period around the turn of the cen tury that people have asked when we are 'going to tackle contem porary themes. I make no claims for our film other than that if it’s not answering a demand, it is at least answering a question. Is the overseas press important to you? Yes. What about the local press? Have they been over-kind of late? Not of late. But I wouldn’t blame the press as much as I would blame some fellow producers. Producers are as greedy as the next person and there have been a lot of stories with headings like “The End” , saying “ We’ve all been going along the wrong track for six years. For tunately I am on the right track. I think there is about to be a weeding out process.” Most of the people who have given these interviews have done so while in the process of making films which have turned out to be dis astrous; I think they would have been better keeping their mouths shut. There has been an enormous amount of “ How much longer can the government persist in pouring money into this situation?” Tim Burstall did a fairly in teresting analysis, two years ago, of films funded since 1971. Out of 92 films I know of, more than 20 are in profit, which is a good average. It’s harder to get into profit now because films cost more, advertis ing costs more and theatres cost more — and fewer people are going to the cinema. But it is a better average than they are getting in the U.S., or many countries. And we have a population of only 14 million. There is another kind of publicity that came out with “My Brilliant Career”, for example, which was the “greatest film ever made” type Brilliant Career is the only film I have seen make that style of approach work, I would run a mile to avoid that sort of publicity. “ Jimmie B la c k s m it h ” also generated that sort of advance publicity . . . And it was very c o u n te r 48—Cinema Papers, February-March

productive. Mad Dog and The Removalists were also given a similar sort of PR, and again it was very counter-productive. Did that sort of reaction play a part in your decision not to have a unit publicist? Yes, a great deal. I would rather be straggling along, hoping it’s in focus and hoping it’s a pleasant sur prise, than telling people that the film was going to hit them between the eyes. Supposing it doesn’t . . . Did you see the film’s strong language as a problem at the boxoffice? I saw it as a perform ance problem more than anything else. I remember a film called The Friends of Eddie Coyle where people swear in a way that suggests that they are quite unconscious of what they are saying — which is what happens in real life. But because a certain amount of adrenalin starts pumping when you begin using taboo words like “ fuck” , an actor can sometimes persuade himself he is giving a bet ter performance than he in fact is. There is an enormous amount of swearing in the film, but very little in the final parts of it. I asked Bob if that was intentional. He said it was because most of the time the men are bored and irritable, and

swearing is part and parcel of the boredom. In gaol it is just a way of stringing out the conversation. The language will ensure you get an “R” rating. Is that a hindrance? I don’t know. Certainly it would have been very helpful in 1971. Peo ple were so delighted to hear phrases that they use all the time — like “piss o ff’ — that they poured

along in droves to see films like Get Carter. Certainly people aren’t pleasant ly surprised anymore at hearing their own language beaming back at them from the big screen; in fact, they are often irritated by it. But we didn’t put the language there for salacious reasons. What I care most about is people finding the film impressive and ef fective. I think where it stands a

PRODUCTION REPORT

chance of impressing people is that be Attica, and were it British it it’s realistic. I t ’s w ritten by would be Hull. someone who has actually been in I wouldn’t be happy if people gaol. Many of the cast, particularly judged the film on how closely it among the extras, have had prison followed events at Bathurst because experience, and I don’t mean a the conditions that provoke riots — night in the cells for being drunk and this is what was in Bob Jewand disorderly. There was a great son’s mind — are the same the deal of knowledge imparted to us world over. by members of the Prisoners Ac The reason I mention Attica and tion Group, and I hope it reflects Hull is that the anatomy of each so m e of its s p e c ia l riot was the same. It was a com knowledgeability. bination of boredom, frustration, If we presented the people in Stir petty restrictions, brutality, nig as talking in a faintly bowdlerized gardliness, refusal to listen to the way, I don’t think you would people who are incarcerated. The believe it. I can believe that nobody funny thing was that a lot of people swears in Wake in Fright, but I who spent time in gaol and who don’t think you’d believe lack of worked on the film were not nearly swearing in this film. as bleeding heart about criminals as you might expect. They would say, Who found the location? “ We committed a crime. We ex pected to be punished. But the Matt Carroll told me about it. punishment is being in gaol.’’ He hadn’t seen it himself, but he They didn’t expect additional knew of two suitable gaols in South things like only being allowed to Australia — one in Burra, which have two letters in a cell. I don’t they were using for Breaker think anybody can question their Morant, and the other in Glad wanting to be treated like human stone. If we hadn’t found it I doubt beings. we would have made the film. Set ting it up on different locations Would you expect the same degree would have cost too much money of interest in the film had Bathurst and wouldn’t have looked as con never happened? vincing. No. But I think it was inevitable Was there any problem in getting that a situation like Bathurst would the gaol? Did the trustees want to happen. Bathurst isn’t the only one see the script?

of course. There have been riots in Long Bay and Grafton. Why are so few films with socialpolitical themes made in Australia? I don’t know and I am always looking for that sort of script. But then someone does send me a script about Victoria Street, or uranium,

No. It’s a council-owned gaol and not under the control of the Prisons Department. Gladstone is a town whose economy had revolved around the fact that it was a gaol town. A lot of people who live there are sorry that it has been closed. I am not really sure that a town’s economy starts pumping when a film crew arrives. The publican’s tills are a lot fuller, but people tend to think that we are attractive prospects, and they were pleased to have us there. Who comprises your target audience?

There was a review in a recent issue of ‘Sight and Sound’ which made reference to the stock company of Australian film actors, one of whom is Bryan Brown. Did the number of films Brown has appeared in lately worry you in terms of casting him as a principal character? Well, the first film Bryan did was Love Letters From Teralba Road, with Stephen and myself. I don’t know how many people know Bryan’s name. I know audiences would recognize him, know they have seen him, and probably like him. There have been a lot of films Bryan has appeared in that haven’t been shown widely, like Third Person Plural and The Irishman. There is only one performance of Bryan’s I don’t like, which is in Weekend of Shadows. I think his performance in Stir is his strongest since Teralba Road. Of course, I want to think that anyway, but I do believe it.

Those who see it will certainly be younger people. But more than that I can’t really say until I see what sort of reaction it gets wherever the first screening is. Are you planning to preview it?

When you are shooting, how do you balance a director’s needs — like additional takes — against the production’s cost?

If Hoyts, who are distributing the film, recommend it, then I will do it. I know that Errol Sullivan and Pom Oliver felt that the oppor tunity to preview Cathy’s Child w ith an a u d ie n c e was very beneficial to them. Will the Bathurst gaol riots play any part in the promotional campaign? I don’t know. Obviously the situation of a gaol being burned to the ground has relevance to Bathurst in an Australian context. If it was an American film it would

I read it and don’t like it. I lose in terest. I am very happy to commit myself to a film if I want to work with the director and I like the script. But if I can’t get both I’d rather go and fish.

McIntosh and Partridge (Ted Robshaw) attack Dave (Gary Waddell).

I have worked with a lot of direc tors who promised to storyboard the film, but Stephen is the only one who ever has — though Phil Noyce did storyboard the flood sequence in Newsfront, which was a tremen dous help. If I asked Stephen to help me out in a particular way with production problems he sometimes would. If he wouldn’t, he usually offered me Concluded on P. 75 Cinema Papers, February-March—49

BOB JEWSON SCRIPTWRITER Someone told me you used to be a “Stir” is Bob Jewson’s first feature as a scriptwriter. A “tank man” . Is that the right former prisoner, Jewson is a journalist and short story writer. terminology? It’s euphemistic. Tank men are people who rob other people’s money and find that money in safes. “ T an k ” is an English derivation of “ safe” — it makes it sound a bit better. The English have a beautiful way of saying those things nicely, to give them some sort of romanticism.

In the following interview, conducted by Barbara Alysen, Jewson talks about his involvement on “Stir” and discusses the state of prison life in Australia.

Could you give me a personal history? How personal? I find this is a problem at times, knowing whether people are more interested in my freakishness or my work. I can understand that. I have worked as a journalist and I know there are things that are interesting to the public. I certainly won’t give you a whole history, but I was a thief for 25 years. I didn’t “ see the light” ; I just got too old to climb through windows and felt that there must be other ways. Also, I was caught and got a fiveyear sentence, nearly all of that at Bathurst, and it was a terrible gaol. You reach a stage where you can’t do any more, but not for reasons of conscience. Was Bathurst the last gaol vou were in? When the place was destroyed, in February 1974, I went to Kirkonnell, which is a prison farm about 30 km out of Bathurst. Were you in Bathurst during the riots? I was, but not in the main gaol; I was out in X wing. I had already been accepted for the Bachelor of Arts (Communication) course at Mitchell College, and needed a warrant to travel outside the gaol. I went over to X wing in December and the gaol was destroyed on February 3. You said you worked as a journalist. Is that since leaving Bathurst? Yes. I worked as a freelance journalist when I came to Sydney to sit in on the Royal Commission into prisons which started in April 1976 and went through to the end of 1977. During that time I worked as a consultant for a firm of solicitors which was acting for a group taking part in the Commission. While there I wrote for The 50—Cinema Papers, February-March

brand him with a number and just treat him as somebody who has to obey. When the keeper sees the person in the green uniform, he has the same reaction as happened in Vietnam with the “gook” syn drome. You see a person as being less than yourself, and then you can commit crimes against him. In the film, we try to explain the forces that cause the keeper to bash and, on the other side, how the kept react. However, we do this in an entertaining, dram atic way — always conscious that films are entertainment. Was the sympathetic warder, Norton (Max Phipps), a real type or was he imposed so that people wouldn’t claim you were showing only one side of the story?

Bob Jewson (right) and Bryan Brown.

Bulletin, The National Times, Nation Review and sundry other things. The reason I kept changing is that some people w ouldn’t publish what I wanted to say.

that would show how riots in gaol came about. It’s not a problem that’s confined to Australia alone — there have been some disastrous ones throughout the world: the horrific events in Attica and the What had you written before that? Hull riot in England. All these riots had sim ilar Short stories and pieces for gaol in g red ien ts, and the M cK ay newspapers. I started Inside Out at Inquiry into Attica produced simi Long Bay, which was the first lar findings to Justice N agle’s prison publication for many years. findings about the Bathurst riot. They found th a t p r is o n e r s ’ What is the connection between the grievances had been ignored by film and the Prisoners’ Action officials. Both reports talk about Group? petty restrictions, their arrogant enforcement, rules that were poorly The PAG made a short docu com m unicated, often ruthless, mentary called Prisoners in 1976, petty and senseless. mainly to put pressure on and lobby In writing Stir, I tried to show for a Royal Commission into how prisoners’ frustrations come prisons. In 1977 the group decided about. In his book Asylums, Irving that it would like to make one on Goffman tells us that to get control prison riots. A lot of ideas were put within the total institution, you forward and Steve Wallace was must first kill the former person; asked if he would be interested in they do it in the army and in directing a feature film. At that monasteries. In prisons they do it time people were talking in terms of by humiliating the person. By a budget of S150,000, which is quite stripping a man of his outer gar unrealistic given what we had to ments, you take away the per make. sonality he has in his clothes. You I was asked to write a film script put him into a prison uniform,

A conversation with a prison officer gave me my first realization that the keeper must live a life outside prison. I started to think what would happen to a prisoner and how he would feel when the media suddenly came in, as they did at, say, Pentridge, after the H division riots, and accused the prison officers of various crimes. That man has to live with his family. His wife has to go to the shops, the children have to go to school. Many gaols where there were bashings of prisoners — Attica, M aitland, Goulburn, Bathurst, Grafton — are located in small towns, so obviously there would be enorm ous pressures on those officers. We couldn’t show very much of that side of their life, because of money considerations, but we did show what we could in the prologue. The person who told me about the prison officer’s situation spoke of a sense of fear, in that when he started in the position he felt good and always had control, but when the prisoners started to protest and riot he realized that the warders only had control by consent of the prisoners. To instil fear back into the prisoners he bashed them. Whether that’s a rationalization or not I don’t really know, but we certainly show that working within the Norton character. How long did bashings go on in New South Wales, and why did it take so long to be made public? Because of cover-ups. Nagle put the blame on the former Com missioner of Corrective Services,

PRODUCTION REPORT

Walter McGeechan. However, I think we have subsequently shown that not only did McGeechan know, or at least have strong sus picions, but there is evidence that the Public Service Board was as informed as he was, because all the papers that he had were sent to them as well. They arrived on January 31, 1970. I think the problem we have always had with allegations of bashings is that they are prisoners and they don’t have the same rights as other people. So we have this arbitrary punishment and it went on at Grafton for 33 years. It’s well-documented in Les Newcombe’s book Inside Out. He was there for more than seven years, and the longest he went without being flogged was seven days. The prison officers admitted in the Royal Commission that intract able prisoners were flogged with a short rubber baton which had a steel rod through it. Another prison officer told the Commission that prisoners flogged that way lost control of their bodily functions during the bashings. I think it’s a comment on our civilization that the people who committed these atrocities are, in the main, still working within the department because of cover-ups. It is the worst case of state criminal conspiracy since we slaughtered the Aboriginals throughout Australia. Richard Brennan said, when he first read the script, that he felt the reasons for the riot were not clear or strong enough to convince people not sympathetic to the cause. Were you aware of that problem?

spontaneity; what you would get is a flat interpretation. To what extent does the PAG see the film as a statement from that organization? I don’t know. I am no longer part of the PAG. I do think most ex prisoners would see it as a true por trayal of what prison feels like. Quite a lot of former prisoners worked on or played in the film, particularly among the extras. One man we picked up in Port Pirie had served 14]/2 years in prison, and he really became part of the film. The feelings of actors who were ex-pris oners were quite important to me and they felt it was worth making. China and Norton (Max Phipps) discuss a riot that happened three years ago.

Were you, at any stage, involved in having to raise script development money on your own? N o, S te p h e n an d I f ir s t approached the New South Wales Film Corporation together. We gave them an outline and a sample of the work, and received script development money on the strength of that. I must say that throughout the project they have been incred ibly supportive and always had faith in it. Steve and I worked throughout 1978, and the longer we worked and the more drafts we wrote, the more obvious it became that we couldn’t make the film for the amount we were thinking about, which was then around the 5200,000 mark.

Even when we got more money we had to keep cutting the script down because it was too long and would have cost too much money. The last cut was made a couple of weeks before filming when we had cut 18 minutes out of the guts of it — a fairly hard thing for a writer.

location?

Probably 13 or 14. I started writing in late October 1977, and filming began in October 1979, but I was still writing during the shooting.

Only scenes that didn’t work. There were some scenes where the actor put his own language into the p a rt, which m eant the p a rt developed differently. I felt I owed it to his performance to explain it throughout the script. That’s some thing I love about the film industry — where that kind of input can come in and you find the character in relation to the rest of the script. I don’t expect an actor to be able to pick that up, because they are-into their ‘own part and its develop ment.

Did you do much re-writing on

Do you regard it as impbrtant for

How many drafts did you go to finally?

No. I do know that the reason for rioting is an individual one. We like to think that everyone jumps up one morning because something has happened and says let’s riot. That is not quite'true. Each man, or all our main characters in the film, has a different reason for rioting. Popular uprisings take a long time. Each man has to come to his own reason to act. Apparently the film, when it was being discussed by the PAG, was going to be a collective production? The original idea was to have committees, each to work on a different area. But that’s an abso lutely impossible thing to do, especially in film. Film is one of the great collective experiences. But there have to be ways in which individual creation can come in. One of the best collective experi ences I found on the film was when an actor — and I won’t name him — interpreted the script quite differently from what I had envis aged. And he did it so well that I wished I had written it that way. It’s the same with direction. If you tried to make the film through com mittee stages you wouldn’t get that

The prisoners mill before the riot.

Cinema Papers. February-March—51

A monthly journal of independent cinema with particular emphasis on film in Australia. Recent issues have contained • interviews with George Miller (Mad Max), Linda Blagg (Just out of Reach), Essie Coffey (My Survival as an Aboriginal), Gill Armstrong (My Brilliant Career),

Senator Susan Ryan on Labor's media policy, and critics John Flaus and

Derek Malcolm • articles on Japanese women film makers, new Czech cinema, Australia's ten most neurotic directors • together with reviews of Australian and foreign films, books on film and much more. Subscriptions $8/year (Australia) and f lir t tltW S10/year (foreign). Box 217, Kings Cross, NSW 2011, Australia. 335 368.

L e m o e

C in e

fü e n M

Arriflex 16 BC, 16 ST, 35 11C & Blimp • CP-16 Reflex • Eclair NPR • Beaulieu R16 • Bolex Reflex • Helmut Cameras • Wide Angle & Effects Lenses • Filters • Tripods and Camera Mounts • Nagra Recorders, 4-2 & IS • Shot-Gun, Radio, Neck & Hand Microphones • Lighting • Generator • Portable Battery Lights • 4 8c 6 Plate Flat Bed Editors • PIC Syncs. • 16mm Viewers • Sound Readers • Synchronizers • A" Umatic VTR Machines 8c Monitors • 16mm Projectors • (03) 429 2992 (03) 489 6011 For bookings through Irene 237 Church Street, Richmond, Victoria. 3121 After Hours: (03) 25 7275 6 Craigmore Street, East Malvern Victoria. 3145

'i L r /

P E N E C O Cinternational J FILM P R O D U C TIO N S Peneco International Film Productions is a complete film making enterprise with representation in both London and Los Angeles. As producers of Features, Documentaries, Commercials, Industrial and Short films, we offer a comprehensive film production service which includes all facets of post-production as well as film crews for both 16mm and 35mm. Why not give us a call on ( 03) 592 0108 anytime and let us talk film with you.

PENECO INTERNATIONAL FILM PRODUCTIONS 202 Church Street, Brighton 3186

London - Los Angeles - Melbourne

PRODUCTION REPORT

the scriptwriter to be on hand on set? I don’t think you can have universal rules. I quite often see people who have had troubles with a writer being on set, so it does depend on the relationship between the writer and the director. If it’s a truly professional one, where they can argue like hell off camera but not in front of anybody else, then there is a chance it can work. Each has to respect the other’s integrity and not be on an ego trip. I know, from a writer’s point of view, that is very easy to get into. In the early days, when Steve was reading drafts of the script, I found that I was defending the script even when he made quite legitimate criti cisms. I only found this out because I taped our script conferences. After that, I decided that if I was being defensive, I’d ignore it. Did you have any actors in mind while you were writing the script? I think the first time we spoke together, Steve said, “ I’d like to use a fellow I used in Love Letters from Teralba Road, Bryan Brown.’’ I met Bryan and liked him, so he was in. The other person we had in mind in the early days — about 15 months before shooting — was Max Phipps. Is there any one character in the film that you see as being close to yourself? I don’t see myself in any of the characters; I see parts of me and parts of other people I have met in some of them. Everyone thinks I am in the film because there is one character called Old Bob. But I would be a bit more subtle than that. Do you have a role in publicizing the film? In my contract with Steve —

because Steve was the producer at that time — it says they can use my image in publicity. I don’t know what my image is — probably a freak. Presumably you made the film to tell people something. What do you hope they will get out of it? First, that they are entertained. We are not going to have a film industry if we don’t entertain people. Then, I hope people go away having a dislike of the prison system. I think even television series like Porridge and Prisoner leave people with a dislike of the institution. Once they have that dislike of the total, rotten, penal institution, they will think of ways to eliminate it. I have no doubt that there are ways we can do that. At the m om ent th ere are countries going for something called deincarceration — a terrible name, but what it means is not putting people in prison as a way of life. In New South Wales, 74 out of every 100,000 are in gaol. In Victoria, only 40 out of every 100,000 are in gaol. There’s no way there is more crime per head of population in New South Wales than in Victoria. In Holland, only 18 or 19 out of every 100,000 are in gaol. It has the same crime rate as Britain, which is somewhere between the rates in New South Wales and Victoria. We have to realize that most people in prison today are serving less than 12 months. We hear in the media of all the “ dangerous people” , and we don’t realize that most people are in prison for all sorts of minor crimes, victimless crimes. So we can start by ridding the system of all those people because they are no threat to the community. Even Walter McGeechan, our discredited former commissioner, said that 75 per cent of the people in

prison could be released today with no harm to the population. I would like people to look at the film and say, “This is not the way.” This system not only brutalizes the crims; we also have evidence that it brutalizes the screws. The film is riddled with bad lan guage. Do you think it will offend people? I am sure it offends. We agonized over it. I don’t think you can make a prison film, and try to do it realistically, with just a “ fuck” here and there thrown in for effect. So we decided to be natural, and where it felt right it went in. We had some pretty rough actors, and at times when we were filming, two or three extra “ fucks” were thrown in and that made me feel that the language was right. I think it does offend people, par ticularly people of my age. It certainly doesn’t offend the young kids. But once people get the feeling that the language is right for the film they won’t be offended so much. In the same way, the word “ cunt” is used only in anger and not as a throw-away. That was delib erate. I showed the script to a fem inist friend and she made a legiti mate point, which was that if a group of people see a word as offen sive to them as a group, then it shouldn’t be used. I thought about that for a long

time and felt that there is a time in anger where you have to use it because of your own use of lan guage. But “cunt” is used only in anger or frustration. People who are in gaol have very limited vocabularies and are unable to express themselves. They come, in the main, from a culture where you don’t use language so much — you use your fists. In prison, where you can’t do that as much, you have to use language aggressively. In middle-class society, instead of using fists, they use language quite aggressively and horribly to strip a person. Sometimes I think it’s just as violent. Do you have any major projects to work on? I am working on two scripts, although whether they get to be made is another point. One is a comedy, although I think it is probably the wrong time for me to write one. I think I was trying to release myself from prison with it. But the other day someone told me I should write from experience. I think that’s true. I still have a lot to say about prison — not in a didactic way, but to show people what it's like. What are these two scripts about? They are set in the outside world; one to do with crooks and the other with redundancy. ★ Cinema Papers, February-March—53

“If you need a fast co m m e rcia l. . . or a short doco cut o ve rn ig h t. . . we’ll make sure it hits the lab on time . . . ”

SPECIAL

VISUAL

EFFECTS

11 Waterloo Crescent, St. Kilda, 3182 Phone: (03)534 7620 ROBERT M. CONN Quality Special Visual Effects available on film in 16 mm and 35 mm, or supplied to your requirements. Our facilities include Animation Camera and Rostrum, Artwork preparation, Model design and building, Model and Matte photography, and Product Shot photography with Infinity backgrounds.

R AND R FILM PRODUCTIONS

VICTORIAN NEGATIVE CUTTING SERVICE P/L 388 Clarendon St, Sth Melbourne, Vic.

(03) 690 4273

PRODUCERS OF QUALITY DOCUMENTARY AND PUBLIC RELATIONS FILMS Our services as producers and consultants to government and industry are available by contacting:

RON. V. BROWN 18 MORRAH STREET, PARKVILLE 3052, VIC. Phone: (03) 347 8207

aa aaa aa

mini

ACME

l l l l l l l M M

Motion Picture Associates Pty. Ltd.

TITLES OPTICALS

9 Abbott Street, Cammeray, N.S.W. 2062. An independent film production house offering complete production facilities. Commercials

—

Documentaries — Audio Visual

AVAILABLE FOR HIRE

Editing room with new 6 plate 35/16mm Intercine. Production office and 3A inch Sony facilities.

GRAPHICS

Telephone: JOHN LEAKE (02) 922 2399.

ANIMATION

18-19 Horne Street Elsternwick Vic 3158 P.O. Box 238

Phone: (03) 528 1904

QUALITY SERVICE

Special Introductory Offer for EASTMANCOLOR — process and workprint combined. $23 per 100 ft. — in processes ECN2 and ECP2.

14-16 Whiting St., Artarmon, N.S.W. 2064 438 2993

• Black and White Processing • Ektachrome Processing • ‘A’ and ‘B’ Roll Printing, Answer Prints and Release Prints

• Super 8 Duplicating - Super 8 Blow Ups to 16mm • 6 Plate Flat Bed Editing Table available For Hire

PRODUCERS, DIRECTORS AND PRODUCTION COMPANIES To ensure the accuracy of your entry, please contact the editor of this column and ask for copies of our Pro duction Survey blank, on which the details of your production can be entered. All details must be typed in upper and lower case. The cast entry should be no more than the 10 main actors/actresses — their names and character names. The length of the synopsis should not exceed 50 words. Entries made separately should be typed, in upper and lower case, following the style used in C in e m a P a p e rs .

Completed forms should be sent to: P ro d u c tio n Survey, C in e m a Papers Pty Ltd, 6 4 4 V ic to r ia St, N o rth M e lb o u rn e , V ic ., 3051 T e le p h o n e : (0 3) 3 2 9 5 9 8 3

FEATURES P R E -P R O D U C T IO N THE BAGMAN P rod, c o m p a n y .............Forest Hom e Film s S c r ip tw r ite r .................................. P h illip Burns

BUSHFIRE P r o d u c e r s .................M cE lroy and M cE lroy D ir e c t o r ................... Brian T re n c h a rd -S m lth Based on the o rig in a l idea by .............................................. .. K. Denton

THE CLUB P rod, co m p a n y .................South A u stralian Film C o rp o ra tio n P r o d u c e r ...................................... M att C a rroll D ire cto r ............................. ^ B ru c e B eresford S c r ip tw rite r s .....................David W illiam so n, B ruce B e resford Based on the play by .................................... David W illiam so n

DRAKOOLA Prod, c o m p a n y .........S a m urai P ro d u ctio n s D ire cto r ...................................... T e rry B ourke S c r ip tw r ite r ................................T e rry B ourke S ound s u p e r v is o r ........................... Phil Judd P o s t-p ro d u c tio n s u p e rviso r . . . . Alan Lake Film e d ito r ................................Ron W illiam s C o m p o s e r ......................................Bob Young Still p h o to g ra p h y ....................... David M iller G auge ..................................................... 35 m m S h ooting s t o c k ...........................E a stm ancolor P rogress ................................ P re -p ro d u c tio n Cast: S tu a rt W agstaff (D rakoola), Noel F errier (P rofe ssor Van Hallsong), Roger W ard, Les Foxcroft, Ton y Barry. Synopsis: A zany s p o o f on the le gendary va m pire. D rakoo la is the yo u n g e r b ro th e r of D r a k u la , w h o liv e s in th e f i c t it io u s M e lb o u rn e su b u rb of C ryptville.

THE FACTOR P rod, c o m p a n y .............F orest H om e Film s P r o d u c e r ............................. A n thon y B u ckley D ir e c t o r ............................... D onald C ro m b ie S c r ip tw r ite r ................................M ichael C raig

THE MAN WHO WASN’T THERE P rod, co m p a n y ................................F.G. Film P ro d u c tio n s P r o d u c e r ..........................A n to n y I. G innane D ire cto r ................................R ichard Franklin S c r ip tw r ite r ........................Everett de Roche Based on the o rig in a l idea by ..........................Everett de Roche C o m p o s e r ........................................ B rian May Exec, p ro d u c e r ................... W illiam Faym an P rod, s e c r e t a r y ..........................Jenn y Barty P rod, a cco u n ta n t ...............M ichael Roseby P ro d u ce r's a s s is ta n t.......... Sylvia Van W yk U n it p u b lic is t ................. Lynette T h o rn b u rn L a b o ra to ry .......................................... C o lo rfilm Len gth ................................................... 94 m ins. G auge ..................................................... 35 mm

Chris Murray Make-up ...........................Deryck De Niese Set d re s s e r............................................... KenJames H airdresser............................................... LizMitchie Carpenters ..................... Peter Templeton, Props b u y e r .............................Jenny Green Glen Finch. Standby p ro p s ....................................... John Carroll Lee Carey Asst editor ................................ Ken Sallows Set construction ................... Herbert Pinter Neg. m a tc h in g ...................Margaret Cardin Asst editor .......................... Jeanine Chialvo Mixer ....................................... United Sound Musical a rra n g e r...................................... PhilCunneen R un n e r..................................................... TonyWinley Music performed by ................... Tanunda P u b lic ity ...................................Brooks White Brass Band Organisation Catering .................................Penny Kentish Sound editor ................. William Anderson Editoring assistant ........Catherine Murphy Mixed at ................................. United Sound MONKEYGRIP Mixer .............................................. Phil Judd Laboratory .................................... Colorfilm S tu n ts ..................................................... HeathHarris. Prod, c o m p a n y ............Clare Beach Films Lab. lia is o n ................................................. BillGooley Tony Smart P ro d u c e r...............................Patricia Lovell Length .......................................... 100 mins. Still photography.................................... MikeGiddens, Director ...................................Ken Cameron Gauge ...............................................35 mm Peter Richards S crip tw rite r.............................Ken Cameron Shooting s to c k ........................ Eastmancolor W ra n g le r................................................HeathHarris Based on the novel b y ........Helen Garner Release date .......................................... 1980 Best boy ................................ Colin Williams Gauge ................................................35 mm Cast: Judy M orris (Fran), Bill Hunter R un n e r........................................ Jenny Miles Shooting s to c k ........................ Eastmancolor (Stephen), Mike Preston (Paddy), Jill P u b lic ity................... S.A. Film Corporation Synopsis: “ Smack habit, love habit — Perryman (Mother), Ken Shorter (Alan), what’s the difference? They both can kill Unit publicist ........................ David Sabine, Michelle Fawdon (Margo), Leonard Teale Jacqui Sykes (The Minister), Jude Kuring (Meredith), Rod you.” Nora's addiction is romantic love; C aterin g .............................Movie Munchles M u llin a r (Ja ck), C hris Heywood (The Javo’s is hard drugs. They are trappejj in a Salesman). S tu d ios....................... S.A.Film Corporation desperate relationship. The harder they pull Studio away, the tighter the monkey grip. Synopsis: The focus is on a modern woman turning 30. Overall the film concerns, Mixed at .................................................Atlab hopefully and humorously, the rising cost of Laboratory .............................................Atlab RACE TO THE YANKEE ZEPHYR emotional freedom in modern times, and Lab. lia is o n .................................................Jim Parsons. Length .............................................. 90 mins. the mixed bag of qualities that go to make Prod, company .............................. F.G. Film up the Australian male. Gauge ................................................35 mm Productions Shooting s to c k ........................ Eastmancolor P ro d u c e r........................Antony I. Ginnane Release date ...............................April, 1980 Director .............................Richard Franklin SARAH Cast: Edward Woodward (Harry ‘Breaker’ S c rip tw rite r....................... Everett de Roche Prod, company ..................... Yoram Gross M orant). Jack Thom pson (M ajor J. F. Based on the original T h o m a s ) , B ry a n B ro w n ( L t P e te r Film Studio idea by .........................Everett de Roche P roducer/director ................. Yoram Gross Handcock), John Waters (Lt Alfred Taylor), C o m p o se r....................................... Brian May Scriptwriter .............................Yoram Gross Charles Tingwell (Lt Col. Denny), Terry Exec, p ro d u c e r................ William Fayman Based on the story by ........Yoram Gross Donovan (Lt Simon Hunt), Alan Cassell Prod, secretary .......................Jenny Barty (Lord Kitchener), Ray Meagher (Sgt Maj. Photography ........................... Jenny Ochse Prod, accountant .............Michael Roseby Editor- .............................................. Rod Hay Drummond), Lewis Fitz-Gerald (Lt Witton), Producer’s assistant ........Sylvia Van Wyk Animation designer ................Athol Henry Rod Mullinar (Major Charles Bolton). Unit publicist ................... Lynette Thorburn GRENDEL GRENDEL GRENDEL Assoc, producer .................. Sandra Gross Synopsis: Based on the famous Boer War Laboratory .................................... Colorfilm Prod, manager ................... Yolanta Pillich incident, in which three Australian soldiers Length .......................................... 100 mins. Prod, company ......... Animation Australia Prod, secretary ........................Meg Rowed were court-martiailed by the British Army as Gauge ................................................. 35 mm .Dist. company .................................... Hoyts Prod. political scapegoats and later executed. Shooting s to c k ....................... Eastmancolor P ro d u c e rs.............................. Phillip Adams, accountant . . . . Christina Burton-GIbbs Alexander Stitt Scheduled release ..................... Foreign — Casting .......................................... Animation C H A IN R E A C T IO N Director ................................Alexander Stitt Cannes 1981 Animation camera Animation d ir e c to r ...............Frank Hellard Domestic — June 1981 ( p re v io u s ly T h e M a n a t th e E d g e o f operator ............................. Jenny Ochse S c rip tw rite r..........................Alexander Stitt S y n o p s is : C o m p e tin g g r o u p s o f th e F re e w a y ) Art director ............................... Athol Henry adventurers race across the country to a .Based on the novel Background layouts ...............Athol Henry, Prod, company .......................Palm Beach by ...................................... John Gardner crashed DC3, The Yankee Zephyr, and its Amber Vellani Pictures Prod, d esig n er............... .. .Alexander Stitt $50 million cargo. Asst editors .......................Phillip Colville, Dist. company ................... Hoyts Theatres C om p o se r...........................Bruce Smeaton PrueByram P ro d u c e r................................... David Elfick Prod, s u p e rv is o r............... Maggie Geddes Still photography . . . ' ............ Yoram Gross Director ........................................... Ian Barry THE YEAR OF LIVING Prod, secretary ....................... Janet Arup Animation ................................ Athol Henry, S c rip tw rite r...................................... Ian Barry Prod, accountant ................... Newell Lock DANGEROUSLY Cynthia Leech, Based on the original idea A n im a to rs ..............................Frank Hellard, Irena Slapczynskl, P ro d u ce rs ............... McElroy and McElroy by ................................................. Ian Barry Anne Jolliffe, Ray Nowland P hotography.............................Russell Boyd Director ........................................ Peter Weir Gus McLaren, Opticals ........... Yoram Gross Film Studio Based on the novel by ................. C. Koch Sound recordist ................... Lloyd Carrick Ralph Peverill, Studio ............... Yoram Gross Film Studio Editor .................................... Tim Wellburn David Atkinson, Laboratory .................................... Colorfilm Assoc, producers ............... George Miller, Alexander Stitt Budget ............................................ $583,053 Ross Matthews P a in te rs............................ Maggie Geddes, For com plete details of the follow ing Length ............................................ 80 mins. Prod, manager ....................... Lynn Gailey Chris Neely, features see Issue 24: Gauge ..............................................35 mm Unit m a n a g e r................. Philip Hearnshaw Suzan Harris, Shooting stock .......................Eastmancolor Prod, secretary ................... Mandy Forster One, T w o, T hree, Up. Janet Arup, Release date ................. December, 1980 Prod, accountant ................... Penny Carl Denis Pryor, Synopsis: The story of a young girl, Sarah, Prod, assistant..................... Louise Ferrier, Marilyn Davies, who escapes from her war-torn Polish Kathy Trubott, Sally Anne Rozario village and takes refuge in the forests, David Trethewey Rostrum c a m e ra .....................John Pollard she joins the struggle against the 1st asst director ................ Ross Matthews Recording supervisor ................... Alf Bean where enemy. P R O D U C T IO N 2nd asst director ................Chris Maudson Recording e n g in e e r......... Graham Ownes 2nd unit d ire c to r................................George Miller Recording s tu d io ................. A & M Studios Continuity ................................. Sian Hughes Additional recording . . . . Albert's Studios, Casting consultants . .. Mitch Consultancy Pepper Studios Camera operator ...................Nixon Binney. Graphics .............................David Dalgarno FATTY FINN P O S T -P R O D U C T IO N Focus p u lle r........................................... PeterRogers Laboratory ............................................... VFL Clapper/loader ...................Laurie Mclnnes Prod, company ................... Children’s Film B u d g e t..............................................$566,000 Key g r ip ............................................ Ian Park Corporation Length .............................................. 90 mins. Asst grip ...................................Stuart Green P ro d u c e r................................................ Brian Rosen Shooting s to c k ........... ........... Eastmancolor BREAKER MORANT Special fx photographyGeorge Greenough D ire c to r..............................................Maurice Murphy Release date ............... Christmas, 1980 G a ffe r.................................Brian Bansgrove S crip tw rite rs .................................. Bob Ellis P rincipal Voices: Peter Ustinov, Keith Prod, company .................South Australian E lectricia n s...............................................PaulGantner, Chris McGill Michell, Arthur Dignam, Ed Rosser, Bobby Film Corporation Paul Moyes Bright, Ric Stone, Julie McKenna, Ernie Based on the original idea Dist. company .............................Roadshow Boom operators ............. Andrew Duncan, Bourne, Alison Bird, Barry Hill. by ................................................Bob Ellis P ro d u c e r................................. Matt Carroll Chris Goldsmith Photography........... T ................John Seale Synopsis: A version of the Beowulf story In Director .............................. Bruce Beresford Art d ire c to r..........................Graham Walker Sound recordist .......................... Tim Lloyd which the roles of the chief characters are S crip tw rite rs..........................................Bruce Beresford, E d ito r ........................................................ BobGibson Asst art directors ............... Lissa Coote. reversed and Grendel becomes the central, Jonathon Hardy, Prod, d esig n er.......................... Llssa Coote Sally Campbell sympathetic character. David Stevens Costume designer ......... Norma Moriceau C o m p o se rs....................................... Graham Bond, Based on the play Make-up ................. Lesley Lamont-Fisher Rory O'Donohue b y ...................................... ■Kenneth Ross Ward, a s s is ta n t............... Camilla Rountree Exec, producer ...................... .John Sexton UNTITLED P hotography............................. DonMcAlpine Prod, manager ..................... Su Armstrong Standby p ro p s .................................... Tobias Sheppard (previously Letters to a Friend) Sound recordist .....................Gary Wilkins Special e ffe c ts ..................................... ReeceRobinson Unit M a n a g e r......................................... Greg Ricketson William Anderson Prod, company ............... Cherrywood Film E d ito r........................ Set construction ............................Bill Howe Prod, secretary ..................... Keri McGarry Productions Prod, manager ................ Pamela Vanneck Asst editor ............................Vicki Ambrose Prod, accountant ................. Vivian Falloon Dist. company . . . . Roadshow Distributors Prod, secretary ..................... Barbara Ring Neg. matching ....................................... Atlab 1st asst director .................... Mark Egerton Prod, accountant .............. Harley Manners P ro d u c e r............................Brian Kavanagh Sound editor ..........................Tim Wellburn 2nd asst d ire c to r.................................. SteveAndrews 1st asst director .................... Mark Egerton Director .................................... Chris McGill Stunts co-ordinator ....................Max Aspin 3rd asst d ire c to r..............................MarshallCrosby 2nd asst d ire c to rs .................Chris Williams, Scriptwriters ............... Anne Brooksbank, Continuity ..........................Caroline Stanton S tu n ts ................. David Bracks, Bob Hicks Ralph Storey Still photography....................................ColinBeard Bob Ellis C astin g ...................................................Alison Barrett 3rd asst d ire c to r...................................Toivo Lember P hotography...........................Russell Boyd Unit publicist ......................Hugh McGowan Lighting cameraman .................John Seale Sound recordist .................... Lloyd Carrick Continuity .................................. Moya Iceton Camera operator ...................... John Seale & Associates E d ito r.................................... Wayne Le Clos Producer's assistant............................. Moya Iceton C a te rin g ...................................... Ray Fowler Focus p u lle r .................................David Burr Clapper/loader ........... Richard Merryman Prod, d esig n er....................... Chris Webster C astin g ................................................... Alison Barrett Mixed at .................................................Atlab (S.A. Casting) Prod, manager ............. Sue Milliken Laboratory ..............................................Atlab Key g r ip ................................................... RossErickson Camera operator ..................... Peter Moss Location m anager................. Ralph Storey 2nd unit photography ............Tony Wilson Lab. lia is o n ......................... Glenda Bartlett Prod, secretary .. Carolynne Cunningham Focus puller ...............................David Burr G a ffe r.......................................... Mick Morris B u d g e t..............................................$450,000 Prod, accountant .................... Lynn Barker C lapper/loader ..................... Simon Smith Boom operator ....................Jack Friedman Length .............................................. 90 mins. Key g r ip ................................................... Ross Erickson 1st asst director ............... Elisabeth Knight Gauge ................................................ 35 mm Art d ire c to r................................ Lissa Coote Asst grip .................................. Rob Morgan 2nd asst d ire c to r............... Steve Andrews Shooting s to c k ........................ Eastmancolor Asst art director ............. Sally Campbell G a ffe r.......................................... Rob Young Continuity ...........................Adrienne Read Costume designer ..........Norma Moriceau Release date ...............................May, 1980 Camera operator ...................Nixon Binney Location m a na g e r......................Jenny Day Cast: Stephen Bisley (Larry), Arna-Maria Make-up ..................... Cheryl Williams Focus p u lle r .......................................... PeterRogers W inchester (Carm el), Ross Thom pson H aird resse r...........................................CherylWilliams Boom operator ...........................Jim Currie Clapper/loader ...................Laurie Mclnnes Art d ire c to r............................................ David Copping (Heinrich). Ralph Cotterill (Gray), Hugh W ardrobe ................................. Sue Bowden Key g r ip .................................Ross Erickson Costume designer .................. Anna Senior K e a y s -B y rn e (E a g le ), R ic h a rd M o ir Props b u y e r ...................... Owen Patterson Asst g r i p ......................... Graham Litchfield Make-up .................................. Judy Lovell (Piggott). Lorna Lesley (Gloria), Patrick Standby p ro p s .................. George Zammit G a ffe r.......................................Miles Moulson H airdresser..................... Catherine Lamey Ward (Oates). Laurie Moran (McSweeney). Choreography .............................Dina Mann E lectricia n ................................ Gordon Nutt Bill McCluskey (Ralph). Ward, a s s is ta n t............. Ruth de la Lande Set d e co ra to r........................................... NedMcCann Best Boy ..................................... Pav Govind Props buyer ......................... Chris Webster Synopsis: A horror thriller about events that Scenic a r tis t...............................................BillMalcolm Boom operator ............... Chris Goldsmith Standby p ro p s ....................................... Clark Munro follow a catastrophic accident at WALDO, Carpenter ...................................Hans Theile an atom ic waste repository in C entral Costume designer ................. Anna Senior Special e ffe c ts ..................................... Monty Fieguth, Set construction ........................ Kim Hilder, Shooting s to c k ....................... Eastmancolor Scheduled release ..................... Foreign — Cannes 1980 Domestic — August 1980 Cast: Robert Thompson. Synopsis. I saw a man upon the stair, I looked again, he wasn’t there, He wasn't there again today, I wish that man would go away.

