Cinema Papers June 1982

Registered by Australia Post - publication no. VBP 2121

Issue 38 $3.00*

“Now you can start introducing depth without introducing ten Arcs?

“The new Kodak 5293 stock opens up so many doors.

It’s given us depth of field for big night exteriors, particularly with anamorphic pictures where the depth is normally limited, especially on super speed lenses.

Now it’s possible (using the same light sources) to achieve a good healthy stop, and therefore a lot more depth to carry action or artists through a set A nother great advantage with the new stock is lighting location rooms or small sets.

Now much smaller light sources can be used, and there­ fore hidden more easily, in ceilings, on doors, curtain rails.

I shot a scene, for the W hitlam Years, of Sir John Kerr and Jim McLelland having a chat by an open fire - lit w ith real fire!

I had the propsm an adding firelighters to the fire until I achieved the stop and depth w an ted - the key light finished up being shot into a tight two sh o t-th e effect is fantastic.

It’s firelight and it’s real.

W ithout the new stock the actors would have been toasted, in order to get the same effect I think the new stock is great.

A whole new ball game!”

D ean Semler, Cinematographer Mad Max II, Kitty &. The Bag Man, The Whitlam Years.

* Eastmancolor 5293.

K7/W6I/KSB/RHP.

K odak M otion Picture Film KODAK (Australasia) PTY. LTD.

Film Corporation of Western Australia Pty Ltd. Eighth Floor, G uardian Royal Exchange Building, 248 St. G eorge's Terrace, Perth, W estern Australia.

Telephone: (09) 3217469, Telex: AA93179

¡cam pai;

—

I Æ j1 1

Sensational new theatre opens ofF-Broaaway Just up M issenden Road, immediately below the site of the old Movietone theatrette, Les McKenzie, Ron Gubbins, John H eath and the team have built an extraordinary preview theatre.

Sporting the same projection and magnetic transport equipm ent as the top W arner Brothers room, Dubbing 5.

M odelled largely on the Alfred Hitchcock Theatre at Universal.

Featuring the kind of fanatical attention to detail and questing for perfection that could only have been achieved by dedicated professionals of the calibre of Les and his team.

It may give you some idea of the m ans powers of persuasion when we tell you that the theatre is built where, until quite recently, the Colorfilm executives had a suite of very comfortable offices.

We finally justified it this way. You people are spending increasingly larger num bers of millions of dollars to produce your films. T he very least we should do is provide you with a world class theatre to view rushes and finished product in as near to perfect conditions as we can manage.

For those of you interested in the finer details of acoustics and projection, ring Les McKenzie. He will answer your questions in far more detail than we can, and will be only too happy to run you a reel so you can see and hear the results of his labours for yourself.

Bring your own popcorn

ColorfilmI p Australias Leading Film Laboratory _____ < 35 Missenden Road Camperdown NSW 2050 Australia Telex AA24545 Phone (02) 5161066

■r

/

¿iß*-

M l

•A:

Leo B urnett 4.3810

p>

i b ^ f 'b u J* * ^ j W . h ^ Jt ' ‘ ‘ rift* O / x / i^

V

u

THE M U SIC BUSINESS

(0 2 ) 27 1 7 1 5

P.O. Box H244 Australia Square Sydney 2000

Across the Tasman the quality and "costs are so much b e tte r. . . *A$.07 PER FOOT 7247 *AS.12 PER FOOT 7383 If your profit and your markets are being eroded by rapidly rising costs . . . and whose aren't these days, then Vid-Com is the Laboratory you need. We’re part of New Zealand’s largest privately owned Video and Film Facility and only maintain our growth by providing a reliable quality product. A purpose built controlled environment together with the latest Film Lab Engineering Pty Ltd., processors flatter even the best exposures.

For the Australian film maker and producer of longer footage 16mm shoots or requiring bulk 16mm release prints a copy of our rate card is essential. Our established links and experience with Custom’s Agents quicken turn around.

Return the reply coupon now for a mail copy of our rate card but for urgent information contact David Calderwood or Bruce McArthur on Tel 796-466 Auckland, N.Z.

V ID 34 Burleigh Street, Auckland 3, New Zealand, Telephone 796-466

f

f

f

<

Articles and Interviews Geoff Burrowes and George Miller: Interview George Tosi 206 The Law of Making Movies Daniela Torsh 213 James ivory’s Later Films Brian McFarlane 214 Phil Noyce: Interview Arnold Zable 220 Joan Fontaine: Interview Brian McFarlane 232 Film Insurance Mike Channel, David White 236 Tony Williams: Interview Scott Murray 242

Geoff Burrowes and George Miller: 206

Joan Fontaine Interview: 232

Features The Quarter Letters Berlin Film Festival 1982 Mari Kuttna, Lesley Stern Picture Preview: Far East Film Censorship Listings New Products and Processes Fred Harden Production Survey Box-office Grosses

Film Reviews

The Recent Films of James Ivory: 214

The Man From Snowy River Arnold Zable Mephisto Brian McFarlane A Most Attractive Man Keith Connolly Absence of Malice Debi Enker Angels of War Curtis Levy Union City Susan Tate Freedom Jim Schembri Quartet Les Rabinowicz

Tony Williams Interview: 242

Book Reviews Those Fabulous TV Years, Australian TV: The First 25 Years and Turning On Turning Off: Australian Television in the Eighties Dave Sargent international Film Guide 1982 James Manning Recent Releases Mervyn Binns

274

Freedom Reviewed: 269

Phil Noyce interview: 220

Managing Editor: Scott Murray. Associate Editor: Peter Beilby. Contributing Editors: Tom Ryan, Ian Baillieu, Brian McFarlane, Fred Harden. Editorial Consultant: Maurice Perera. Proof-reading: Arthur Salton. Design and Layout: ARTetc. Business Consultant: Robert Le Tet. Office Administration: Patricia Amad. Secretary: Anne Sinclair. Office Assistant: Jacquelyn Town.

Advertising: Peggy Nicholls (03) 830 1097 or (03) 329 5983. Printing: Eastern Suburbs News­ papers, 140 Joynton Ave., Waterloo, 2017. Telephone: (02)662 8888. Typesetting: B-P 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. U.S.: T. B. Clarke Overseas Pty Ltd.

"Recommended price only.

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, No. 38, June 1982.

Front cover: Christina Marshall from Tony Williams’ Meat of Kin. Composite Image by Alex Stitt.

CINEMA PAPERS June - 203

Strickland Strikes Scott Murray reports: As predicted in previous censorship item s, the C om m onw ealth C hief Censor, Janet Strickland, has finally achieved her ambition of removing the censorship privileges of film festivals.

Not only has she effectively overridden the 1975 Film Festival Agreement, which gave festivals certain censor­ ship exemptions, Strickland has also banned one of the 1982 entries at the M elbourne and Sydney festivals (Pixote, winner of the 1981 New York Film Critics’ Award for Best Foreign Film).

On hearing of the banning, Mel­ bourne Festival director, Geoffrey Gardner, said “The film has been shown at more than 12 major film festivals, and has been commercially released, uncut, in the United States. To suppress it is a decision grossly out of touch with what is happening in the best of modern cinema.”

Gardner then went on to call for Strick­ land’s resignation.

The Sydney Film Festival director, David Stratton, said the ban was, “ an outrageous intervention in the selection of program m ing. Mrs Strickland has placed the festivals in jeopardy, in total foreknowledge of the consequences . . . I cannot see the film festivals surviving without the im m e d ia te in te rv e n tio n of the [federal] Attorney-General.”

B ut p e rh a p s the m o st d ire c t response came from the Premier of Victoria, John Cain, who opened the Melbourne Festival: “ I thought we had stopped all that nonsense 15 or 20 years ago. I believe it should not have happened and will do ail I can to ensure it does not happen for next year’s festival.”

The History Trouble began soon after Strick­ land’s assumption of office two years ago. Regarding the 1975 censorship agreement for film festivals as “ elitist” , she vowed to bring festivals in line with regulations governing commer­ cial importers of films.

The 1975 agreement says in part, “ (b) Every film will be registered without screening with ‘Festival Conditions’ except: — Registration will not be made of any film which has pre­ v io u sly been re je c te d fo r commercial use.”

Clearly, any film not already classi­ fied by the Censor can be shown in a film festival. This is the very basis of the 1975 pact. But Strickland has, without consultation, abandoned that agree­ ment.

Strickland’s action in banning a fes­ tival film has long been feared and is part of a long campaign. Her first move came in the 1980 Annual Report of the Film Censorship Office: “ By 1977 it had become obvious that the new system [the 1975 agree­ ment] . . .^'reached . . . provisions of the state film censorship Acts . . .”

This is nonsense, in 1975 the then Chief Censor, Richard Prowse, was only too aware of what constituted a “ breach” . The 1975 agreement was a “gentlemen's agreement” , in its most correct sense, and found a way of being tolerant instead of insipid adher­ ence to the letter of the law. Strickland knew this and her remark merely reflects her desire to abandon the agreement, y The next move came from the Attorney-General, Senator Durack, on August 25, 1981. In answer to a question from Senator Hamer about the need to amend regulations in favor of festivals, Durack said he was having discussions on the matter. His full reply left no doubt about his ultra-conser­ vative views. These were spelt out even more e xp licitly in the Senate in

October, referring to “ absolutely ghastly material . . . produced by obviously sick minds” , and other Fred Nile-like asides. He concluded with, “the test of obscenity is that of the [Censorship] Board” .

Durack also said (in August) that the Censor “ always reserved the right to call in a film which might have difficulty obtaining commercial registration” .

Clearly that contradicts the section of the 1975 agreement quoted above.

Strickland’s next move was in May 1982 when she called in films from the Melbourne Film Festival for approval (The Order, The Babysitter, Red Love, 1922). In his reply of May 7, director Geoffrey Gardner wrote: “ I must protest at your action as i feel it threatens the very basis of the film festival. I am, quite frankly, aston­ ished to receive these requests as it appears to me that you have either forgotten or overlooked the terms of the agreement negotiated by the festivals, with you present, in 1975, an agreement which, up to now, has worked quite smoothly as far as we are concerned . . . " . . . it is obvious that you are uni­ laterally disregarding the terms of the agreement and rendering it worthless. If you are of the opinion, as you seem to be, that the agree­ ment should not be honoured by at least one party to it, then surely it is up to you to notify the other parties concerned of this so that ail are aware of your actions and represen­ tations can be made to the various responsible Governments for dis­ cussion.”

Strickland replied on May 10, saying “ .. . you state that you are ‘aston­ ished’ to receive such a request and charge me with having ‘either for­ gotten or overlooked the terms of the agreement negotiated by the Fes­ tivals’ in 1975 . . . I draw your' attention to sub-para, (ii) in the second paragraph of that letter in which I stated, ‘. . . that Festival films are processed on receipt of applica­ tions and synopses without censor­ ship screenings provided they are not called in for screening by the Chief Censor . . .’ In the light of this advice, your astonishment is a little difficult to understand. “ None of the conditions as set out in the 1975 ‘agreement’ to which you refer affects the Chief Censor’s right to require that the Film Censorship Board screen any film before registration may occur. Moreover, if the Film Censorship Board is of the opinion that Regulation 13(1) of the Customs (Cinematograph Films) Regulations is applicable, the Board has a statutory obligation to refuse the film’s registration. “ No ‘agreement’, including the 1975 ‘agreement’, can invalidate the legal responsibilities of the Chief Censor or the Film Censorship Board, as laid down in the Customs (Cinem atograph Films) Regula­ tions.”

Gardner has also raised the issue of time delays caused by the Censor calling in films. Strickland replied, “ . . . you claim that the Film Censor­ ship Board has held a film (which you have failed to identify) for a lengthy and unreasonable time. Our records would indicate that you are referring to the film The Order which was received for screening on April 27, 1982, screened five working days later and your office informed by telephone the following day of the decision to register. I enclose the Certificate of Registration.”

Despite Strickland’s protestation, Gardner was given to reply: “ I must confess to having little con­ fidence that this [getting film s processed] can be done quickly especially in the light of the exper­ ience with the previous film, The Order, which I would point out has still not arrived back at this office, 17 days after it was received in your office.”