Phil Worth Asst editor ........................... Andrew Jones Neg. matching ................................ Colorfilm No. of shots ..............................................800 Musical directors ................Graham Bond, Rory O'Donohue Music performed by ..........Graham Bond, Rory O’Donohue Sound editor ........................... Bob Gibson Stunts co-ordinator ................... Max Aspin S tu n ts ............................................ Max Aspin Still photography................. Mike Giddens O p tic a ls ............................................Colorfilm Dialogue coach .........................Dina Mann Wrangler .................................... Dale Aspin R u n n e r................................ Marshall Crosby Catering . . . . Cecil B. De Meals on Wheels S tu d ios............................................ Spectrum Laboratory ......................................Colorfilm Lab. lia is o n ....................................Bill Gooley B u d g e t........................................ $350,000.00 Length ..............................................90 mins. Gauge ................................................35 mm Shooting s to c k ........................ Eastmancolor Progress .......................................Production Schedule release ............December, 1980 Cast: Ben Oxenbould (Fatty Finn), Bert Newton (Mr Finn), Noni Hazlehurst (Mrs Finn), Gerard Kennedy (Tiger Murphy), Greg Kelly (Bruiser Murphy), Lorraine Bayly (Maggie McGrath), Henri Szdps (Mr Zilch), Frank Wilson (Lord Mayor), Peter Carroll ( T e a c h e r ) , R o s s H ig g in s ( R a d io Announcer). Synopsis: Times were rough, clothes were hand me downs, fun was what you made yourself; guts, cunning and itching powder triumphed over Chinese burns, nugget on your bum and the tough son of the local S.P. bookie.

Cinema Papers. February-March—55

Prod, secretary ......................... Sally Webb THE Z MEN C o m p o se r.......................... Peter Sculthorpe Arron Mansfield 1st asst director ............... Kerry O’Rourke 3rd asst d ir e c to r .....................Jenny Miles Exec, producers ............... Malcolm Smith, Prod, c o m p a n y ................. John McCallum Continuity ...........................Suzanne Provis Continuity .........................Caroline Stanton Gil Brealey Productions Costume designer ........... B. St. Lawrence C asting.................................. M & L Casting Prod, manager ......... Pamela H. Vanneck P ro d u c e r.................................Lee Robinson S tu d ios....................... Backyard Workshop, Casting consultants ........... M & L Casting Prod, s e c re ta ry .....................................CarolWilliams D ire c to r..................................................... Tim Burstall Lighting cameraman ........... Geoff Burton York Street Recording Studio Prod, accountant ..............Joan Macintosh S c rip tw rite r................................ R.Marshall Mixed at ..................................... Jan Murray Camera operator ................. Geoff Burton 1st asst director .................. Robert Hynard E d ito r ......................................................DavidStiven L a b o ra to rie s...........................Cinevex, VFL Focus p u lle r.......................................... DavidForeman 2nd asst d ire c to r................................... RossHamilton Cast: Mel Gibson, John Philip-Law, Chris Length ..............................................83 mins. C lapper/loader ............................ Gill Leahy 3rd asst d ire c to r.............................. DaphneCrooks THE EARTHLING Heywood, Sam Neill. Gauge ................................................16 mm Key g r ip .................................. Brent Collins Continuity .................................... Linda Ray Prod, c o m p a n y ___Earthling Productions Synopsis: A film Illustrating a typical World Shooting s to c k ........................... Ektachrome 2nd unit p h o to g ra p h y ___Vincent Monton Lighting cameraman ........... Gary Hansen P ro d u c e r...................................Elliot Schick War 2 Z-force operation which, though Release date .............................April, 1980 Camera operator ................. Gary Hansen G a ffe r................................ Brian Bansgrove D ire c to r.................................................. PeterCollinson successful, culminates in the death of most Cast: Robert Antoniades (manager), Kim Focus p u lle r ............................................PaulMurphy E lectricia n s..................................Paul Moyes, S c rip tw rite r.............................. Lanny Cotier of the Australian team. Bannikoff (cabbie), Monica Bannikoff Paul Gantner Clapper/loader ..............Gerald Thompson P hotography......................... Don McAlpine (barworker), Eric Beach (poet), Charlie Dale Boom operator ................. Mark Wasiutak Key g r ip .............................. Noel McDonald Sound recordist ................... Don Connolly (d ig g e r ), P a u l D a v ie s ( c r o s s w o r d Art d ire c to r................................... Kim Hilder Asst g r ip s ...........................Gary Clements, E d ito r ..................................................... Mick Beauman enthusiast), Peter Finlay (a Mormon), Mary John Jasiukowicz Make-up .............................. Monica Brown For com plete details of the follow ing Exec, p ro d u c e r ............... Stephen Sharmat Anne G rey (usher), C arolyn Howard H airdresser............................ Monica Brown G a ffe r.......................................................Mick Morris features see Issue 24: Prod, s u p e rv is o r..................... John Weiley (usher), Pat Laughren (paper seller). Wardrobe ................................ Edie Kurzer Boom operator .....................David Cooper Prod, c o -o rd in a to r..................... Jenny Day The Blue Lagoon Synopsis: The strange events surrounding Art d ire c to r................................ Neil Angwin Ward, a s s is ta n t............... Leslie McLennan Prod, manager ..................... Su Armstrong the closure of a Melbourne cinema and the Props b u y e r ........................ Anni Browning Make-up ............................ Cheryl Williams Unit m a n a g e r..........................................GregRicketson sacking of one of its ushers. A freelance Standby p ro p s ...........................Clark Munro H airdresser..........................Cheryl Williams Location m anager................. John Warran newspaper collector stumbles across the Special e ffe c ts .......................................Chris Murray, Wardrobe ........................... Graham Purcell Transport manager ............... Ralph Clark ultimate political clue to the events of •Property master ...................... Harry Zettel Rob Morgan Asst transport manager ........Jack Skycer November 11, 1975. Set construction ...................Herbert Pinter Set construction .................John Bowling Prod, secretary ..................Kathy Flannery Asst editor ......................... Cathie Sheehan Asst editor ............................ Posie Jacobs Prod, accountant ................. Trisha Ghent Edge n u m b e re r.................... Carmen Galan Musical a rran g e r............... Peter Sculthorpe A W A IT IN G R E L E A S E FINAL CUT Bookkeepers ......................... Cathy Barear, Stunts co-ordinator ........Peter Armstrong Sound editor ........................ Peter Burgess Lea Collins Still photography.................................. Mike Giddens Prod, c o m p a n y ...........Wilgar Productions Still photography.............................. Jacquie Gardner 1st asst director ................. Mark Egerton Horse M a s te r.............................. Lex Clark C aterin g ................................................. Keith Heygate Dist. company ....................................... GUO 2nd asst director ................Steve Andrews Best boy ................................... Reg Garside S tu d ios..................................Gladstone Gaol P ro d u c e r............................................... MikeWilliams 3rd asst director ................. Chris Williams HARLEQUIN Laboratory .............................................Atlab R un n e r....................................................PeterSchmidt Director .................................... Ross Dimsey 2nd unit Lab. lia is o n .......................... Jim Parsons Prod, company . . . . F.G. Film Productions Unit publicist ............................ Athol Meyer S crip tw rite r..................................... Jonathon Dawson asst d ire c to r..................David Le Maistre B u d g e t..............................................$485,000 Mixed at ................................................ Atlab Original idea b y ..............................Jonathon Dawson for Far Flight Investments Continuity ..................................Jill Freeman Laboratory ..................................... Colorfilm Length .......................................... 100 mins. Photography.............................................RonJohanson P ro d u c e r..........................Antony I. Ginnane Producer’s assistant........... Su Armstrong Lab. lia is o n ................................................ BillGooley Gauge ................................................35 mm Sound recordist ..................... John Rowley Director ...................................Simon Wincer Casting consultants ............M & L Casting Shooting stock ........................Eastmancolor B u d g e t........................................... $481,000 E d ito r...................................................... TonyPatterson S c rip tw rite r....................... Everett de Roche Camera operator ................. Dean Semler Cast: Bryan Brown (China), Max Phipps Length ............................................. 90 mins. Prod, d esig n er.....................................JamesPenny Additional dialogue ............... Jon George, Focus p u lle rs .............................David Burr, (Norton). Dennis Miller (Redford), Gary Gauge ............................................... 35 mm C om p o se r.......................................... Howard Davidson Neill Hicks Peter Menzies Jnr Waddell (Dave), Michael Gaw (Andrew), Cast: Mawuyul Yanthalawuy (Manganinnie), Assoc, p ro d u c e r.................................. FrankGardiner Script e d ito r ...........................Russell Hagg C lapper/loader ...........Richard Merryman Phil M o th e rw e ll ( b y ), Ray M arshall Anna Ralph (Joanna), P h illip H inton Prod, manager .....................Terrie Vincent Based on an original idea Camera assistants ................. John Seale, (Chalmers), Ted Robshaw (Patridge), Syd (Edward W aterm an), Elaine Mangan Prod, secretary ........................... Llyn Miller b y ...................................Everett de Roche Frank Hammond Heylen (Old Bob), Robert (Tex) Morton (The (Margaret Waterman). Prod, accountant ...................Judy Frazer Photography ...........................Gary Hansen Key g r ip .............................Graeme Mardell Governor). Synopsis: The story of a lone Aboriginal 1st asst director .......................Scott Hicks Sound recordist ..................... Gary Wilkins Asst g r ip s ................... Graheme Litchfield, woman separated from her tribe during the Synopsis: A prison drama where the build 2nd asst d ire c to r.................................... BillFegelson E d ito r ...................................... Adrian Carr Rob Ricketson Black Drive in Tasmania in the 1830s. In her up of tension between ‘crim s’ and ‘screws' Continuity .................................. Julie Bates C o m p o s e r............: .......................Brian May Camera g r ip ........................................... Merv McLaughin leads to a large-scale confrontation. search for her people, Manganinnie finds Casting consultants . .. Mitch Consultancy Exec, producer ..................William Fayman 2nd unit Joanna, a settler's child. The film tells of Focus p u lle r ......................................... HenryPierce Assoc, p ro d u c e r.................................... Jane Scott camera assistants ..........Andre Fleuren, their journey together and their growing Clapper/loader .........................Gary Wade Prod, co-ordinator ................. Jenny Barty Benjamin Schick love for each other. Joanna learns to Key g r ip ..................................... Jack Lester Prod, manager ........................... Jane Scott G a ffe r.........................................................RobYoung survive in the hostile bush and is initiated TOUCH AND GO G a ffe r...........................Graham Rutherford D raftsperson................... Virginia Bieneman E le ctricia n ............................................... ColinWilliams into the mysteries of the Dreamtime. E lectricia n ................................. Lyie Binney (p re v io u s ly F rid a y th e 1 3 th ) Prod, accountant .......................Lyn Barker Directors batman ........... Marshall Crosby Asst electrician ...................... Alan Glossop 1st asst director ...............Michael McKeag Gene o p e ra to r................. David Parkinson Prod, company ................. Mutiny Pictures Boom operator .......................Max Bowring 2nd asst d ire c to r..................... Grant Harris Boom operator ......................... Joe Spinelli Dist. company ...................................... GUO SAM Art d ire c to r............................................Philip Warner 3rd asst d ire c to r..................... Jenny Miles Art d ire c to r........................................Bernard Hides P ro d u c e r................................................. John Peliatt Costume ...........................Camilla Rountree Continuity ! ....................... Caroline Stanton Costume designer ........... Judith Dorsman Prod, company ........................ Ukiyo Films Director ................................ Peter Maxwell Make-up .........................Margaret Lingham Producer’s assistant...........Sylvia Van Wyk Dist. company .......................... Ukiyo Films Make-up ..................................... Judy Lovell S c rip tw rite r...........................Peter Yeldham Wardrobe .........................Helen Weathered Casting consultants ............... Marvin Paige P ro du ce rs............................ Hilton Bonner, H airdresser............................................. Judy Lovell Based on the original idea P ro p s ......................................................Philip Warner and Associates (USA) Don McLennan Wardrobe ................... Robyn Schuurmans by ...................................... Peter Maxwell Special e ffe c ts ................................... FrankLennon Camera operator ..................... Peter Moss Director .............................. Don McLennan P r o p s .......................................................John Carroll Photography .........................John McLean Set d e co ra to r.....................James Wharton Focus p u lle r .............................................. JanKenny S crip tw rite rs...................... Don McLennan, Props b u y e r ........................................... John Carroll Sound recordist ...................... Brian Morris Music performed by ...H o w a rd Davidson Clapper/ioader ................. Jeremy Robbins Hilton Bonner Standby p ro p s ..........................................KenJames E d ito r....................................................... Sara Bennett Stunts co-ordinator ....... Peter Armstrong Key g r ip ................................................... RossErickson Photography....................Zbigniew Friedrich Set d e c o ra to r......................... Terry Larsen Prod, d esig n er.....................David Copping S tu n ts......................................................PeterArmstrong Asst grip ................................ Robin Morgan Sound recordist ...................Lloyd Carrick Scenic a rtis ts ......................... Bill Malcolm, C o m p o s e r................................................. Jon English Still photography.......................................IanPoole G a ffe r........................................................Mick Morris Editor . . . .........................Zbigniew Friedrich Ned McCann Exec, producers ................. Peter Maxwell, Animation ................................. Max Bannah Boom operator ....................Mark Wasuitak Assoc, producer ................... Sonny Naidu Carpenter .................................Ian McGrath Peter Yeldham Title d e sig n e r.......................................... MaxBannah Art d ire c to r............................ Bernard Hides Prod, manager ..................... Rod McNicol Campsite c a rp e n te rs ..............Errol Mason, Prod, manager ............... Michael McKeag Best boy ..................................Alan Glossop Make-up ...............................Lois Hohenfels Prod, accountant ................. Sonny Naidu Stuart Mason Location m anager............... .Tim Sanders R unners.............................. Peter Mountjoy, H aird resse r...........................................CherylWilliams 1st asst director ................... Rod McNicol Asst editor .................. Frans Vandenburg Prod, secretary ..........................Susi Parker Lindsay Colbourne W ardrobe .................................... Terry Ryan Continuity ..................................Julie Cutler Dubbing editor ...........................Bob Cotter Prod, accountant .......................Lea Collins C aterin g............................................. Barbara Harris Ward, assistant .....................Vicki Rowland Camera operator ....... Zbigniew Friedrich Asst dubbing e d ito r ............................ Phillip Cotter 1st asst director ................... Ken Ambrose Mixed at ................................................ Atlab Props b u y e r .......................................... OwenPatterson Focus p u lle r ............................................. PhilCross G reenm an................................................. DonMurphy 2nd asst d ire c to r............... Ken Richardson Laboratory .............................................Atlab Standby p ro p s ....................................... Clark Munro Clapper/loader ................. Virginia Brooke Assts G re e n m a n ............... David McCann, Continuity ............Margaret-Rose Stringer Length .............................................. 98 mins. Special e ffe c ts ..........Conrad C. Rothmann Key g r ip .............................. Rod McLennan Peter Forbes Producer’s assistant............. Vivien Hobbs Gauge ............................................... 35 mm Special effects asst ............... Chris Murray G a ffe r.....................................................GerryLock Edge n u m b e re r........................... Rick Lisle Lighting cameraman ........... John McLean Shooting s to c k ........................Eastmancolor Set construction .................. Steve Courtley Boom operator ............... Chris Goldsmith Campsite co-ordinators . . . John Shipton, Camera operator .'.....................Kevin Lind Release date .............................. April, 1980 Dubbing editor ......................... Adrian Carr Art d ire c to r............................................ AnneMoir Anthony Chartres Focus p u lle r ...........................Russell Dority Cast: David Ciendlnning (Dominic), Louis Best boy .................................. Reg Garside Make-up ................................ Carol Devine Animal c o -o rd in a to rs ..........Ray Winslade, Clapper/loader ........... Richard Merryman Brown (Chris), Jennifer C luff (Sarah), R u n n e r..................................................... Daro Gunzberg H airdresser.........................................Renarti Warren Lloyd, Key g r ip .................................................... PaulThompson Narelle Johnson (Yvette), Thaddeus Smith Unit publicist ................. Lynette Thorburn Wardrobe .........................Penelope Hester Keith Harris, Asst grip ................................. Wally Wilmott (Mick), Deanne Carsas (Julie/Lyn), Amanda Catering .................................Meals on Heels Neg. m a tc h in g ...................Warrick Driscoll Evanne Harris G a ffe r................................. Frank Heffernan Mactaggart (Reporter). Mixed at . . . , .......................................United Sound Still photography................Maxine Rosewall Still photography.....................................Tom Towniey Boom operator ................. Andrew Duncan S ynopsis: A glossy th rille r about a Laboratory .....................................Colorfilm C aterin g .................................... Liza Rosewall Art director ........................... David Copping D riv e r........................................ Doug Sayer s h o w b u s in e s s ty c o o n w ith a shady Lab. lia is o n ................................................. BillGooley Laboratory ...............................................VFL Asst art director ............. Lindsay Hewson •Tutor......................................Shane Sullivan background, and a young documentary Length ...............................................94 mins. Length ............................................ 90 mins. N u rs e s ...................................... Alan Bailey, Make-up ........................................ Jill Porter Gauge ................................................ 35 mm Gauge ........................................... .. 16 mm Vivienne Riches film m aker and his g irlfriend who are Make-up assistant ........... Brita Kingsbury making a film about him. They believe the Shooting s to c k ....................... Eastmancolor Shooting s to c k........................Eastmancolor H airdresser........................................... Jenny Brown Best boy ................................Peter Moloney tycoon has been making “ snuff” films, and Scheduled Release.............March 18, 1980 Cast: Tracy Mann (Sam), Kim Rushworth Wardrobe . . . .............................Kate Duffy R un n e rs.................................................. PeterKearney, Cast: Robert Powell (Gregory Wolfe), David (Tim), Kirsty Grant (Debbie), Penelope Ward, assistant ....................Wendy Sugars Nick Reynolds try to get a confession about the films. He invites them to his luxury penthouse for a Hemmings (Nick Rast), Carmen Duncan Stewart (Raelene), John Arnold (Wally), Props b u y e r ...................... Lindsay Hewson Sue Clark (Sandra Rast), Broderick Crawford (Doc Hilton Bonner (Frank), Tony Barry (Barry), Standby p ro p s .................. Derrick Chetwyn Art department runner . . . Peter Glencroff weekend of partying and film ing, and indulges in mind games until the party ends Wheelan), Gus Mercurio (Mr Bergier). Bill Hunter (Brady), Max Cullen (Newman), Asst standby props .. .Karan Monkhouse P u b lic ity...................................... David White in disaster. Synopsis: A 1980 version of the Rasputin Jack Allen (Father). Sydney Liaison .................Brianne Kearney Asst editor ............................Duncan Taylor legend. Synopsis: A young girl, with a background Sydney officer runner . . . . Michael Weiley Musical director ....................... Jon English of urban poverty and juvenile crim e, Sound editor .........................Paul Maxwell C a te rin g ...................................................John Faithfull FLY TO THE WOLF attempts to become a fashion model. The Stunts co-ordinator ........Peter Armstrong Catering assistants...............................Susie Faithfull, hypocrisy and double standards of society Still photography....................Chic Stringer Nareil Brown Prod, company ................. John McCallum are juxtaposed against the confusion and O p tic a ls ............................................Colorfilm Asst c h e f.................................... Ray Fowler Productions frustration she feels as she struggles to Best boy ................................ Ric McMullen Laboratory .................................... Colorfilm P ro d u ce r............................. Lee Robinson become part of a community that has no R un n e r..................................................... NigelAbbott IN R E L E A S E Length .......................................... 100 mins. Director ...............................Peter Collinson place for her. Gauge ................................................ 35 mm S c rip tw rite r.............................Michael Cove Publicity ................................. Carlie Deans Shooting s to c k .......................Eastmancolor Cast: John Philip-Law. C aterin g ...................................Frank Manley Cast: William Holden (Foley), Ricky Shroder Synopsis: The adventures of an American Mixed at ................................ United Sound STIR (Shawn). pilot who has been shot down in Vietnam, Laboratory ...................................... Colorfilm (previously The Promotion of Mr Synopsis: A story of survival: an old, dying and two Vietnamese children he meets on THE LITTLE CONVICT Lab. lia is o n .................................................BillGooley Smith) man finds a child lost in the bush and his journey back to the American lines. Length ..............................................95 mins. Prod, company ..................... Yoram Gross teaches him to survive. Gauge ................................................35 mm Prod, company ..................... Smiley Films Film Studio Shooting s to c k ........................ Eastmancolor Dist. company ........................... Roadshow Dist. company ...................................... Hoyts MANGANINNIE C ast: W endy Hughes (Eva), C hantal Producer/director ................. Yoram Gross P ro d u c e r...........................Richard Brennan EXITS C o n to u r i (F io n a ), C a rm e n D u n c a n Screenplay ............................. John Palmer D ire c to r.............................................Stephen Wallace Prod, company ................. Tasmanian Film (Millicent), Jeannie Drynan (Gina), Jon Based on the original story S c rip tw rite r...............................................BobJewson Corporation Prod, company ............. Stringybark Films English (Frank), John Bluthal (Anatole), Sound recordist ..................... Gary Wilkins Dist. company ...................................... GUO by .........................................Yoram Gross P ro d u c e rs ...........................Pat Laugheran. Brian Blain (George), Liddy Clark (Helen), E d ito r .................................... Henry Dangar Sound recordists ....................... Phil Judd, P ro d u c e r...............................Gilda Baracchi Carolyn Howard Christine Amor (Sue), Barbara Stephens Prod, d esig n er..................... Lee Whitmore Director .................................... John Honey Laurie Napier, Directors .............................Pat Laugheran, (Julia). C o m p o s e r.............................Cameron Allen David McConnachie Paul Davies S c rip tw rite r.................................. Ken Kelso Synopsis: A comedy-thriller about a group Editor .............................................. Rod Hay Prod, manager ................... Barbara Gibbs Based on the novel S c rip tw rite r............................... Paul Davies of attractive young women who take to Unit m a n a g e r....................... Barbara Gibbs Composer ...................................Bob Young by ..........................................Beth Roberts P hotography.............................. Paul Cavell crime to financially support a school for Prod, secretary .....................Barbara Ring Assoc, producer .................. Sandra Gross P hotography............................. Gary Hansen Sound recordist ........Lynton Macfadzean underprivileged children. A series of mixProd, accountant ................. Digby Duncan Prod, managers ..................Yolanta Pillich Sound recordist ........... John Schiefelbein C o m p o se rs.............................Peter Holden, ups causes the women to lose the loot, their 1st asst director ................. Mark TurnbullE d ito r...............................Mike Woolveridge (animation), Peter Botsman, dignity, but not their freedom. 2nd asst directors ..........Chris Maudson, Richard Meikle (live-action) Prod, d esig n er........................... Neil Angwin Lynton Macfadzean Australia. Larry, an ex-racing driver, and his wife, Carmel, meet Heinrich, a doomed p h y s ic is t, and th ro u g h him becom e innocently enmeshed in a conspiracy which threatens their lives and the security of the nation.

■ 56—Cinema Papers, February-March

Prod, secretary ....................... Meg Rowed Prod. accountant . . . . Christina Burton-Gibbs Casting ................................. Richard Meikle Casting consultants .. Mitch Consultancy Lighting cameraman ........Madd Lighting Camera operators .............. Brian Probyn, Chris Ashbrook, Frank Hammond (live-action) Jenny Ochse, Bob Evans, Graham Sharpe, Ted Northover (animation) Camera assistants ............... Paul Murphy, Mathew Thane, Richard Michalak, Christy Smith, Peter Menzies jun. Animation director ............. Paul McAdam Character design ...................Athol Henry, Paul McAdam Make-up ............................ Josy Knowland, Patricia Cunliffe Hairdresser ......................... Josy Knowland W ardrobe ..........................Judith Dorsman Props ................................... Jan Carruthers Background layouts ...............Athol Henry, Amber Vellani Asst editor ..............................Prue Byram, Phillip Colville Neg. matching ................. Margaret Cardin Songs performed by ............... Rolf Harris Sound editor .................................Rod Hay Still photography ................. Yoram Gross Animation ................................ Athol Henry, John Hill, Cynthia Leech, Wal Logue, Paul McAdam, Ray Nowland, Vivien Ray, Irena Slapczynski, Kay Watts Opticals ........... Yoram Gross Film Studio Title designer ....................... Amber Vellani Publicity ...................... Village Roadshow Studios ............. Yoram Gross Film Studio Mixed at ............................................... Atlab Laboratory .....................................Colorfilm Budget ............................................ $423,467 Length ............................................ 80 mins. Gauge .............................................. 35 mm Shooting stock .......................Eastmancolor Relase date ............. December 20, 1979 To be first released ........Village cinemas throughout Australia Cast: Rolf Harris and animated characters. Synopsis: The story of 13 year-old Toby, the youngest convict to be deported to Austra lia from England, his friendship with Wahroonga, an Aboriginal boy, and a pet koala, Yo-Yo.

1st asst director ............. ,.. .Peter Hopson E d ito r........................................Robert Grant C om p o se r.........................Richard Zatorski Continuity ..................... Lindsay Colbourne Camera operator ......................Jan Murray Camera assistant ............. Tony McDonald Clapper/loader ........... Lindsay Colbourne Asst grips ....................................Geoff Hall, Robin Plunkett, Camera assistant ............... Peter Nearhos David Thomson G a ffe r.................................. Dave Aberdeen Boom operator ......... Graham Blackmore 2nd unit photography ..........Natalie Green Mixer ........................................Kathy Fenton 2nd unit sound ........................... John Elliot Asst m ix e r................................................. JanMurray G a ffe r................................ Tim McLaughlan Mixed at .....................Murray Film Sound Boom operator .....................Martin Wilson Laboratory ......................................Colorfilm Music performed by . . . . Richard Zatorski B u d g e t...................................................$3556 Laboratory .............................................. VFL Length ..............................................12 mins. B u d g e t.................................................. $1600 Gauge ................................................16 mm Length ..............................................22 mins. Shooting s to c k ........................Eastmancolor Gauge ............................................... 16 mm Cast: Simon Venning (Son), Kevin Dean Shooting s to c k ........................Eastmancolor (Father). Edna Strudwick (Mother), Rod First released..............November 23, 1979 Coates (Police Officer). Longford Cinema (Melbourne) Synopsis: A narrative based on the Box Cast: Jan Marnell (Tony), Simon Beattie Flat mine disaster in Ipswich, England, in (The Kid), Alethea McGrath (The Lady), Peter Peshut (The Elderly Man), George which 17 men were killed. The film is about a close relationship between a 14 year-old Vidalis (Crash Helmet), Anna Kannava boy and his father, who was one of the men (Skating Girl), Naynook Gaygirl (Henrietta). killed in the accident. .Synopsis: Two desperate louts turn to crime for some easy money, but are foiled by a bathroom door.

COUNTRY EDITOR

Prod, company . . . Rob Brow Productions P ro d u c e r............................ Peter Johnston Director ........................................Rob Brow Scriptwriters ...........................Geoff Taylor, Noel Field P hotography............................ Peter Sykes Sound recordist ................. Ian Jenkinson E d ito r..................................... Insync Editing C o m p o se r...................................... Cobbers Prod, co-ordinator ............. Robert Kewley Prod, secretary .................................... Nola Music performed by .....................Cobbers Laboratory ............................................. VFL Length ............................................. 30 mins. Synopsis: A week in the life of a country newspaper editor.

EMPLOYING STRATEGY

Music performed by ........... Declan Affley, Gary Shearston Mixer ................................ Film Soundtrack S tu n ts ..........................................Mark Ryan Still photography................. Norval Watson C atering...............................Abbey Nathanie, Jo Fletcher Laboratory ...............................................VFL Lab. lia is o n ................... Peter Watson (Jnr) B u d g e t...................................................$4100 Length ..............................................25 mins. Gauge ................................................16 mm Shooting s to c k ........................Eastmancolor Progress ...........................Awaiting release Release date ................... December, 1979 Cast: David Scott (Dave), Marion Edward (Kindly Neighbour). Cathy Hurley (Cath), Adam Briscomb (Jake), Ron Pinnell (Ed), Tom H ills (H im se lf), Noel C ounihan (Himself), Bodan X (Policeman). Synopsis: Tom Hills and Noel Counihan reconstruct the experiences of militant unemployed groups of the 1930s, re-live the eviction of a young couple forcibly thrown out, and the action taken by the un employed to make sure It doesn’t happen again.

HE CAUGHT A CROOKED LIZARD

Prod, assistant........... Helene Hollinshead Continuity ................................ Andrea Grey C asting..............................................Paragate Creative consultants..........Peter L. Nelson Camera assistant ................. Martin Turner Sound editor .............................. Jim Currie Mixer ............................................Jim Currie Asst m ix e r...............................Robert Parker Still photography.......................................IrisWakulenko Animation .......................... Salik Silverstein, Andre Sollier O p tic a ls ........................................... Colorfilm Title d e s ig n e r........................Digby Rodgers C atering................................. Jen Westwood Art d ire c to r............................ Joanna Seidel Costume designer ....................Drawstrings Make-up .................................. Chris Wilson Props .................................... Joanna Seidel, Helene Hollinshead Neg. m a tc h in g ................................Colorfilm Musical director .............. Robert Parker Mixed at ............................................... SAFC Laboratory ......................................Colorfilm Lab. lia is o n .............................................. DickBagnel B u d g e t...................................................S9000 Length ..............................................20 mins. Gauge ................................................16 mm Shooting s to c k ........................Eastmancolor Progress ............................ Awaiting release Cast: Kendal Bird (Henley), Deborah Seidel (Samantha), John Crouch (Taxi Driver), Peter Nelson (Dr.Von Zietgiest), Owen Wills (Businessman). Synopsis: Henley periodically finds himself lying on the floor rather than in his bed. Samantha tries to understand, but finally leaves him. Henley turns himself inside out with anxiety in his efforts to catch her and bid her a last goodbye.