Gardner continued,

“ I believe strongly that it is time that the regulations were re-written into som e m ore s e n s ib le fa s h io n whereby recognised international film festivals and such organisations as the National Film Theatre of Aus­ tralia, who I believe act responsibly at all times, should be given the same freedom of operation as is given film festivals in other coun­ tries around the world including such bastions of democracy as the Philip­ pines and the USSR.” On May 17 Gardner issued a state­ ment of concern over Strickland’s actions, and on May 20 issued a second release. In it he said, “We remain strongly of the opinion that the Customs (Cinematograph Films) Regulations should be im­ mediately amended to a position similar to that which applies in Britain whereby British Customs and Excise Regulations permit the direct im port of film s for showing at approved Festivals.

“The Shadow Attorney-General, Haddon Storey, has sent a telegram to the Commonwealth Attorney­ General, Senator Durack, which endorsed the view taken by the [Victorian] Premier, Mr Cain, on Festival censorship. Mr Storey’s tele­ gram reads as fo llo w s: ‘ I am concerned at the decision of chief film censor to examine four films for M elbourne Film Festival. This appears to depart from previous practice over many years and to be contrary to spirit of last Ministers’ meeting. I urge maintenance of long­ standing position pending resolu­ tion at next meeting. Haddon Storey, Shadow Attorney-General.’ ” But the matter didn’t rest with Strick­ land’s action on these four films (two of which are now cleared; decisions are awaited on the others). Late in May, S trickland called in the Brazilian film, Pixote. Then, on June 3, she announced she had refused to register the film and that it couldn’t be shown (on a Board vote of 8 to 1). Not only has Strickland done the Festival incal­ culable harm (the prestigious Inter­ national Federation of Film Festivals has said it will expel Melbourne and Sydney if Strickland continues to impose censorship on festival films) she has also achieved her long-term ambition.

J ! . * Stop press: On June 9 the Films Board of Review upheld an appeal against the banning of Pixote and released it for the festivals. As well, the remaining two films of the four called in

by Strickland (Red Love and 1922) were cleared for screening. So, a few, small victories have been won. But the issue of festival censorship — and censorship in general — is unresolved.

Archive Crisis Graham Shirley reports: Grave concern at news that the National Film Archive of Australia may have to stop providing filmmakers with footage that it holds set the scene for a dinner held in Sydney by the Docu­ mentary Division of the Film and Tele­ vision Production Association on May 4. Special guests were Harrison Bryan, director-general of the National Lib­ rary, and Ray Edmondson and Mike Lynskey, both from the National Film Archive.

During an evening of discussion, p ro d u ce rs m ixed praise fo r the Archive’s hard-working staff with alarm at the drawbacks of its paltry funding ($400,000 per year, nearly half of which is basic operating cost) relative to the film activity it is supposed to preserve, its philosophical isolation within the National Library and its geographic remove far from nearly all film produc­ tion. Speakers including Tom Haydon, Peter Luck, David Salter, Bob Conally, Malcolm Smith, Brian Morris and Albie Thoms all agreed that the industry would have much to gain from closer ties with an upgraded Archive, not only

The Quarter/Letters for the provision of archival services but for the nurturing of an Australian film culture.

One initial hurdle is that the Archive’s isolation conceals evidence of its potential, not to say its plight, from most of the industry. Demands for Archival access have doubled since 1979, yet the staff has remained at its 1972 level of seven.

Considering the previous tendency of the Council of the National Library to dismiss any question of the Archive’s autonomy, director-general Bryan’s admission that he had no opinion one way or another on the subject came as something of a surprise. He doubted, however, that the Archive could survive outside the National Library. When this was disputed by most producers present, he added that it was up to the FTPAA to inform the Minister for Home Affairs (responsible for the Library as well as film matters) of its members’ unhappiness at the Archive’s status.

From discussion on what action the FTPAA could take, it was agreed that the body should inform politicians of the desperate and immediate need for increased funds and staff, and should develop a policy on such issues as the Archive’s future location, its organiza­ tional structure and what it needs to preserve the industry’s current output.

Meanwhile, the industry-based National Film Archive Advisory Com­ mittee established by the National Library has met regularly with the aim of improving communication between the Archive and the industry. The Library has also received a report on the Archive written by Clyde Jeavons, deputy curator of-the British National Film Archive, who visited Australia in m id -1 9 8 1 . T h is r e p o r t, w h ic h corroborates the concern felt by pro­ ducers, will be published in the next issue of Cinema Papers.

Television Renewal Hearings Peter Morris reports: The chairman of the Australian Broadcasting Tribunal (ABT), David Jones, gave an assurance at the renew al hearings th a t he w ould approach the. Minister for Communi­ cations, Neil Brown, about holding an inquiry into a caption service for the deaf.

A le xa n d ra Hynes, the deputy executive director of the Australian Caption Centre, put a submission to the ABT at all the stations’ hearings on behalf of the Deaf Council and the Centre. Jones rejected the appli­ cations but said he would ask the Minister to call an inquiry “ in the near future” .

The Caption Centre was established last year (with a $627,000 Federal Government grant) to provide a closed c a p tio n s e rv ic e fo r A u s tr a lia ’s estimated one million hearing-impaired people.

The ABC has announced it will begin broadcasting captions in December but the commercial stations have been arguing over which system should be used. They had said that whichever system was chosen would influence their choices when the new general data technology becomes available.

In one of his last decisions while holding the Communications portfolio, Ian Sinclair opted for the British Tele­ text system. (The caption service will not be received by all sets, but only those equipped with a decoder.)

The only group which was allowed to put a submission to the Tribunal was the Australian Children’s Television Action Committee (ACTAC).

The A C T A C ’ s vic e c h a irm a n , Marjorie James, told the Tribunal that despite the improvements in children’s viewing times by the requirements of the “ C” certificate much of what they see is “ harmful, ugly, frightening, confusing or inane” .

Their criticism of all the stations was based on these themes and provoked some spirited rebuttals by each station’s counsel.

All the stations had more Australian content than the regulations required; in fact, the 10 most popular programs in M elbourne last year were all produced in Australia.

For ATV-10, in particular, this policy had proven to be very profitable. Under its new ownership (Thomas Nation­ wide Transport and Rupert Murdoch’s News Group) the station has reported much better figures, largely through the ratings success of its Australian pro­ ductions.

But while Australian product seems to be “ hot” , most of the stations are depending on their “ big brothers” in Sydney to provide material. Although ATV-10 told the ABT a studio is being built specifically for drama production the trend is continuing for most pro­ ductions to come from Sydney.