Prod, com panies.....................Andrew Vial Film Productions Prod, company ........................Di Net Films and Videorep Dist. company ..........................Di Net Films P ro du ce r/d irector...............Diana Nettlefold Dist. com panies............................ Videorep, Paddington Access Centre S c rip tw rite r.......................... Diana Nettlefold Based on the original idea P ro du ce r/d irector...................Andrew Vial by .................................... Diana Nettlefold S c rip tw rite r..............................Frank Galea P hotography........................ Diana Nettlefold Based on the original idea E d ito r....................................Diana Nettlefold b y ......................................... Frank Galea 1st asst director ....................... Sally Varne P hotography....................Steve Burgess, Robin Petersen, Neg. matching .........................................VFL Peter Cribb No. of shots ............................................. 600 MAN OF HIS TIME Sound recordist ........................Fiona Lugg Laboratory ...............................................VFL Prod, company ......... Rocket Productions E d ito r................................................. Andrew VialLength ..............................................28 mins. P ro d u c e r...............................Lucy Maclaren Vision switchers .................. Frank Galea, Gauge ............................................... 16 mm Director .....................................Dave Collyer Geoff Friend Shooting s to c k ........................Eastmancolor COUPLES (A trilogy) S c rip tw rite r............................................. DaveCollyer Progress ...................................... Production Prod, designers............. Amanda Lovejoy, P hotography................................ Tim Smart Lisbeth Saxton Cast: S tuart N e ttlefo ld (S tu a rt), Sam Prod, company ................. Swinburne Film Sound recordist ...................... Neil Torode Nettlefold (Sam), Campbell Brehney (Bob), C om p o se r............................................BaxterFunt Department E d ito r......................................... Bob Martin Assoc, producers . Western Access Video Gwen Nettlefold (Nurse), Ceri Brehney P ro d u c e r................................Helen Gaynor (Mother). John Cherry (Policeman). Art d ire c to r.......................................BeamishElliot and The Australian Film Commission D ire c to r.............................Debra-Ellen Keep Synopsis: Sam has an adventure with an C om p o se r...........................Bill McDonald Prod, co-ordinator . . . . Madine Lapthorne S crip tw rite r.......................Debra-Ellen Keep unidentified two year old who unwittingly Camera assistant ..............Pete Armstrong Prod, manager ........... Madine Lapthorne Photography.......................Ralph Strasser, follows him up the bush on a lizard hunt. Boom operator ................... Paul Goldman Floor m anager.......................Simon Butler Andrew DeGroot Police come to the rescue when things get Special e ffe c ts .................................. Andrew Jones Technical advisers .................Jim Tumeth, Sound recordists ...................Jacqui Fine, Still photography...............................Andrew Jones Cliff Giles out of hand. Robert Grant Title d e s ig n e r............................ Graphix Ink Continuity .................................Barbara Eite E d ito rs ...........................Debra-Ellen Keep, Length ..............................................12 mins. Lighting cameraman ................ Chris Noon Tim McLaughlin THE JOGGER Gauge ................................................16 mm Music performed by ................Baxter Funt Art d ire c to r.......................Debra-Ellen Keep Cast: Vincent Lukaitis, Jo Kennedy, Jacki Still photography.................. Simon Butler, Prod, company ..................... Valhalla Films Prod, su p e rv is o r.................... David Fallon Hanrahan, Clarrie Wilkins. Nadine Lapthorne P ro d u c e r................................................Terry Jennings Continuity ................................ Jaine Fallon, Synopsis: A bleak drama in which a young Tech, a d v is e r.............................. Cliff Giles Director ...................................... Craig Lahiff Denton Smith anarchist is violated for breaking the rules C atering............................... Joyce Hawkins, Photography.............................. Peter Smith Camera assistant ........... Tim McLaughlan of a society of elderly people. Amanda Holmes, E d ito r................................................. Andrew Prowse Grips ............................ Matthew Lovering, Jim Roberts, Camera assistant ................ Peter Felstead Adrian Brady Anne Tolhurst Mixer ........................................Rod Pascoe Boom operators ............. Mark McSherry, THE QUICK BROWN FOX S tudios............... Paddington Colour Video Length ............................................ 7Vz mins. David Fallon Centre Gauge ............................................... 35 mm Neg. m a tch in g ..................................Cinevex P ro d u c e r................................... Natalie Miller Boom operator ........... Frances McDonald Shooting s to c k .................... Eastmancolor Mixer ............................ Murray Tregonning D ire c to r.......................Malcolm Robertson Art d ire c to r..........................Caroline Jones Progress ............................ Pre-production R unner................................ Peter Reynolds S criptw rite r............................ Alan Hopgood Asst art director ............... Mandy Holmes Cast: John Saunders (The Jogger). Mixed at ...........................Film Soundtrack P hotography..................................... Malcolm Richards Wardrobe .......................... Caroline Jones Synopsis: The exploits of a super-jogger. AND SOMETIMES I FEEL LIKE I’M Australia Sound recordist .....................John Rowley P ro p s ........... Australian Opera Company, Laboratories............................................VFL, ONLY 18 E d ito r...................................................... TonyPaterson Australian Film and Television Mastercolour, Exec, producer ................Anthony Buckley KEEPING UP WITH THE JONESES Assoc, School Prod, company ................. Australian Film Cinevex producer .................... Julia Overton Set construction ............... Steve Burgess, and Television School B u d g e t.................................................. $1400 Prod, manager ...................Robert Kewley Prod, company . . . Rob Brow Productions Simon Butler, P ro d u c e r/d ire cto r......... Virginia Westbury Length ............................................. 10 mins. Prod, secretary ............. Elizabeth Watson Wayne Cull P ro d u c e r............................ Peter Johnston S c rip tw rite r.........................Ginny Lowndes Gauge ............................................... 16 mm Prod, assistant............................ Tessie Hill Director ..........................................Rob Brow Musical director .....................Frank Galea P hotography...........................Simon Smith Shooting s to c k ........................Eastmancolor S c rip tw rite r............................................. NoelField1st asst director .................. Robert Kewley Length ............................................. 11 mins. Sound recordist .................... Dick Arnold First released............. November 23, 1979 Continuity ....................................Julie Bates Photography.......................................... PeterSykes Gauge ....................................%” videotape E d ito r .................................. Peter Andikidis Longford Cinema (Melbourne) Production assistant ................. Tessie Hill Sound recordist ................... Geoff Wilson Progress .......................... Awaiting release Prod, d esig n er.................... Doug Kinsman Cast: Ross Williams (The Man), Annette Lighting cameraman ...M a lco lm Richards E d ito r.................................... Insync Editing Scheduled re le a s e ....... January 11, 1980, Exec, producer ................. John Matthews Hulm (The Woman), Scott Bird (The Youth), Camera assistant ........................ Phil Cross Prod, manager ...................Warwick Field Sydney Filmmakers Cinema, Sydney Prod, manager ..................Catherine Millar Heidi Wharton (The Child), Elizabeth Smith Key g r ip .......................Richard Lowenstein Cast: Craig Lambert (John), Wayne Cull Prod, secretary ...................................... Nola Unit m a n a g e r.................................Catherine Millar (The Baby). E lectrician............................................... GaryPlunkett (Peter). Vicki Torpy (Judy), Ross Hill Camera assistant ............... Robert Murray Prod, secretary .. Margaret-Rose Stringer Synopsis: The first part involves a cryptic Boom operator ........................ Greg Steel Key g r ip ................................ Lindsay Foote (Lawrence). Prod, assistant.................... Kate Westbury message of duality of roles between homo Costume designer .................Jon Dowding G a ffe r......................................................Colin Chase Synopsis: A young man who is out of work C asting.....................................................MaryHuntington sexuality and heterosexuality. The second Make-up ............................... Kirsten Veysey is told by his brother to say anything just to Laboratory ...............................................VFL Lighting cameraman ........... Simon Smith follows the tense relationship between a H airdresser............................................. KylieLawler Length ..............................................30 mins. get a job . . . Camera operators ............. Geoff Morgan, husband and wife and the consequent Props ........................................Jon Dowding Gauge ............................................... 16 mm George Petryowski, impotent rape. The third concerns a nuclear Set d e c o ra to r........................................... JonDowding Shooting s to c k ........................Eastmancolor Greg Faulkner family, stranded and hungry, and the Musical director ............... George Dreyfus Progress ...................................... Production Boom operator .........................David King EVICTIONS conquest of their surroundings. Mixer .................................. Steven Edwards Synopsis: The many and varied activities of Art d ire c to r..........................Kevin Scanlon R unners............................................ Ian Lang, Jonah and Nancy Jones of Pental Island, Prod, company ...................Berry St Films Make-up .............................Brlta Kingsbury, Ian Fowler near Swan Hill. Jonah Jones is well known P ro d u c e r............................... Lyn Nicolson DESIRE Pauline Grebert C atering...................................................C.J's Catering D ire c to r........................Richard Lowenstein for his success as a pig breeder and trialist. Wardrobe .......................Margarita Tassone Prod, company ..........Ansata Productions Length .............................................. 20 mins. and has also played a leading part in the S c rip tw rite r.................. Richard Lowenstein Still photography.................................... AlanHughes P ro d u ce rs.............................. Alan Ingram, Progress ...................................... Production development of arts and drama in the Based on the original idea Laboratory .............................................Atlab Mark Stow Smith, Mallee region. Nancy Jones (form erly C ast: Gary Day, Pat B ishop, Gerda b y ............................ Wendy Lowenstein, Length .............................................. 50 mins. Lou Brown Nicholson. Ray Lawler, Alan Hopgood. Noel Counihan, Nancy Cato) has followed a successful city Progress ............................. Post-production Director .................................... Alan Ingram M urray C opland, Jam ie W a llis, John Tom Hills television career with a busy life as a mother Cast: Diane Craig (Joan Walsh), Gillian S crip tw rite r.....................Mark Stow Smith of four, broadcaster, actress and drama Heywood, Peter Felmingham, Adele Lewin. P hotography...................Andrew De Groot Hyde (Laurie Harding), Bunney Brooke (Ally teacher. Synopsis: Paul Sharman, an author, writes Based on the original idea Sound recordist .......................Jacqui Fine Marsh), Wendy Blacklock (Mary 'Tiger' b y ......................................................... AlanIngram a plot and acts it out to become famous. It E d ito r........................... Richard Lowenstein Lyons), Vivian Grayson (Penny Knight), involves the attempted seduction of a long Assoc_ producer .........................Lou Brown C om p o se r........................ Tim McLaughlan Mary M ackay (Maureen O’Reilly), Dot THE LAST GOODBYE Laboratory .................................... Colorfilm line of secretaries. Sharman ends up in Exec, producer ...................Murray Brown Strong (Ada Johnson), Shirley Cameron gaol, but much to his agent's delight, he Length ............................................ 25 mins. Assoc, p ro d u c e rs .....................................Ian Fowler, Prod, company ............................ Paragate (Susan Jones), Gayda Campbell (Leah becomes a best-selling author. Gauge ............................................... 16 mm Miranda Bain Dist. company .................South Australian McCormack), Joyce Jacobs (Ettie James). Shooting s to c k ....................... Eastmancolor Prod, manager .......................... Ian Fowler Experimental Filmmakers Synopsis: An old dancer, Tiger Lyons, is Cast: Natalie Bate, Michael Hannon, Scott 1st asst director ...............Michael Bladen P ro d u c e rs............................... Andrea Grey, SOMETHING BEGINNING WITH put into a religious nursing home to be Phillips, Greg Kirk, Rrats Bander, Simon Continuity .............................. Jenna Hayes Salik Silverstein looked after. Unfortunately, Tiger is very fit, ART Reptile, Jandy Rainbow, Richie Finder, 3D. Camera assistant ............... Beamish Elliot Director .............................. Salik Silverstein so she has to be made sick for the hospital Synopsis: An allegory on sex and jealousy. Key g r ip ................................ Norval Watson S criptw rite rs........................................KendalBird,P ro d u ce r/d irector..................... ARDWIRKZ system to be able to cope with her. Boom operator .................Tony McDonald Film Collective Andrea Grey, Art d ire c to r.......................................Miranda Bain Scriptwriter . . . ARDWIRKZ Film Collective Joanna Seidel, DIRTY BUSINESS BOX FLAT Asst art director ................. Norval Watson Based on the original idea Salik Silverstein Costume designer ........................ Val Pitts Based on the short story b y ....... ARDWIRKZ Billboard Collective P ro d u c e r/d ire cto r...................Kathy Fenton' Prod, c o m p a n y ................. Swinburne Film Wardrobe .......................... Lucy McLaren P hotography.......................................Richard Maude Department by .................................... Salik Silverstein S c rip tw rite r.............................. Kathy Fenton P r o p s ................................................ Miranda Bain Sound recordist .............................Lyn Lee P ro d u c e r.....................................................Ian Fowler Photography............................ Gus Howard Original idea b y .......................Kathy Fenton Special e ffe c ts ...............Demar Demolition Director .................................. Robert Grant E d ito r......................................................PeterCallas Sound recordist ......................... Jim Currie P hotography............................... Jan Murray Company S crip tw rite r.............................Robert Grant E d ito r..................................Cynthia Connop C om p o se rs............................................. DaveSmith. Sound recordist .....................Narja Kaspar Neg. m a tc h in g ...................Warrick Driscoll C om poser.............................Robert Parker P hotography......................Ralph Strasser Andrew de Teliga, E d ito r ........................................Kathy Fenton No. of s h o ts .................................200 to 250 Sound recordist ............. Richard Zatorski Unit m a na g e r..................................... Andrea Grey Bob McGowan C o m p o s e r............................... Victor Kaspar

SHORTS

Cinema Papers. February-March—57

Prod, s e c re ta ry .................. Jane Calthorpe Camera operator ............. Richard Maude G a ffe r................................... Kerryn Stanton, Yanni Stumbles Art d ire c to r.................................Ross Wolfe Costume designer ........... Dianne Bridson Music performed by ............. Dave Smith, Andrew de Teliga, Bob McGowan Still photography................... Kit Lauchlan, Barbara Anderson S tu d ios............... East Sydney Warehouse, Inner-city Side F/X Laboratory ......................................Colorfilm B u d g e t................................................... $7603 Length ..............................................35 mins. Gauge ................................................16 mm Shooting s to c k ........................ Eastmancolor Progress .......................................Production Release date .............................June, 1980 Cast: Paul Bertram (TV news reporter), ARDWIRKZ Collective. Synopsis: An informative and entertaining look at a public art project involving billboards, made collectively by the artists participating.

THE LITTLE CONVICT

S c rip tw rite r........................... Barbara Boyd it is claimed, are produced under the P ro d u c e r.............................Nick Alexander guidance of a “ cosmic force". Photography.......................Mike Brayshaw D ire c to r.................................... Tony Chenn Sound recordist ................ Ian Jenkinson Reporter ................................ Paul Griffiths E d ito rs ...................................Barbara Boyd, P hotography................... Roger Seccombe THE DANGEROUS SUMMER Kevin Anderson Sound recordist ........... Malcolm Paterson Prod, manager ........Sacha Grocholewska E d ito r......................................Robert Martin Prod, company . . . . McElroy and McElroy PUSSY PUMPS UP Prod, secretary .................... Val Musgrave P ro d u c e r.................................... Jane Scott Camera assistant ............... Dennis Nikolic Producer/director ..Antoinette Starkiewicz Length ..............................................30 mins. Laboratory ........................................Cinevex D ire c to r................. Brian Trenchard-Smith S c rip tw rite r....................................Antoinette Starkiewicz Gauge ................................................16 mm S c rip tw rite r.......................Ann Brooksbank Length ..............................................25 mins. Based on original idea Shooting s to c k .......................Eastmancolor Photography...............................John Seale Gauge ................................................16 mm b y ............................................... Antoinette Starkiewicz Progress ............................ Post-production Shooting s to c k ........................Eastmancolor Sound recordist .........................Tim Lloyd Photography........................................... KimHumphreys Scheduled release ................. March, 1980 E d ito r............................................. Alan Lake Progress ............................. Post-production Sound recordist ................... Alistair Jones Synopsis: A short documentary about Dr Synopsis: A depiction of the interactions, Exec, producer .......................Jim McElroy E d ito r ..................................................... Eddie Graham Tom Pressley, a retired CSIRO scientist. His complexities, ambiguities, advantages and Prod, secretary .......................Fiona Gosse C o m p o se r............................Sharon Calcraft work on clothing flammability enabled him' ironies inherent in Australia as a multi Prod, assistant........................Fiona Gosse Exec, producer ....A n to in e tte Starkiewicz to end his career on a high note. 1st asst director ................. Ross Mathews cultural society. Music performed by ...... Sharon Calcraft Clapper/loader ....................... David Knaus Animation ................ Antoinette Starkiewicz Camera assistant .......................Jan Kenny MOON IN ARIES Best boy ................................ Victor Linden Key g r ip .................................Jeff O’Donnell Mixed at .................................... Honeyfarm BIRTH Gaffer .......................................Craig Bryant P ro d u c e r/d ire c to r........... Robert M. Conn Laboratory ......................................Colorfilm Special e ffe c ts ........................ Chris Murray S c rip tw rite r......................... Robert M. Conn P ro du ce r/d irector.................................Anne Gordon Lab. lia is o n ............................ Kerry Jenkins Bushfire control officer . . . Phil Koperberg Based on the original idea S criptw rite rs..................... Anne Gordon, B u d g e t................................................S20.000 Accommodation . . . .The Carrington Hotel b y .................................. Robert M. Conn Marianne Bence, Car H ire ................... Kings Cross Rentacar Length ............................................... 7 mins. Photography....................... Robert M. Conn Shirley Videion Gauge ............................................... 35 mm Truck h ir e ................... Hertz Truck Rentals E d ito r...................................Robert M. Conn Sound recordist ................... Phillip Staindl Shooting s to c k ......................... Kodachrome Laboratory ......................................Colorfilm Special fx photography .. Robert M. Conn, Continuity .............................Shirley Videion Length ..............................................25 mins. Progress ......................... Awaiting release Christopher Beck Lighting cameraman ........... Phillip Staindl Scheduled re le a s e ......... December. 1979 Progress ............................. Pre-production Still photography............Christopher Beck TOM ROBERTS Camera operator ................... George Tosi First released . . . Best of World Animation, Animation ...........................Robert M.Conn Camera assistant ........... Marianne Bence London Film Festival. Prod, company ................... Canberra CAE S tu d ios............................................ Photonics N a rra to r.............................. Marion Crooke November, 1979 GETTING THE MESSAGE Media Centre Laboratory ........................................ Cinevex Length ..............................................17 mins. Synopsis: After much pumping up, Pussy Director ............................................ Ian Hart B u d g e t...................................................$3000 Progress ............................ Awaiting release Prod, company .................. AVEC Film Unit triumphs in a world of muscle-men, or in S c rip tw rite rs............................................ IanHart, Length ..............................................20 mins. Dist. company ......................... Audio Visual Scheduled re le a s e ........... February, 1980 other words, anything is possible. Alan Byrne Gauge ................................................16 mm Cast: Mushroom Mime Troupe. Education Centre Photography................... John Houldsworth Shooting s to c k ........................ Eastmancolor Synopsis: A documentary on childbirth, P ro d u ce r/d irector........................Ivan Gaal Sound recordist ............................Jim Wise Progress ..............................Post-production SARAH detailing foetal growth and development, S criptw rite rs................................ Ivan Gaal, E d ito r...............................Helene Jamieson Scheduled re le a s e ........... February, 1980 Barbara Boyd physiotherapy, pre-natal care, hospital See details in Features (under Production) Continuity .......................Helene Jamieson C a s t: C h r is B e c k ( P ilo t ) , S te v e n procedures and birth. Produced for the P hotography............................... Leigh Tilson Laboratory .................................... Colorfilm this issue. Cacapardou (Pilot). Sound recordist ................... David Hughes Royal Women's Hospital. Length ...............................................20 mins. Synopsis: A documentary-short of a trip to E d ito r..............................................Ivan Gaal Gauge ................................................16 mm the moon in the year 2000, using only very Exec, producer ............................ Jim Tate WHATSABODY Shooting s to c k .......................Eastmancolor COAL basic special visual effects. Prod, manager ................... Barbara Boyd Progress .................................... Production Prod, company ................... Side Steppers Continuity ............................Laurie Hastings Prod, company ............................ .'Galfilms Release date ..............................May, 1980 Animation Co-op P roduce/dlrector..................... Gillian Leahy Lighting cameraman ...............Leigh Tilson Synopsis: The conservation and restoration Directors ................................ John Hughes, G a ffe r........................................................ RobMcCubbin S crip tw rite rs.............................Gillian Leahy, of Tom Roberts' painting, “ Opening of the Julie Cunningham SLACK VANGUARD Ian Milliss Make-up ............................... Lois Hohenfeis First Federal Parliament", by students of the Based on original idea Asst, editor ........................ Margot Lethlean P hotography.............................Ned Lander Canberra CAE M aterials Conservation Prod, company . . . Black Star Illumination by ................................ Julie CunninghamSound editor ......................... David Hughes Sound recordist ...........................Pat Fiske course. P ro du ce r/d irector................... Oliver Robb Sound recordist ............... Ashlie Grenvile Mixer .................................... David Hughes' E d ito r.......................................Jim Stevens Based on the original idea E d ito rs .................................... John Hughes, Assoc, p ro d u c e r........................... Ian Milliss Titles d e s ig n e r........................... Des Bunyon b y ..........................................Oliver Robb Julie Cunningham WHITE WAVES R esearcher.....................................Ian Milliss Mixed at ...................................................VFL Photography.............................Andrew Vial, Mixed at ................................ United Sound Laboratory ...............................................VFL Prod, manager ................... John Cruthers Prod, c o m p a n y ............Sumpter Brothers’ Oliver Robb Laboratory ......................................Colorfilm Laboratory ..................................... Colorfilm- Length ..............................................25 mins. Production Sound recordist .....................Mike Bajko, B u d g e t...................................................$6000 Gauge ............................................... 16 mm Budget ............................................... $32,700 Dist. c o m p a n y ...........David Sumpter Films Trevor Prouse Length ..............................................18 mins. Length ............................................. 50 mins. Shooting s to c k ........................Eastmancolor P ro d u c e r/d lre cto r................................... RodSumpter E d ito r........................................ Oliver Robb Gauge ................................................16 mm Progress .......................... Awaiting release Gauge ............................................... 16 mm Based on the original idea Asst, e d ito rs ..............................Alan Smith, Shooting s to c k ........................ Eastmancolor Scheduled release . . . February 28, 1980, Progress ............................. Pre-production by .................................... David Sumpter Ian Adkins Progress ............................. Pre-production State Film Centre (Melbourne) Release date ..........................................1980 Photography...........................Rod Sumpter Sound editor .............................. Ian Adkins, Synopsis: An animated short illustrating the Synopsis: A d ocu m e n ta ry abo u t the Cast: Barbara Boyd, Jean Holkner, Sue E d ito r...................................... Lefkos Greco ideal in dress and behaviour — historical Alan Smith forthcoming expansion of the coal industry Dunstan, Lance Balchin, Sacha Wood. Prod, d esig n er............ Peter Watson-Wood Mixer ........................................... Ian Adkins, and contemporary. in the Hunter Valley region. The film wifi ex Synopsis: Tony recalls the frustrations and Exec, producer .................... Ralph Rodger Alan Smith amine the benefits and possible problems failures of his past caused by illiteracy. The Assoc, producers ................... Val Warren, Mixed at ..............................................Film 8 the changeover from farming to mining will documentary shows how he is taught to David Sumpter For details of the following films see Issue Lab o ra to rie s...........................................Agfa, overcome this failure, and how he begins to bring to the area. Prod, s u p e rv is o r................... Lefkos Greco 24: Warren Film Services read and w rite through language ex Camera operators ............. Rod Sumpter, B u d g e t................................................... $3051 perience. The Bunch of Flowers David Sumpter Length ..............................................40 mins. Quick Follow That Star COSMIC ART Focus p u lle r................... Rod Sumpter Gauge ..............................................Super 8 Art d ire c to r............................................ PeterWatson-Wood GIVING UP IS BREAKING MY (for distribution on 3/<” cassette) Prod, company ........................... TKA Films Asst art director ..................David Sumpter HEART Shooting s to c k ...........................Agfachrome Dist. company ............................. TKA Films Asst editor .............................. Rod Sumpter Progress ........................................ In release and P ro d u c e r...........................Tanya Kamenew, Music performed by . .Vangelis and Yanis Synopsis: What does the future hold for ITS HARDER THAN YOU THINK Alec Kamenew Sound editor ......................... Lefkos Greco Australia’s unemployed? This experimental Director .................................Alec Kamenew O p tic a ls ............. Sound Film Laboratories d o c u m e n ta ry exam ines som e of the Prod, c o m p a n y ............ Red Heart Pictures S c rip tw rite r............................ Alec Kamenew Title opticals . . . . Studio Film Laboratories possibilities. Dist. company . . . . NSW Film Corporation Based on the original idea Tech, a d v is e r..........................Lefkos Greco b y ....................................... Alec Kamenew P ro d u c e r.............................. Daniela Torsh P u b lic ity............................... David Sumpter Photography..........................Alec Kamenew D ire c to r.................................Susan Lambert For details of the following documentaries Laboratory' ........Studio Film Laboratories FEATURES see Issue 24: Sound recordist ...................Charles Slater S c rip tw rite r........................... Susan Lambert B u d g e t................................................$15,000 Photography................................ Jan Kenny E d ito r............................ Hariet Clutterbuck Big H Length ..............................................20 mins. Sound recordist ............................Pat Fiske Prod, d esigners.....................................BrianNelson, Gauge . . . . 16 mm for blow up to 35 mm Eat the Rich Alec Kamenew E d ito r..............................Ronda Macgregor Shooting s to c k ........................ Eastmancolor TheEleven Powers C om p o se rs............................Tony Burkys, C om posers........................................... HenryCorrey, Progress ........................... Awaiting release For a Child called Michael Carol Ruff MICK Ron Chadwick, I am Fijian Release date ................. November, 1979 Exec, producer ............. . . . Richard Davis Michael Pandelis Cast: Buttons, Mark Ladell, The New Wave Prod, company ..........................Geoff Beak Raccolto D’inverno (Winter’s Harvest) Prod, co-ordinator ................ Gerry Amena Prod, manager ................... Daniela Torsh of Hawaiian and Australian artistes. Stairway to the Moon Productions Prod, secretary ................ Tanya Kamenew Prod, s e c re ta ry ..........Christina Fitzgerald Thankyou P ro d u c e r...................................... Geoff Beak Continuity ................................... Lena Slater Prod, assistant.................................... Carole Kostanich D ire c to r......................................... Jane Oehr Camera assistant ........Shalagh McCarthy For details of the following films see Issue Lighting cameraman ......... Alec Kamenew S crip tw rite r.................................. Geoff Beak Camera operator ................Alec Kamenew Scenic a r tis t..................................Carol Ruff 24: Based on the original idea Set construction .......................... Carol Ruff Focus p u lle r .......................................... CarlWoods Cigarettes and Matches by ............................................. Geoff Beak Special fx photography . . . .Alec Kamenew Neg. m a tc h in g ..........................Chris Rowell Craypot Sonata B u d g e t..............................................$150,000 E lectricia n .............................. Alec Kamenew Musical director ......................Tony Burkys Desire S E R IE S Length .............................................. 90 mins. Music performed by ........... Tony Burkys, Art d ire c to r............................................ Brian Nelson Down Under Downunder? Progress ............................. Pre-production Warwick Kennington, Costume designer ......... Tanya Kamenew Forest and Dove Scheduled release ................................ 1980 Robert Luckey, Grandma Rose, Elise Mae and Lotte Make-up ...................................Rose Nelson Synopsis: A documentary drama on a Carol Ruff H airdresser.............................................RoseNelson I Like to Go Fast Down the Slippery Slide would-be battler who finds the ground con Set d e c o ra to r.........................Alec Kamenew Sound editor .................Ronda Macgregor Kevin is Fine TOWARDS COMMUNITY tinually cut under his feet. Editing assistant ........................ Liz Stroud Carpenter .............................Alec Kamenew Man of the Earth EDUCATION Set construction ................. Alec Kamenew Mixer ...................................... Peter Fenton Mike’s Blood Still photography..................Sandy Edwards For com plete details of the follow ing Neg. m a tc h in g .......................................Chris Rowell Natura Morta Prod, company ..................... R and R Film documentaries see Issue 24: Musical director .................... Henry Correy O p tic a ls ................................................. Acme Newsboy Productions T itle s ............................. Optical and Graphic Music performed by ........................... H o b o Now and Then Dist. company . Department of Education, Asia — Threat or Opportunity? Sound editor ............... Hariet Clutterbuck S tudios.................................................Rozelle Studios Play Hookey in the Snow Vic. Band on the Run Still photography...................Alec Kamenew Mixed at ................................ United Sound Point Omega P ro d u c e r/d ire c to r............... Ron V. Brown Beg, Steal or Borrow Laboratory ......................................Colorfilm Animation .. .•...........................................CarlWoods Ra Tat Ta S c rip tw rite rs ...........................Tony Delves, Enid Lorimer O p tic a ls .................................. Alec Kamenew Lab. lia is o n .................................................BillGooley Recognition Ian Bennett, The Hunter and the Hunted Title d e s ig n e r.........................Alec Kamenew B u d g e t................................................$49,500 Slack Vanguard Ron Brown The Women and Work Film Mixed at ..................................Palm Studios Length ............................................. 16 mins., Wagerup Weekend P hotography............................... John Lord, 25 mins. Laboratory ......................................Colorfilm Wattamolla Ernie Clark Gauge ................................................16 mm Lab. lia is o n .................................................IanStevens Windsurfer Sound recordists ..................Danny Dyson, B u d g e t................................................$20,000 Shooting s to c k ........................Eastmancolor Lloyd Carrick, Length .............................................. 53 mins. Progress ............................ Awaiting release John Phillips, Cast: CarolRuff, Emu Nugent, Peter SHORTS Gauge ................................................16 mm Ron Brown Gregory, Robert Luckey, Lorna Lesley. Shooting s to c k ........................Eastmancolor E d ito r.......................................... Ron Brown Progress ............................ Awaiting release Synopsis: A professional training film and a Exec, producers ..................... Tony Delves, Cast: Virginia Amena (artist), Prof. Brin community education film for the Reduction Ian Bennett Newton-John (host and mediator), Prof. of Drug Usage during Pregnancy Program. Camera assistants ..............Dennis Nikolic, Eric Sharpe, Dr. Barbara Thiering, Dr. Don AUSSIES ALL Harry Glynatsis Diespecker, Dr. Truda Howard, Mr. Nevill I CAN NEVER RESIST THAT Key g r ip ................................ Tony Sprague GRENDEL GRENDEL GRENDEL Prod, company .................................. AVEC Drury. 2nd unit p h o to g ra p h y ...............Ron Brown, CHALLENGE Dist. company .................................... AVEC Synopsis: A documentary short on the See details in Features (under Production) Ruth Brown P ro du ce r/d irector............... Barbara Boyd paintings of Virginia Amena. Her paintings, Prod, company ................................ CSIRO this issue. Special fx pho tog ra ph y............. Rob Conn See details in Features (under In Release) this Issue.

DOCUMENTARIES

ANIMATION

58—Cinema Papers, February-March

G a ffe rs .................................. Tony Holthom, Mick Ewan Boom operators ..................... Phil Adams, Phil Sterling A rt d ire c to r.............................Mike Hudson Make-up ...........................Anne Pospischil H airdresser....................... Anne Pospischil Neg. m a tc h in g .................. Warwick Driscoll Mixers .........................................Ron Brown, Stephen Edwards N a rra to r.................................. Fred Parslow Still photography...........Robert Loughman Animation .................................... Rob Conn O p tic a ls ................................ Kevin Williams C aterin g .................................... Ruth Brown S tu d ios............................................... Filmsets Mixed at .................................Studio Tracks Laboratory ............................................... VFL B u d g e t................................................$60,000 Length ...................................... 5 x 20 mins. Gauge ................................................16 mm Shooting s to c k ........................Eastmancolor Progress ........................................ In release First re le a se d ............... State Film Centre, Melbourne Synopsis: A public relations documentary to encourage greater interaction between schools and the community. Produced for the M inisters Advisory Com m ittee on Community Education in Victoria.

Key grip ..................................Andy Glavin Marcus Cole, Sound recordist ........... John Schiefelbein TRIAL BY MARRIAGE G a ffe r.................................... Jack Kendrick Leigh Spence E d ito r..........................................Kerry Regan Prod, company .................................... ABC Boom operators (studio)........... Ian Wilson, C om p o se r.............................. Michael Carlos S criptw rite rs...........................Sheila Sibley, Exec, producer .................... John O'Grady Ross Wilson, Michael Brindley, Unit m a na g e r.............................lan Berwick Directors ................................David Goldie, Roger Fleming Denise Morgan, 1st asst director ................. Steve Connard Geoffrey PortmannMake-up ......................... Christine Balfour Ray Kolle, 2nd asst d ire c to r................ Daphne Crooks S c rip tw rite r.........................Michael Aitkens Wardrobe ..........................Beverley Powers John Upton, Continuity ......................................Linda Ray Prod, d esigners................. Barbara Major, Props ............................................ Jack Dyer, Margaret McClusky, Lighting cameraman ........... Chris Morgan Dennis Gentle Alf Zappala Dave Wothington, Focus p u lle r......................Russell Galloway Prod, managers ............... Gae Mulvogue, Props b u y e r...........................................Ernie Jones lan Bradley Camera assistant ......... John Jasiukowicz Judy Murphy Vision control (s tu d io )......... Bruce Liebau Key g r ip ...................................................GaryClements Original idea b y ......................... Reg Watson Prod, secretary .....................Jenny Lewis Vision mixer (s tu d io )....................... MichaelFlintMake-up .................................Astra Palkovs Sound recordists .................... Gary Hayes, 1st asst directors .................Wayne Barry, P u b licity..............................................Virginia Sargent Rob Saunders, Wardrobe .............................. Peter Schmidt Brian Sandwell S tu d ios..................................................... ABCSydney David Keates Ward, a s s is ta n t.........................Gaye Arnold 2nd asst d ire c to rs ...............David Young, Length ..............................................85 mins. E d ito rs .................................................... Keith Elliott, P ro p s ...................................................... NigelSaunders Gae Mulvogue Shooting s to c k ............................ Videotape David Jaeger Asst editor ............................ Debbie Regan Producer’s assistants . . . Maggie Hegarty, Progress ............................. Post-production Prod, d esig n er.............................lan Costello Neg. m a tc h in g .................. Marilyn Delaney, Jenny Newton Release date .................... July,1980 C o m p o se r................................ Alan Caswell Ron Delaney Lighting cameraman . . . Danny Batterham Cast: Diane Cilento (Mag), John Gaden Mixer .................................... Peter McKinley Exec, producer ..........................lan Bradley Camera operator .................... Hugh Powell (Ritchie), Max Cullen (Terry). Prod, c o -o rd in a to r........... Fay Rousseaux Still photography..................................... RayDavy Clapper/loader .......................David Collins Synopsis: A b rittle comedy of sexual Prod, manager ..................... Valerie Unwin Laboratory ........................................... Atiab Key g r ip ................................ Paul Lawrance politics in which the biggest toy of all is Length ..............................................50 mins. Prod, assistant................... Fay Rousseaux E lectricia n .................................. Geoff Smith uranium. Behind the domestic triangle of a 1st asst director ............... Simon Hellings Gauge ............................................... 16 mm Sound recordist .........................Ben Osmo Queen's Counsel, his promiscuous wife and C asting..........................................Maura Fay Progress ............................Post-production Boom operator ...................Brent Bonheur an idealistic trade union leader is a sharp Cast: Simon Burke (Steve Cameron), John Camera operators ...................Peter Hind, Film editor .........................Matti Heinonen indictment of the frivolous misuse of power. Ken Mulholland, Waters (David Wilding), Arkie Whiteley Dubbing editor ...................Gethin Creagh Noel Penn, (Alana Cameron), Jon Blake (Doug Riley), Make-up .................................. Suzie Clemo Joe Battaglia, Martin Harris, Gerry Duggan, Brian Young, CORAL1E LANSDOWNE SAYS NO Barry Pierce, Noreen Le Mottee, Maureen Wardrobe ................................ Elsie Evans, Steve Mann Bridget Graham Boom operator ................. Paul Covington Gay. Prod, company ....................................ABC Props b u y e r...............................Merv Asher, Synopsis: The lives of a boy and his sister Make-up ...................Vivienne Rushbrook, D ire c to r.............................. Michael Carson Tony Cronin Adrienne Lee’ who have gone through the ‘welfare’ system S crip tw rite r.........................Alexander Buzo For com plete details of the follow ing Standby p ro p s ........................................Jack Dyer, H airdresser.....................Gilbert Broadway as neglected children. Based on the play by . . . .Alexander Buzo documentaries see Issue 24: Gordon Walsh Wardrobe .......................Jennifer Carmen, Technical producer (studio) .. Barry Quick Studio lighting .....................Ted Reynolds, Jan Petersen Technical producer (OB) Peter Tkachenko Discovery 4 A TOAST TO MELBA Ezio Belli Props .................................. Stephen Walsh Working Up Lighting (studio) .....................Barry Quick Technical producers ......... Ted Reynolds, Asst editor ........................ Peter Barbedos Lighting (OB) ............... Michael Fitzpatrick D ire c to r................................................... AlanBurke Ezio Belli Musical director ...............William Motzing Videotape e d ito r ................... Mike Audcent S c rip tw rite r........................... Jack Hibberd Sound ....................................... Noel Cantrill Music oerformed Prod, d esig n er.......................... Brett Moore Based on the play by ......... Jack Hibberd Cameras ......................................Dick Bond, by .....................Australian Screen Music Exec, producer ..........................Alan Burke Technical producer ....... Bruce Valentine Murray Tonkin, Sound editor ...........................Greg Gurney Script Consultant ............... ..Sandra Levy Lighting ................................ John Wharton John Lander, Still photography.........................Ray Hand Prod, manager ................... Michael Collins Sound ................................... Noel Cantrill Mick Walter P u b licity.........................Felicity Goscombe Prod, secretary ........................ Lyn Knight Videotape e d ito r .................Barbara Franc Vision m ix e r............................. Bruce Wilson C atering..........................Anne Dechaineux 1st asst director .................Brian Giddens Prod, d esig n er.......................... Roger Kirk Vision c o n tro l..............................Peter Ollier S tudios......... Channel "0" — Nunawading 2nd asst d ire cto r.......................Sue Williss Exec, producer .......................Alan Burke Videotape e d ito r ................................... John Randeil Length ......................................2 x 60 mins. Producer's assistant............ Carol Chirlian Script consultant.....................Sandra Levy Progress ........................................In release Studio warm-ups ........... Bruce Bromhead C asting................................... Jennifer Allen Prod, manager ...................Michael Collins First re leased..................... February 1979, P IL O T S P ublicity.....................................................RosJones Cameras (studio) ............... Richard Bond, Prod, secretary ........................ Lyn Knight Length ......................................7 x 30 mins. National 0-10 Network John Lander, 1st asst director ................. Brian Giddens Gauge ............................................... 16 mm Cast: Val Lehman (Bea). Patsy King (Erica), Murray Tonkin, 2nd asst d ire c to r...................Dave Tunneil Shooting s to c k ....................... Eastmancolor Colette Mann (Doreen), Elspeth Ballantyne Tony Conolly Producer's assistant............ Carol Chirlian Progress .................................... Production (M eg), G erard M aguire (Jim ), Sheila Cameras (OB) ..................... Ross Milligan, Casting................................... Jennifer Allen Cast: Peter Sumner (Bruce), Jacki Weaver Florance (Lizzie),Fiona Spence (Vera), THE COAST TOWN KIDS lan Marden Cameras ............................ Murray Tonkin, (Joan), Terry Bader (Jacko), Bill Kerr (Sir Sound (stu d io ).........................Noel Cantrill John Lander, Amanda M uggieton (Chrissie), Monica Prod, company . .Andromeda Productions Edmund), Carole Skinner (Gwen), Harry Sound (OB) .............................. John Bourn Tony Conolly. Maughan (Pat). George Mallaby (Paul). P ro d u c e r.........................Tom Broadbridge Lawrence (Uncle Fred), Maggi Dence (Rita Synopsis: A drama on life in a contem Music and E ffects..........Janine Chapman Mick Walter Director . .............................Peter Maxwell Rosebud). porary Australian women’s prison. Lighting assistant ..........Laurie Donaldson Music and E ffects........... Janine Chapman S c rip tw rite r............... Roger Vaughan Carr Key g r ip ........................................... Ken Hey Lighting assistants ............... Zahir Tawfik, Sound recordist ..................... John Phillips Asst grips .............................. Steve Bailey, Laurie Donaldson E d ito r........................................... Ray Daley WATER UNDER THE BRIDGE SAM’S LUCK Bill Wolverson Boom operators ....................... Jan Wilson, Exec, producer .......................Ewart Wade Boom operators .................Mike Roberts, Ross Wilson, Prod.' company ......................................ABC Prod, manager .......................Sue Hornby Prod, company ........Shotton Productions lan Wilson, Roger Fleming P ro d u c e r..................................Keith Wilkes P ro d u c e r...................................John McRae 1st asst director ..................... Tom Burstall Roger Fleming, Costume designer .....................Roger Kirk Director ....................................David Zweck Director ......................................Igor Auzins Lighting cameraman ............... Ernie Clark Geoff Bullock, Make-up ............................ Johanne Santry S criptw rite rs................. Eleanor Witcombe, Camera assistant ..................... Rod Murray S c rip tw rite r..............................................NoelRobinson Brad Polldore Wardrobe ........................ Bridget Graham Sound recordists ................. John Boswell, Michael Jenkins Key g r ip .............................Paul Ammitsboll Make-up ....................... Norman Blanchard Props .........................................Chris Webb, Asst grip .............................. Peter Kershaw Based on the n o ve l, Gary Lund, Wardrobe .............................. Elsie Rushton Gordon Walsh G a ffe r...................................................... Brian Adams by .......................... Sumner Locke Elliott John Beanland P ro p s .......................................Igor Lazareff, Props b u y e r...............................Tony Cronin E d ito r........................................... Ted Lowe Boom operator ........................ Phil Sterling Photography............................ Dan Burstall Chris Webb Vision c o n tro l............................ Peter Ollier R un n e r.................................... Duncan Wade Sound recordist ........................Phil Stirling Prod, d esig n er........................Kevin Bartlett Props b u y e r................. Paddy MacDonald Vision m ix e r............................ Bruce Wilson Prod, manager .................Lorraine Collett E d ito r................. Edward McQueen Mason Standby p ro p s ................... Paddy Reardon Vision Control (studio) ........... Peter Ollier P ublicity.............................. Virginia Sargent 1st asst director ...................Peter Baroutis C om p o se r.......................................... Andrew Wiltshire Post-production facilities . . . Cutting Point Vision Control (OB) ................. David Pike S tudios..................................................... ABCSydney Assoc, p ro d u c e r..................................JennyCampbell Progress ............................. Post-production 2nd asst d ire c to r............... Peter Trofimovs Vision m ix e r........................... Bruce Wilson Length .............................................. 85 mins. Producer's assistant............... Kerry Bevan Prod, co-ordinator .................. Clare Griffin Cast: John Wood (Tom W iide), Frank P u b licity..............................................Virginia Sargent Shooting s to c k ............................ Videotape Gallacher (Len Wolding), Alan Hopgood Prod, secretary ................Evelyn Maurirere C asting...................................... Pauline Sell S tudios..................................................... ABCSydney Progress ............................. Post-production Lighting cameraman ............... Chris Davis (Mick James), Peter Felmingham (Fred Prod, accountant ........................Patti Scott Length ............................................. 93 mins. Release date ................................July, 1980 Camera operator .....................Ron Hagen Farnell). Robert Korosy (Pete Martin), Missy 1st asst director .....................Tom Burstall Shooting s to c k ............................ Videotape Cast: Robyn Nevin (Nellie), Michael Aitkens M a rtin (Sally W ilde), Ju stin S ta n fo rd 2nd asst d ire c to r................................. StuartBeatty Make-up .......................Linda Bridgewood Progress ............................ Awaiting release (Armstrong, Harris, Caruso), Mervyn Drake Wardrobe .................................. Pat Jordan 3rd asst d ire c to r...............................Andrew Morse (Skinny). Release date .............................. July, 1980 (Gottlieb, O’Kane. Norton), Tim ‘ Eliott Length .......................................6 x 30 mins. Synopsis: A pilot for a children's series Continuity .............................Shirley Ballard Cast: Wendy Hughes (Coralie), David (Father, Shaw), Jane Harders (Mother, Lady Progress ...................................... Production based in the coastal resort town of Lome, Focus p u lle r................. Peter Van Santen Waters (Stuart), Brian Blain (Peter), Robert de Grey, Amy, Eunice). Donald Macdonald Cast: David Clencie (Sam), Dena McAbee Clapper/loader ........................... Chris Cain Victoria. Coleby (Paul), Elaine Mangan (Anne), Mary(Lemmone. Lupton, Duke), Henry Szeps (Janny). Paul Colombani (Daniel), Michael Key g r ip ...............................Paul Amitzboll Lou^Stewart (Jill), Basil Clarke (Dr Salmon). (Cecchi. Buffalo Bill, Mayor, Beecham), Carman (Dave Bristow), Ernie Bourne (BenAsst grip .............................. Peter Kershaw Synopsis: Coralie Lansdowne lives alone, Shane Tapper (Jimmy, Newsboy), Anna no), Ursula Olejnik (Christine), Lloyd Cun G a ffe r.........................................Brian Adams chooses not to work and appears to enjoy Volksa (Marchesi, Moncrieff). Boom operator ......................... Ray Phillips ningham (Mr Kaminski), Colin McEwan (Un her life of aimless leisure. But she dreads Synopsis: A seemingly frivolous account of cle Harry). Marian Edwards (Aunty June). Art d ire c to r.............................Logan Brewer her 30th birthday — the end of her youth. A FEATURES the life and times of the famous Australian Sue Jones (Lindy). Asst art director ........................... Ro Bruen group of visitors interrupts her life, and soprano. Dame Nellie Melba, told in words Synopsis: A series about the adventures of Costume designer ......... Bruce Finlayson suddenly there are three men with a and music by the many friends, foes, family three children who decide to manage their Make-up ............................ Bob McCarron, common goal — Coralie. and assorted flum m ery she collected Sally Gordon home in the absence of their mother. during her early life in Australia and her 40H airdresser.........................Ann Pospischil year reign at Covent Garden. Ward, a s s is ta n t................. Julie Constable BIG TOYS DEAD MANS FLOAT P ro p s ............. Nicholaas Van Roosendael TOO MANY SPEARS Prod, company .................................... ABC Asst props buyer ............. Paddy Reardon Prod, company . .Andromeda Productions Director .............................. Chris Thomson Standby p ro p s ................... Sue Armstrong P ro d u c e r......................Tom Broadbridge Prod, company .......................... Both Ends S c rip tw rite r..........................................Patrick White Choreography ...................... Betty Pounder P ro d u c e r................................ Russell Hagg Director ................................ Peter Maxwell S E R IE S Based on the play by ......... Patrick White Scenic a r tis t..........................................KarenTrott S crip tw rite r............... Roger Vaughan Carr S criptw rite rs.................Everette de Roche, Technical producer (stu d io ).. .John Nixon Set construction ..................... Rowan Flude Based on the original idea Peter Pinney Lighting (studio) ......... .Samuel Chung Asst editor ........................ Mark McAulisse by .......................... Roger Vaughan Carr Based on the novel b y ..........Peter Pinney Sound (s tu d io )........................David Odams Still photography..................................... RayHand Photography.............................. Ernie Clark and Estelle Runcie Videotape e d ito r ........................John Dobie S tudios.................................... AAV Australia E d ito r.......................................... Ray Daley Length .................................... 13 x 60 mins. THE LAST OUTLAW Prod, d e sig n e r.........................Quentin Hole Laboratory ........................................Cinevex Exec, producer .......................Ewart Wade Gauge ............................................... 16 mm C o m p o se r..........................................Mozart Length .......................................9 x 47 mins. Prod, manager .......................Sue Hornby Shooting s to c k.................... Eastmancolor Prod, c o m p a n y ........Pegasus Productions Exec, producer .........................Alan Burke Gauge ................................................16 mm Prod, s e c re ta ry ......... Heather McPherson for the Seven Network Progress ............................ Pre-production Script co nsu lta n t.............................. .Sandra LevyClapper/loader ...................Warwick Field Shooting s to c k ........................Eastmancolor Synopsis: Set in the 1870s, the series is a P ro d u c e r.......................Roger Le Mesurier Prod, manager ................... Michael Collins Progress ...................................... Production Camera assistant ................ Rob Murray dramatization of the struggles of Govern Directors .............................. George Miller, Prod, secretary ......................... Lyn Knight Laboratory ........................................Cinevex Kevin Dobson ment Resident Frank Jardine to maintain, C a s t: R obyn N evin (S h a s ta ), D avid 1st asst director ......................Peter Wilson Cameron (Neil), Judy Davis (Carrie), Jacki the tiny outpost of Somerset on Cape York, Length ............................................. 72 mins. Art d ire c to r.................................. Les Binns 2nd asst d ire cto r....................................John Rooke Weaver (Maggie), Chris Milne (Ben). Rod within the heaving, lawless frontier of Torres Gauge ............................................... 16 mm Exec, producers ............... Bronwyn Binns, Cameras (studio) .................. John Lander, Muliinar (Don), Linden Wilkinson (lla), Jan Strait. Progress ............................. Pre-production lan Jones Tony Conolly, Hamilton (G eraldine), Rowena Wallace Synopsis: An exciting film about drug Assoc, producer ....................... Tom Binns Geoff Wilkins, (Honor), John Howard (Archie). running, set along Australia’s east coast. Progress ............................ Pre-production Mick Walter A TOWN LIKE ALICE Synopsis: The story of a group of people Synopsis: The story of Ned Kelly. Lighting asst (studio) . . . Laurie Donaldson whose lives, through time and circum P ro d u c e r.............................Henry Crawford Music and e ffe c ts ..................................... IanCicciari SLIPPERY SLIDE stance, are entwined in several ways — Director ................................ David Stevens Producer’s assistant.............Sharon Goldie PRISONER from love to murder. S criptw rite rs........Rosemary Anne Sisson, Dist. company ...................Tasmanian Film C asting............................................... Jennifer Allen Corporation Prod, company .The Grundy Organization Tom Hegarty Film editor .........................Neil Thumpston Dist. c o m p a n y ....................0-10 Network Based on the novel b y ........... Nevil Shute P ro d u c e r................................ Damien Parer Lighting cameraman ........... Peter Hendry YOUNG RAMSAY P ro d u c e r........................................Phil East B u d g e t..........................................$1,200,000 Director ............................ Donald Crombie Camera operator ............... Graeme Galton Directors .................................... Rod Hardy, Gauge ................................................16 mm Prod, company ....C ra w fo rd Productions S crip tw rite r.......................Donald Crombie Focus p u lle r......................................... RogerLanser Gary Conway, Dist. c o m p a n y ............The Seven Network Progress ............................. Pre-production Photography...........................Chris Morgan Clapper/loader .....................Russell Bacon

TE L E V IS IO N

Cinema Papers. February-March—59

SOUND STUDIO FOR HIRE Suitable for Filmy Video and Stills at:

FROM FEATURED PLAYER THROUGH TO ‘SPECIAL’ EXTRAS

FILM SETS 88 Warrigal Road, Oakleigh, M ELB O U R N E 3166

(and all stops In between!)

SUITE 2 609 ST KILDA ROAD, MELBOURNE (03) 529 1595

Studio 75’ x 46’ with 14’ to lighting grid. Large three sided paintable fixed eye. Good access to studio for cars and trucks.

ROBERT MARTIN

Design and set construction service available.

FILM EDITOR

Dressing rooms, wardrobe, and make-up facilities.

... with own completely independent post-production facility for the 16mm filmmaker. Editing rooms and theatrette available separately for hire.. .

STUDIO BOOKINGS, PHONE: Alex Simpson,

Contact Macclesfield Productions at:

(03) $68 00$8,

Telephone (03) 699 6185 (03) 699 4216

(03) $68 2948 AH (03) 2$ 38$8

20 Thomson Street, South Melbourne Vic. 3205 Post O ffice Box 79

« u n ia t) 35mm &J6mm Negative Cutting

CHRIS ROWELL PRODUCTIONS 1QQ ppnehi irci Qfrppt

\Willoughby. MS.W 2068 Telephone (02) 4112255^

JEN N Y TAYLO R ’S SCRIPT TYPING SERVICE S C R IP T S R E L E A S E S C R IP T S TREATM ENTS LETTERS

S H O O T IN G S C R IP T S P R O D U C E R ’S P A C K A G E S O U T L IN E S G R A N T A P P L IC A T IO N S

Any draft of the script will be typed in either American, British or Australian layout on an IBM golf ball typewriter. A complete script printing — by Gestetner or by photocopy — and binding service. A photocopying service. An answering service for short or long periods. A tape transcription service (from regular cassettes only). A complete temporary pre-production secretarial ser vice. T O P Q U A L IT Y IM M E D IA T E S E R V IC E T O S A T IS F Y

8 SIR JOHN YOUNG ORES., W OOLLOOMOOLOO 2011 Phone: (02) 358 3362 or A.H. (02) 32 9417

I L

F 0 F

JOM IWMM&YA MiOClATg! I

I E

¡s

'■ i

BlouvÿS an') /wjl-fiplz for ‘fr<m't'of'hoi/se an? press loth 'from yw r MfSf dipt, arfrJork. orfruvn ovr phofo^faphy.

A lio A 't s M t y s o p e « ,

6roni/H4/ film overlays

OftiObi Sr. SWTH At€x£OcJ(be£ 37joG. pHorfZ fo%) 690 tb& ò

Z-3

Post-production

AUSTRALIAN FILM COMMISSION » PROJECT DEVELOPMENT BRANCH Projects approved at the AFC m eetings in N ovem ber and D ecem ber 1979:

Script Development Jim G eorge, fu rth e r s c rip t deve lo p m e n t fo r T h e S p irit W in d — $ 5 0 0 0 .

Pom O liv e r, E rro l S u lliv a n and H ila ry Llnstead, scrip t d e ve lopm ent and p ro je c t deve lo p m e n t fo r an untitled cin em a featu re — $60,500. John Synott, s c rip t deve lo p m e n t fo r a firs tdraft of W a l t z i n g M a t i l d a — $5900. JNP P rodu ctions, s c rip t deve lo p m e n t fo r a first dra ft of P a u l a n d F r a n c e s c a — $8350. In te rc e p to r P r o d u c tio n s , s c r ip t d e v e lo p m e n t fo r a fir s t d ra ft of T h e I n t e r c e p t o r — $3500. Sam son P rodu ctions, s c rip t deve lo p m e n t fo r a firs t d ra ft of A M u c h L o v e d W o m a n — $15,000. S u rv iv a l F ilm s In te rn a tio n a l, tre a tm e n t d eve lopm ent fo r B illy W e s t — $3000.

Production Investment C h ild re n ’s Film C o rp o ra tio n , a d d itio n a l pro d u ctio n in vestm ent fo r F a t t y F in n — $40,000 (AFC total in vestm ent $180,000). Reg G ru n d y P r o d u c tio n s , a d d itio n a l pro d u ctio n in vestm ent fo r T h e G h o s t T o w n G a n g — $2000 (AFC to ta l in v e s tm e n t $64,000). E xca lib er Nom inees, p ro d u ctio n in vestm ent fo r F a lc o n Is l a n d — $81,000 (AFC total investm ent $144,000).

Overseas Facility Loans N o m in e e s,

F a lc o n

Films Completed — October/November 1979 P hillip Bull (NSW ), D o w n w a r d ly M o b i l e — $8036. A n dre w de G roo t (Vic.), A T w e n t y D o lla r N o t e — $1994. G e ra rd E ld e r (S .A .), C i g a r e t t e s a n d M a t c h e s — $4936. Gayle Lake and C h ris Hooke (NSW ), A C i r c u la r N o t io n In c o m p le t e — $3173. John Laurie, L ife C la s s — $10,349. G len Lewis, S o m e o f M y B e s t F r ie n d s A r e M en — $2146.

David O ’Brien, V o x P o p — $10,393. O liver R obb (NSW ), S la c k V a n g u a r d — $3051. A n to in e tte S ta r k ie w ic z (N S W ), P u s s y P u m p s U p — $14,445. B ruce Tolley, T h e In t r u d e r — $2253. G avin W ilson, E x ile — $8584.

WOMEN’S FILM FUND INVESTMENTS P rojects a p p rove d at the W om en’s Film Fund m eeting in O ctobe r, 1979:

Script Development

(if required for completion) E x c a lib e r $48,000.

Sharon Bell (NSW), T h e E x o r c is t s — $500. Paul Davies (Vic.), F r a g m e n t s — $500. M ichael Farrelly (Vic.), A r t h u r ’s B u s — $160. J a cqu eline Fine (Vic.), H is M a s t e r ’s V o ic e — $2097. M ark Foster (NSW), D r in k t h e M o o n — $755. R ichard Low enstein (Vic.), E v ic t io n s — $500. B r ia n M c K e n z ie ( V i c . ) , R a c c o l t o d ’l n v e r n o / W i n t e r s H a r v e s t — $3398. John P rescott (Vic.), N e w s b o y — $1700. Ian P ringle (Vic.), W r o n s k y — $5041. R obert W yatt (NSW), S u b u r b a n W in d o w s — $2633.

Is la n d

—

Lilias Fraser, fo r s c rip t dev e lo p m e n t of W h o C a re s ? — $ 1 5 5 0 .

Shalagh M cC arth y and Rosalind Dey, fo r s c rip t de v e lo p m e n t of W h a t H a p p e n s to

CREATIVE DEVELOPMENT BRANCH Projects app rove d at the AFC m eeting in D ecem ber 1979:

Script Development

K id s — $ 1 7 1 0 .

Alison Tilson and Joan R owlands, fo r s c rip t deve lo p m e n t of F o r O u r s e lv e s — $1800.

Production Investment S andra A lexander, p ro d u c tio n in vestm ent for T h e S k y W ill N o t F a ll In — $4206. G enni B atterham , p ro d u c tio n in vestm ent fo r P in s a n d N e e d le s — $3416. S a ra h G ib s o n a n d S u s a n L a m b e r t, p ro d u c tio n in vestm ent fo r H o t F lu s h e s — $14,945.

M artha A nsara and Laurie A a ron s (NSW), fo r s c rip t deve lo p m e n t of S ix t y Y e a r s — $650. A d a m B o w e n (N S W ), fo r a d e ta ile d tre a tm e n t of R o c k S u i c i d e — $800. W endy Doyle and Sue W a rb u rto n (NSW), fo r s c rip t d eve lopm ent of O u t in t h e W o r ld a t L a r g e — $1600. John Em ery (S.A.), fo r s c rip t d eve lopm ent of F r e e d o m — $2467. Robert G ibson and John Sullivan (Vic.), f o r . scrip t deve lo p m e n t of B lo o d o n t h e S n o w — $ 1000 . D e n n y L a w re n c e (N S W ), f o r s c r ip t d e ve lopm ent of It H a d t o b e Y o u — $980. ALLIGATOR RIVER RESEARCH Richard M ason, John G aden and Steve Prod, c o m pany .......................Film A u stralia Mason (NSW), fo r s c rip t deve lo p m e n t and Dist. com pany ......................... Film A u stralia test scenes o f A B ig H e l p — $2340.

FILM AUSTRALIA

P r o d u c e r ......................................Don M urray Rod S im m ons P h o to g ra p h y ............................. A n d y Fraser, D ir e c to r .......................................................David Roberts E d it o r ........ ................................. Nick Torrens K e rry Brow n S c r ip tw rite r ................................................ David R oberts Length ..........................................2 x 26 m ins. S ound reco rd ists .............. H ow ard Spry, P h o to g ra p h y ...............................................A n dy Fraser, G auge .....................................................16 mm Rod S im m ons K erry Brow n S h ooting s to c k ......................... E a stm ancolor E d it o r .......................................... Nick Torrens Sound re cordists ....................H ow ard Spry, Progress .......................................... In release Length .................................................. 26 mins. Rod S im m ons Release date ....................... February, 1980 G auge ........................... 16 m m and 35 mm E d it o r .......................................................S tew art Young S y n o p s is : This s h o rt series fo llo w s the S h ooting s t o c k ......................... E a stm ancolor Length ...........................................2 x 26 m ins. A b o rig in a l rangers fo r the Kakadu National P rogress ........................................P rodu ction G auge ............................... .....................16 mm Park in the N o rthern T e rrito ry durin g th e ir S y n o p s i s : T he “ R o ck A r t” in K a kadu S h ooting s to c k ...........................E astm ancolor tra in in g classes. National Park is one of the finest in A u s Progress ............................................ In release tralia. This s h o rt film studie s the art and th e 1 Release date ................... February, 1980 m eth ods being used to p ro te ct it. Synopsis: Two s hort film s re c o rd in g the KEEPING UP WITH THE JONES’ s cie ntific w ork and study of the Kakadu Prod, c o m pany . . . Rob B row P ro d u ctio n s National Park area w hich w ill be m ined by SEAWATCH Dist. c o m pany ........................Film A u stra lia “ R anger U ranium " m ining com pany. P r o d u c e r .................................. Peter John son Prod, com p a n y .. K in g cro ft in association D irector .............................................. Rob Brow with Film A u stralia ART FESTIVAL S c r ip tw rite r ...................................................NoelField Dist. c o m p a n y F ilm A u stralia P h o to g ra p h y ..................................P eter Sykes P r o d u c e r ........Peter Johnson Prod, c o m pany ........................Film A u stralia S ound re c o rd is t ................... Ian Jenkinson D ir e c to r s ..........................................................B illStacey, P r o d u c e r ........................................................ Don M urray E d it o r ..........................................David H ipkin s Terry O hlsson D irector .....................................Bob K ingsbu ry Length ...................................................26 m ins. S c r ip tw rite r ...................................... G eoff Pike S c r ip tw rite r ....................................................Bob K ingsbu ry ........................... 16 m m and 35 m m G auge E d it o r ................................................................ BillStacey P h o to g ra p h y ................................. A n dy Fraser Shooting s to c k ......................... E a stm ancolor M ixer ...............................................John M arsh Sound re c o rd is t ....................... Howard S pry Progress ........................................P rodu ction N a rr a to r .............Paul R icketts E d it o r ............................................................. Ian W alker S cheduled release .....................June, 1980 Length ...................................................20 m ins. Lighting ....................................... B ruce G ailey S y n o p s is : A s h o rt film a bo ut a co u p le living G auge ........................... 16 m m and 35 m m Length .................................................. 20 mins. in the o u tback w ho are doing som ething to S h ooting s t o c k E a stm ancolor G auge .................................................... 16 mm alleviate the lo neliness of ou tb a ck life. Progress ............................................ In release S h ooting s t o c k ......................... E a stm ancolor Release date ......................... Janu ary, 1980 Progress .......................................... P rodu ction S y n o p s is : A s h o rt film to explain w hy A u s S ch eduled r e le a s e ............................... M arch, 1980 KIRIBATI? HERE WE ARE tra lia needs a navy. S ynopsis: A s h o rt film show ing som e of the Prod, c o m pany ....................... Film A u stralia art and crafts e x hibited at the firs t National Dist. co m p a n y ......................... Film A u stralia A rt Festival held in Vila, New H ebrides. P r o d u c e r ......................................Don M urray SO YOU WANT TO OWN A PONY D irector ............................................John Shaw THE AUSTRALIAN EYE S c r ip tw r ite r ..................................................John Shaw Prod, co m p a n y ............................. Bob T albot (series 2) P h o to g ra p h y ..................................... Ross King and Associates Sound re c o rd is t ....................... H ow ard S pry Dist. c o m p a n y ........................F ilm A u stralia Prod, co m p a n y ....................... Film A u stralia E d it o r .............................................................. Ian W alke r P rodu cer ..................... P eter John son in association with Length ................................................... 50 m ins. D irector ............................ Bob T alb o t The A rt G allery o f NSW G auge .....................................................16 m m S c r ip tw rite r ............................... Bob T a lb o t Dist. c o m pany A u stralian Film C o m m ission S h ooting s to c k .........................E a stm ancolor P h o to g ra p h y ...........................Keith W agstaff P r o d u c e r ..................................M alcolm O tton Progress ............................................ In release E d it o r ......................................David P u lbrook D irector ............................................ David M uir Release date ........................... January, 1980 Length ...................................................15 m ins. S c r ip tw rite r ....................................... David M uir S y n o p s i s : A s h o r t f ilm a b o u t th e G auge .....................................................16 mm P h o to g ra p h y ..................................... David M uir in depend ence of the G ilb e rt Islands from Shooting s to c k ...................... .E a stm a n co lo r S ound re c o rd is t ........................ G eorge Hart B ritain on Ju ly 12,1979, and how th e peo ple Progress ............................................ In release E d it o r s ......................................Henry Dangar, chan ged its nam e to K iribati. Release date ....................... February, 1980 Ian W alker, S y n o p s is : A d o cu m e n ta ry on the problem s Denise Hunter and jo ys associated w ith the ow nership of a Assoc, p r o d u c e r ...............A n ne W hitehead THE FEDERAL PARLIAMENTARY child 's firs t horse. C am era assistant .........................Jan Dallas .

Roger M cD ona ld and Ian Hart (ACT), fo r P rodu cer .....................................G eorge M iller tre a tm e n t of 1915 — $1050. S crip t e d it o r ........................G raem e Farm er Lighting cam eram an ........ Ross Berrym an J enn ifer O’Neil and Luce Pelliser (NSW ), fo r s c rip t deve lo p m e n t of W h o A m I $1600. Sound re co rd ist .....................Paul M aloney Rolland Pike (Vic.), fo r s c rip t dev e lo p m e n t E d it o r ................................................P h ilip Reid o f R u n — $1112. Exec, pro d u ce r .................H ector C raw ford O liver R obb (NSW ), fo r a tre a tm e n t of T h e Assoc, pro d u ce r ....................... Kevin Powell B u n n y — $800. Prod, m anager ........................... Irene K orol S o phia T urkie w icz and Frank M o orhouse Unit m a n a g e r................................ Ralph Price (NSW) fo r s c rip t deve lo p m e n t of T r i o — 1st asst d ire cto rs ...............Ross H am ilton, $1600.. n = S tew art W rig h t Jono W all (Tas.), fo r s c rip t de v e lo p m e n t of C o ntinuity ..........................................Jo W eeks S e r p e n t in e — $1300. C a s tin g ......................................Helen Rolland W om en’s ;?Film G rou p (W .A.), fo r s c rip t C la p p e r/lo a d e r .............................. C hris Cain d e v e lopm ent of B u y M e , L o v e — $500. C am era assistant .......... Peter van Santen Key g rip ....................................Ian Benallack Production G a ffe r ............................. Stew art S o rby Ray B a rtra m (S.A.), R e v e n g e — $1300. E le c tric ia n ....................................... Laurie Fish R obert Bull (W .A.), P la n e T a le — $5586. Boom o p e ra to r .................A n dre w Ramage B a rbara C a m pb ell (NSW), W o r ld W a r II o n A rt d ir e c t o r .............................................. H arry Zettel t h e E a s te r n F r o n t — $2949. Asst art d ire c to r ...........................Julie S kate Peter Daliow, John Drews and R ichard M ake-up .................................. Kirsten Veysey G oodw in (NSW ), T h e In h a b it a n t — $4643. W ardro be ...................................... Phil Eagles, M ic h a e l G la s h e e n ( N S W ) , A t o m i c Gail Mayes L a n d s c a p e s — $3008. P r o p s ............................... John Stabb N adine Hood, Lydia K oleff and S haryn Set d e c o ra to r ........................... Brian Holm es M cG ee (NSW), C i r c li n g — $212. Set co n stru c tio n . . . C raw ford P rodu ctions M arg ot Lethlean (Vic.), A n s w e r M e W o r ld Asst e d ito r ................................... Ken Sallows — $5000. Tech, a d v is e r .....................C h ristine Powell Ian M acrae and Jo Lane (Vic.), F r e y a — Best boy ............................. David P arkinson $9580. R u n n e r ................................................ Peter Dick W ayne M oore (Qld.), M e a t h e a d s — $1880. S tu d io s ....................... C raw ford P rodu ctions Olga Novak, Tim S m a rt and A n d re w Jones M ixed at ................... C raw ford P rodu ctions (Vic.), T h e P a t c h e d - u p F a s h io n P la t e — Lab ora tory ................................................. A tlab $1250. Length ........................................13 x 46 m ins. A rth u r P apaste rgiou (Vic.), T h e B la c k S w a n Gauge .................................................... 16 mm — $500. Shooting s to c k ...........................Ea stm ancolor Peter and Pavla Rada (Vic.), A b o u t K a lif Progress ................................ P o st-p ro d u c tio n a n d S t o r k — $3001. Cast: John Hargreaves (Peter Ramsay), Peter Ryan (NSW ), T r a p p e d — $1000. Serge Lazareff (Ray T urner), Louise H owitt Jam es Stevens (NSW ), U .S . B a s e s in A u s (Cassie M cC allum ). t r a l ia — $5202. Synopsis: The adventures of a c oun try Henry T efay (Vic.), L o n g A g o H u r t — $6954. veterinaria n (second series). W im in sfilm s (NSW ), T u r n in g t h e C lo c k B a c k — $5980.

N a rr a to rs ............................... C ecily Poulson, Paul Ricketts, Jam es Gleeson, R obert Klippei, Frank Hinden Length ....................... 7 x 10 m ins, (approx.) G auge ........................... 16 m m and 35 mm S h ooting s t o c k ......................... E a stm ancolor P rogress ......................................... In release Release date ....................... February, 1980 Synopsis: The second part of this series study, illustrate s in detail, five m ore m asterw o rk s from the A rt G allery of New South W ales. C o m m ents abo ut th e ir w o rk have been recorded by the artists fo r fo u r of the film s and p re lim in a ry sketches and studies have again been extensively draw n upon.

SYSTEM

Prod, c o m pany ........................Film A u stralia Dist. c o m pany ..........................Film A u stralia P r o d u c e r ...................................Peter Johnson D irector .................................... Brian M cD uffie S c r ip tw rite r ................................. C lare Dunne P h o to g ra p h y ............................... K erry Brow n Sound re c o rd is t .................Ken H am m ond E d it o r .......................................... Louis A n ivitti C am era assistant ..................... Jam es W ard N a rr a to r ........................................C lare Dunne Length .................................................. 30 m ins. G auge .................................................... 16 mm S h ooting s t o c k ........................E a stm ancolor Progress ..........................................In release Release date ......................... January, 1980 S y n o p s is : A s hort film on the w o rkin g s of the Federal P a rliam entary system .

SOLOMON ISLANDS EDUCATION Prod, c o m p a n y ......................F ilm A u stralia Dist. c o m p a n y ......................... Film A u stralia P r o d u c e r ......................................Don M urray D irector .................................... G raham Chase S c r ip tw rite r ..............................G raham Chase P h o to g ra p h y ..............................Dean S em ler S ound re c o rd is t ........................... Bob Hayes E d it o r ........................................... Sue H orsley G auge .....................................................16 mm S h ooting s t o c k ......................... E a stm ancolor Progress ........................................ P rodu ction Scheduled r e le a s e ..................M arch, 1980 S y n o p s is : A seies of film s abo ut variou s aspects of life in the S o lom on Islands and its culture.

BEYOND HELL’S GATE Prod, c o m p a n y ...........Satonyx M u ltim e d ia NAVIATORS THE THINGS WE WANT TO KEEP P rodu ctions Prod, com pany ........................Film A u stralia Dist. c o m pany ......................... Film A u stralia Prod, com pany ....................... Film A u stralia Dist. com pany .......................... Film A u stralia P rodu cer . . . : ......................... Peter Johnson Dist. c o m p a n y .........Heritage C o m m ission D irector ......................................David R oberts P r o d u c e r ..................................................... Peter Johnson P r o d u c e r ............................................... M alcolm O tton S c r ip tw r ite r ............................... David R oberts D ir e c to r ....................... .............. David Barrow D ir e c to r ...................................................... O live r Howes S c rip tw rite r i ............................. David B arrow P h o to g ra p h y ..................................... Paul Tate S c r ip tw rite r ................................................ O live r Howes P h o to g ra p h y ............................................... John H osking, S ound re c o rd is t ................... Kevin Kearney P h o to g ra p h y ............................................... A n dy Fraser Ross King E d it o r .............................................................. Bob C ogger S ound re c o rd is t ....................... G eorge H art Length ........................................ .. .25 m ins. S ound re c o rd is t ..................... M ax Hensser E d it o r ......................................Lynne W illiam s E d it o r .......... ............................... Peter Fletcher G auge ............................16 mm and 35 m m N a rr a to r .......................................................... Je ff A shby S h ooting s t o c k ...........................Ea stm ancolor C am era assistant ....................... Tony G ailey Length ................................................... 21 m ins. 15 m ins. P rogress ................................ P o s t-p ro d u c tio n Length .......... G auge .....................................................16 mm G auge .................................................... 16 m m S ch eduled r e le a s e .............F ebruary, 1980 S h ooting s t o c k ...........................E a stm ancolor Synopsis: A film a bo ut the P alm er River S h ooting s to c k ...........................Ea stm ancolor Progress .......................................... In release G o ldfie lds fro m the turn of the c e n tu ry to P rogress .............................................In release Release date ..........................February, 198 0. Release date ..................... D ecem ber, 1979 the present day survivor. ¡ .S y n o p s is : A s h o rt film illu s tra tin g the S y n o p s is : A d o c u m e n ta r y a im e d to richness and variety of A u s tra lia ’s N ational pro m o te naval aviation as a ca re e r in the E s ta te r a n g in g fro m A b o r ig in a l ro c k Royal A u stralian Navy. THE CAPITAL pain tin g s to M u rra y River pad d le steam ers. It aim s to enco ura ge m ore re sponsible Prod, c o m pany ...........................C a m eracraft attitud es to w a rd s the thing s we w a nt to THE NEVER NEVER LAND Dist. com pany .......................... Film A u stralia keep, and p ro p o se p ractical w ays in w hich P r o d u c e r ..................................................... Peter Johnson Prod, c o m pany . . . . K in g c ro ft P ro d u ctio n s A u s tra lia n s can h e lp to p ro te c t th e ir D irector ............................... ..........G reg Parry Dist. com pany .......................... Film A u stralia heritage. S c rip tw rite r : .......................................... M ichael Falloon P r o d u c e r ........ .......................... P eter John son P h o to g ra p h y ................................Jim G ilb e rt D irectors ...................................... H arry Booth, E d it o r ............................................ Kevin Franzi T e rry O hlson TOWN PLANNING AND ROAD Length .................................................. 20 m ins. S c r ip tw rite r ........ .. H arry Booth Gauge .................................................... 35 mm SAFETY S ound re c o rd is t ............................ Jon M arsh Shooting s to c k ...........................Ea stm ancolor E d it o r ................................................................ BillStacey Prod, co m pany ....................... Film A u stra lia Progress ................................ P o s t-p ro d u c tio n Length ................................................... 25 mins. Dist. co m pany ......................... Film A u stralia Scheduled r e le a s e .........M a rc h /A p ril, 1980 G auge ........................... 16 m m and 35 mm P r o d u c e r ................................... Peter Johnson S y n o p s is : A s h o rt film on o u r national S h ooting s t o c k ........................ E a stm ancolor D ir e c to r ............. ................... G reg Reading capital w hich lo oks at the very real p ictoria l Progress ........................................ P rodu ction S c r ip tw r ite r ................................ G reg Reading attrib utes of C a nberra and its environs. S cheduled release ..................... June, 1980 P h o to g ra p h y ................................................Ross King Synopsis: A m ontage of A u stralia and its Sound re co rd ist ................. Ken H am m ond lifestyle using the w o rds of Henry Law son to C am era assistant ........ W olfgan g Knochell KAKADU NATIONAL PARK de s c rib e th is unique contin ent. Length ......................... 20 m ins. Prod, c o m p a n y .......................Film A u stralia Gauge .................................................... 16 mm Dist. com p a n y ......................... Film A u stralia S hooting s to c k .................... E a stm ancolor ROCK ART P r o d u c e r ..................................... Don M urray Progress .......................................... P rodu ction D irector ....................................David R oberts S ch eduled release ........................ May, 1980 Prod, com pany ....................... Film A u stralia S c r ip tw rite r ..............................David R oberts S y n o p s i s : A s h o rt film on th e lia is o n Dist. c o m pany ......................... Film A u stralia P h o to g ra p h y ..................... ........A n dy Fraser, between those involved in the planning of P r o d u c e r .......... ...........................Don M urray K e rry Brow n co m m u n ity areas with office rs of road D irector ....................................David R oberts S ound re c o rd is ts ...................H ow ard Spry, S c r ip tw r ite r ............................. David R oberts safety coun cils.