The ATOM A wards for Educational Short Films Arnold Zable reports: On April 27, the Australian Teachers of Media (ATOM) held the inaugural presentation of Awards for Educa­ tional Short Films. The audience that attended the presentation at the Vic­ torian State Film Centre viewed the winning films in four categories: the Arts, the Social Sciences, Special Award for innovation in the area of Educational Short Film, and the award for the Best Australian Educational Short Film.

A fifth award for the Best Science Film was not given this year because the judges felt that none of the films in this area was of sufficient standard.

But certainly all the other award winners proved, yet again, that there are many talented Australian film ­ makers producing high quality short films: three of the four winners and the five films that were highly commended were made by Australians.

Explaining the procedures for judging, Helen Kon, president of ATOM, and Bernadette O’Brien, the convener of the Awards, pointed out that only films produced in 1980 or 1981 were eligible. All the films entered were first assessed for their relevance to specific areas of curriculum by practising classroom teachers and curriculum consultants working within the Victorian Education Department.

More than 200 entries were narrowed down to 25 and then viewed by a panel of five judges, which included experi­ enced film m akers with a special interest in the short film and docu­ mentary. Maximum length for entries was 60 minutes.

Children’s television producer and board member of the newly-formed A u s tra lia n C h ild re n ’s T elevision Foundation, Jennifer Hooks, spoke of the hazards involved in producing programs for children: finance is diffi­ cult to obtain, since children’s audi­ ences fall short of the number in other areas of television, there are many varied views as to what is suitable for the audience, and government regula­ tion seems inevitable (with approval required from the Children’s Program Committee of the Australian Broad­ casting Tribunal).

Jennifer Hooks commended ATOM on the work it is doing in media education, and in its encouragement of the production of better quality educa­ tional films through the ATOM awards.

The award for the Best Educational Film in the Arts went to A Puppet Pudding, produced and scripted by Michael Creighton and directed by David Perry.

A Puppet Pudding combines a number of educational objectives in the area of arts education, and provides an introduction to the work of artist Norm an Lindsay, e s p e c ia lly his paintings and drawing of Australian animals in their bush setting. An inter­ view with his niece gives an insight into the circumstances under which Lindsay

Continued on p. 277

Critical Indigestion Dear Sir, For several years I have been engaged in a noble pursuit. Like many serious minded people, I have been at­ tempting to discover the meaning of life.

Everything seemed to be going a treat, in fact I damn near had the answer when, regrettably, I became aware of interference. A strange, insidious counter force invaded my thought waves, distracting my finest efforts, tearing me away, as it were, from the problem.

It oecame increasingly apparent that the cause of this diversion was your film reviews. How can I devote my sole attention to discovering the meaning of life when it is now demanded of me that I discover the meaning of your film reviews?

Naturally, it occurred to me that your film reviews are, in the general scheme of things, far more important than life. I even began to wonder (as they seem not to relate to the kind of life I have come to know) whether, in fact, they have actually replaced life.

However, I quickly banished such thoughts from my mind because if it were true it would mean that your film critics are playing God and I know this simply isn’t so.

Nevertheless, the puzzle surround­ ing the meaning of your film reviews has now attained cosmic proportions and your reviewers will be pleased to know that their mysterious works now command my full attention. I hope to get back to the meaning of life after I’ve had breakfast.

Robert Kersey

Token Ghettos Dear Sir, Geoff Gardner’s gratuitous refer­ ence to “ token 16mm C reative Development Fund ghetto films” in his review of Heatwave (Cinema Papers, No. 37, pps 163-4) cannot be allowed to go unchallenged.

I suppose that, as a film festival director, Gardner would know all about cultural ghettos and what causes them.

But his remark is strangely at odds with his reputation as one of the most enlightened champions of the short film in Australia. His record of 120 short films (nearly half of them Australian) at last year’s Melbourne Film Festival deserves to be emulated elsewhere.

It is also ironic that his sideswipe should occur within the context of a review of new work by a director who has himself been lured into the “ ghetto” for the production of his early work, Backroads. I assume that the fact that this film has an honored place in Aus­ tralia’s recent film history will not wash with your reviewer. The implication that Phil Noyce shares with some of our most esteemed creative talent (Peter Weir, Gillian Armstrong, John Duigan, Ken Cameron, Bruce Petty, Stephen Wallace, etc.) the dishonor of “token ghetto” productions in his filmography will also no doubt be regarded as proof that the ghetto’s influence is all­ pervasive.

Geoff Gardner should know better.

This type of wisecrack slips easily out of the typewriter, but only serves to confirm prejudices that people less en­ lightened than him are happy to see propagated. Isn't he aware that the Creative Development Fund is fighting for its financial survival at this very moment, suffering from the body blows of rising film budgets, an inequitable tax scheme and progressive cuts in the Creative Development Branch’s budget over the past 5 years, owing to inflation?

The reason for my dismay is that terms like “token” and “ ghetto” are not only misleading, but also the source of

self-fulfilling prophecy. There are enough commercial barriers against the short film without Gardner erecting cultural ones. The “token” films about urban renewal which he appears to despise were in fact made with care and love and great personal risk over long periods of time. They didn’t have the luxury of budgets which could buy top stars, advisers and art directors.

But they did tackle the subject from the grass roots, by enlisting the help of the people actually caught up in the battle for their homes. They have since won awards and been seen by thousands of people in non-theatrical viewings. In fact, Pat Fiske and Denise White’s Woolloomooloo, a film about the BLF and citizens’ struggle for inner-city Sydney housing, is one of the 10 most rented titles from the Sydney Film­ makers’ Co-operative’s library.

Like your reviewer, I am delighted to see these issues being taken up by feature directors, but I totally reject his assumption that features are ipso facto the real thing, not some inward-looking piece of self-congratulation made on a government grant for a film society of mutual masturbators.

Do I need to emphasise the point by listing the CDF-funded films which have gone on to commercial success in Aus­ tralia and overseas? Start with Bruce Petty’s Australian History, then The Singer and the Dancer (Gillian Arm­ strong), Love Letters From Teralba Road (Stephen Wallace), Frontline and Public Enemy Number One (David B r a d b u r y ) , My Survival as an Aboriginal (Essie Coffey), Wrong Side of the Road (Ned Lander and Graeme Issac), Stepping Out (Chris Noonan) Token ghetto films, Geoff? As token as some of the D-grade tax-avoidance features that have sunk without trace?

Or are there some ghettos that we prefer not to see?