Cinema Papers, February-March—61

DEVELOPMENT OF ENERGY RESOURCES

WAR GAMES

Prod, com p a n y ........................ Film A u stralia S c rip tw rite r .................................. John Dick Dist. co m p a n y .......................... Film A u stralia Exec, p ro d u c e r ......................... B ruce M oir P r o d u c e r ..................................................... Peter Johnson Length ................................................50 m ins. D irector ..................................M ichael Falloon G auge ...................................................16 mm S c r ip tw r ite r ........................... M ichael Falloon S yn opsis: An in fo rm a tio n film fo r the pub lic. P h o to g ra p h y ......................... Peter V iskovich S p onsored by the D e p a rtm e n t of M ines and S ound re c o rd is t .............Rodney S im m ons Energy. E d it o r ........................................ M ichael Norton C am era assistan t ..................... Jam es W ard EDUCATION TECHNOLOGY Length ................................................... 50 m ins. S c rip tw rite r ........................... T e rry Jenn ings G auge .....................................................16 mm Exec, p ro d u c e r .............Lesley Ham m ond S h ooting s t o c k ...........................E a stm ancolor Length ................................................20 m ins. P rogress ................................ P o s t-p ro d u c tio n G auge .................................................. 16 m m S ch eduled r e le a s e ............................... M arch, 1980 S yn opsis: A do c u m e n ta ry on edu cational S y n o p s is : A d ra m a tiz e d d o c u m e n ta ry show ing the chain of com m a nd in an arm y technology. S ponsored by the South Aus tralian E ducation D epartm ent. c o rp s in battle.

FITZROY ADVENTURE PLAYGROUND

WAR WITHOUT WEAPONS

Prod, c o m p a n y .. C urtis Levy P rodu ctions P ro d u ce r ................................Ron S a unders Dist. com p a n y .......................... Film A u stralia D irector ............................ David W oodg ate P r o d u c e r ......................... P eter Johnson Exec, p ro d u c e r ......................... B ruce M oir D ir e c t o r ...................................................... C urtis Levy C am era o p e ra to r .............David Forem an S c r ip tw r ite r ................................................ C urtis Levy Length ....................................15 to 20 mins. E d it o r ............................................ David Stiven G auge ...................................................16 mm Length .......................................... 25 m ins. S y n o p s is : T h e d o c u m e n ta r y e x p lo r e s G auge ........................... 16 mm and 35 mm aspects of child d eve lopm ent and safety in S h ooting s t o c k ..................... E a stm ancolor an in novative a dve nture p layground run In Progress .......................................... In release the in ner city area of M elbourne. S p o n Release date ....................... February, 1980 sored by the O ffice of C hild Care and the S y n o p s is : A do cu m e n ta ry on the b u ild -u p D e partm ent of Social S ecurity. of a V icto rian Rules fo o tb a ll team b efore the GREAT ARTESIAN BASIN season begins, and th e ir first tough gam e. S c rip tw rite r ........................... H arry Bardw ell Exec, p ro d u c e r ......................... B ruce M oir Length ................................................ 12 m ins. Gauge .................................................. 35 m m Synopsis: A do c u m e n ta ry on the G reat Artesian Basin. S p onsored by the D e part m ent of M ines and Energy.

SOUTH AUSTRALIAN FILM CORPORATION

HORSE CARE ATTITUDINAL BEHAVIOUR SERIES S c rip tw rite rs

..............................Rob G eorge, John Dick Exec, p ro d u c e r ......................... B ruce M oir Length ........................................ 24 x 2 mins. G auge ...................................................16 mm S y n o p s is : A s e rie s of s h o rt film s on b e h a v io u r a l s itu a tio n s , d e s ig n e d fo r s p e c ia lis t. audiences. S ponsored by the D e partm ent of M ental Health.

S c rip tw rite r ......................................John Dick Exec, p ro d u c e r ............ Lesley H am m ond Length ................................................ 15 m ins. G auge .................................................... 16 mm S ynopsis: A series of- sh o rt in structiona l film s on horse care. S ponsored by the South A u stralian D e partm ent of Further Education.

INDUSTRIAL DEMOCRACY

BLASTING FOR BEGINNERS Prod, co m pany ........ Pepper A u diovisual S creen play ........................... T erry Jennings S ound re c o rd is t ...........................Bob Allen E d itor .......................................... C olin B udds Exec, p ro d u c e r ......................... B ruce M oir C am era o p e ra to r ................... Paul D allw itz Length ..............................................15 m ins. G auge ...................................................16 mm S yn opsis: A docu m e n ta ry designed to p ro m ote c o rre ct proce d u re s in the use of e le ctric blasting techniques and to prevent the deve lo p m e n t of an attitud e of c o m p la c e n c y a m o n g e x p e rie n c e d b la s te rs . S p onsored by the D e partm ent of M ines and Energy.

BOUND FOR THE ALICE Prod, co m pany ..................... Slater S tudios D irector ..................................Brian Hannant S c rip tw rite r ........................... Brian H annant Exec, p ro d u c e r ............................B ruce M oir C a m era o p e ra to r .............David Forem an Length ................................................ 15 m ins. G auge ...................................................35 mm S yn opsis: A d o c u m e n ta ry on the c o n s tru c tion of the T a rco o la -A lice S p rin g s railway, one of the w o rld 's la rge st dese rt railw ay constru ctio n s. S ponsored by the A u s tra lian N ational Railways.

BRAIN DEATH Prod, co m p a n y ............................. New film s D irector ......................................Justin M ilne S c rip tw rite r ........................... T erry J e nn ings E d itor ............................................A n d re w Ellis Exec, p ro d u ce r ........................... B ruce M oir C am era o p e ra to r ........ G eoffrey S im p son Length .......... __....................................15 m ins. G auge ........ ..........................................16 mm S yn opsis: A teaching film fo r hospital staff. S p onsored by the Royal A d e la id e H ospital.

CLUSTER HOUSING S c rip tw rite r ........................... T erry Jenn ings Exec, p ro d u c e r .............Lesley H am m ond Length .................................................20 m ins. G auge ...................................................16 mm S y n o p s is ; A d o c u m e n ta r y on c lu s te r housing. S p o n so re d by the D e partm ent of H ousing, Urban and R egional A ffairs.

Prod, com pany . . . .S la te r S ound Studios P rodu cer ..........................Nicholas C ockram D irector ....................................Brian Hannant S c rip tw rite r ......................................John Dick Sound re c o rd is t ................... Jam es C urrie Editor ..................................G. Turney-S m ith C o m poser ..................................S im on Eddy Exec, p ro d u c e r .............Lesley H am m ond U nit m anager .......... C h ris to p h e r W illiam s Prod, assistant ...............S tepha nie Phillips S till ph o to g ra p h y ..................Peter R ichards C inem a to g ra p h e r ............ David Forem an O rche stra co n d u c to r ........ M yer Fredm an Length ................................................ 28 mins. G auge .................................................. 16 mm S ynopsis: A short film designed to acquaint w o rkers, m anagem ents and bo a rd s witn som e of the philoso phie s of an ‘in dustrial d e m o c ra c y ’, and to enco ura ge them to partic ip a te in discussion s on the subject. S p o n s o re d by th e U n it o f In d u s tria l D em ocracy.

PSYCHIATRIC SERVICES S c rip tw rite r ............................... Rob G eorge Exec, p ro d u c e r ......................... B ruce M oir Length ................................................ 50 m ins. G auge ...................................................16 mm S y n o p s is : A d o c u m e n ta r y a im e d at c o r r e c tin g th e m is c o n c e p tio n s a b o u t psychiatric hospitals. S ponsored by the D e partm ent of M ental Health.

RED CROSS Prod, c o m pany ..................... S later S tudios P rodu cer ............................... Nick C o ckram D irector ................................. Brian H annant S c rip tw rite r ........................... B rian H annant Exec, p ro d u c e r ......................... B ruce M oir C am era o p e ra to r ............. David Forem an Length ................................................ 20 m ins. G auge ...................................................35 mm S y n o p s is : A d o c u m e n ta ry d e s ig n e d to m ake th e p u b lic aw are of the varie ty of activities in w h ich the Red C ross is in volved. S ponsored by the A u stralian Red Cross.

TEENAGE DRINK DRIVING S c rip tw rite r ..........................R ichard T ippin g Exec, p ro d u c e r ......................... B ruce M oir Length ................................................. 12 m ins. G auge .................................................... 16 mm S ynopsis: A s h o rt film aim ed at young d rin k in g drivers. S p onsored by the D e part m ent of T ra n s p o rt and the Road Safety C o uncil fo r schools and c o m m u n ity groups.

TREATMENT SERVICES FOR YOUNG OFFENDERS S c rip tw rite r ............................... David Young Exec, p ro d u c e r ......................... B ruce M oir Length ................................................. 15 mins. Gauge .................................................... 16 mm S y n o p s is : An in fo rm a tio n film on the assessm ent, tra in in g and tre a tm e n t of young offenders. S ponsored by the D epart m ent of C o m m unity W elfare.

YOU CAN’T ALWAYS TELL Prod, com pany .................. Chrysalis Film s P rodu cer ...............................Terry Jenn ings D irector ......................................... S co tt Hicks S crip t outline ..................... Ron Saunders Sound re c o rd is t ........................ Jim C urrie E ditor ....................................A n dre w Prowse Exec, p ro d u c e r .............Lesley Ham m ond Length ................................................. 15 mins. Gauge .................................................... 16 mm Synopsis: A sh o rt film w a rning eight to 11 y e ar-olds not to go with strangers. S p o n s o re d by th e S o u th A u s tra lia n P o lic e D epartm ent.

TASMANIAN FILM CORPORATION

COMMUNITY AIDES . . . WHO NEED ’EM? Prod, co m p a n y ..............................New film s E d itor ..................■.......................A n d re w Ellis S c rip tw rite r ................. M agda de la Pesca Exec, p ro d u c e r ......................... B ruce M o ir C a m era o p e ra to r .........G eoffrey S im p son Length ............................................... 15 m ins. G auge ...................................................16 m m S yn opsis: An in fo rm a tio n film on c o m m u n ity aides. S p o n so re d by the D e part m ent of C o m m u n ity W elfare.

62—Cinema Papers, February-March

PICHI RICHI RAILWAY Prod, c o m pany ........ Bosisto P rodu ctions Exec, p ro d u c e r ......................... B ruce M oir C am era o p e ra to r ...................Brian Bosisto Length ....................................12 to 15 m ins. G auge ...................................................35 mm S yn opsis: A sh o rt show ing the re c o n s tru c tion of the h istorica l Pichi Richi Railway.

JOE BLAKE SHOW Dist. com p a n y .....................Tasm anian Film C o rpo ratio n P r o d u c e r ......................................B arry Pierce D ir e c to r ....................................Jack Z alkalns S c r ip tw rite r s ........................... B ruce G rundy, Jack Zalkalns Based on the orig in a l idea b y ..........................................B ruce G rundy Length ............................................. .25 m ins. P rogress ............................... P re -p ro d u ctio n S y n o p s is : A p ilo t fo r a television series abo ut a gro u p of unusual p up pet anim als.

VICTORIAN FILM CORPORATION CHANGES Prod, c o m p a n y ...................F ilm p a rtn e rsh ip P r o d u c e r ..................................M ike Brayshaw D ir e c to r ....................................K a rin A ltm ann P h o to g ra p h y ........................... M ike Brayshaw Sound re co rd ist ..................... Ian Je nkinson E d it o r ..............................................P eter Bray M usic pe rfo rm e d by ................ S w eet Jane Exec, p ro d u c e r .................... Kent C h adw ick R e s e a rc h .................................. B a rba ra Boyd Prod, m anager ..................... B a rba ra Boyd Length ...................................................24 m ins. G auge .................................................... 16 m m S h ooting s t o c k ......................... E a stm ancolor Progress ............................... A w aitin g release S ynopsis: A sh o rt film a bo ut the chan ging nature of the w o rkfo rce and the in crea sing c o n trib u tio n w hich w om en m ake to w a rd s it. P r o d u c e d f o r th e D e p a r tm e n t o f th e P rem ier (W om ens A ffa irs Section).

MINING AND CONSERVATION CHILDREN’S COURT Dist. c o m pany .....................Tasm anian Film C o rp o ra tio n D ir e c to r ............................. Phil de M on tig n ie P r o d u c e r .................................................Dam ien Parer E d it o r ...........................................................David P u llb ro o k D ir e c to r ................................... Dam ian Brow n Exec, p r o d u c e r ..........................................Kent C h adw ick S c r ip tw rite r ....................... C h ristine S chofield Length .................................................. 15 m ins. Sound re c o rd is t .............Tim H ohenboken Gauge .................................................... 16 mm E d it o r ....................................... Denise Hunter Progress ............................. A w aiting release U nit m a n a g e r ............................. Ian B erw ick S ynopsis: A case study of a 15 y e a r-o ld girl Prod, a s s is ta n t .....................Gaye A rnold detained by police after a m issing persons C am era o p e ra to r ............ Russell G alloway re p o rt has been file d. P rodu ced fo r the C am era assistant .................H arry G lynatsis D e partm ent of C o m m u n ity W elfare S e r Length ...................................................15 m ins. vices. Gauge .................................................... 16 mm Progress ............................... P o st-p ro d u ctio n DO NOT PASS GO Synopsis: The standard of living w hich we enjoy today is d e p endent on the use of Prod, co m pany ...............Phil de M ontignie m ineral resources. This short film exam ines and Associates the c o n flic t betw e en the d e m a n d fo r D irector ........................... .P h il de M o ntignie m inerals and the desire to preserve the S c r ip tw r ite r ..............................Russell P orter e n v iro n m e n t. P ro d u c e d fo r th e M ines P h o to g ra p h y ........................... David Haskins Departm ent. S ound re co rd ist ........................... Ian W ilson E d it o r ...................................... David P u llb ro o k C o m p o s e r ............................ M ichael D rennan NATIONAL PARKS Exec, p ro d u ce r ..................... Kent C h adw ick Dist. com pany .................... Tasm anian Film Special adviser . D oris Liftm an C o rpo ratio n Length ..................... .............................48 m ins. P r o d u c e r ................................... Dam ien Parer G auge .................................................... 16 mm D irector ....................................Don A n derson Shooting s to c k ......................... E a stm ancolor S c r ip tw rite r ............................. Don A n derson Progress ............................... Aw aiting release Length .................................................. 15 m ins. Synopsis: A docu m e n ta ry set in the streets, Gauge .................................................... 16 mm in the courts and in the prisons, w hich Synopsis: A d ocu m en tary on Tasm ania's follow s the story of tw o young p eo ple and u n iq u e p a rk s a n d w ild e rn e s s a re a s , th e ir con fro n ta tio n with the law. An ex h ighlighting the ease of getting away from a m ina tion of som e o f the p ro b le m s faced by the rat race. Produced fo r the D e partm ent young offe n d e rs and the su p p o rt system s of Tourism . offered. P rodu ced for the D e partm ent of C o m m unity W elfare Services. ROUND THE BEND

ALIVE AND KICKING

Dist. com panyT asm anian Film C o rpo ratio n P r o d u c e r ......................................B arry Pierce D ir e c to r ....................................Ian M cFadyen Technical p ro d u c e r . . . . Peter R ichardson Prod, m anager ......................... Ian Berw ick C am era o pe rators ........ Russell Galloway, W illiam Kerr M ake-up ............................... Lois H ohenfels, Dianne M iles JUST THE JOB M usic perfo rm e d by .....................Ian Klein Prod, com pany ___ _ .S o re a b a ja Pictures Length .................................................25 mins. P rodu cer ........................................Jenny Day P rogress ............................. P o st-p ro d u c tio n D irector ....................................Ron Saunders C a s t : Sue Becker, P h illip Adam s, Bob S c r ip tw rite r ................................................. Brian Hannant Ansett, Dr John Cooper, Bernard Bolan. Sound re c o rd is t ................ R odney Pascoe S y n o p s is : The pilo t of a television series Editor ..................................... A n dre w Prowse hosted by Sue B ecker and aim ed at m aking Exec, p ro d u c e r .........Lesley Ham m ond A u stralians a little m ore aw are of the shape C a m era o p e ra to r .............David Forem an they’ re in. N a rrators ....................................John Parker, Paula Vowles Still p h o to g ra p h y ...................................... Peter R ichards THE AUSTRALIAN CORRIEDALE Length ................................................ 17 mins. Dist. com panyT asm anian Film C o rp o ra tio n ■ G auge ...................................................16 mm P r o d u c e r ............................. Anne W hitehead S y n o p s is : An in s tru c tio n a l film w h ic h D ir e c to r ....................................Don A nderson presents technical and fu rth e r edu cation as S c r ip tw rite r ............................. Don A n derson an a lte rn a tiv e fo rm of p o s t-s e c o n d a ry P h o to g ra p h y ........................... Don A n derson edu cation fo r schoo l-leave rs, stressing the P rogress ........................................P rodu ction w ide range of o ptio ns available. S p o n S y n o p s is : A docu m e n ta ry pro m o tin g the sored by the South A u stralian D e partm ent virtues and a d a p ta b ility of the A ustralian of Education. C o rr ie d a le , p a r t ic u la r ly fo r o v e rs e a s m a rk e ts . P ro d u c e d fo r th e A u s tra lia n MIND MADE C o rried ale A ssociation. Prod, c o m pany .........P e pper A u diovisual D irector ........................................ M ax P epper E ditor ............................................ M ax P epper Exec, p ro d u c e r ......................... B ruce M oir C am era o p e ra to r .................... Paul D allw itz Length .................................................12 m ins. G auge .................................................. 35 mm S ynopsis: A sh o rt p ro m o tin g the services of a rchitects and edu cating the p u b lic in the values of architecture. S p onsored by the Royal A u stralian Institure of A rchitects.

P r o d u c e r ............................. A nne W hitehead D ir e c to r ......................................Bob C o nnolly S c r ip tw rite r ............................... Bob C onnolly C o -s c rip tw rite r................... Robyn A nderson P rodu ction m anage r . . . . Robyn A nderson Length .................................................. 25 m ins. Progress ................................ P re -p ro d u ctio n S y n o p s is : An explo ra tio n of th e F ranklin River, one of the last w ild rivers in A u s tralia. P rodu ced for the N ational P arks and W ild life Service.

Dist. c o m pany ......................Tasm anian Film C o rpo ratio n P r o d u c e r/d ire c to r .............Anne W hitehead S c r ip tw rite r ......................... Anne W hitehead Length ................................................. 25 m ins. Progress ................................ P re -p ro d u ctio n S y n o p s is : A d ra m a tiz e d d o c u m e n ta ry e x a m in in g t h e c a s e h i s t o r y o f a s c h iz o p h re n ic p a tie n t in a p s y c h ia tric in stitutio n. Produced fo r the M ental Health C om m ission.

SAWMILL SAFETY

FRESHWATER FISHING IN VICTORIA S c r ip tw rite r ............................. Russell P orter Exec, p ro d u c e r ................... Kent C hadw ick P rogress ........................................P rodu ction Synopsis: The native fish in g resources of V icto ria ’s rivers and the need to ensure them . P rodu ced fo r th e . D e partm ent o f C o n s e r v a tio n , F is h e rie s a n d W ild life Division.

GIPPSLAND LAKES

Prod, com pany ........................................ ABC Dist. com pany ......................Tasm anian Film D ir e c to r .................................................... Dionne G ilm ore C o rpo ratio n S c r ip tw rite r ..............................................R onald Strahan P r o d u c e r ......................................B arry Pierce P h o to g ra p h y ................................Keith Taylor, D ir e c to r i......................................................Roger Lupton Peter Parks, S c r ip tw rite r ........................... John Patterson Densey Clyne, Length ..................................................20 m ins. Jim Frazier Gauge .................................................... 16 mm S ound re c o rd is t ..................... John Boswell Progress .......................................... P rodu ction E d it o r ...................................... Je rem y H ogarth S y n o p s is : A docu m e n ta ry designed to show C o m p o s e r ....................................................G reg S n edden s a w m ille r s th e d a n g e r s th e y p la c e Length ...........................................4 x 30 m ins. them selves in thro ugh carelessness and G auge .....................................................16 mm boredom . Progress ............................... A w aitin g release Release date ....................... February, 1980 SLIPPERY SLIDE S y n o p s is : A s e r ie s o f 3 0 - m in u t e docu m e n ta rie s on the G ippsland Lakes See details in Television (under features) region of V icto ria, in d iv id u a l p ro g ra m s this issue. are e ntitle d: “ The High C o u n try” , “ Throug h the Forest", “ Down R iver” and “ O pen to the A SPORTING CHANCE Sea” . P rodu ced fo r the D e p a rtm e n t of C o n s e rv a tio n fo r te le v is io n re le a se in Dist. com pany .....................Tasm anian Film co n ju n ctio n with the ABC. C o rp o ra tio n FOOD P r o d u c e r ............................. A nne W hitehead Dist. com pany ..................... Tasm anian Film D irector ..................................... Jack Zalkalns GOONAWARRA PROJECT C o rpo ratio n S c r ip tw rite r ..................... C h ristine S ch ofield P r o d u c e r ......................................B arry Pierce P h o to g ra p h y ..............................G ert K irch ner P r o d u c e r ..........................David B ilcock sen. D ir e c to r ............................ Roger Lupton S ound re c o rd is t .............John S ch iefelb ein D irector ............................David B ilcock sen. S c r ip tw rite r ................................................Roger Lupton E d it o r ......................................D enise H unter Exec, p r o d u c e r ................... Kent C h adw ick Length .......................................... 2 x 15 mins. Unit m a n a g e r ....................... D aphne C rooks P rogress ................................P o st-p ro d u ctio n Progress ........................................P rodu ction A ssistant cam eram a n ........ G ary C lem ents S y n o p s is : A do cu m e n ta ry on the b u ild in g of S y n o p s is : A sh o rt series to show how the Length .................................................. 25 m ins. a m a jo r housing deve lopm ent. P rodu ced body uses food to pro d u ce energy and how Progress ............................... P o st-p ro d u ctio n fo r the Housing C om m ission. to e lim inate the need fo r diets by eating S y n o p s is : This s h o rt film is a im e d at properly. enco ura ging girls to take a m ore active interest in s port and o ther physical pursuits, and to create aw areness of the in fluence of FREE FLOW sex-ro le c o n d itio n in g in in h ib itin g physical S om e entries have been held over fo r the Dist. c o m pany ......................Tasm anian Film s e lf - e x p r e s s io n . P r o d u c e d f o r th e next issue. C o rp o ra tio n Tasm anian Education D epartm ent.

BOX-OFFICE CROSSES Distributor

TITLE

PERIOD 8.7.79 to 20.10.79

PERIOD 21.10.79 to 5.1.80 SYD.2

MLB.

PTH

ADL

BRI.

(11*)3

(1 1 *)

(3*)

My Brilliant Career

GUO

278,595

145,018

36,923

(1)

(2 )

(6 )

GUO

(8)

(1 /8 )

Tim

62,003

2,152

42,932

7,559

49,085

The Journalist

11,574

Thirst

GUO

9,491

Total $

Rank

460,536

163,731

11,574

9,491

3,520

1,417

SYD.

MLB.

PTH

ADL.

BRI.

Total $

Rank

176,672

206,426

50,670

(9 *)

176,672 (4*)

(11/3*)

(3*)

(2 *)

54,790

117,491

21,738

12,407

(1/3)

(2 )

Cathy’s Child

3,520

The Little Convict

1,417

(1/4)

(6/1)

20,091

30,579

(1 )

Australian Total

361,663

147,170

84,792

7,559

49,085

650,269

N/A

3,376,025 2,713,092 1,354,392 729.674

693,676

8,866,859

Grand Total

3,737,688 2,860,262 1,439,184 737,233

742,761

9,517,128

☆ Figures exclude N /A figures. • B o x-office grosses of Individual film s have been, supp lie d to C inem a Papers by the Australian Film Com m ission. o T h ls fig u re represents the total box -o ffic e gross of all foreign film s show n during the period in the area specified. . I , , . , ° C o ntinuing into next period NB: Figures in parenthesteabo ve the grosses represent w eeks in release, If more than one tlgure appears, tne turn nas been released In more than one cinem a d urin g the period.

4,105,579 3,650,249 2,052,996 1,276,540 1,052,875 12,138,239

(1 » A ustralian theatrical d istrib u to r only. RS - Roadshow; G UO - G reater Union O rganization Film D istributors; HTS - Hoyts Theatres; FOX ~ 20th C entury Fox, UA United A rtists, CIC ^ n e m a Internat onal C orporation, FW Fllm w ays A ustralasian D istributors, 7K 7 Keys Film D istributo rs; CO L — C olum bia Pictures; REG - R egent Film D istributo rs; CCG — Cinem a C entre G roup; AFC - Australian Film C o m m is s io n ; SAFC — South A ustralian Film C o rpo ratio n; M CA — M usic C o rp o ra tio n of A m erica; S — S h arm lll Films; OTH — O ther. (2) Figures are draw n fro m capital city and Inner subu rba n firs t release h ardtops only. (3) S p ilt fig u re s Indicate a m u ltip le cin e m a release,

BOX-OFFICE GROSSES

Foreign Total0

.......

111

........ .

Features and shorts on 16mm and 35mm for commercial and non-commercial exhibi tion: And not even cry, A ntartida, Antonio das m ortes, A sylum , B efore the R evolution, Black god, w hite d evil, Blood o f the condor, Boesm an and Lena, B of!, B ritish sounds, B u llfig h t at Sincelejo, Cam pam ento, Com paneras and com paneros, D ays and nigh ts in the forest, Dear Irene, D eath o f a bureaucrat, D illenger is dead, D istan t thunder, Dream life , D yn amo, Film in revolution: an introduction to cThe T raitors’, Film portrait, First charge o f the m achete, T he gladiators, Going home, H allelu jah the h ills, H ow to draw a cat, Ice, Infernal triangle, In the nam e o f the father, In trod u ction to th e en em y , K a sh im a p a ra d ise , La m arseillaise, La villeggiatura, L ancelot du la c, Le voyage de m onsieur G uitton, Letter to Jane, L ife w asn ’t m eant to be radioactive, Lions love, L iving w ith Peter, M acunam ia, T h e m id d le m a n , M in a m a ta , O r a n g e s a n d le m o n s , Punishm ent park, Re-Lone, R em iniscences o f a journey to L ithuania, Rocket ship, Sangham : aid to liberation , The soldier and the three sisters, The spirit o f the beehive, Strike, Terra em transe, Them roc, Throw away your books le t’s go into the streets, Tools o f change: introduction to appropriate technology, To the people o f the world, T out va bien, The traitors, Tupam aros, V alparaiso, Valparaiso, W hen the people awake, W ind from the east.

Write or ring for our free catalogue: Cine Action Pty Ltd, 263 Adderley St., W est Melbourne, Vic. 3003. Phone: (03) 329 5422. L

cinematic services Introduce

H M I

LIGHTING

by FILM-LICHT, Munich S ta te -o f-th e -a r t e q u ip m e n t by G e rm a n y ’s p re m ie r film lighting m a n u fa c tu re r c o m b in e s th e high o u tp u t a n d low c o n s u m p tio n of H M I lighting w ith: LIGHTEST WEIGHT:

With the lamp and booster in separate cases, even the heaviest Film-Licht units can be easily carried by one man. The combined weight of the 4000 AND its booster is only 45kg, while the 2500 weighs in at 31kg. W IDE RANGE:

10 models from 200W to 4000W. FRESNELS:

Optional on most models. FULLY ADJUSTABLE:

Heads rotate through 360° both horizontally and vertically. OFF-ON CAPABILITY:

No need to wait until the lamp cools before switching on again. For a demonstration of these brilliant new FILM-LICHT HMI’s contact the sole agents:

cinematic services pty limited 8 CLARENDON STREET, ARTARMON 2064

(02) 439 6144

Telex AA20149 att ST 102

Equipment Sales —Rentals —Services —Facilities

------------—

-------------- ------

—

«/

Apocalypse Now Keith Connolly For almost two hours, Francis Coppola’s Apocalypse Now looks like the definitive

U.SC film about the Vietnam war, the one I somewhat optimistically envisaged in Cinema Papers last year1. Enthusiasm wanes, however, in the final 30 minutes. Flaving given lucid, touching, occasionally searing, insights into the way this war was waged, Coppola then takes cover in a metaphysical mist which may, or may not, be a statement on the nature of war itself. I think not. though a number of people whose opinions I respect argue strongly that it is just that. However, if the philosophical overview is. to say the least, hazy, down on the ground the film is unarguably explicit. The action is imaginatively staged and shot, even the steamy sub-surreal closing episode is- visually compelling, and the many-layered soundtrack is quite haunting. If nothing else. Coppola has chalked up a triumph of filmmaking logistics. The picture of the U.S. 1. “ Vietnam on Film” . C inem a Papers, No. 21, pp 334-8.

Francis Coppola’s Apocalypse Now: philosophically hazy, but on the ground unarguably explicit. military in full cry is shatteringly effective (and, I have been assured, remarkably ac curate). Yet this was achieved without a jot of official U.S. help, shot mostly in the Philippines with hand-me-down, but authen tic, military hardware. The big problem with Apocalypse Now is that it is so strongly divided within itself — in content, form, and, one suspects, inten tion. To enucleate: A great deal has been made of the film having its mainspring in the Joseph Conrad novella Heart o f Darkness. Less attention has been paid to its debt to a vastly different literary source: Dispatches, a Hemingwayish memoir of the Vietnam war by war cor respondent Michael Herr. Pungently, Herr conveys the sights, sounds, the very taste, of Vietnam in his book (actually a collection of magazine articles, published in book form in 1977). Herr wrote the narration that is delivered voice-over by Martin Sheen throughout the film and incidents similar to many described in Dispatches pop up in the screenplay Cop pola fashioned from John Milius’ original script.

This is quite some distance from the Conrad of Heart o f Darkness, upon which the narrative structure of Apocalypse Now is closely based. Conrad's novella is a first-person descrip tion by a British seafarer named Marlowe of an expedition he once undertook, as skipper of a small steamer, up a river in darkest Africa. His mission, to locate a colonial of ficial named Kurtz, is accomplished with some difficulty, but Kurtz turns out to be a dying madman, having lost his health, his hair and his marbles while becoming the god-king of the local tribespeople. Once con sidered a “coming man” , Kurtz is now a rav ing wraith in the grip of acute megalomania. Much of this is echoed in Apocalypse Now. A U.S. army officer. Captain Willard (Martin Sheen), journeys by navy patrol boat up a winding river and into the Viet nam hinterland with orders to kill (“ ter minate with extreme prejudice” is the Orwellian terminology) a Green Berets colonel also named Kurtz (Marlon Brando). This Kurtz, originally sent to lead moun tain tribesmen against the Viet Cong, has been all too successful, becoming a terror to

the enemy, a god to his native followers and a pain in the arse to the Saigon command (“ unsound" says the general, played by G.D. Spradlin, who orders his elimination). Like his Conradian namesake, Colonel Kurtz is also bald and wearily mad, though apparent ly in rude physical health. Conrad’s Kurtz had written a report for .the International Society for the Suppres sion of Savage Customs in which he extols in high-flown language the white man’s civilizing mission, but ends with the scrawled injunction: “ Exterminate all the brutes!” In the film, there is a manuscript on Kurtz’ desk with the scrawled words: “ Drop the bomb . . . exterminate them all !” Apocalypse Now isn't entirely Conrad and Flerr, though. There are fairly obvious sur vivals of the Milius original. Scenes depicting the camaraderie of the boat crew have the Hawksian flavor of Milius’ Big Wednesday, and, of course, Coppola’s very personal vision suffuses it all. (One example among many typical Coppola touches: the sequence in which Kurtz is slain is jux taposed with shots of the tribesmen ritually slaughtering a buffalo, recalling the intercut ting of a baptism and Mafia executions in The Godfather.)

So much for the antecedents. Now the Cinema Papers, February-March—65

APOCALYPSE NOW

structure. Coppola has frequently described Apocalypse Now as “ film opera” , and there is certainly an operatic ring to it. An over ture of thrumming helicopter motors blends with the voice of the late Jim Morrison, an nouncing. like a post-melodic Tonio, the film’s leitmotif with'his song “The End” . Morrison's mournful rendition leads, opera style, to an expository first act, a robust se cond act and a denouement of sorts in the third act. replete with enough bodies to satisfy Verdi. The tone-setting opening segment shows Willard, himself zonked out on the war (“ I wanted a mission” , he croaks), being briefed about Kurtz. The real guts of the film is the' second act. the long account of Willard’s up river journey. Coppola uses this odyssey by PT boat to link fiercely accusatory scenes showing the U.S. winning hearts and minds with fire, sword and Wagner. Memorable se quences include a helicopter attack on a Viet Cong village, with the choppers blaring “The Ride of the Valkyries” (“ . . . it scares the hell outa the slopes”), a crass girlie show in a jungle setting lit up like Broadway and an eerie night battle which stresses, in its noisy confusion, the ultimate futility of the American effort. This realism dissolves into fervid mysticism when Willard reaches his goal. Here, Coppola leans most heavily on Conrad, image by haunting image. True, Brando’s Kurtz also spouts T.S.. Eliot, but the tenor of his rumblings is utterly Conradian in its florid misanthropy. An even more direct update from Heart o f Darkness is Dennis Hopper’s wild-eyed photo-journalist, a character closely resembling the ratty acolyte who has at tached himself to the Kurtz of the novella. Hopper is hard enough to take, but what are we to make of Brando’s extraordinary mumble-jumbo? After several viewings, I am still at a loss. Did Coppola encourage, or just tolerate, this outrageous display of oneflew-over-the-topmanship? Brando seems to be trying to compress the mannerisms of a lifetime into one Great Performance (perhaps the most apt lines he utters are from Eliot's “The Hollow Men”). When he had already spent $30 million and had 20 hours of film in the can, Coppola was still claiming that he didn’t have an ending for the film. Today, with the 2'/2 -hour finished product in international release, it could be argued that he still hasn’t. The concluding act opens with Willard reaching a native village which Dean Tavoulriris must have designed immediately after seeing The Island of Dr Moreau. Harassed, harangued, imprisoned, Willard is then subjected to mumbled soliloquies about death, decadence and the horrors that dwell in rthe human soul. When Willard, either remembering his mission or simply unable to take any more, bloodily slays Kurtz, sighs of relief mix with the audience’s gasps. Distaste for the pretensions of this whole episode cannot, however, efface admiration for so much of what precedes it. But this division is a mark of the film’s stylistic schizophrenia. The sad truth is that, in straining to establish Apocalypse Now as something more than just another war (or, rather, anti-war) film, Coppola succeeds only in clouding an already trenchant state ment. He no doubt had pressing reasons for this — perhaps 30 million of them. In the years that Apocalypse Now was in the pipeline, Coppola saw the collect-ive conscience of the U.S. undergoing a self-induced, selective amnesia where Vietnam is concerned (abet ted, of course, by later developments in South-East Asia and elsewhere). It is this phenomenon to which the most objec tionable aspects of Michael Cimino’s The Deer Hunter cynically pander. Cimino’s film reassures middle America, and its imitators in other parts of the West, 66—Cinema Papers, February-March

THE MARRIAGE OF MARIA BRAUN

including Australia, that the whole thing was a phantasm that didn’t really happen — not like that, anyway. Moreover, those sub human Vietnamese weren’t really worth the sacrifice made on their behalf. As he labored on Apocalypse Now, Cop pola also would have been aware of this mounting tide of retrospective rectitude, and one suspects that therein lies the real reason for the largely unsuccessful attempt to make the film “ reflect bigger issues . . . morality, darkness of the soul” (words he used in Sydney late last year). He added, however, that three-quarters of the film is. indeed, a political statement about the use of modern technology to perpetrate genocide (his term, mark you). Not that the U.S. servicemen in Apocalypse are cast as bad guys, although they are far more believable, and much less idealized, than Cimino’s gallant buddies. The most representative group is the boat crew, two blacks (Albert Hall and Larry Fisburne) and two white (Fred Forrest and Sam Bottoms). Even when they nervously wipe out a family of river-boat people (the context is ironic, and may even be deliberate), these men are seen as sorelytried human beings trying to stay alive — and live with themselves. The brass are another matter. Their outlook is exemplified by Robert Duvall’s outlandish portrait of an air-cavalry commander who loves the smell of napalm in the morning: “ It smells of victory.” Coppola doesn’t ever really question what these Americans are doing in Vietnam (perhaps that’s among all the discarded footage). In any case, it’s probably asking far too much of a mainline Hollywood film to go into that just yet. After all, they are still a bit nervous about depicting the Civil War. Apocalypse Now: Directed by: Francis Coppola.

Producer: Francis Coppola. Co-producers: Fred Roos, Gray Frederickson, Tom Sternberg. Screen play: John Milius, Francis Coppola. Director of photography: Vittorio Storaro. Editor: Richard Marks. Music: Carmine Coppola, Francis Cop pola. Production designer: Dean Tavoularis. Sound: Walter Murch. Cast: Marlon Brando (Col. Kurtz), Robert Duvall (Lt. Col. Kilgore), Martin Sheen (Capt. Willard), Frederic Forrest (Chef), Albert Hall (Chief). Sam Bottoms (Lance), Larry Fishburne (Clean). Dennis Hopper (Freelance photographer). Production company: Omni Zoetrope. Distributor: Hoyts. 70mm. 144 min. U.S. 1979.

the immediate post-war period in Germany. The film opens with the rather hurried and farcical wedding of M aria (H anna Schygulla) and Hermann Braun (Klaus Lowitsch), amid bombings and falling debris. The marriage certificate is signed by the characters lying flat on the ground. After this first set piece, Fassbinder inserts his credits, and with this short break in the narrative the scene shifts, with Hermann back at the front. Maria still considers herself the wife of Hermann, despite news from a friend that he has been killed. The task she sets is to look a fte r herself, her m o th e r and her grandfather, making sure they have enough to eat, and plenty of firewood and cigarettes. She embarks on a very successful career of economic “ reconstruction” . She meets Bill (George Byrd), a black American, and becomes pregnant to him. At this most inconvenient moment her beloved Hermann appears from nowhere (it seems he was a prisoner-of-war), and Maria kills Bill by hitting him over the head with a bottle. Hermann takes the blame and is gaoled.