Murray Brown, Creative Development Branch

CINEMA PAPERS June - 205

“The Man From Snowy River ” is one o f the most successfulfilms to be released in Australia. In its first eight weeks it grossed faster than Australia’s biggest money earner “Star Wars”, returning more than 3 million dollars in box-office.

It is producer GeoffBurrowes and director George Millers' first feature. Both began their careers at Crawfords. Burrowes has also worked as a press secretary for Moss Cass and in advertising with Monahan Dayman Adams. Miller has been directing television series for more than 10 years.

His credits include the historical series “Against The Wind” and “The Last Outlaw”.

Top: executive producer Simon Wincer, producer Geoff Burrowes and director George Miller. Above: “Thankyou, Spur”: Jim Craig (Tom Burlinson) and the horse given to him by Spur. Left: the chase across the river. Far left: Clancy (Jack Thompson) and Spur (Kirk Douglas).

206 - June CINEMA PAPERS

Scripting When did you get the idea to film ‘Snowy River’?

Ruth Maddlson

TwoM en B ehind NOWV

Burrowes: I was talking to a pub­ lisher friend about various projects when his wife said, as a bored aside to the wine-soaked conversation, “Why doesn’t someone in the film industry do something that is central to Australia’s heritage rather than always dealing on the edges of it?” I asked what she meant, and she said, “Take, for example, The Man From Snowy River. Why doesn’t someone do that?” I jumped down her throat and said, “Oh, get out. It’s too wellknown. It’s almost a cliche. Any­ way, it’s too short; it only runs five or seven minutes. How can you make a film out of that?”

Then, as I drove home that night, I wondered why I had rejected her idea so strongly. That’s when I got the idea that the poem wouldn’t make a film in itself, but what a superb end to a film. So I flew around to George’s place, raced in the door and said, “Guess what?

I’ve got a great end! All we need is another 90 minutes!” So, we sat down and plotted it out that weekend.

Miller: The idea came first from

CINEMA PAPERS June - 207

George Miller and GeoffBurrowes

Geoff s love of the mountains. I had also filmed there — probably more than anybody else — and had this rich, residual feeling about the place. Certainly, I had very strong feelings about how the film should look.

So, we applied what we knew of our craft to that concept. That is to what Snowy River owes its great success.

Burrowes: We looked at the poem, but that gave us almost no clue as to what story might have preceded it. All one has is the gathering of a certain number of horsemen, and a wild and moving horse chase.

came into money when Pardon won much of Clancy in the film. He is too legendary, too big, and we felt the Cup. But that’s all we know.

The one we know least about is he would eat Jim. If we brought the Man from Snowy River. The him on too often, it would become a only clue is that he is a “lad” and a film about Clancy.

At the same time, we wanted to “stripling” . That, I guess, was the breakthrough. Hitherto, every keep him as that legendary charac­ single artist’s rendition of the Man ter, the catalyst who exercises not was that of a hirsute, 30-year-old, only a psychological prerogative on mature man with a heavy beard. Jim but also a metaphysical influ­ For some reason, no one, or very ence throughout the film — few, had picked up that he was a sim ilarly with Spur. It was young boy, barely capable of grow­ important that Spur motivate Jim at exactly the right times. ing bum-fluff.

Miller: He is referred to as a lad in the early part of the poem, and at Equally, the action with the brum­ the end as “the man” . What does bies and the colt is important in rela­ that tell you? That the ride is his tion to what’s happening to the p assag e into m anhood, the characters . . . definitive act of growing up.

Burrowes: The horses aren’t just Burrowes: Once we had those three characters, we decided we simply there because they look cute

There are only three characters mentioned in the poem: Clancy of the Overflow, Harrison and the Man from Snowy River. Frankly, we know everything we need to about Clancy from the poem. He is already a legend, the consummate horseman. As for Harrison, he is “ the old man with his hair as white as snow, but few could ride beside him when his blood was fairly up” .

We also know that he fortuitously

needed to know a lot more about the Man from Snowy River, whom we called Jim Craig. We gave him that name because he is a fictional character. Paterson created him as a composite character, based on no one individual. So we built the character of Jim Craig as Paterson had — from our observations of a number of mountain horsemen.

Another decision we took early on was that we would not show too

You had the ending, but how did you evolve the beginning and middle?

208 - June CINEMA PAPERS

and make for nice visuals. They had to be characters in the same way that Jim or Jessica is a character.

If you like, there are three basic levels: an up-front, dramatic level which works at the simplest level of understanding; behind that are the various psychological under­ pinnings of the characters, for those who care to look; and then, over and above that, is the metaphysical level, which is the most difficult. If

that third level gets out of control, it wrecks your film entirely; but if you haven’t got it, it makes it slight.

It is these aspects and attitudes in the characters which help one understand a little more about the milieu. What values do these characters stand for? Or in its simplest expression: What are the values of a hero?

Is it fair to draw a comparison between Jim and the leader of the brumbies?

Burrowes: No, I don’t think so.

Some mad reviewer got off on that particular bike, but that’s just wank.

Miller: The brumbies are Jim’s nemesis. Jim represents civiliza­ tion, and the brumbies the moun-

Jim Craig (Tom Burlinson) makes the leap and races “down the mountain like a torrent down its bed’’. The Man From Snowy River.

tains in their original state. The conflict between the two, which is the pivotal line in the film, is that people have to earn the right to live in the mountains. Even people who know the mountains on a super­ ficial level understand that. It has its own truth.

George Miller and GeoffBurrowes

Every time the brumbies appear, it is at a major junction in Jim’s life.

Was that deliberate?

the mountains. She is overlaid by aspects of character that stem from my wife’s sister-in-law. Then, there are the purely in sp iratio n al Burrowes: Absolutely. The role elements. All the time, we were of the brumbies, apart from the looking for historical models, life visual and specific plot aspects, is models, and then adding one’s per­ those second and third levels. We ception of the qualities of the felt the horses had to exercise a characters. malevolent and metaphysical influ­ Miller: Geoff looked after the ence on Jim’s life. They are great authenticity of the mountainmen, harbingers of change. Whenever we while I looked after the overlay of see the brumbies, something goes character, the historical authen­ wrong, like Jim’s father dies, or the ticity. This is why Jim is a very situation with Jessica is fouled up. sexist person. It is historically That brumby stallion is not accurate. meant to be a lovable character.

Burrowes: Now came the time to Otherwise, how the hell would you have a screenplay written which sustain the end of the film, which is conformed to our view of the film. a kid removing horses from their There was no point having a writer native freedom. You would alienate do something that didn’t suit us. your audience altogether if the final I’m not interested in the writer as scene is Jim locking up a bunch of auteur; that’s a total waste of time. nice horses that are going to end up That is not to belittle a writer. It is as glue. putting him on the appropriate pinnacle, but not on a pinnacle in a So, Jim becomes a man because he different mountain range to you. can control the stallion . . .

Why didn’t you take screen credit Burrowes: Because he can beat for your contributions to the script? the stallion. But, even that, I suspect is taking things too far. It’s Burrowes: We have credit in our not as if Jim, too, is a young stud own right; we don’t need it. Those and he goes to fight the old stallion stupid, bloody credits of “Story by for the mares. That’s a bit of your . . . ” or “Concept by . . . ” often Meaghan Morris type stuff.' It is sound like a pitiful cry for recogni­ simply that the brumbies are the tion from the wilderness. Screen­ epitome of a wild and free spirit writers get screen credits. which unfortunately mitigates against man’s efforts to control an environment. And, since it’s people who go to films and not horses, we decided to come down rather squarely on the side of people winning, not horses.

How long did it take to write the screenplay?

Burrowes: It took us a weekend to get the first rudiments of our character outlines and plot. Then we spent a year in plotting and developing characters. This is before we .even went to a script. We wrote about 12 treatments, many of them 40 to 60 pages.

One of the key things was that it was unhurried. We didn’t try and force a treatment or plot by a dead­ line. It would have been foolhardy.

Deadlines have to be considered a moveable feast, if the object of the exercise is to make something worthwhile. So, we just kept working at it.

In the meantime, I would go up to Merrijig and refer what we had talked about to Jack Lovick and the other mountain horsemen, and ask them for character insights.

Jack used to take me around and introduce me to people whom I could use as character bases, drawing from the history and the traditions of the mountain people.

For example, the character of Jessica, Jim’s paramour, is drawn largely from a lady who died in the early part of the century, in the most remote and beautiful valley of 1. Meaghan Morris is film critic for The Financial Review, Sydney.

Actors How did you choose your actors?

Burrowes: Sigrid Thornton was cast as Jessica the day we decided we needed a romantic interest for Jim. Miller: Sigrid and I have a long history; the first time I worked with her she was about 14. I also worked with her on The Last Outlaw. She is somebody whose ability I have watched grow as she matured — though, of course, she’s still very young. I just knew that she was the right person, and Geoff was con­ vinced fairly readily.

Burrowes: Kirk we had to work on a lot. Originally our idea was to have two Australian actors play Harrison and Spur. We tested about a dozen actors, but we just couldn’t get what we were after.

There are good reasons why, par­ ticularly in the case of Harrison. He needs to have an extraordinary physical presence, with an over­ whelming, immensely-powerful personality on screen.

Miller: He is Jim’s protagonist, so the more powerful he is, the more powerful Jim becomes by overcoming him. Again, it is an application of craft to casting.

Burrowes: Harrison is in an enor­ mous number of scenes, so we needed a very competent actor.

There are competent actors in Aus­ tralia, in that age bracket, but we

Why did you shoot in Mansfield and not on l ocati on at Mount Kosciusko?

As for Jack Thompson, as soon as we came up with the idea of Clancy, we knew it had to be him.

It was fairly obvious.

The most important thing about the cast was that they had to have fantastic ability as actors. I didn’t really care what they looked like.

Sigrid is fantastic and she is beauti­ ful — well, that’s great. I probably would have cast her even if she weren’t beautiful.

The same goes for Tom. We were looking for an actor who would appeal to women; that was terribly important. Sigrid was the first person we cast, so we took her on all the auditions for Jim. Burrowes: Sigrid sat through 45 screen tests and read a scene with each of the young guys we tested.

And that 45 had been narrowed down from about 2000, who had been checked by casting agents.

Well, Tom just cast himself. The relationship that sprung between Tom and Sigrid was absolutely magic. It required no rational appreciation of the screen test, no discussion or intellectual strain.

Miller: Again, an excellent tele­ vision training showed through.

Miller: It is more beautiful in the Mansfield area and it is home ground. They are very much our people. Geoff’s father-in-law lives there, and he helped take us into those mountains.

Also, from a director’s point of view, Kosciusko doesn’t look like a mountain —just a feature on a high plateau. When I went to look at it, I drove right past. I genuinely missed it.

Finally, Mansfield is logistically very convenient.

Burrowes: Even before we went to a treatment, we were drafting in terms of what we knew and under­ stood of the mountains in that district. To some extent, the film conformed to what we knew existed around the Mansfield area. Then, as we got on to the fourth or fifth draft of the script, we went there again on a round trip through the mountain area. We wanted to prove to ourselves that we weren’t being emotionally drawn to Mansfield, that we weren’t being a bit lazy and going for somewhere we knew would be safe. But we couldn’t get within a bull’s roar of Mansfield on many, many scores.

What about Kirk Douglas?

Top: Clancy, “the consummate horseman’’, and Spur. Above: Jessica and Jim after Jessica's rescue. The Man From Snowy River.

did not find that physical presence, that strength Kirk brings to a role.

With Spur, we had a lot of diffi­ culties in the reads. We just didn’t get close to what we wanted. So, at that stage, we decided to look over­ seas. That immediately raised the question of lifting the budget, but we felt it would enhance the marketability of the Film at the dis­ tribution level overseas. It evens out in the end.

So we had a clear choice: we could thump the nationalist tub and CINEMA PAPERS June - 209

George Miller and GeoffBurrowes

which had been th o ro u g h ly marketed. Marketing is a multi­ faceted and esoteric operation.

Marketing is not just selling, not Edgley just promotion, not just adver­ tising — it is all those things and What was Michael Edgley’s in­ more. volvement in the production?

I have a good background in marketing but not in promotion Burrowes: Michael’s forte is not and selling, and th a t’s where at the coal face. He’s not a work­ Edgleys are phenomenal. They ing producer in the sense that he have a promotional infrastructure gets involved in the actual produc­ which is without a doubt the best in tion. What Michael brings to the this country. We were not dealing production, firstly, is an extra­ with an ad hoc publicist. The notion ordinary credential. People like of a unit publicist as the only sop to George and I ostensibly have no marketing is a joke. You make a $3 track record — which, I take to million film and you spend $10,000 mean, we have not failed five times on publicity! What kind of mistake Are you happy with Douglas’ per­ in the film business. We lacked cre­ is that? dentials. formance?