Maria (Hanna Schygulla) with the sign she wears to the railway station, which asks if anyone knows the whereabouts of her husband. The Marriage of M aria Braun.

Maria conveniently loses the baby, and sets forth this time to earn money, not for her mother, but for her future happiness with Hermann — when he is eventually released from prison. Maria befriends a French industrialist, K arl O sw a ld ( I v a n D e sn y ), who manufactures stockings. She becomes his adviser and assistant, as well as his lover, while still maintaining that her husband is her only true love. Oswald dies, but by this time Maria has earned enough to buy herself a huge villa (“ I want to live alone” , she tells her mother, who may have had ideas of sharing Maria’s wealth), in preparation for her life in married bliss. However, when Hermann is released, he refuses to live with Maria, saying he must prove himself as a human being, and until that time she will have to settle for a red rose which he will send her every month. Eventually, Hermann returns, but the long-awaited consummation of their marriage is not to be. They are unexpectedly interrupted by two people who have come to read Oswald’s will. And then they are definitively interrupted by an explosion in the kitchen as Maria goes to light a cigarette at the stove. Thus the film ends as abruptly as it began. There is a “coda” to the film, however, and this takes the form of a series of photographs in negative of Germany’s leaders, from Konrad Adenauer to Helmut Schmidt. It is these photographs that emphasize the reconstruction program; they are the cynical backward glance of

Fassbinder, the enfant terrible of German film, theatre and television. The story reads like high melodrama, as do most of Fassbinder’s scripts, although this is one of two films whose script comes from elsewhere. An earlier film, Despair (with Dirk Bogarde), was taken from the Vladimir Nabokov novel of the same name, with a screenplay by Tom Stoppard. In Maria Braun, Fassbinder is working from a script by Pia Frolich and Peter Marthesheimer (who was also the producer of Despair). One wonders about the extent to which Fassbinder contributed to the script, if at all, but the style of Maria Braun is un mistakably his own. Fassbinder’s mise-en-scene and his distanciation techniques give the melodrama some uncomfortable and disquieting undercurrents, especially in the personal dealings between characters. It is not very satisfying to see each character as a cipher parading in a metaphorical puzzle: Hermann as pre-Adenauer Germany, Maria as the New Germany, Bill as American Aid, and Oswald as wider European Interests. These do not lead one very far, and certainly cannot account for all the characters. The political implications are there, but the film functions on a number of other levels as well. Fassbinder distances the audience from his characters, and what could have been ludicrously melodramatic becomes sober, even unnerving, and thus provokes reflection. His techniques become familiar to anyone who has seen even a few of his many films, although he is not repetitive in his effects and often comes up with surprises.

THE EUROPEANS

THE MARRIAGE OF MARIA BRAUN

One of his well-known techniques is the grouping of characters in a frozen tableau — consistently used, for example, in The Merchant of Four Seasons. In Maria Braun this is not done systematically, but the Fass binder touch is obvious in such scenes as the murder of Bill ; the mother’s birthday party; the early scenes of Maria bringing goods' home to her mother; and the arrangement of characters on the bare hillside when Bill provides for all the family (Fassbinder’s ver sion of Lunch on the Grass). Silence often ac companies a tableau effect. In Maria Braun, Fassbinder has also endowed certain objects with a heightened significance by inserting a tight close-up unexpectedly. There is a close-up of a shaving brush, a packet of cigarettes, Maria’s wedding ring, the doctor’s needle or the keys of a prison warden. They are not necessarily subjective shots, but important signposts in the structuring of a discourse which is other than the narrative thread of the film. Or, then again, the “ realism” of melodrama will be interrupted by a character who is strangely out of key with the rest, or steps out of the shadows only briefly, such as the appearance of Fass binder offering Maria a volume of Kleist, or the couple behind the door in the restaurant, after Oswald dies. Or else the background music is actually picked up by a character, as when Oswald plays a few phrases of the soundtrack music on an out-of-tune piano. These are all ways of interrupting the flow of melodrama “ in the first degree” (Fass binder’s words), thus creating breaks in thé narrative which allow for symbolic or meta phorical emphasis or else a re-evaluation of the incident or character concerned. Fassbinder’s recurring themes surface again in Maria Braun. As is evident in previous films, such as The Bitter Tears of Petra von Kant, Fox, Effi Briest and Fear Eats the Soul, he is interested in exploring the mechanics of repression, of domination and dependence, whether the pressures be economic, societal, sentimental or sexual in nature. From such explorations the filmgoer can draw his own metaphors, for personal hypocrisy can be likened to n ational hypocrisy, and b e tra y a l, exploitation, greed and cynical self-interests belong to all these areas of human intercourse. Thus, Maria depends financially on her lovers, but refuses sexual exploitation or dependence. By day she is at the service of Capital, by night a tool of the Proletarian Masses: “ I’m the Mata Hari of the Economic Miracle” , she jokes. However, she foists dependence on Hermann, who refuses it and goes to Canada to earn back his self-respect. Ironically, it is Oswald who lib e rate s H erm ann from econom ic dependence by leaving his wealth divided equally between Maria and her husband. The Marriage of Maria Braun can also be seen as the rise (and fall?) of the Independent Woman. Hanna Schygulla’s portrayal of the determined Maria Braun never falters. She goes through many changes of hat and dress, but it is never merely to please, and her transactions are all conducted on her terms. Thus, she refuses marriage with either Bill or Oswald, and also refuses favors during working hours: “ Pay me for what my work is worth, not a penny more” , she tells Oswald. She sends men into the kitchen several times in the film, but ironically perishes in the kitchen. Maria corrects Oswald’s paternalistic language: “ You’re not having an affaire with me; I’m having one with you.” She approves of Willi’s compliment to her having risen to the top: “ Yes, I like that. / have made myself." She gives advice to friend Betty, and they sing songs about the dispensability of men. She is shown as a fine match for the businessmen in the scene where Oswald and his accountant are haggling over a knitting

machine: the men are grouped in a tableau in single file, and pitted visually against Maria. Although Maria is in many ways a very attractive character, Fassbinder seems to leave her as a very ambiguous one. The final explosion raises more questions than it provides answers. Was it an accident? Was it suicide? Was it fate? Or was it madness? The photographic portraits of Germany’s political leaders give no answers, but Fass binder seems to be suggesting, by association, that these men are also paving the way towards annihilation. The M arriage of M aria Braun (Die ehe der Maria Braun): Directed by: Rainer Werner Fassbinder. Producer: Rainer Werner Fassbinder. Screenplay: Peter Marthesheimer, Pia Frolich. Director of photography: Michael Ballhaus. Editor: Juliane Lorenz. Cast: Hanna Schygulla (Maria), Klaus Lowitsch (Hermann), Ivan Desny (Oswald), Gott fried John (Willi), George Byrd (Bill). Production company: Albatross Film — Trio Film — WDR — Filmverlag der Autoren. Distributor: Vincent Library. 35mm. 120 min. Germany. 1979.

The Europeans Brian McFarlane Henry James has been left fairly much alone by filmmakers — and understandably so. James’ imagination is not a powerfully visual one as compared, say, with Dickens’; and the subtlety and precision of his dis criminations depend on the author’s tone which colors every page of his novels. A great author’s tone, the most intrac tably individual aspect of his achievement, tends to resist a visual translation as Aldous Huxley found when adapting Pride and Pre judice for the screen. He wrote: “ . . . the very fact of transforming the book into a picture must necessarily alter its whole quality in a profound way. In any picture or play, the story is essential and primary. In Jane Austen’s books, it is a matter of secondary importance.” 1 He goes on to lament the in 1. Quoted by Tom Dardis, S o m e tim e in the S u n , Scribner’s, New York, 1976, p. 177.

evitable loss of her ironic voice. Thisj?ense of the author’s tone was miss ing from The Heiress, Wyler’s handsome, finely-acted version of Washington Square, from Jack Clayton’s The Innocents (based on The Turn o f the Screw), and Peter Bogdanovich’s stylish and often successful go at Daisy Miller. (One of the most tan talizing of all “ missing” films is Martin Gabel’s The Lost Moment, adapted from The Aspern Papers in 1947.) Other authors have fared worse than James, but even the talented directors mentioned have not found it easy to strike a visual equivalent for the fine ironic exactness of his prose. The gifted director-writer-producer team of James Ivory, Ruth Prawer Jhabvala and Ismail Merchant have, in their production of The Europeans, come nearer than any of their predecessors. Near enough, in fact, to make one wish they might try James again — perhaps The Bostonians or even The Am-, bassadors which was made into a prettily vacuous television film. Served by a remarkably good cast, they achieve a striking richness of emotional tex ture, a very satisfying sense of the reaction of one nature upon another. As they render the impact of the visit of Eugenia (Lee Remick), the Baroness Munster, morganatic wife of a German prince, and her brother Felix (Tim Woodward), who earns his living “by going about the world and painting bad portraits” , on their American kin, the Wentworths, the surprise is not in what they fail to realize of James’s vision but that they grasp so much of it. It is not just that the dialogue stays so close to the original or that it is delivered with so much intelligent awareness of its nuances. That is indeed impressive, but even more so is the sure, unobtrusive building of relationships as the “ Europeans” (actually Americans returning home) and the New Englanders feel their way into and around each other’s understanding. Eugenia and Felix approach the Wentworths in different frames of mind. Eugenia, retreating from her un satisfactory marriage, wants, without being vulgar about it, a fortune (“That’s always in teresting” , is, her reply to learning that the Wentworth’s neighbour Robert Acton has

one). Felix is determined to be entertained. He will be pleased if his cousins are rich but it is not a condition of his entertainment. Eugenia, with her clearer sense of purpose, loses her chance with Acton (Robin Ellis) who is as shrewd as she is sophisticated, while Felix, ironically, finds in his love for Gertrude Wentworth (Lisa Eichhorn) the seriousness that has been missing from his life. In a curious, and I think miscalculated, departure from the novel, the film omits the scene from the opening chapter which es tablishes so exactly the differences between brother and sister in their approaches to America. By this omission. Ivory and his collaborators have undervalued the impor tance James places on the cultural gap between them and thei^ New England cousins. The novel is far from being a schematic treatm ent of Old World sophistication exploiting American in nocence. or of the latter effecting moral regeneration in decadent Europeans. James is as much interested in how a different background helps to dictate behaviour as in how one individual character responds to another. The film certainly avoids any simplistic sense of representativeness in its two sets of characters, but it also loses a pressure that would make the finely achieved individual relationships mean more. The American setting is exquisitely realized in Larry Pizer’s glowing images of autumn brilliance declining into wintry bleakness, of the solid, simply elegant Wentworth house, of lamp- and candle-lit interiors (Jeremiah Rusconi’s art direction is a model of discreet perception, under standing how wealth and homeliness might be found together), and in a whole series of lovely tracking shots along streets, across fields, up staircases and over bridges. Ivory ensures, however, that the film’s visual beauty never — well, almost never — becomes an end in itself. The European influence has to make itself felt in less tangible ways. It is hinted at in the opening shots of European statuary, which quickly give way to watercolors and sketches of sailing ships and New England scenes, all of these behind the credits. But it is more importantly there in the careful at-

Eugenia (Lee Remick) with Mr Wentworth (Wesley Addy) on her arrival at the Wentworth’s. The Europeans.

Cinema Papers, February-March—67

THE RUSSIANS and THE HUMAN FACE OF CHINA

THE EUROPEANS

The Russians a n d The Human Face of China Peter King The Russians and The Human Face of China are the most recent fruits of a concept

tention to differences in dress (at the ball, for instance, Eugenia’s blue-black dress con trasts with the pastel sameness of the Boston ladies), in ways of looking and walking and sitting. Nevertheless, our sense of these dif ferences would have been strengthened by retaining Jam es’ opening scene instead of the film’s which introduces us to Gertrude Wentworth’s undefined discontent. In itself, this is very well done, and Lisa Eichhorn’s Gertrude, perhaps the film’s finest perfor mance, makes us intensely aware of the pres sures built up in the young girl in this serene ly beautiful setting. With “ Shall we gather at the river” played on the soundtrack, the scene is as American as Ford, but the mood is neither reverent.nor celebratory: the girl’s restlessness is at odds with the visual and aural imagery. Her life is established as waiting for an experience that will give it direction and Felix appears on the scene as if in answer to her unspoken need for a fresh impulse in her life. Their first scene together delicately plays off his cosmopolitan ease against her strained openness. Fine as this is. its coming at the start of the film does work against the centrality the book gives to Eugenia and it slightly under mines Lee Remick’s effectiveness in the role. Without seeing her earlier, bitterly unhappy response to America, we are less moved than we should be by the sudden access of genuine emotion when she says to her uncle: “ I should like to stay here . . . Pray take me in.” And part of the context of her subsequent disillusionment is also lost. Lee Remick’s performance is, despite this, often locally very telling, and her two scenes with Acton’s mother (superbly played by Helen Stenborg) c h art accurately the emotional distance she has travelled. In the first, she chatters with an affectation about longing for American life (“ an old negress in a yellow turban” ) that leaves Mrs Acton’s gentleness at a loss. In the second, when she is about to leave America, it is Mrs Acton’s direct and touching concern for her son’s — and for Eugenia’s — happiness that leaves the la tte r at a loss which forces h e r into simplicity. When I speak of the film’s excellent per formances, I mean partly the unusual capacity of the cast to speak dialogue of a subtle resonance not often heard in films. Perhaps even more significantly, I mean to draw attention to the faces — to the marvellous rightness with which they have been chosen, to their flexibility as instru

68—-Cinema Papers, February-March

ments of meaning, and to the way Ivory trusts them with so much of the film's mean ing. The film's grammatical staple is the centre-screen medium shot of one or other of these eloquent faces, and Ivory is right to trust them. The tracking shots, the beautiful ly and naturally composed two-shots and groupings around tables, in doorways, or by hearths, all make their points with un obtrusive rightness, but again and again we are drawn back to the faces. The confident directness of Robin Ellis' Acton set against the worldly knowingness of Lee Remick's Eugenia to create the proper sexual charge; the smiling ease of Tim Woodward’s Felix gradually giving way to more serious hap piness before the earnest, blossoming readiness of Lisa Eichhorn’s Gertrude; the two kinds of goodness reflected respectively in the gentleness of Helen Stenborg’s Mrs Acton and the stern rectitude of Wesley Addy's Mr Wentworth; the mischievous, barely contained liveliness of Kristin Griffith’s Liz zie Acton: all of these have an extra ordinary physical aptness that goes a long way towards matching the subtle shifts of James’ prose. The Europeans is not perfect James: there are some inevitable coarsenings, particularly in comic moments like that in which Felix asks M r W entworth if he may m arry Gertrude; and Norm an Snow’s Brand, a Unitarian minister in love with Gertrude, belongs to a different New England tradition and is an unsuitably heavy presence. The film is not perfect Ivory either: it does oc casionally linger when it ought to move on; but it is a quiet triumph nonetheless. Like the novel, it is short without being slight, complex without being obscure. The sensibilities involved are clearly in tune with what they are doing and the result is a civilized pleasure indeed.

E u ro p e a n s : Directed by: James Ivory. Producer: Ismail Merchant. Associate producer: Connie Kaiserman. Screenplay: Ruth Prawer Jhabvala. Director of photography: Larry Pizer.Editor: Humphrey Dixon. Music: Richard Rob bins. Art director: Jeremiah Rusconi. Costumes: Judy Moorcroft. Sound: Derek Ball. Cast: Lee Remick (Eugenia), Robin Ellis (Robert Acton), Wesley Addy (Mr Wentworth), Tim Choate (Clif ford), Lisa Eichhorn (Gertrude). Nancy New (Charlotte), Kristin Griffith (Lizzie), Helen Sten borg (Mrs Acton). Norman Snow (Mr Brand), Tim Woodward (Felix). Gedda Petry (Augustine). Production company: National Film Trustees Company Ltd. Distributor: Roadshow. 35mm. 90 min. Britain. 1979. The

that dates back to the Film Australia-ABC co-productions of the Asian Insight series. Arch .Nicholson, director of The Russians, is a veteran of these, as well as several tele features. Nicholson will also direct Film Australia’s Japanese series, which is the big “ a w a y ” d o c u m e n t a r y for 1980 (preproduction research is complete), and which could be followed by an American series. . But what is this genre Film Australia has so often exploited? Simply, it means to take some typical citizens in an exotic location (farmer, worker, Party cadre, boss, acrobat) and film them at work, at home, at play, at the Party meeting, etc. One should also do it on the double quick in case the local bureaucrats interfere.1 At any rate, that is roughly how it is worked in both these projects, where the ex igencies of dealing with such bodies as the State Committee on Radio and Television of the U S S R (and behind it the KGB) and the Central Newsreel and Documentary Film Studio of China’s Ministry of Culture dic tate a less than “ in-depth” approach, or seem to. The Russians consists of three, 1'/2 -hour segments: People of the Cities, seen at the 1979 Sydney Film Festival, People of Influence and People of the Country. People of the Cities introduces Lydia, a Muscovite bus driver, and her beautiful daughter (who has foresworn romance until she finishes aviation college): Nikolai, a foreman on the Odessa docks, his wife, son, b a b u s k a ( m o th e r - in - l a w ) , c olor televisio n and Z hig uli-Fiat (dockers are particularly bonus-prone): and, finally, the family of Wadimi, who is head doctor (and a practis ing hypnotherapist) at a sanatorium belong ing to the giant Steelworkers’ Union in the famous Black Sea resort, Sochi. People of Influence pursues Valentina, the 1. A s th e n a r r a t o r e x p la in s , th e c r e w o f T h e Russians w a s th r e a t e n e d s h o o tin g

w ith fo r

p r o m p t e x p u ls io n th re e w e e k s in to s la n d e ro u s c o u n t e r -r e v o lu t io n a r y

c a m e r a w o r k : a d i r t y p u d d l e h e re , a d e c a y in g b u i l d i n g th e r e , e tc . B u t th e y s u r v i v e d w h a t th e y m a y n o t h a v e r e a liz e d

is s t a n d a r d S o v ie t i n t i m i d a t i o n

t u r e s o m e t r u l y s la n d e r o u s i m a g e r y .

t a c t ic s to c a p

chairperson of the Trade Union Committee of the Order of the Red Banner Refrigerator Plant in Minsk, capital of Belorussia; V la d im ir , th e d i r e c t o r , an d Ivan (Denisovich!), another prosperous foreman from a coal-mining enterprise in Donetsk, Southern Ukraine; and, finally, another Ivan (Folemeevich), a Party secretary-cumengineer and boss from a small gravelextracting operation on the A ngara River below the great white elephantine dam at Bratsk, in Central Siberia. Then, in People of the Country, we en counter Vyacheslav, a cattle breeder on the New Mode of Life k o l k h o z (collective farm) near Minsk; Vladimir, an electrician, ditto; Ahmed, a k o lk h o z chairman from the Kuban, near Krasnodar, in the south of the Soviet Union who comes (untypically) from the tiny pre-Cossack native population, the Adygei — plus sundry dairy maids and retired k o l k h o z n i k i (and the Kuban Cossack choir); and, finally, the remarkable Maria, a senior evaporator and ideological militant in the Bratsk timber complex (a modern paper mill of Swedish turnkey construction) who was a delegate to the 25th Congress of the Soviet Com munist Party, and is a member of the Irkutsk district Soviet. The producer team of John Abbott and Tom Manefield spent three months on research and organization in the Soviet Union in 1977, and both were on hand for the filming. (John Abbott was originally to direct.) The detailed and intelligently infor mative narration in The Russians (delivered by the mid-Atlantic voice of Nick Tate) is John Abbott’s work, although there is no w riter’s credit. High quality politicalscientific advice came from Dr Bob Miller of the Australian National University. There is no doubt that the Australians who shot The Russians had extraordinary access in a geographical and a social sense compared with recent Western film and tele vision experience in the Soviet Union. London-based John Abbott, it seems, had very useful connections in the British tjade union movement, as well as in the Soviet Union. The BBC, for instance, has been s t r u c t u r a n o n g r a t a in Moscow since Michael Charlton got lost long enough to film an interview with academician Andrei Sakharov, and the Film Australians were (and are), if anything, a little too mindful of the penalties of indiscipline under Soviet conditions. Have they, then, in effect filmed nothing

THE RUSSIANS and THE HUMAN FACE OF CHINA

more than a series of Potemkin villages23and towns? (After all, the social sample listed above is rather skewed towards the Soviet elite.) Certainly, some of the footage leaves one a little wide-eyed. The southern locations — on the Black Sea, in the Kuban and even at Donetsk (which was rebuilt after being devastated by the Wehrmacht) — are beautiful beyond question, but so, apparent ly, is southern life, which includes the fruits of the sea and the temperate climate, and also (for many) a personal Zhiguli, a chauffeured Volga and a dacha or an izba (pea sant hut). “The Australians” (as the production team designate themselves in some strikingly inept publicity handouts’) were obviously impressed, as interviews will attest. But they convey the point with an indirection which unfortunately results in some feeble apologetics and a little absurdity. First, they (through the narration) grossly exaggerate the isolation of Soviet society from the West, and the uniqueness of their own penetration which is largely on the level of showing hitherto forbidden scenes, not at exposing the Russian soul: “ Real contacts between Soviet citizens and foreigners from the West are few — mostly restricted to hotel staff, tourist guides, and young street hustlers offering black market rates for foreign currency . .. The ordinary people remain faces in the street.”4 Now, in fact, there are thousands of Russian-speaking exchange students, research scholars and others from the First and Third Worlds on extended stay in the Soviet Union, whose intimate daily contact with Soviet citizens yields far more soulknowledge than can be vouchsafed to a 2.

P rin c e

P o t e m k in ,

f a v o rite

o f th e

E m p re s s

C a t h e rin e ,

s p e c ia lis t in c r e a t i n g a f a c a d e o f p r o s p e r i t y a m i d p e a s a n t m i s e r y f o r th e g r a t i f i c a t i o n o f i m p o r t a n t p e r s o n a g e s o n to u r. 3.

W hoever b a f f le d

w ro te

th e

th e s t r u c t u r e o f

h a v e s le p t t h r o u g h 4.

A ll

m a in

q u o ta tio n s

a re

b lu r b

seem s

The Russians

have

(a n d

been

strolling English-speaking film team on a short visit and accompanied by a Soviet bureaucratic entourage reporting daily to the higher cinematic officialdom and “the organs” .5 Again, the narration tells us that the programs “do recognize that, in the Soviet Union as in other societies, most of the people make a reasonable fist of their lives most of the time.” Now, leaving aside the question whether all other societies (India? Uganda?) are embraced by this amazing proposition, we still confront a time problem. Granted that things are nice-ish now, the Soviet Union is only a little more than 60 years old, of which about 30 were lived under the leadership of the vilest autocrat known to history. The Soviet Union has experienced not only the purges, two artificial famines and a needlessly disastrous war, but also a kind of collective trauma from which several of The Russians’ Russians have manifestly not recovered. A little more respect for the awful pressure of Soviet history on the present generation is indicated. Despite these blemishes, however, and the lack of dissenting voices among the film’s subjects (imagine filming a program on Australian lives under a ban on interviewing the likes of Donald Horne, Manning Clark, Jack Mundey, Phillip Adams, etc.), The Russians must Finally be judged a con siderable and non-obfuscating success. The iron law of Iron Curtain filmmaking (the more conformist the producer’s proposition and credentials the better his access) has been upheld. But when the narrator says: “The Film Australia motive is friendly. These are not hostile, prying programs trying to ‘look into dirty backyards’ . . . ” he is being disingenuous to a degree. More than one filthy backyard of the soul and the mores is revealed — and the glimpses are fascinating. Item: Owing to “ Siberian readiness to

bend the rules” , the crew Filmed the inside of the annual meeting of the Party cell of Ivan Folemeevich’s Hydro Mechanization Ad ministration out on the Angara — a world first, evidently, since non-Party Soviet citizens are not permitted in Party meetings. And what transpired? The politics of the graveyard, I fear; a replication in miniature of the pre-digested and over-determined speeches, motions, votes and amendments of the great All-Union Party Congresses themselves. Question time for a prospective new Party member is a high camp occasion: Question; “Who can become a member of the C o m m u n ist P a r ty , C o m ra d e Nikolaev?” Answer: “Any citizen of the Soviet Union can become a member of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union.” Fortunately for the severely-challenged Comrade Nikolaev, there were no other questions. Likewise, the “secret” ballot for the Party committee of Ivan’s cell is that of an election for the Supreme Soviet of the USSR writ small. Drop the prepared ballot with the district party committee’s approved slate on it in the box unmarked, or tamper at your peril!6 Item: Equally deadly is the Party activity of Maria, the senior evaporator from Bratsk, whose duties include an occasional speech at Party Explanation Meetings for the members of her shop. We see her reading through a speech by Brezhnev himself (which has already been printed in Izvestial) for the benefit of her allegedly 98 per cent literate audience.7 The speculating mind reels. What appall ing combination of obligation, fear, habit and conformism can have half-filled this benighted hall on this lost evening to hear the ailing septuagenarian’s borrowed thoughts in the borrowed mouth of the all-

b e f o r e th e m e e t i n g ” h e is r i g h t w i t h t h e fir s t p r o p o s it io n

a ls o to

and

m o s t o f it). fro m

th e

t r a n s s c r i p t o f th e s o u n d t r a c k .

W h e n th e n a r r a t o r a v e r s t h a t “ o n l y m o t i o n s w h i c h a re li k e ly to be r a t if ie d b y th e D i s t r i c t C o m m i t t e e a n d w h i c h h a v e th e s u p p o r t o f th e m a j o r i t y o f m e m b e r s a r e p la c e d

o f f ic ia l

F ilm

A u s tr a lia

i .e ., th e M V D

K G B

(M in is t ry

(C o m m it te e

o f S la t e

o f th e In t e r io r ).

h a s c o m m it t e d

th e s in a g a in s t th e H o l y

S o v i e t d e m o c r a c y w i t h th e o t h e r .

S e c u r i t y ) a n d th e 7.

1 9 6 9 c e n s u s fig u r e s .

Ghost of

too-virtuous Maria? To that question, however. The Russians gives us no answer. Final item: On the Minsk kolkhoz, the New Mode of Life does not yet run to an adequacy of calculating machines, and the Australian team even catches the ad ministration red-handed hiding the abaci behind the samovar. So, Abbott, Manefield, Nicholson and company do their share of prying after all, and if the multiplication of minor portraits has severe limitations as art, there is yet a strong case for it in sociology. The R ussians is above all a rich sourcebook on the Soviet class structure. It lucidly displays some of the prime elements and beneficiaries of privilege in Soviet society, including high pay (foremen and others in favoured and male-dominated in dustries, and industrial and agricultural bos ses generally); free state-provided services and trips abroad (the sanatorium doctor, whose official salary is rather low); and sim ple Party favour which guarantees wide social influence (the exemplary evaporator, Maria). Thus three partly overlapping Soviet aristocracies are convincingly portrayed in The Russians: a labour aristocracy, a specialist aristocracy and a Party aristocracy. Only the intelligentsia and the artistic elite are missing. Again, People of Influence conveys in heroic detail the work of Party secretaries and committees, kolkhoz chairmen and local Soviets, enterprise directors and trade union officials — and also the often unexpected relations between the serried ranks of offi cialdom. There is more here than in many a text book of Soviet government, but what will the Channel 7 audience think of it? Although made for television, the films deserve a permanent place in scholarly film libraries, and someone should ensure that they find it. As a final bonus, The Russians has epiphanies for which this reviewer will be forever grateful — such as a picnic by the Angara River at 13 below (the redoubtable Maria again!); a touching ceremony at a 10year school in Sochi, where the graduating class present little gifts to the incoming first years and receive flowers in return; and, above all, the chaotic and vastly festive wed ding party in the slanting yellow sunlight of a Bratsk autumn whereat the Antipodean crew manifestly did achieve union with the Slav soul in the form of a leg-pulling bridegroom, a tipsy bridesmaid and some hosts who forgot (Siberia again!) that the party was not scheduled shooting. Having said all that, the reviewer must carp and suggest that two production deci sions went fatefully wrong in The Russians. The first was the decision not to interview. A few interviews were tried early in the shooting, one is told, and were a fiasco. But it is not credible that a handful of good inter views could not have been uncovered to liven up the ultimately rather deadly pattern of Boris at home, at work, at play, etc., where Boris has no chance to express his interior self, and where the omniscient and omni present narrator tends to pall. The second weakness, and one that aggravates the first, was the decision not to sub-title. The voice-over translations of monologue do come off quite well, but the dialogue voice-overs are inept, and, of course, a lot of Slavic atmosphere has been lost. But even worse are the considerable stretches of dialogue, including some materia! which sounded intriguing, which are left totally untranslated, and which easi ly could have been picked up with titles. The Siberian Party meeting, for example, is con siderably denatured by the chosen tech nique, and one can only hope that someone somewhere will be able to mount this priceless footage in the way it deserves. Why no titling? Well, those concerned say they were shooting for television, and Cinema Papers, February-March—69

THE RUSSIANS and THE HUMAN FACE OF CHINA

Father and son: The Human Face of China. everyone knows about sub-titles and televi sion executive values. But their colleagues on The Human Face of China use not only titles for converse, which I judged less interesting than the untranslated nooks and crannies of The Russians, but a swag of interviews as well. (That the Australian interlocutor should be sent back to elocution class is another matter.) Other, more minor, criticisms include the title (Ukrainians, Belorussians and Kuban minority people are not Russians), some un sound terminology (“the collective” in the Soviet Union is not a farm, but the officious, prying, immediate peer group at the place of work; and “collectivists” have never been heard of before this film), and inaccurate pedantry (Lenin did not found a nation, only a regime). Also, if a new Film Australia film is ever to be made back in the Soviet Union (and the informal word of invitation is already out), let’s have more of the minority ethnic peoples, so that there won’t ever be a temp tation to call it The Russians, Part II. The Russians, properly so called, are already, or soon will be, a minority in their own land, and the Baltic and the Turkic and the Cauca sian peoples see things Soviet rather dif ferently. The Human Face of China crew also had problems with bureaucracy, but these were dwarfed by the marvellous access they were offered by the Chinese (and aided by help from the then Ambassador, Stephen Fitz Gerald). When a requested trip to Sinkiang fell through, for example, the Chinese turned on an unheard-of journey down the Yangtze River from Chungking to Wuhan. There were also difficulties, such as the troublesome shooting on a Kiangsu province commune, where director Bob Kingsbury

70—Cinema Papers, February-March

reports that the crew was practically para lysed, and the accompanying Peking cadres could not help (lingering Gang of Four in fluence was suspected). But the resulting se quence of a barefoot doctor doing her rounds (“ Health for the Masses” ) is paradoxically among the best in the film. Other human faces glimpsed in the five half-hour episodes included the Shensi Provincial Acrobatic Troupe (“ One Hundred Entertainments”); members of the Wa Tung People’s Commune in Kwangtun (“Something for Everyone” ); the threegeneration Sun Family (factory worker, midwife wife, and broad-jumping daughter enrolled in sports high school) of a Shanghai “ new village” ; and the crew of the Yangtze riverboat, The East is Red, Number 32 (“ Son of the Ocean”). Bob Kingsbury, consultant Jocelyn Chey and producer Susan Baker had two months’ research in China early in 1978, and Kingsbury and company had weeks in country filming, from July to September, 1978. That they got an even fatter dose of blandness than the crew of The Russians was perhaps to be expected: “ Everyone must share the work.” (Woman at neighbourhood meeting.) “ We shall continue to make revolution, although old.” (Grandmother of broad jumper.) “We can get more grain for the state.” (Girl responding to a call for “criticism” at commune production team meeting.) Such lines make one wonder whether there is in China some code hidden to foreigners for carrying on real, instead of Potemkin, communications with fellowcitizens. But, I suspect, there were some sly dogs among Kingsbury’s subjects. When an old China hand was told that the guys and damsels of the Shensi acrobatic troupe were shown during the late afternoon “working” in the cotton fields of the communes before performing in the early evening, he laughed loud and long. Also rather droll were the well-rehearsed tales of passenger discomfort and travail on the Yangtze riverboat under the baneful dispensation of the much un lamented Gang. All this is presented straight, without editorials, and there is a very curious episode where a handful of exceedingly right-minded young women are found sounding off to camera about their ideals, aspirations and ambitions. It is shattering and probably il luminating in its banality. Between the lines and littered among the images, The Human Face of China has a lot to tell about China and the Chinese: the terrible technical backwardness, especially in transport; the strength of local political and economic structures; the timeless stoicism expressed in a wildly extravagant ideological language; and more. If one must choose, The Russians is probably the more useful achievement, but both show resoundingly well that film can enlarge comprehension and perhaps em pathy across barriers of language, culture and politics — even if these barriers are, as I fear, very much more formidable than some Film Australians allow. Directed by: Arch Nicholson. Producers: John Abbott, Tom Manefield. Assis tant producers: Rosemary Gow, Zahar Balk. Director of photography: Dean Semler. Editors: Tom Foley, Wayne Le CIos. Sound recordists: Howard Spry, Alexander Tetukha. Narrator: Nick Tate. Narration by: John Abbott. Production com pany: Film Australia. 16mm. Part 1: 87 min; Part 2: 81 min; Part 3: 91 min. Australia. 1979. The Human Face of China: Directed by: Bob Kingsbury. Producer: Suzanne Baker. Production assistant: Michael Rubetzki. Screenplay: Bob Kingsbury. Director of photography: Andy Fraser. Editor: David Huggett. Sound recordist: Howard Spry. Narrator: John Bell. Narration by: John Power. Production company: Film Australia. Five half-hour programs. Australia. 1979. The Russians:

Travelling the Yangtze River. The Human Face of China.

When Merle Oberon, Australia’s most glittering film star, died (November 24, 1979), the obituaries made much of her age, speculation running between 60 and 68. The fact seems to have been 68, with Merle favoring 62. The reason for such speculation is that, above all. Merle Oberon remained, in defiance of lime, one of the indisputably great beauties of the century, and perhaps that is what she will be chiefly remembered for. The foregoing is not meant either frivolously or unkindly. The way film stars look is immensely important td how we res pond to them. In the end, it is hard to know what film acting is. How far is it a matter of directors pushing players round the set for a few moments at a time? How far is it, in Josef Von Sternberg’s exaggeration, all a matter of “the play of light and shade” across, as it might be, Audrey Hepburn’s eloquent cheekbones or the craggy facial grandeurs of John Wayne’s later years — or. as it was in Merle Oberon’s case, the most exquisitely delicate features crowning an inspirational figure? Actually. I am trying to provide a theory to justify falling heavily for Merle Oberon in 1946 and staying fallen, through thick and exceedingly thin, for more than 30 years. At best a limited actress by the usual criteria, through the four decades of her screen career she remained astonishingly beautiful, on occasions almost movingly so. Of its kind, it is an unbeaten record. Merle Oberon made more bad films than possibly any other leading star, but there were moments in almost all of them when the camera caught this enduring beauty in such a way as to stop breath and heart. Reluctantly, one is led to suspect that the beauty got in the way of the actress. In Henry Koster's Desiree (1955), on many counts one of the worst films ever made (though there were worse to follow for Merle), she played with a new kind of authority and feeling. As Josephine, cast off by “ Napoleon” Brando, she suggested that the time had arrived for her to embark on stylish character roles, and a new and in teresting career. In the event, however, she had only two more such roles: first as Dorothy Donnelly, dying gracefully on a chaise longue in Stanley Donen's Sigmund Romberg biographv. Deep in My Heat (1955), an allstar musical when there weren’t enough stars left: and then Richard Quine’s mildly diverting multi-story Hotel (1966) in which she played a devious duchess. In both these commonplace films. Merle played with pleasing warmth and in telligence. but between them was one of the most bizarrelv appalling films of all time, Richard Rush's Of Love and Desire (1963). In this farrago of nymphomania, wrist slashing and suppressed incest, she looked stunning as a society hostess, but was frank ly absurd in suggesting the wholesome girl trying to gel out (i.e., of the above con ditions) in response to the manly advances of Steve Cochrane (Steve Cochrane! — that it should come to this). Her last film, Interval (1973), had better credentials (Gavin Lambert’s screenplay, Delbert Mann as director) but reviewers reached withering heights in their acidulous accounts of this May-December love story. As-a result, no doubt, it has not yet been released here or in Britain. Interval introduced Merle to her fourth husband, minor actor Robert Wolders. It must be said that her first two (industrialist Bruno Pagliai was No. 3) did more for her

career. Her first, Alexander Korda, launched her on international screens as Anne Bolevn. with a few poignant moments at the start of The Private Life of Henry VIII (1933), not a very good film but still much better than most British films of the 1930s, and everyone remembers Charles Laughton tossing his chicken bones over his shoulder and Merle losing her pretty head. Except in The Scarlet Pimpernel (1935), she was mostly insipid in her other early British films (a pity Alfred Hitchcock didn’t grab her), and it was not until she went to Hollywood that she worked with a good director.