Edgleys worked full-time dream­ So, about a year-and-a-half into ing up ways of publicizing and pro­ Miller: Absolutely. It’s stun­ the project we decided to get into moting this film. We were able to ning. I can truly say Kirk was not bed with someone a bit heavier than position the film. We were able to us, who could give us some credi­ develop a merchandising and bility and whose involvement would licensing stream, an advertising help to justify the need to spend stream, a publicity stream and all several million dollars. the other attributes of marketing.

Up to this point, we had had the M arketing is the difference whole range of idiocy purporting to between accepting that a certain be sound advice thrust at us, like number of people will see your film “Why don’t you boys do it as tele­ no matter what, and taking the atti­ vision” or “ I think this is a great tude that you are going to get film as long as you keep the budget millions of people to see the film for under $750,000.” Can you imagine particular reasons. It has to do with the fatuity of that advice? We kept the very nature of the product itself. getting it from so-called senior If we had not made a product that figures in the industry — fatuous, was eminently marketable, then it infantile reactions, like “ Is it a wouldn’t have mattered how musical?” from the head of one of erudite our marketing strategy was.

Marketing practice goes right back the corporations. Holy Christ!

After a while, we realized these to what you’re making and how you guys were playing in a different go about making it. world. They’re idiots. You can’t M ich ae l E dgley and his discuss, articulate or advocate organization was intrinsic to the against that kind of crap. development of our marketing Miller: We cured the problem approach. with geography; we went around them.

So, you tailor the film to a particu­ Burrowes: So, the key thing was lar market . . . to involve someone with the right credentials.

Burrowes: Absolutely.

Then, Simon Wincer, who is an old friend of George’s, rang us and And what is that market? said he’d been working with Michael Edgley for about three Burrowes: All Australians — the an easy man to work with, but I months. Michael wanted to get into whole 15 million of them. As broad don’t know anybody in the whole film and television in a big way and and as unabashedly as that.

Filming in the high country.

Now, the way we sought to world who could have given us a they had looked at a lot of projects. better Harrison. He is such a But none had excited them and they achieve that was to segment the When did you decide to make it a powerful Harrison that when Jim were keen to find a good project. market and to provide aspects of overcomes him, by Jesus, you know This was at the very moment I had the film which would suit different dual role? my finger poised over the dial to audience segments. So you say, he has become a man. “ Let’s make this film comprehens­ The film was made the way we ring people like Michael Edgley.

Burrowes: While we were talk­ So, Simon and Michael came ible to kids.” That’s important. ing to Kirk in Los Angeles. At that wanted and, despite a tremendous stage, we had drafted Spur and input from Kirk, the film is our down, we talked, and in half-an- Then, “ Let’s make it appealing to Harrison as friends, not brothers. film. That meant some clever foot­ hour we had a deal. We also had people who don’t go to cinemas.”

Then we thought it would become work on our part. In many ways, seeding finance and an expanded The cinema market is undergoing richer as drama if they were handling Kirk was my passage into core group, with Simon joining enormous pressures and there are manhood. Nothing scares me now, George and I to make up the pro­ vast numbers of people who do not brothers. duction team.

Miller: Conflict is where drama like nothing. go to cinemas. Right, we have to Burrowes: The important thing is get them. comes from. to determine whose film it is, and By the same token, there is the Harrison seems in conflict with just then you must make sure the film very volatile and effective centre of conforms to that vision. You must about everybody in the film . . . the cinema market: the youth M arketing never allow the film to take its own market. We must have something Miller: Most especially himself. life and run. That is a recipe for in it for them. Also, something in it Burrowes: Yet he is not intended self-indulgence and disaster. So, we Another aspect of Michael’s in­ for the cineastes and the family to be a mean mongrel. He’s not had to extract from Kirk his con­ volvement, and this is really groups. You want a film that a mean-minded, he’s just single­ tribution — and it wasn’t a ques­ critical, is promotion. The film mother and father can take their tion of extracting it: Kirk gives it to industry in Australia knows little children to, not enduring what they minded.

One of the many contributions you — while all the time fighting to about promotion. There had never think is going to be good for their John Dixon made to the screen­ keep the perspective. been a film made in this country children but enjoying it them-

take recourse in the fortress mentality of “ Let’s do this all­ Australian because we are little Aussie bleeders’’ and end up with a second-class product, not through anyone’s fault, but simply because of availabilities. Or we could do what we’d always intended, which was to do the best bloody thing we could and think outside of the fortress mentality.

When we started to think of Harrison, setting aside the ques­ tion of a dual role, there are few actors in the world with that amount of power who can play a 60-year-old. You can think of George C. Scott, Sean Connery, Burt Lancaster and Kirk Douglas, then you start to hiccup, close your eyes and cough. There’s not many that you can get. The possibilities of the dual role restricted it even further.

210 - June CINEMA PAPERS

play was that he didn’t want Harrison to be a cipher of a character. John wanted to make a statement about the kind of men who made Australia what it is today, irrespective of whether they were attractive or not — and most of them weren’t. We were looking for the kind of person who laid the basis for the great agrarian industry upon which Australia depended for so long, and to a large extent depends upon now. We wanted someone analagous to the Duracks and the Kidmans, the men who, at whatever cost to themselves and those around them, forged empires and built Australia.

George Miller and Geoff Burrowes

selves. And their kids will go along with a view to enjoying it and not being forced to watch something that their parents think is good for them.

All this means you multi-layer the proposition. That’s where the script comes in.

Miller: Again, these things were resolved at day five. This is where our background in television was a tremendous help. Television is a popular medium. You sink or swim in television. You don’t have five flops in a row; you have one flop and that’s it.

We have a very good track record in television — again, Craw­ fords training. It is amazing the number of people from that place who come up trumps. They just keep coming.

People who decry television do so at their own expense and out of pro­ found ignorance. I would defy 90 per cent of people who are making feature films in Australia to go and direct an episode of a cop show, or The Sullivans. That would sort them out so fast their feet wouldn’t touch the ground.