In her first film for William Wyler, These Three (1936). she gave one of her best per formances. She worked very well with the notoriously difficult Miriam Hopkins: they played teachers victimized by scandal in this whitewashed version of Lillian Heilman's solemn play. The Children’s Hour. In fact, she made Hopkins look somewhat theatrically strained. Her Catherine in Wyler’s truncated and romanticized Wuthering Heights (1938) was a long way from Emily Bronte’s passionate creation, but under Wyler's painstaking direction she was unaffectedly lovely and touching. It was Geraldine Fitzgerald (as

Isabella), though, who seemed to have read the book. Merle played with appropriate romantic intensity in Sidney Franklin’s Dark Angel (1936). a ripe weepie. for which, improbably, she was Oscar-nominated; aged charmingly in Julien Duvivier’s Lydia (1941) in which the role of the eponymous heroine gave her some emotional scope: danced the can-can with careful enthusiasm in John Brahm’s version of The Lodger (1943): was briefly sensitive in a scene w'ith Gladys Cooper in the all-star flag-waver. Forever and a Day (1943) : and was convincingly scared out of her w'its in Andre de Toth’s Dark Waters (1945) in which it was touch and go whether quicksand or script would get her first. Her second husband, Lucien Ballard, was the cameraman on The Lodger and on four of her mid-40s films: This Love is Ours (William Dieterle. 1945), Temptation (Irving Pickel, 1946. with Merle as the wickedest woman in Cairo), Night Song (John Cron well, 1947) and Berlin Express (Jac ques Tourneur. 1948). Ballard made her look ravishing in all these, though, with the marginal exception of Berlin Express, they were films of surpas sing idiocy. By that time, her career as a leading star was declining: but her long career as a great beauty showed no abate ment. Charles Vidor’s A Song To Remember (1944) . the life story — to use the term loose ly — of Chopin, u'as the film that first made me her devoted follower. There have been few sillier films, yet who has ever forgotten it? Firmly set in the realms of higher lunacy, it offers Merle as George Sand, flashing her eyes and flaring her nostrils in a very decent impersonation of passion — one that under standably deters Cornel Wilde Chopin from his creative work. Whether she is striding about in trousers, demanding to be told who knew this human jungle better than she. or luring Wilde aw'ay from Paris with, “ You could make miracles of music in Majorca” , she is a marvellous presence. As suggested earlier, I am not sure this is really acting: certainly it would not easily be confused with life. Whatever it is, I doubt we shall see its like again and that means a lot of harmless pleasure has gone out of the movies. When silly old Paul Muni as Professor Eisner, all mumbling and whiskers, comes to beg the imperious Madame Sand, having her portrait painted at the time, to come to Chopin's deathbed. Merle replies without a tremor of that famous profile: “ Frederic was wrong to ask for me. Pray continue. Mon sieur Delacroix." They don't, of course, write dialogue like that any more, and, if they did. who could say it as if she believed it? Merle Oberon did sound as if she believed the tosh she was mostly given to say. It is futile to ponder how' much “ better” an actress she might have been if she had been less of a beauty. Beauty made her a star and anything else she offered w'as a bonus.

Brian M cFarlane Albert Wright, a projectionist in and around Melbourne for 57 years, died in January 1980. Wright began work in 1912, as an assistant in a cinema in Cheltenham, before working for Herschells and the Phillips brothers, and as a projectionist in many of Melbourne’s famous old cinemas. An interview with Wright was published in Cinema Papers. No. 7, Nov.-Dee., 1975. Cinema Papers. February-March—71

TH E PERFORM ING ARTS BOOKSHOP

YOUR MOVIE LIBRARY KEN RUSSELL “ It’s the best thing ever written ab o u t me an d m y w ork and likely to rem ain so.” Himself. $25.95 FILMS OF MICHAEL WINNER His developm ent as a film m a ke r is exam ined. Nineteen film s in 15 years. $22.95.

2 3 2 Càstlereagh Street, Sydney. 2000. Telephone: Patrick Carr (02) 2 3 3 '1 6 5 8

PICTURES W ILL TALK The life and film s of Joseph L. M ankiewicz with an Introduction by Richard Burton. $22.95. COMPANION TO THE MOVIES A W ho’s W ho of directors, writers, designers, etc, of the m ost popular British and Am erican film s. $29.50. OSCAR MOVIES FROM A-Z Listing every feature film to have won an Oscar with com prehensive inform ation on each. $29.50. THE HOLLYWOOD STUDIOS A history, year by year, of the great days of Hollywood and those who m ade it great. Facts, trivia and scandal are included in this perm anent record. $48.95.

TO ADVERTISE IN

WHO PLAYED WHO IN THE MOVIES A lphabetically listed by character with an index of film s. Notes included make this a com prehensive guide.

$32.50. ENDURANCE OF FRANKENSTEIN Explains why the myth continues to fascinate through the inexhaustible capacity of film , stage and television.

$23.95. FILM AS ART by Rudolf Arnheim . A book of standards; a theory of film .

$4.50.

I W

WHAT IS CINEMA? by Andre Bazin. Essays selected and translated by Hugh Gray. Vol. 1 and 2: $4.95 each. “ ___jo ins that sm all com pany of books on movies that do no t exp lo it interest on m ovies b u t intensify it."

New York Times Book Review.

Ring

AUSTRALIA & NEW ZEALAND BOOK CO. PTY LTD

Peggy N ich olls: Melbourne 830 1097 or 3 2 9 5983

23 Cross St., Brookvale 2100 (938 2244)

Sue A d ler: Sydney 3 1 12 2 1

M USIC FOR FILMS

IN T ER N A T IO N A L ^

FILM GUIDE

1Q8 0 1

—

EDITED BY

New Soundtracks in Stock JOHN WILLIAMS: Star Trek, $ 8 .9 9 . Piranha, $ 9 .9 9 . BRIAN MAY: Patrick, $ 9.99 ENNIO MORRICONE: 1900, $ 8 .9 9 . MIKLOS ROSZA: Fedora, $ 9 .9 9 . JUDY GARLAND: Mail Call, $ 1 0 .5 0 . Sweet Charity, $ 1 0 .9 9 . JOHN WILLIAMS: Dracuia, $ 9 .9 9 . JOHN BARRY: Black Hole, $ 1 0 .5 0 . MIKLOS ROSZA: Time After Time, $ 1 0 .5 0 . FRANCIS LAI: Bilitis, $ 8 .9 9 . JERRY GOLDSMITH: Alien, $ 9 .9 9 . DORIS DAY: Young at Heart, $ 1 2 .9 9 . ENNIO MORRICONE: A Fistfull of Dollars, $ 3 .9 9 . GROFE: Rocketship XM, $ 9 .9 9 . Mail orders welcome; add $1.20 post/packing

-------- READINGS RECORDS & BOOKS--------Can you afford to be w ith o u t the latest and largest edition of the w o rld's most unusual, most inform ative, and most respected cinema annual? This year there are illustrated reports from over 50 countries, reviews of dozens of new movies, profiles of "D irectors of the Y ear" Hal Ashby, Henning Carlsen, Bertrand Tavernier, Peter W eir, and W im W enders, plus all the usual sections (revised and updated) covering.Film Festivals, Film Schools, Films on 16mm (U.K) and N on theatrical (U .S .A .), A nim ation, Video, Film Collecting, Educational Films . . . and much, much more!

Distributors

SECOND ISACIf BOV/ PRESSltd RO.Box 197, North Sydney.NsW, Australia 2 0 6 0 S Cliff Street,/Wilsons Point. Ph-(02)922-2770 U.K. and EUROPE (£ 3 .9 5 /$ 7 .9 5 ) : The Tunt.vy Press. 136 148 Tooley Street, London SE1 2TT.

132d Toorak Road, SOUTH YARRA. Telephone (03) 267 1885 We are open 7 days a week ■

■

i There's No B usiness Like The ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■

SHOW BUSINESS BOOKSHOP where you’ll find a wide range of carefully selected scripts from Sam uel 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. M agazines include Plays & Players, Dance & Dancers, Film s & Film ing, After Dark, Dance M agazine, T .D .R ., and Cinema Papers M elbourne’s largest range of Stage M ake-up including ultra high quality Stein Theatrical M ake-Up from USA an efficient and prompt mail order service

Now at new enlarged premises SHOW BUSINESS BOOKSHOP 20-22 McKillop St, Melbourne

67 5391

(4 lines)

BACK ISSUE CLEARANCE SALE Take advantage of our special limited offer and catch up on those missing issues now. Multiple copies less than half-price! 1 or 2 copies 3 or 4 copies 5 or 6 copies 7 or more copies

$4 each $3 each Save $1 per copy $2 each Save $2 per copy $1.80 each Save $2.20 per copy

To order your copies place a cross in the box next to your missing issues, and fill out the form below. If you would like multiple copies of any one issue, indicate the num ber you require in the appropriate box.

UNAVAILABLE: numbers 4,6,7, and 8 No. of copies ordered ....... at $ ....... each.

Total amount enclosed $.............

□ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ 1 2 3 5 9 10 11 12 13 14

□ 15

□ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23

Nam e.. Address. Postcode.

Please make your cheque or money order payable to: Cinema Papers Pty Ltd, 644 Victoria St, North Melbourne, Victoria, 3051, Australia

P le a s e N o te : th is o ffe r e x p ire s on M a r c h 3 1 , 1 9 8 0

BOUND VOLUMES ORDER VOLUME 6 NOW

$30.00 (including post) per volume.

(numbers 21-24 available in Feb. 1980)

Please send me CH copies of Volume 3 □ copies of Volume 4 □ opies of Volume 5 □ opies of Volume 6 Enclosed c heque/postal o rder for S _____

Volumes 3 (9-12), 4 (13-16) and 5 (17-20) are still available. H a n d s o m e l y b o u n d in b l a c k w i t h g o ld e m b o s s e d le t t e r in g . E a c h V o l u m e c o n t a in s 4 0 0 la v is h ly illu s t r a te d p a g e s o f •

E x c lu s iv e in t e r v ie w s w ith

EZIBINDER

p r o d u c e r s , d ir e c t o r s , a c to rs a n d te c h n ic ia n s . •

Please send me D copies of C inem a Papers' Ezibinder at $12.50 per binder.

V a lu a b le h is to r ic a l m a te ria l o n A u s t r a lia n f ilm p ro d u c t io n .

•

F ilm

•

P ro d u c tio n s u r v e y s a n d

ORDER FORM BOUND VOLUMES

Enclosed cheque/p osta l orde r for $ _____

a n d b o o k r e v ie w s .

(a v a ila b le A u s t r a lia o n l y )

NAME.................................................................

r e p o r t s f r o m t h e s e ts o f lo c a l a n d in te rn a tio n a l p r o d u c t io n .

• Box-office reports and guides to film producers and investors.

STRICTLY LIMITED EDITIONS TO PLACE AN ORDER FILL IN THE FORM P L E A S E N O T E : V o lu m e (n u m b e rs 5 -8 ) A R E

l (n u m b e r s I - 4 ) a n d V o l u m e 2 N O W

g i f t s u b s c r ip t io n s

(p e r 6

.............................................. Postcode................ Total amount enclosed $_______ NOTE: Remittances in Australian dollars only.

Ezibinder is now available in black with gold embossed lettering to accommodate your unbound copies. Individual numbers can be added to the binder independently, or detached if desired. This new binder will accommodate 12 copies.

C in e m a P a p e rs P ty . L t d ., 6 4 4 V ic t o r ia S tre e t, N o rth

TO PLACE AN ORDER FILL IN THE FORM

U N A V A IL A B L E .

OVERSEAS RATES (including postage) (A ) S u b s c r ip tio n s a n d

ADDRESS............................................................ Cinema Papers is pleased to announce that an

is s u e s ) .

Zone 1 (New Zealand, Niugini): Surface — $19.80; air — $3-1.80. Zone 2 (Malaysia, Singapore, Fiji, Indonesia etc): Surface — A$1 9.80; air — $A36.00. Zone 3 (Hong Kong, India, Japan, Philippines, China etc): S urface — SA19.80; air — SA40.20. Zone 4 (North America, M iddle East): Surface —

$A1 9.80; air — SA44.40. Zone 5 (Britain, Europe, Africa, South Am erica): Surface — $A 19.80; air — $A 46.50. B o u n d V o lu m e s ( p e r v o lu m e ) . Zone 1: Surface — $A 30.20; air - SA33.00. Zone 2: Surface - SA30.00; air $A35.00. Zone 3: Surface - SA30.40; air - SA36.80. Zone 4: S urface — $A30.80; air — SA40.30. Zone 5: Surface — $A 30.80; air - $A42.20. (C) B a c k Is s u e s . To the price of each copy a d d the following: (B )

M e lb o u r n e , V ic t o r ia , A u s tr a lia 3051

_________Please allow up to tour weeks tor processing.

S u r f a c e (all zones):- $A0.80. A ir :- Zone 1 - SA2.80- Zone 2 - SA3.50; Zone 3 - $A 4.20; Zone 4 - SA4.90; Zone 5 SA5.25. NB

(1 ) A ll r e m i t t a n c e s in A u s t r a l ia n d o l l a r s o n ly .

(2) S urface Air Lifted available to U.K, Germ an Federal Republic, Greece, Italy and U.S.: (a) S u bscriptions (per 6 issues) — $27.60; (b) per bound volum e — $A 32.80; (c) Back issues — add $2.60 per copy.

Pappy —the Life of John Ford Prentice Hall, 1979 Dan Ford Richard Franklin When Orson Welles was asked to name the three greatest directors, he replied: “John Ford, John Ford and John Ford.” When Pudey Nichols retired from Hollywood, and collaboration with Ford, he sent him a note: “ You’re the best there is. Nobody else even comes close.” The “ greatness” of John Ford (nee Feeney) cannot be reputed. Few Filmmakers were more prolific (136 films), more longlived (with a career spanning nearly 50 years), more acclaimed (six Academy Awards — more than any other director) or of more influence on generations of film makers. Citizen Kane’s so-called “ revolutionary technique” , for example, seems to me to be merely the synthesis of Ford’s work to that date, particularly with Gregg Toland on Grapes of Wrath and The Long Voyage Home. But for me, the most staggering measure of Ford’s stature on all these levels came in the 12-month period, from October 1938 to November 1939, when he made four films: Stagecoach, Young Mr Lincoln, Drums Along The Mohawk and The Grapes of Wrath. As Dan Ford, his grandson, says in his new biography, Pappy — the Life o f John Ford, “ these films together stand as the greatest collective achievement in the history of cinema.” Until recently, the sheer bulk of Ford’s work has daunted critics and little has been written on him. But three recent books — John Ford by Joseph McBride and Michael Wilmington1, John Ford: A Biography by Andrew Sinclair2and Pappy — have all shed a little more light on the Ford enigma. Rightly or wrongly, Pappy is the first book which has not followed the example of Ford’s biographer-journalist in The Man Who Shot Liberty Valence who printed the legend instead of the tru th . While Wilmington’s book is largely critical, its in troduction (a description of Ford’s funeral) is sentimental to the point of being ridiculous. Ford might have advised his protege, John Wayne, to play such corny stuff “ to the hilt” , but even Ford could not have condoned such mawkishness. Sinclair’s book presents an image of Ford that he certainly would have condoned, but one which is impossible to accept: that of a Byronic man of action, a soldier poet, an admiral who filled in his idle moments knocking off films. In Dan Ford’s Pappy, an entirely different man emerges. The greatest of all directors, but nonetheless a melancholic sometime drunkard and a chauvinistic, even misogynistic, egomaniac whose home and family life was something of a disaster, and who became an admiral to try and convince 1. Seeker and Warburg, 1974. 2. Allen and Unwin, 1979.

his wife he could do something worthwhile with his life. In fact three men emerge: Ford the direc tor; Admiral Ford; and Pappy, the man, the husband and the father. 1. The Director: While the book attempts no critical analysis of the many films, and even omits to mention a few major films, books like Peter Bogdanovich’s lengthy but superficial interview3 have at least provided chronologies of the director’s work before. Dan Ford instead gives details of how and why the director apparently accepted almost anything that was offered to him, how much he was paid, how many feet of film he shot and who he insulted on the set. For example. Ford accepted The Wings of Eagles (in which Dan sees the Spig Wead character as autobiographical of Ford) because he didn’t want anyone else to do it, even though he didn’t like it himself. He was paid $250,000 to direct They Were Expen dable, but donated this to build a war veterans’ home, because he felt guilty about getting so much during wartime. On Grapes of Wrath he shot only 40,000 ft (less than 4 to 1). On Mary of Scotland, apart from not changing his shirt for the entire film, he out raged the “ liberated” Kate Hepburn by tell ing her she’d “ make someone a good wife someday” . As for Ford’s oft-mentioned selfdeprecation of his work as a “job of work” , he announced himself to his peers in 1939 as “ the best traffic cop in Hollywood” . At the same time he was able to tell Eugene O’Neill that it was their common Irish ancestry which “ makes us both great” . The book also suggests it is possible that Ford’s West could have become melancholy without him realizing it, and that he may not have been obtuse in his interviews with Bogdanovich and others. For the sad thing about Ford the director is that he outlived his career. As he slowed down to only one film a year or less (a respectable output for anyone else) he became worried that he was no longer in demand, became melancholy and sloppy in his work, and finally desperate as he attempted to get half-baked projects off the ground when nobody would hire him because of his poor health. Dan tells of one night on Ford’s yacht, “The Araner” , when he had to put the drunken, weeping old man to bed. Ford had just directed Seven Women and was terrified they’d never let him work again — they didn’t. 2. Admiral Ford: When Ford received his Academy Award for How Green Was My Valley, he was already on his way, with Cap tain Gregg Toland, to film the aftermath of Pearl Harbour as head of the newly-formed Field Photographic Unit. Ford supervised all filming of the Normandy invasion, the Nuremberg trials, made films in Korea and Vietnam, and remained an admiral in the naval reserve till his death. As impressive as his military career was, its beginnings reflect a fascinating side of his character. His wife Mary, the daughter of a wealthy and influential Protestant family, was never impressed by his film career. To impress her. Ford courted her San Diego 3. Jo h n F o rd , University of California Press, 1978 (revised edition).

military friends and undertook several selfinitiated “ missions” in his private yacht to spy on the Japanese prawn fleets off Califor nia, sending elaborate and somewhat fan ciful reconnaissance reports to the OSS. Joining the reserve as a lieutenantcommander, he then began drilling members of his film crews on empty sound stages at Fox, in uniforms borrowed from the wardrobe department. Although a joke at first, “ Ford’s Navy” was finally given of ficial sanction, and its ranks were filled with some of Hollywood’s leading filmmakers. 3. Pappy: Even when directing his first film at 29, Ford’s fatherly attitude to his team, his stable, earned him the nickname “ Pappy” . But to his family he always seemed ex tremely distant. Not surprising, when one considers how often he was on location. But even when he wasn’t he seemed to prefer drinking at his private club to spending time at home. Ford and his wife were constantly quarrelling, and he seemed to ignore his children. As much as his grandson Dan seems to admire his grandfather, on several occasions he speaks of his own father, Ford’s son Pat, as if he were a victim of Ford’s bullying, and never realized his own poten tial because of it. He tells one extraordinary story of a trip which Ford took to Bali in the early 1930s with actor-friend George O’Brien. As the boat left the dock, O’Brien was appalled that Ford would not turn to wave to Mary; he was paying her back for an argument they’d had, and didn’t write to her for four months. Above all. Ford always seemed to have a chip on his shoulder, which is evident in his filmed interview with Bogdanovich. One can only conclude that this came from his early childhood when he was the youngest of an Irish Catholic family of 13. It is interesting also to conjecture that perhaps his pre-eminence (several older brothers finished up working for him) came in a similar way to that of his young hero in How Green Was My Valley, for, as a child, Ford spent six months bed-ridden with dipptheria, with his family ministering to him. The most fascinating incident in which all three sides of John Ford overlapped oc curred at Midway. Ford got wind that a pivotal battle was likely to take place there and, cutting all red tape, flew from Hollywood with a young cameraman. The morning after they arrived, Midway was at tacked and Ford filmed the incident. At one point, the flag detail decided to raise the American flag during the battle and Ford himself shot the scene, although wounded. In this one extraordinary and quintessentially Fordian moment, straight from the “Star Spangled Banner” , history (and Ford’s vision of it) became one: the legend became fact. Ford was, in fact, buried with that flag.

each entry, as well as the local distributor. If no distribution is indicated, the book is imported (Imp.). The recommended retail prices listed are for paperbacks, unless otherwise indicated, and are subject to variation between bookshops and states. This list was compiled by Mervyn R. Binns of the Space Age Bookstore, Melbourne. Popular and General Interest The Fifty W orst Film s o f AH Tim es

Harry Medved and Randy Dreyfuss Angus and Robertson/Angus and Robertson Australia. S9.95 • Not everyone will agree with this selection — like Last Year At Marienbad, The Ambushers and The Omen. The Film B ook o f J .R .R . T o lk ie n ’s The L o rd o f the Rings

Produced by Saul Zaentz. Directed by Ralph Bakshi Allen and Unwin/Allen and Unwin Australia. S8.95 (HC) • An abridged version of the great fantasy story due in Australia as an animated film. H orses in the M ovies

H. F. Hintz Barnes/Imp., S18 (HC) • A popular pictorial book on equine film stars. M oe H ow ard and the Three Stooges

Moe Howard Citadel/Davis Publications, S 10.45 • New in paperback. A filmography of the successful comedy team. Biographies, Memoirs and Experiences in Filmmaking and Filmographies A n n a N eagle (Autobiography) Futura/Tudor Distributors. S3.25 • A biography of the British screen and stage star now in paperback. Bardot — A n In tim a te Biography

Willi Frishnauer Michael Joseph/Thomas Nelson Australia. S3.50 • The best book on Brigitte Bardot now in paper back. The Divine Garho

Frederick Sands and Sven Broman Hutchinson/Hutchinson Australia. S18.95 (HC) • The best book on the life and career of the famous star of the 1930s. Errol Flynn: A M em oir

Earl Conrad R. Hale/Associated Book Co. Australia. S14.55 (HC) • More behind-the-scenes revelations on one of the screen’s most famous stars. The Film s o f H edy Lam arr

Christopher Young Citadel/Davis Publications. S22.50 (HC) • A new release in the Citadel “ Films of' series — full filmography with numerous illustrations. The Film s o f Jennifer Jones

W. Franklyn Moshier Moshier/lmp.. S27.75 (HC) • A limited edition volume similar to the Citadel series — full filmography and photographs. Forty Days with M arilyn

Hans Jorgen Lembourn Hutchinson/Hutchinson Australia. S16.50 (HC) • More intimate details on the life of Marilyn Monroe. The Funsters

J. R. Parish and W. T. Leonard Arlington House/Imp.. S36 (HC) • A very large volume, profusely illustrated, on all the film comedians. John H uston: A Biography

Alex Madsen Robson/Hutchinson Australia. S18.95 (HC) • A biography of one of the American screen’s leading actor-directors. K eaton: The M an W ho W ouldn't Lie D ow n

Recent Releases This column lists those books released in Aus tralia between October and December 1979 which deal with the cinema or related topics. All titles are on sale in bookshops. The publishers are listed below the author in

Tom Dardis Andre Deutsch/Hutchinson Australia. S19 SO (HC) • A new biography of the great comedian in novator of silent films.

Concluded on P. 79 Cinema Papers. February-March—73

DAVID PUTTNAM

David Puttnam Continued from P. 14 No, only now it’s almost non existent; there is no money left. People often assume that bodies like the NFFC, and the Australian Film Commission, can have a philosophy, but those types of organizations aren’t really able to. In fact, they have a reality pressed on them. They inevitably come in on films which are difficult, and are rarely given the opportunity to come in on films which are home runs. The role of such bodies is a very difficult one, and relates entirely to how much you believe in the impor tance of an indigenous cinema. If a nation goes through a period of believing in it, like Australia has done, then there is a real need for such a body. But if Malcolm Fraser, for whatever reason, decides he doesn’t give a damn whether there is an Australian cinema, and that you can be perfectly happily supplied by American product, it’s hard to even begin to defend an AFC. Its ex istence in the first place requires an article of faith. We have a government in Britain at the moment which is quite ex traordinary in its attitude to the arts. I have a nasty feeling that Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher doesn’t regard the cinema as being of any real importance, and isn’t, therefore, prepared to give it any serious thought. Having adopted that attitude, the only reason she will keep the NFFC going is out of a sense of embarrassment: i.e., for a limited amount of money it may not be worth having a lot of trouble caused in the newspapers. On the other hand, if the sums of money involved were £5 million and £10 million, I am sure she would be prepared to knock it on the head, despite the bad publicity. This attitude seems to have come at a time when there appears to be a resurgence of indigenous produc tions . . . There is an interesting equation in the government side of things, which has to be taken seriously: that is, if you make state funding too simple people cease to have the ability to go out and raise funds from the private sector. Those areas of the arts which have relied on government money for their fiscal virility find they are impotent when the government says “Now we are going to trim back.” This is because the type of person who is running that area of the arts doesn’t know how to go about getting money any other way. Since I have been in Australia — and I haven’t thought this through clearly — I have begun to feel that there may be some merit in a dif ferent concept of state funding, which is one they are using in one or 74—Cinema Papers, February-March

two of the states in the U.S.: i.e., for every dollar a producer raises, the government matches it. The days of automatic aid are over, and producers will have to start moving their arses. That scheme has been proposed here, though in a slightly different form, and has been largely poohpoohed . . . Yes, and a lot of the people who pooh-pooh it are academics who quite reasonably don’t want to become hustlers. Maybe one way to solve the problem is to team up people. It seems to me, for example, that a well-run art gallery should be a two-pronged affair. It should have an academic director, and a business affairs manager. And there should be, perhaps, even a healthy friction between the two — one of them thinking he is propping up the other, and other feeling he is giving his cultural blessing to the business. There doesn’t seem to be a lot wrong with that concept. Diaghilev, for example, got little or no state funding, and yet he managed to put together, for me, the most cultural ly important series of events of the century. Do you think the absence of in digenous production in Britain in the 1950s and early 1970s reflected a culturally barren period? No, I think it was a period of no confidence in the indigenous creative force. In many respects, it was never stronger. This terrible lack of confidence is something I have read into a lot of the conversations I have had with Australian filmmakers. They, and their scripts, are incredibly ten tative. They don’t really believe in themselves. They think they may have talent and they know their in tentions are good, but they lack the confidence to go flat out for the filmic jugular. I don’t understand, for example, how anyone can even begin to think that in a quasi-creative area like filmmaking you can create an ex port business. Sure you can get an export business, but the only way you can function creatively is to say, “ I believe that this script is terrific and if I make it correctly, people all over the world will res pond to it.” You are making it for yourself, foremost. Saying you are making a film for the U.S. market is to avoid the im portant issues. Not only that, it is a negation of your own creative ability. No human being, since the beginning of time, has been able to sit in one country, second-guessing what people 10,000 km away, and two years later, might or might not commercially respond to. You can’t do it, and you are doomed to failure to even try. This is my argu ment with a producer like Tony Ginnane.

Ginnane would claim he is a businessman, and in the business of making films . . . But it’s an absurd business to be in. If he really believes he is a businessman, he should go into real estate, which is sound. Any businessman who is in the film in dustry is a lunatic, and the only reason one should be in films is if one has deep and abiding passion for it. Yet there are people in the U.S., like Roger Corman and Sam Arkoff, who make exploitation and genre films with the primary motive of making money . . . My experience is — and I know Arkoff well — that they both love films. Corman lives, eats, and breathes films. He is not a business man, he just happens to be able to turn films into a reasonable way of earning a living. Arkoff has an absolutely en cyclopaedic knowledge. The great regret of his life is that he has never been able to get into a different area of filmmaking. I know two or three times he has tried and failed. But he is a man with a great love for film. Also, let me say, they are not cynical men. They may, now and then, make cynical investments, but they are not cynical. They have also been responsible for fostering some of the most creative filmmakers in the U.S., like Francis Coppola . . . Absolutely, and respect them too, which is more to the point. So you see the making of genre films at a distance as dangerous and un desirable? It seems to me to be a negation of all the reasons why anybody would ever want to make a film. It is reducing film to a product, and a very unstable one, at that. Do you see this situation in Australia as a misguided attitude that can be corrected, or is it a more fundamental part of the Australian make-up? I have been here little more than a week, but I do get the feeling that while, on one hand, you pay lipservice to throwing off the colonial mantle, on the other you seem prepared to apathetically become the 51st state. If you really believe what you say — i.e., that you want to be a nation — then it seems to me that you are very equivocal in an awful lot of your demands. And your energy, instead of going into trying to second-guess American taste, should be going into trying to embarrass ,the government and the population of this country into be ing more Australian. A lot of people, particularly film critics, don’t feel that energy is real

ly there and, because of that, neither are the scripts . . . It is less good scripts, and more a question of good ideas. Certainly the issues are here. Since I have been in Australia, there has been the attempted Murdoch newspaper takeover. Now that is an excellent tale. So is the Australian involve ment or non-involvement in East Timor. You could spin a great film out of that. I get the strong feeling that there is a banana republic level of corrup tion in this country, yet I have never seen a film about Australian cor ruption. I have seen many films about American corruption, and if the Americans can do a film like Network, why can’t you? The British and the Australians are at fault over this. We are prepared to accept American in digenous product in a dog-like manner, yet feel that they are not interested in what happens to us. The thing is, of course, that we don’t present our ideas interestingly enough or with enough balls. I went to a pop show in Califor nia recently and saw a group called Bad Company. I don’t know a lot ‘about the music business, and I am not particularly interested, but when they came onto the stage in their high heel boots and western gear, and went into a riff, 20,000 14 year-olds went bananas in the stadium. Then, after they had been playing for about 20 minutes, one of the group w alked to the microphone and said, “ Good evnin’ it’s lovely to be ’ere again.” He was from bloody Islington! So, here were 20,000 Californian, blonde lunatics watching this bloke from Islington playing his guitar. If that’s possible, are you really going to tell me that it’s impossible for Australians to become relevant? I have just read a script called Fatty Finn, which Bob Ellis wrote. Now if that was made properly and had enough money spent on it, it could make a fortune. But what is happening is that they are trying to cobble together a way of making it for $318,000, on 16mm in four weeks. You can’t make a film with children in four weeks. So, unless things change, they will end up with a half-arsed film which could have done twice as well if another $150,000 had been spent. Do you think there are a number of producers here who can recognize a property like “Fatty Finn” and make it in the style that it requires? I am sure there are people here who could recognize it. It is just a question of finding the people with the confidence to say, “This is go ing to be great, and this is going to be rubbish.” If you think this confidence is here, but lying dormant, are there Concluded on P. 77

PRODUCTION REPORT

Richard Brennan C o n tin u e d f r o m P . 4 9

something in return along the lines of “ I promise I’ll get through in the day and with the money we have.” He was very conscious of the budget and the schedule. Is a producer’s first responsibility to ensure that the film comes in on budget, or to try and find extra funds? I guess it would be to try and find more money, the point being that nobody is going to say, “ I believe this film came in on time and under budget, let’s go out tonight and see it after dinner.” Films should have elements that attract an audience, and if they are not there with the resources you have, you must try and pull it out of the fire and not just cut your losses. How many of the films you have worked on were projects you in itiated? None. Do you ever have a burning desire to make a particular film? I have a great desire to do C h r is tin e 's I s la n d a n d G la n d T im e . G la n d T im e is a novel by Don

Townshend which was found for me by Malcolm Smith. C h r i s t i n e ’s I s la n d is a screenplay that I com missioned for the Tasmanian Film Corporation, adapted from a short story from which it differ» wildly. I probably had more to do with the initiation of that than any other project I have been involved with.

attitude and they agree. It’s their money. Love Letters has been successful ly screened on television in Ger many and Holland, and theatrically in Britain.

Did you ever consider going to a Was “Love Letters” made with a 35mm blow-up for theatrical release loan or a direct grant from the here? AFC? Given the light conditions we It was an investment of $25,000. shot the film in, I think the blow-up They get 75 per cent of the money would be very grainy. We have night scenes that were done with back. very little illum ination. Tom Cowan (cinematographer) has a Have you paid back much? fantastic skill at doing that sort of When the fruits of a Dutch sale material. The film was shot with 16mm in come through in 1980, we will have back about $15,000. So far the mind, and I think it would not be AFC has been repaid about $6000. pleasing as a blow-up. But we have had to pay out money for a lot of extra prints, so we will What is the theatrical and television have to work out what direct costs market in Australia like for a film we have had over and above the which is not quite a feature and on $25,000, and then split the latest 16mm? sale with the AFC. I’d rather keep Not good. I hope there will be the lot myself, but that wasn’t what more of a market in the future. I I signed. believe The Plumber, The Sound of What about television sales? Ap Love and Arch Nicholson’s A Good p a ren tly you turned down Thing Going all did well on televi sion. The problem is you can buy an Australian television . . . episode of Kojak for $4000 or I had an offer of $10,000 from $5000, and you know that people Channel 7 which I turned down. I want to watch Kojak. It is always thought the film was worth at least going to depend on how much the $25,000, and I still do. I don’t think stations think a film is worth, and I am cutting off my nose to spite how much ‘goodwill’ they want to my face. It’s setting a precedent for buy. I sold a lot of films when I was at other people. The AFC knows my

the Australian Film Institute, but that was not entirely unconnected with the fact that the Senate Standing Committee on Science, Education and the Arts was being held at the time and they were in terested to know how the stations were meeting their responsibilities. Is there any way of predicting whether a film that does badly in Australia will do well overseas, or vice versa? There is with genre films. Deathcheaters, Patrick, Long Weekend and The Money Movers have all been very successful overseas.

What about prestige? Those “death of the industry” articles tend to ig nore overseas sales, except for big films like “My Brilliant Career” They ignore what I think is a far sighted move on the part of the AFC and the NSWFC, which is to let the private backers take their money out first. Very few private backers have had their fingers burned since that happened. But it’s never been well publicised. The private backers would have to be very unlucky to lose money on this film, which is not to say it will do well. It would have to be dis astrous for them to lose money.

Which is more important: the But don’t people worry more about domestic or the foreign market? the government losing money than they do about private backers? Normally the home market, because your foreign revenue is What has the government in usually only 10 or 15 per cent of vested in the film industry over the your total. But with all of those past eight years? It’s about SI3 films I have listed, foreign sales million. That is very little for the have made up most of the income publicity it has received. and they are all in profit, or about The altered consciousness of to go into profit, on the strength of Australia in overseas terms has overseas sales. been remarkable, particularly in In the case of Long Weekend, the the past three or four years. I just landscape is over-familiar here and don’t think you could buy that sort p e o p le ’s k n o w le d g e of th e of publicity. Obviously you can buy Australian bush makes them much it for the cost of those films, but S13 less willing to suspend disbelief million is a drop in the ocean in than in a country where it looks terms of the gross national product. alien. The idea of a marauding pos If I were Prime Minister, I’d like sum might raise a giggle in to be seen as a Medici prince, A ustralia, but it’s something benevolently fostering the arts. ★ remotely plausible in Karachi. Cinema Papers. February-March—75

EVERETT DE ROCHE

Everett de Roche Continued from P. 33 Not really. Once I have chosen a story, I then decide whether it’s best told in a contemporary or period setting, and whether it’s best as a feature, tele-feature or episode of a television series.

Writing in Australia What are the opportunities for a writer to express himself in Aus tralia?

any price; Peter and Marcia are doomed because of their aggression towards the bush. Is this part of your cynicism? Yes. I would find it hard to create a lead character who is the typical hero or heroine; someone who behaves impeccably. I am more comfortable working with characters who have faults and pimples, who are human like the rest of us. You also concentrate on characters in the 20 to 30 age group . . .

being bigger than the last. This happens to suit the story nicely, because the closer you get to the treasure, the more difficult the terrain, and bigger the obstacles. Is it important to have a good technical knowledge, such as how shots are put together? It can be an advantage and a handicap. It certainly helps to get out once in a while and find out what the practical difficulties are. How is it a handicap?

There are plenty of opportunities for personal expression, even if you have to sneak it under the door. You can usually say what you want even in the m ost re stric te d television series.

I am more comfortable writing in It may inhibit you from writing a my own age group, but there is no sequence the way you want to hard and fast rule. Sometimes I because you are thinking that it write a character who is either old, would mean an early shoot for the or very young, but production or crew and so on. You shouldn’t casting difficulties force me to re think about such things; only about write the character into this age the story. Presumably, the opportunities for group. this would be greater in films . . . At what stage do you show an idea I wondered if there w asn’t to somebody else? That’s what I thought before I something more to it. In all your films the older people prey on the got into films. That is the hardest thing to younger. One thinks of Madeline in decide. Do you show it at an Does a writer have to be self- “ Snapshot” , or Dr Roget in undeveloped stage and take a “Patrick” . . . effacing to function? chance on a director being able to

is an adolescent industry. It’s afraid of people laughing about it. It has to take more chances. Australian scripts are often criticized for being under-worked. Are writers prepared to do the re drafting? It’s not a matter of not being prepared, but of not being able to afford it. If the Australian Film Commission pays $3000 for a script, it gets a $3000 script. If an American studio wants a $100,000 script, then you write one. What these various producers are buying is time, and $3000 only buys a certain amount. My family and I can exist for X amount of time for $3000, and after that I can’t afford to keep working on it. How important is the reaction of critics? The things I have seen written on Patrick, good and bad, I have agreed with 100 per cent. Would critics make good script editors?

We all work differently, but a degree of isolation works for me. I don’t like being too close to a subject, and when I am doing research I don’t like anybody to know I am a writer. In “Patrick”, “Long Weekend” and ^‘Snapshot” , a De Roche style seems to be emerging — your obsession with water or the mysterythriller format, for example. Are you aware of such things? I am, though I don’t wish to be locked into any particular style. The suspense-thriller just happens to be a popular type of film at present.

Angela (Sigrid Thornton) prepares to fight the occupant of her bed, only to find it a decapitated pig’s head. Snapshot.

There is also a degree of romance and comedy in your films . . . I like putting comedy into drama, but I am scared of doing a straight comedy. It’s hard to be funny. If you put a shqck into a film, people will jump out of their seats, or they won’t. And if they don’t, it’s not a disaster. But unless you are getting laughs all the time in a comedy, it will be a turkey. I have never done a comedy of the Neil Simon style, but I’d love to. The comedy in “Long Weekend” is very black . . . I am certainly more comfortable with black comedy. Essentially I am a cynic. The cen tra l ch a ra cte rs in “Patrick”, “Snapshot” and “Long Weekend” are all doomed to a certain extent. It is as if they have broken some moral code and are condemned. Patrick has murdered his mother; Angela seeks success at 76—Cinema Papers, February-March

I am not conscious of this, and I leave it to others to figure out what it all means. Most of the time, a story writes itself; I can’t say I have a lot of control over it. How conscious are you of structure when writing? One of the sustaining strengths of “ P atrick ” , for example, is its manipulation of suspense . . .

understand what you are doing, or do you polish it and only give him your best shot? I tend to get anxious, and need a stamp of approval to keep going. But if someone says they don’t like it, I can get discouraged and feel te m p te d to th ro w aw ay a potentially-good idea. What would your influences be as a writer?

Not necessarily, because the critic can stand back and criticize without having to offer positive alternatives. A good script editor has to be able to criticize and come up with ways to improve it; not many people can do that. One thing Richard and I did on Patrick was to have Tom Ryan, a film critic and friend of Richard, read the script. Tom pointed out certain things we had cheated on.

When I did the original draft I wasn’t really aware of such things, and when Richard took over, he actually charted the story. He had a scale of one to 10, and would say, “This shock is worth maybe three, and the next one’s five. We have a gap there, so I need another shock. Make it worth four.”

That’s a hard one, because I am not a great film buff. I suppose there have been influences, but I am not aware of them. Recently, I was one of the judges at a film festival, and I saw more films then than I had in my life time.

Are you going through a similar process on “Yankee Zephyr”?

Did it give you any perspective on Australian films in relation to global filmmaking?

No. I like to go along for two or three days to watch the filming, but it’s boring if you are not involved. The writer is the odd man out on the set, and if you are doing something, like working as an extra, you feel more a part of it.

We are working with stunts, rather than shocks, with each stunt

My only criticism is that we are a little self-conscious at present. Ours

Concluded on P. 78

In “Patrick” you appear as an electrician, and in “Snapshot” as a forensic expert. Would you like to act?

DAVID PUTTNAM

David Puttnam

Continued from P. 74

catalysts that could be brought to ig nite things a little more? In the end, you are going to have to do it yourselves. Catalysts from overseas can help a little, but the problem then is that if you listen to an idiot like me, you must listen to the whole story, and not just pick up the bits that are attractive. For example, we have been talk ing about getting films made, but the problem in Australia is not that as much as creating an economic base for the making of films. That means looking beyond cinema to recoup, and that means getting into the whole area of pay television. Unless you are prepared to at tack that with the same passion you attack your filmmaking, you will get nowhere. It is essential you all badger the federal government so that there are no more films shown free on television — it is castrating you at birth. Television sales have to relate back to the cost of films. There must be a direct relationship between cost of production and what people pay to see it. Forget the word “ television” . Television is a printing mechanism. When you print Cinema Papers, you don’t ask the printer what he thinks about the front cover. Your contract with the printer requires him to deliver X number of copies by a certain date. T hat’s what television is — a printing mechanism of visual im ages, supplied to it by some other third party, be that an advertising agency, Crawfords, or whoever. Television has no real power or editorial rights, and that must be established.

.weren’t running from pillar to post. It would hold teams together, and teams are the key. There are two very noticeable things about your industry. One is that I have never known such a small place to be so fragmented. Britain is bad enough, but you are worse. You also don’t have the cafe society that Los Angeles has. It’s no good meeting producers at forums and all that; you need a centre where people habitually have lunch or tea. There is also the state-by-state fragmentation . . . That is another reason why you should develop these small “ bouti que” companies. You could spread them so that there were at least two in each state, and maybe three in New South Wales and Victoria. What is your reaction to co productions? The danger there is that if American productions keep coming in, given the limited number of competent crews, these crews- will begin to be ‘stolen’. This, in turn, will force up wages, and you don’t have an industry that can cope with that. What I would advise, having thought about it a fair bit in Britain where we have a similar problem, is that you devise a system whereby producers, directors and crews have residual positions on Australian films, which are, as it were, federal ly guaranteed. Because they are freelance, establish proper pension and retirement schemes, all of which can be funded out of residuals. This way, the incursions from Americans may be regarded as goodies on a cake, and not as a regular form of employment.

Apart from cable television, what other elements are important in creating a sound economic basis? What about co-production treaties For example, will small studios, which limit the extent to which with a continuity of production, play an important role? I have thought about that and, were I to invest state money or federal money, I would probably be inclined to invest it in the form of seed money for those sort of com panies on a consistent basis. I am not sure that having half a dozen people, sitting in judgment of scripts, works. I think enough money has been invested federally to be able to judge quite reasonably who has, and who hasn’t, potential. What I would do would be to use federal and state monies as buying boardroom positions on six or so satellite companies, each with a guaranteed level of overhead funding. F ederal funding w ould, of course, be in prior position for recoupment if a company went into profit. This way you would have a consistent basis for people who knew they were going to be funded for the next three years, and who

crews can be brought in? This is a system that seems to have be e n devi sed f or entrepreneurs, and not for creators. It just hasn’t worked. One of the first questions I was asked at a producers and directors meeting here was whether foreign directors should be encouraged to come to this country. The obvious answer is that it depends on what basis they come in. One of the tragedies in the U.S. is that the directors are very loath to come out of film and into televi sion. They tend to see it as a colos sal step backwards in their careers. The net result is that you have peo ple like Elia Kazan and Billy Wilder sitting at home doing nothing, though Kazan does write novels. Their pride won’t allow them to do television and, as they are not being offered features anymore, they have become redun dant.

Now. I would have thought the Australian film industry could benefit greatly by having a Kazan or a Wilder coming here to make features or do television. The Film School could set up a package, with the AFC, whereby there would be a film for them to direct, and a series of seminars they could run at the Film School or at the National In stitute of Dramatic Arts. You could really use a man like Kazan in a big way.

How do you see your future? I am on my own. and I guess, for the time being, I will continue to be. I have twice been offered head of production jobs at studios, but I don’t think I am ready. I can see a time coming, however, when it might be interesting. There are three or four stories I am passionately eager to make, one of which I hope to be starting early 1980. When I have done those, my son should be finishing school, and my daughter already finished. Then. I wouldn’t mind decamping and taking a studio job for a couple of years. If I had to try and predict my career now, and, God knows it’s a dangerous game, it would be as an independent film producer for the next five years. After that, I would work, if possible, in an executive capacity, either in film or televi sion. for three or four years. Then. I would hope to go into the teaching area full time. That would seem to me to be a very attractive career — or, to move into a regular form of television production, not in an executive position, but to have a mandate to produce six pieces of drama a year. I wouldn’t want to go into my fif ties involved in the rough and tum ble of independent film production. It is to o e x h a u s t i n g a n d debilitating. Anyway, 20 years is enough for anybody. ★ Cinema Papers, February-March—77

CENSORSHIP LISTINGS

EVERETT DE ROCHE

Everett de Roche Continued from P. 76

is to get people off their bums and It will obviously bring about a great into a cinema. However, the tech many changes to television . . . What percentage of your projects nology we now have means you no At the moment, television is longer have to do this. If you can are unproduced? put a two-metre television screen aimed at the lowest common Most of my failures have been into your living room and can dial a denominator. Dialogue has to be television pilots. I write a lot of film, why would you want to pay to w ritten so th a t a child can understand it, and the plots are them — last year I did six. One guy go to a cinema? constructed so that somebody can Now, this doesn’t mean we won’t even paid me out of his pocket take a leak in the middle and not be making films; we just won’t be because he believed in his project so making films for cinemas. It’ll be miss much. much. Now, if you have the selectivity Then it goes to a network which like Home Box Office in the U.S., of cable television, you have to win where people pay to see first-run says “ yes” or “ no” , and that your audience. They are not just films on cable television. decision could well depend on what watching because you are there. I might be wrong, but it seems all the executives had for breakfast. this will increase the demand Often you feel, “ Jesus, if they’d incredibly. I see less than six films a only take a punt, they would see year, which is terrible for a script What changes will this bring to the that this is going to work.” There writer, but if films were being piped type of films we are making? are so many things that could be into my home, I’d probably see 40. In Australia, it is probably quite done on television but aren’t. It’s The rest of the population would do difficult to get money to make a very frustrating. the same. film about homosexuals, draft The big difference this will mean dodgers or Aboriginals. Films have Television and the in Australia is that people will have to be so broad in appeal that Future to pay to see some television shows. hopefully every man, woman and Up till now, television has more or child in the country will want to see less been free, as long as you put up it. But by having the selectivity of a You once said the future of film with the ads. But people are Home Box Office situation, where making was in television. What did becoming increasingly fed up with you can dial whatever you want to you mean? ads, and it has reached the point see, it can become economically overseas where people are willing to feasible to have a broad selection of The hardest thing in filmmaking pay money not to see them. material.

Film Censorship Listings Continued from P. 20

S p e c ia l c o n d itio n s

(16 m m ): N. B ro o m fie ld /J . C hurchill, U.S.A. (877.60 m) 1 0 : B. Edwards, U.K. (3288.40 m) Y a n k s : J. J a n n i/L . Pensky, U.K. (3796.37 m) T a tto o e d T e a rs

For restricted exhibition (R)

T ha i the film be shown only to its m em b ers by the N ational Film Theatre of A u stralia in its 1979 'W est G erm an Fem inist Film s' Season. (16 mm): L. S traug/O H Muvie, W. G erm any (935.00 m) Ic h D e n k e O ft A n H a w a ii (I O fte n T h in k o f H a w a ii)

Decision review ed: 'R' registration by the Film C en sorship Board. Decision of the Board: Uphold the decision of the Film C ensorship Board. Note: ‘M ’ cla ssification of film A ir p o r t 8 0 — T h e C o n c o r d e (August, 1979 List) should be am ended to 'NRC'

M a d a m X — E in e A b s o lu te H e r r s h e r in ( M a d a m X — A n A b s o lu te D ic t a t o r ) (16 m m): A u torenfilm /Z D F , W.

You have also said that the television industry in Australia was healthier than in the U.S. Have you changed that view since your recent trip to the U.S.? No, it’s been confirmed even more. Australia probably has the best television in the world, and that is because we only see the best American and British shows. And the local shows — love them or leave them — have to compete with these top shows, and they usually hold their own. In the U.S., I found television, other than cable, really dull. The only exception was late night television, like The Johnnie Carson Show and Saturday Night Live. They really push comedy and good taste to the limit. I am sure there are plenty of Americans who are capable of being a lot funnier or dramatic than they are at present. It’s not that they don’t have creative people — after all, they make some of the best films in the world — it’s just that something is holding them back. I don’t know what it is. ★

Kong (2788.80 m) T h e F a ll o f T h e H o u s e o f U s h e r : F o r t u n e H u n t e r ’s P lo t:

(2459.62 m) A ttias C inem aT og rap hica, Italy (2520.00 m) T h e H e r o i c D e f e n d e r : Not show n, Hong Kong (2753.70

G erm any (1541.00 m)

H is

Nam e

Nobody:

(4930.00 m) B lo o d lin e : G eria Prods., U.S.A. (3207.12 m) B r u c e L e e T h e I n v in c ib le : Keung Chun Ping, Hong Kong (2379.41 m) C h o r u s C a l l: A. W illiam s/D . Freem an, U.S.A. (2007.94

S p e c ia l c o n d itio n s

(2700.23 m)

For show ing not m ore than tw ice at 1979 SYDNE Y/M E LBO U R N E /BR IS BA N E/PE R TH a n d /o r AD EL AIDE Film Festivals and then exported.

The M edusa Touch:

D a re

D e v ils :

R. S h aw /M .

Fong,

Hong

Kong

R a p u n z e l L e t D o w n Y o u r H a ir

(16 m m ): British Film In

(2860.64 m)

stitute, U.K. (877.60 m)

G a m e s o f L o v e : J. Chan, Hong Kong (2035.82 m) I T e m b ii i d e s T is E fo r x is K ila d a s ( T h e Id le r s o f t h e F e r t i l e V a lle y ) : A lix Film Prod., G reece (3154.73 m) J o u ir l: La Persane Prods., France (2258.93 m) K in g D ic k : M onti Films, Italy (1844.71 m) R a q u e l ’s M o t e l (Reconstructed V ersion) (b): Fantasia

S e c o n d A w a k e n in g o f C h r is t a K la g e s :

Films, U.S.A. (1416.96 m) R e f in e m e n t s o f L o v e (Reconstructed version) (c): C. Tobalina, U.S.A. (1673.28 m) S in fu l C o n f e s s io n : R. Shaw, Hong Kong (2780.44 m) S iv , A S w e d i s h G irl: Not shown, U.S.A. (1604.10 m) S u n n y s id e : R. L. Schaffel, U.S.A. (2733.02 m) (a) See also und er ‘Film s Board of Review’ (b) Previously show n on A u gust 1979 List. (c) Previously show n on A ugust 1979 List. S p e c i a l c o n d it io n s

For show ing not m ore than tw ice at 1979 SYDN E Y/M E LBO U R N E /BR IS BA N E/PE R TH a n d /o r AD EL AIDE Film Festivals and then expo rted. (16 m m ): V im ke m stra at 186, N etherlands (704.00 m) A s c e n t: C h itralekha Film Co-op, India (3503.67 m) A s k T h e D e a d A b o u t T h e P r ic e o f D e a t h : S ovexport Film, U.S.S.R. (2096.00 m) B a s t ie n , B a s t ie n n e : AFI/FR3, France (2880.00 m) B l a c k J a c k : T. G arnett, U.K. (2825.00 m) B r a v o M a e s t r o : Jadran F ilm /C ro a tia Film , Yugoslavia (2715.57 m) B u s h m a n : D. Schickele, U.S.A. (1975.00 m) C r a z y Y e a r s : Zvenzda Film, Y ugoslavia (2260.00 m) C ru e l Love: Slovak Film Studios, C zechoslovakia (2142.00 m) T h e E m p o r e r : Sw edish Film Institute, Sw eden (2792.00 T h e A lie n :

T h e G ir l W i t h T h e G o ld e n H a ir :

T. Lycouressis, G reece

(2780.00 m) H u n g a r i a n R h a p s o d y P ts

L a D r o le s s e : La G ueville, France (2441.27 m) L e B a lc o n E n F o r e t: A2, France (2057.25 m) L e S u c r e : Cine P rodu ction/S F P , France (2605.85 m) L e t T h e C h u r c h S a y A m e n (16 m m ): C ham ba Prods.

P le a s a n t v ille : R a n c h e a d o rs :

(R e a s o n s

W o m a n in a T w ilig h t G a r d e n :

S ta te ):

F r a n c e /M e x ic o /C u b a La Nouvelte Imagerie,

Belgium (3700.00 m) A W o m a n L ik e E v e :

M. Van Heyningen, Netherlands

(2965.00 m) S p e c ia l c o n d itio n s

That the film be shown only to its m em b ers by the N ational Film Theatre of A u stralia in its 1979 'Recent French C inem a’ Season. A d ie u , V o y a g e s L e n ts ( F a r e w e ll S lo w V o y a g e s ) :

Not

Shown, France (2525.00 m) A t te n tio n ! L e s E n fa n ts R e g a r d a n t :

Not shown, France

(2750.00 m) L e s G a n t s B la n c s D u D ia b le ( T h e W h it e G lo v e s o f t h e D e v il) (16 m m): Renn. Prod., France (990.00 m) U n N e v e u S ile n c ie u x (16 m m): Not shown, France

(1185.00 m) S p e c ia l c o n d itio n s

That the film be shown only to its m em b ers by the N ational Film Theatre of A u stralia in its 1979 'W est G erm an Fem inists Film s' Season. D ie A lls e it ig e R e d u z ie r t e P e r s o e n lic h k e it — R e d u p e r s ( T h e A ll- R o u n d R e d u c e d P e r s o n a lity — O u t t a k e s ) (16

m m): Basis film , W. G erm any (1078.00 m) D ie M a c h t D e r M a n n e r 1st D ie G e d u ld D e r F r a u e n ( T h e P o w e r o f M e n is t h e P a t ie n c e o f W o m e n ) (16

m m): Not show n, W. G erm any (836.00 m)

FILMS REGISTERED WITH ELIMINATIONS

FILMS REFUSED REGISTRATION

C .H .O .M .P .S .

o f th e D ead ( s o f t v e r s io n ) ( a ) : R. R u benstein/Lau rel G roup, U.S.A. (3368.50 m) Reason: Excessive violence (a) Previously show n as Z o m b i e — D a w n o f t h e D e a d on N ovem ber, 1978 List. Daw n

U.S.A. (636.26

A g e A n i m a t i o n (16 m m): S erious Business Co., U.S.A. (965.36 m) 1988 (16 m m ): R. S chm idt, U.S.A. (1079.00 m) O f T h e D e a d : T hierry Zeno, B e lg iu m /F ra n c e (2857.00

P r e s id e n te

Shih Ding, China (2447.00 m) M. R appaport, U.S.A. (1272.52

M a t e r n a l e : RAI, Italy (2468.70 m) M e n o f B r o n z e : (16 m m ): Killiam Shows,

m ) N ew

K G /F R 3 /C o n a c in e /IC A C , (3017.30 m)

(16 m m ): B ritish Film Institute,

U.K. (629.62 m)

V iv a

Hanna B a rb e ra /A m e rlc a n International, U.S.A. (2426.26 m) Elim inations: 3.6 m (8 secs) Reason: Indecent language .

U.S.A. (822.75 m)

T h e L in F a m ily S h o p : L o c a l C o l o u r (16 m m):

W. G erm any (2551.00 m) S im o n e D e B e a u v o ir (16 m m): G M F /S F P /P ie rre Films, France (1151.85 m) T h e T e s t S h o ts : Film Polski, Poland (3026.00 m) T ir o : MGS Film s, N etherlands (3017.30 m)

I a n d II: M. Jancso, H ungary

(4808.00 m)

T h e L if e S t o r y o f B a a l

Bioskop Films,

FILMS BOARD OF REVIEW

NOVEMBER 1979

FILMS REGISTERED WITHOUT ELIMINATIONS For General Exhibition (G) T h e C o b b le r a n d th e L ittle F o lk : H .

78—Cinema Papers, February-March

A p o c a ly p s e

(4930.00 m)

Now

(70 m m ): O m ni Z oetrope, U.S.A.

Uzbekfilm Studio,

U.S.S.R. (1869.00 m)

G. P. C inem a/R ai TV, Italy (5075.62 m) T h e L e g e n d o f S le e p y H o llo w : S e llier/C onw a y, U.S.A. (2677.25 m) T h e L ittle C o n v ic t : Y. Gross, A u stralia (2195.00 m) M a r c e lin o P a n Y V in o (16 m m): Not Shown, Spain (987.00 m) T h e S c h o la r a n d t h e W o m a n G h o s t: Not show n, China (2900.35 m) T h e S o ld ie r a n d th e E le p h a n t: A rm en-F ilm Studio, U.S.S.R. (2198.00 m) T h r e e C h a r m in g S m ile s : Loh Y uan-Liang, Hong Kong (3074.52 m) W h e r e T im e B e g a n : Int'l P ictu re Show C o /A lm ena Film s, U.K. (2370.48 m)

Not Recomended for Children (NRC) A ffa irs : Ful Chi, Hong Kong (2994.32 m) A m ic o M io . . . R r e g a T u . . . C h e F r e g o lo l:

T arquinia Int’l Cinem a, Italy (2580.00 m) T h e C r i m i n a l (16 m m): M. Haggag, Egypt (1341.12 m) C r i p p l e d K u n g Fu B o x e r: Chu Ken, Hong Kong (2607.00 m) C r o s s r o a d : I. Ling-P o, Hong Kong (2780.44 m) F r e n c h P o s t c a r d s : G. Katz, U.S.A. (2565.70 m) K a g a z K i N a o : B. Ishara, India (3900.00 m) M e te o r : A. O rgo lin i/T . Parvln, U.S.A. (2928.24 m) P o r r id g e : W itzend, U.K. (2539.82) A S t a r o f H o p e : M o s film /A rm e n film , U.S.S.R. (4294.76

S to r y

of G re e n h o u s e :

Kwok Luen, Hong Kong

(2566.56 m) O n P e u t L e D ir e S a n s S e F a c h e r ( T a k e It E a s y ) (sub titled) (a): O lia ne/G erla nd, France (2459.00 m) T w o a n d t h e D e v i l M a k e T h r e e (16 m m ): El Ith a a d /D o lla r Film, Egypt (1189.00 m) T h e W ild G o o s e o n t h e W in g : S u perstar (HK), Hong Kong (2760.91 m) W i t n e s s o f P o v e r t y : M o s film /O d e s s a , U .S .S .R . (1899.00 m) T h e W o m a n w h o S in g s : M osfilm , U.S.S.R. (2163.00 m).

m) m)

Fong, Hong Kong (2956.23 m) Y. C heng-C hun, Hong Kong

A. C o ate s/J. G old, U.K. (2984.02

A n O ld K u n g F u M a s t e r :

C. W en, Hong Kong (2379.41

The

Tynan:

S e d u c tio n

of Joe

M. Bregm an, U.S.A.

S t a r t i n g O v e r : A. P a kula/J. B rooks, U.S.A. (2872.46 U n S i J o li V il l a g e . . . : J. R oitfield, France (3123.46

m) m)

(a) F orm erly 'R'; reduced by im p o rte r’s cuts from 3207.12 m (O ctober 1979 List).

For Restricted Exhibition (R) C r ip p le d

A v en g ers :

R. S h aw /M . Fong, Hong Kong

(2914.11 m) E x c it a t io n A u S o le il: M. Lem oine, France (2621.47 m) F ir e in H e r B e d : Pet Elephant, U.S.A. (1630.83 m) R e a d y fo r A n y th in g : Ace Cine TV, Italy (2807.17 m) R o x a n n a : Not shown, U.S.A. (1604.10 m)

Scum : B e lling/P arsons, U.K. (2649.36 m) S h a m e o f t h e J u n g le (a): P ich a /S zu lzin g e r/V a lisa Film, France/B elgium (2067.00 m) S t o n e (b): Hedon Prods, A u stra lia (2900.00 m) T w o G r e a t C a v a lie r s : Not show n, H ong Kong ( 2 6 7 3 . 5 0

(a) Shown as Tarzoon, Sham e of the Jung le (February 1976 List). (b) S u bm itted fo r reclassification (version m easuring 3621 m show n on June 1974 List). S p e c i a l c o n d it io n s :

For show ing not m ore than tw ice at 1979 SYDNE Y/M E LB O U R N E /B R IS B A N E /P E R TH a n d /o r A D EL AIDE Film Festivals and then exp o rte d . R o o t s o f B lo o d : C onacine Prods, M exico (2743.00 m) A t t e n t io n , L e s E n f a n t s R e g a r d e n t ( W a t c h O u t , t h e C h i l d r e n a r e W a t c h i n g ) : A del Prods, France (2750.00 m ).

FILMS REGISTERED WITH ELIMINATIONS For Restricted Exhibition (R) W. Ho, Hong Kong (2406.15 m) Elim inations: 3.7 m etres (8 secs). Reason: Excessive violence. —

T h e S e rv a n ts :

FILMS REFUSED REGISTRATION J. M athew, U.S.A. (1739.50 m). Reason: Indecency and Indecent language. (videotape): T riu m p h Film s, U.S.A. (56 m ins). Reason: Indecency. P r o -B a ll C h e e rle a d e r s : L o v e in H o t P a n t s

(a) E n glish-d ubbed version show n on July 1979 List.

For Mature Audiences (M) T h e B e ll J a r : B ra n d t/T o d d , U.S.A. (3095.57 m) B e y o n d D e a t h ’s D o o r: S. Siegel, U.S.A. (2593.29 m) B lo o d lin e (Reduced version) (a): G ena Prods, U.S.A.

(3179.23 m) C h a s e : L. C hing, Hong Kong ( 2 6 7 3 .5 0 m ) C r ip p le

V. Polon, U.S.A. (3634.00 m) ICAIC, C uba (2605.85 m)

S chonger, W . G e r

F a n ta s e a (16 m m ): G. Huglin, U.S.A. (888.57 m) G u n g a D in : RKO Radio Piets, U.S.A. (3264.00 m) L ’A lb e r o D e g li Z o c c o li ( T h e T r e e o f W o o d e n C lo g s ) :

The

L e g e n d o f t h e B a t: M. M a d M a d K u n g F u ::

(2887.38 m)

m any (2063.71 m) T h e C o o k a n d t h e S in g e r - F e m a le :

L. Ying Chau, H ong Kong

(2620.03 m)

(70 m m) (a): O m ni Zoetrope, U.S.A.

The

Baccarat Film Ent, Hong Kong

G io r n i D ’A m o r e S u l F ilo D i U n a L a m a :

T u e R e c h t U n d S c h e u e N ie m a n d ( D o R ig h t a n d F e a r N o O n e ) (16 m m): ZDF, W. G erm any (660.00 m)

A p o c a ly p s e N o w

S ch ick-S unn Classic,

U.S.A. (2816.69 m)

Lee

B ecom es

Im m o r t a l:

M e l G in , H o n g

Kong (2459.62 m) T h e D ru n k e n M on key:

Y. F e n g S h a w / G . P . C h y n , H o n g

FILMS BOARD OF REVIEW o f th e D ead ( S o f t v e r s io n ) ( a ) : R. R u ben ste in /L a u re l G roup, U.S.A. (3368.50 m). D ecision Reviewed: Refusal to re g iste r by the Film C e nsorship Board. D ecision of the B oard: U p hold the decision of th e Film C e nsorship B oard. (a) P reviously show n on O ctobe r 1979 List. Daw n

BOOKS

Book reviews Continued from P. 73

Colin Shindler RKP/Cambridge University Press, $28.55 (HC) • A critical history of the film industry during the war years. Reference

Larger Than M orley

Life:

The Biography o f R o b e rt

Margaret Morley Robson/Hutchinson Australia, $16.95 (HC) • Written by his daughter-in-law, a novelist and film critic. A loving, vet not uncritical, account of his remarkable career.

The Film B u ffs C hecklist o f M otion Pictures (1912-19791

Edited by D. R. Baer HFA/Imp., $23.95 (HC) • A new book by the publisher of the Film Buffs Bible. A very handy reference volume. Film R eview 1979-1980

Oliver Reed W. H. Allen/Hutchinson Australia, $16.95 (HC) • An autobiography of the leading British actor.

Edited by Maurice Speed W. H. Allen/Hutchinson Australia, $20.50 (HC) • The latest edition of the annual review of films released worldwide.

Critical

H alliwells Teleguide

R e e d A ll A b o u t M e

W estern M ovies

Edited by William T. Pilkington and Don Graham University of New Mexico/Imp., $8.70: $16.75 (HC) • A collection of essays on important westerns. Students of film, popular culture and literary criticism will find this collection noteworthy. Im age and Influence: S tu d ies in the So cio lo g y o f Film

Andrew Tudor Allen and Unwin/Allen- and Unwin Australia, $18.95 (HC) The R e e l Revolution: A Film Prim er on Liberation

Neil P. Hurley Orbis/imp., $9.95 History of Film Industry and Accounts of Filmmaking The Cinema: A H istory

Keith Reader Hodder and Stoughton/Hodder and Stoughton Australia, 54.95 • A comprehensive paperback history. D ocum entary a n d Education Film s o f the 1930s: The H istory o f the British Film 1929-1939

Rachel Low Allen and Unwin/Allen and Unwin Australia. $24.50 (HC) • A study on aspects of film and the relationship between film and reality (fact or fiction). Includes a list of 370 films and production notes. Compa nion volume to Film s o j C o m m en t and Persuasion o f the 1930s. H ollyw ood Goes to War: Film s and A m erican S o ciety 1939-52

Leslie Halliwell Granada/Associated Book Co.. $31.95 (HC) A new volume by the author of the Filmgoers C om panion on films shown on television. Screenw orld 1979 Film A n n u a l

John Willis Crown/lmp., $19.15 (HC) • The latest edition of the annual listing, with casts and stills.

South End' Press/AII Books, $7.95 • The political aspects of Hollywood filmmaking. Sex, Violence and the M edia

H. J. Eysenck and D. K. B. Nias Temple Smith/Imp.. 518,95 (HC) • The book discusses the effect of television, sex and violence on the audience. Television Children and Television

Edited by Ray Brown Collier Macmillan/Cassell Collier Macmillan Australia. $19.95 (HC) • A study of the effects of television on children. H ow to R aise Children in a Television W orld

Dr Leland W. Howe and Dr Bernard Solomon Hart/Imp.. S8.70 • How to avoid the destructive influence of televi sion and use it as a positive force. M y M usic

Steve Race Robson/Hutchinson Australia, 514.50 • A book based on the British television series with Frank Muir. Denis Norden and others.

Television as a C ultural Force

Ediled by Richard Adler and Douglas Cater Praeger/Holt Saunders Australia, S28.80 (HC) • A critical survey of television and its effects on people's lives. The Television W riters H andbook

Nash and Oakey Harper and Row/Harper and Row Australasia, S13.95 (HC) • A guide for scriptwriters from original idea to finished script. Non Cinema Associated Titles Being a C hum was Fun: The S to ry o f N ic k y and N ancy Lee

Listen and Learn/Kingfisher Australia, 56.95 Fats Waller: His Life and Tim es

Joel Vance Robson/Hutchinson Australia, $17.55 (HC) NB: The compiler of this column would be pleased to receive details from publishers of books on the cinema or related subjects, particularly those dealing with technical aspects.

Scripts The A d ven tu res o f R obin H ood

Edited and introduced by Rudy Behlmer Wisconsin/Imp.. S6.20 The Green Pastures

Ediled and introduced by Thomas Cripps Wisconsin/Imp., S6.20 High Sierra

Edited and introduced by Douglas Gomery Wisconsin/Imp., S6.20 Filmmaking, Acting, Technique and Marketing H ow to Edit

A focal Cinebook Focal/Pitman Publishing. 54.95 Media, Education and Texts Children and Screen Violence

Patricia Edgar University of Queensland/U niversity of Queensland Press. SI4.95 (HC) • A survey of the effect of films and television on children with some controversial results. Creative Differences

Profiles of Hollywood Dissidents

THE REVIEW OF AVANT-GARDE CINEMA AND VIDEO (AND RELATED MUSIC AND PERFORMANCE ARTS) -

CANTRILLS FILMNOTES ENTERS ITS 10TH YEAR OF CONTINUOUS PUBLICATION WITH DOUBLE ISSUE 31 /3 2 WHICH IS NOW AVAILABLE Issue 31/32 includes essays by Roger Horrocks: ‘Len Lye’s Figures of M otion’ — Andrew Pike: ‘New Guinea Notes’ — Solrun Hoaas on her Filming of ‘Hatomajima’ — Margaret Benyon on her work as a holographic artist — Gabrielle Dalton/ George Gittoes on their environmental multi-media work — composer Martin Wesley-Smith: ‘Intermedia’ — Solrun Hoaas interviews Japanese Film and video artist Nakai Tsuneo. There is an extensive survey of Film/video/performance works at the 1979 Biennale of Sydney, including the work of Richard and Pat Larter, Arthur Wicks, Peter Dallow, Ulay and Abramovic, Nicholas Spill, Phil Dadson. Plus book reviews. The issue is lavishly illustrated. 72 pages. Subscription rates (Australia) — Individuals: $7.00 per annum or $13.50 for 2 year sub. Libraries and Institutions: $8.00 p.a. or $15 for 2 years. (Back Issues: $8.50 per annual set.) Single copies o f Issue 31/32 cost $4.00 posted. Send subscriptions to: CANTRILLS FILMNOTES, Box 1295L, GPO, Melbourne, Vic 3001.

edited by Peter Noble

ESSENTIAL READING FOR ALL FILM ENTHUSIASTS Europe’s leading film industry paper keeping you informed with Reviews Reports from Film Festivals News of Films in Production Technical Developments

Available weekly Send for free specimen copy to: Christine Fairbairn, Screen International, Film House, 142 Wardour Street, London W.1

Cinema Papers. February-March—79

Short film reviews Feature film reviews. . . Latest film library news. Film society and festival new s. Films for the specialist.

Stills Film Processing for Professionals Fast and Accurate. All usual services to Reproduction standards, Colour and Black & White.

A/V duplicate slides and copying a speciality.

F e d e ra tio n N e w s has all the answers It is the quarterly journal of the Federation of Victorian Film Societies.

For over 20 years, Federation News has become recognised as an essential reference journal for the non-commercial use of i6mm film . . . film societies, schools, adult discussion groups, specialists who use film and plan programmes. is published in March, June, September and December. F e d e r a tio n N e w s

(03) 240 8408 462 Chapel Street South Yarra 3141

STUDIO FOR HIRE 6 0 ' x 3 0 ' — area — drive-in. 2 sided painted fixed C yc‘40'. Floor to ceiling 14'. Changing rooms, single and 3 -p h a s e power. Available 7day w eek.

IAN SM ITH & ASSOCIATES 3 0 4 Coventry Street, South Melbourne Bookings: (03) 6 9 9 8 5 3 3

SHARMILL FILMS announces with much pride the acquisition of Ermanno Olmi’s highly acclaimed Italian masterpiece

Subscription enquiries: Ian Davidson, 19 Warnes Rd, Mitcham, Vic. 3132 Phone: (03) 874 5270

Cambridge Film Productions Pty Ltd 288 Coventry Street, South Melbourne 3205 Producers of TV commercials, and documentaries Telephone: (03) 690 2500

THE TREE 0E WOODEN CLOGS (L’Albero Delgi Zoccoli) W inner of the coveted GOLDEN PALM, CANNES FILM FESTIVAL 1978. " ... 'The Tree of Wooden Clogs' is incomparable. It towers over the contemporary cinema. After only a few minutes of the film, I felt myself magically transported to the realm of sublimely expressed feelings. That exultation, of which only the most magnificent art is capable . . . A CINEMATIC MIRACLE".

Corbett Cambridge Productions Pty L td

A n dre w S arris, V ILLA G E VOICE.

Watch for release — Longford Cinema, March-April. Sharmill Films 27 Stonnington Place TOORAK 3142 AUSTRALIA Phone: (03) 20 5329. Cable: Sharfilm s Director: Natalie M illar

D istributors of Q uality Movies . . . PADRE PADRONE, ALLEGRO NON TROPPO, LEMON POPSICLE, BUÑUEL CLASSICS, etc.

Telephone: (03) 690 2964 Producers of high quality commercials

new answ ers to professional Introducing the new Fujicolor Negative Film, crowning long of development by meeting today’s needs with tomorrow’s technology, • Living, natural skin tones and greens. • Ultrafine-grain high-definition images. • A reliable performer under difficult conditions.

Data: Fujicolor Negative Film 35mm type 8517,16 mm type 8527 • Tungsten Type 3200K • Exposure Index Tungsten Lamps 100 (ASA equiv.) Daylight 64 (ASA equiv.) (with Fuji Light Balancing Filter LBA-12 or Kodak Daylight Filter No. 85) » Perforation Types 35mm N-4.740mm (BH-1866) 16mm 1R-7.605mm (1R-2994) and 2R-7.605mm (2R-2994) » Packaging 35mm 200ft (61 m), Type 35P2 core 400ft (122m), Type 35P2 core 1000ft (305m), Type 35P2 core 16mm 100ft (30.5m), Camera spool for daylight loading (B winding for single perforation film) 200ft (61m), Camera spool for daylight loading (B winding for single perforation film) 400ft (122m), Type 16P2 core (B winding for single perforation film)

'"in /12 2 m /4 0 0

HANIMEX

Industrial Division

Old Pittwater Rd., Brookvale, N.S.W. 2100. Ph: 938-0240. 282 Norm anby Rd., Port Melbourne, V IC , 3207. Ph: 64-1111. 49 Angas Street, Adelaide, S.A. 5000. Ph: 212-3601. 22 Northw ood St., Leederville, W .A., 6007. Ph: 381-4622. 169 Campbell Street, Hobart, TA S, 7 000. Ph: 34-4296.

N A M E : ............... . A DDRESS: .................... ......................... ...........................Postcode:...............................Telephone: Please send me more inform ation on

LD Fujicolor Negative Film

JUNE A N D JILL ARE j IDENTICAL TW IN S.

June is film, Jill is her videotape copy. So how com e Jill gets lots of phone calls from guys, but June doesn’t? W h a t’s Jill got that June hasn’t got? Frankly, Jill’s hair looks better than J u n e ’s. T h a t’s because it w as colour-graded during the transfer from film to tape. And Jill’s skin-tone is better too. Along the w ay w e gave her a little extra tan and lifted her highlights. So now she looks w arm er and friendlier. And gets noticed. W hen you finish a film com m ercial at Custom Video, w e give you quality th at’s noticeably better.

W hen your im age becom es our im age w e ’ll m ake it hard to tell the difference. But if you’d like us to change som ething about your picture, w e ’ll m ake it easy. " Y o u ’ll get exactly w hat you w ant to see. B ecause the prettier your im age looks, the better our im age gets.

CUSTOM ▼IDEO AUSTRALIA TELEVISION CENTRE EPPING NSW AUSTRALIA TELEPHONE (02) 858 7545 CVA/16/AK6A

Where it’s hard to tell the difference . ..