Burrowes: One of the main things we are lacking in the feature business is an ability at the narra­ tive level, and television is narra­ tive. It has to be to survive. People like George emerge from the ruck because they are adept at narra­ tive; they can tell a story and tell it quickly.

Today’s audiences, and particu­ larly kids, are visual rather than literate. They can take in an entire lifestyle message in 30 seconds off the box. Commercials set the standard by which we have to judge what the audience can perceive. The old days of taking 10 minutes to play a scene no longer apply. After 30 seconds, the audience is scratch­ ing its bum. It knows what’s going to happen, and you insult them by dragging it out.

Miller: When I was shooting Snowy, I was very conscious that the visual literacy of young people especially is very high. That is reflected in the pace of the film. I would say, “Okay actors, read it through.” Then 10 seconds into it, I’d say, “Too slow, too slow! This is giving me the shits. It’s boring.”

Burrowes: We had a big dis­ agreement about this one day.

G eorge was going th ro u g h rehearsals for the dinner scene and I thought, “Oh Christ, this is a gallop. I told George he was going too fast, but he said, “Too fast, be buggered. I’m not going fast enough.” Well, when we looked at the rushes, I realized I was wrong.

The lesson is get on with it, never hang around.

Take the scene where Jessica is on the cliff and Jim comes along to rescue her. Everyone knows how he is going to rescue her. They have seen it a million times before. They know he is going to climb down to her, that they are going to climb nearly all the way to the top and they’re going to slip and, “Ohhh!,

they’ve gone, oh no they haven’t” They know that.

Miller: The instant Jim claps eyes on Jessica, end of story. Move on to the next point.

Burrowes: If this film is a testi­ mony to anything, it is to two things: (1) craft over indulgence, and indulgence can be expressed in many terms, like intellectual wanking, and (2) the vast, un­ tapped talent that lies out there which has been passed over by the feature industry. This film is a first for George, for me, for Michael Edgley, for Simon Wincer as an executive producer, for John Dixon the scriptwriter, for Bruce Rowland the composer, for Keith Wagstaff the cinematographer, for Tom Burlinson the actor and for the guys that handle the horsework — and so on down the line. We so often found that the people we wanted were those who worked without any preconditioning as to how good they were, who hadn’t been slapped on the back and told by their peers how brilliant and insightful they were. The ones who were best happened to be ones who had been passed over.

ola and scream “ Boring!” , and 30 seconds later the stuff was out.

Burrowes: On the cutting room floor is some of the most exquisite, exciting and beautiful footage, but it had no place in the structure of this piece of entertainment.

What do you think the public is get­ ting out of the film? Why is it so attractive?

a tremendous audience response. In Adelaide, they clapped Jim when he Filming the wild bush brumbies: harbingers o f was bringing the horses back. Un­ change. believable. They weren’t clapping the film, they weren’t saying, many ways in which you can “Good job, boys” , they were clap­ address the Australian character. A ping Jim, the hero, winning and number of people in Perth and bringing the horses back. And Adelaide articulated this to me in a because the film is intrinsically way I hadn’t thought of before. A Australian — it is socially and cul­ couple of girls came up to me in turally specific to Australia — Perth after the premiere and I when Jim wins, Australia wins. asked what they liked about it.

Miller: One word: entertain­ ment.

Burrowes: That’s what this film fundamentally set out to achieve.

Anything that mitigated against entertainment was thrown out, without pain.

Miller: We’d stand at the Movie-

Do you think the film has signifi­ cance on a nationalistic level .. .

Burrowes: Yes. That was some­ thing that we set out to manipu­ late, ' to achieve. But it is not as simple as having, for example, “Waltzing Matilda” played in the end credits music.

Miller: I first heard the fullyorchestrated version of “Waltzing Matilda” when I had been away from home for eight weeks in the U.S. I nearly wept.

For me, Snowy is a love letter to Australia and, for Geoff, a love letter to the mountains. We can’t understand why any filmmaker would want to depress an audi­ ence. If you want to get depressed, turn on the television and watch the news.

Burrowes: The film has been out now for six weeks and we have had

That seems unique about the film.

Most Australian films tend to have very passive central characters . . .

Miller and Burrowes: That’s because they don’t apply their craft!

Burrowes: They don’t realize what turns an audience on. The feeling we wanted to generate in the audience, when Jim beat those horses and “alone and unassisted brought them back” , was that similar to a team winning the grand final. When Carlton wins a grand final, 20 players don’t win it — hundreds of thousands of people win it. When Jim beats the horses, everyone in the audience wins.

Another thing is that we avoided the pitfall of Ockerism, which too many people fell into in the early days of the A ustralian film industry, and indeed even in tele­ vision. Nobody likes Ockers. They are detestable characters. They have never worked in drama, and are box-office poison. So, it is important to maintain an Austra­ lian character in an attractive, not unattractive, light.

Another thing is that there are

CINEMA PAPERS June - 211

George Miller and GeoffBurro wes

They said, “Oh, it made me so proud to be Australian.” I asked why, expecting Waltzing Matilda or Jim beating the horses. “No,” they said, “it was the elements of honesty in Jim, the honesty in the script. For example, when Spur How do you feel about the critical gives him the horse, and he said, reaction?

Thank you, Spur’, you obviously felt he meant it. He wasn’t a smarty Burrowes: I think it is time for a arse.” man-bites-dog story. It is time the

Jessica and Jim: “One can say, I think authoritatively, that most o f the critics who slammed us are wrong. ”

These, incidentally, are the very lines that our erudite friends, the critics, leapt on and said, “ How banal.” They just don’t under­ stand! They have no comprehen­ sion of what makes successful drama, successful entertainment.

They are the lines that really flesh Jim out. When he is chopping the wood, and he is serious about it, you can see there is a fundamental honesty and integrity in the guy.

That’s one thing that Australians have always had in them, a sort of open-faced naivety, an ability to survive gotterdammerung but still profess an openness, a lack of cynicism. Australians have tradi­ tionally not become cynical, although I think we’ve taken a bit of a course in it of late. Our knocker syndrome is very cynical and bordering on the old cultural cringe.

But there are many aspects to an audience’s response, like the scenery being so beautiful. It makes people proud to belong to a con­ tinent that is so pretty.

Miller: We rejoice at just being able to zoom out and see, as one critic put it, half of Victoria. That critic mentioned this as a negative thing, but my heart leapt when I stood on top of that mountain. One person sees beautiful scenery as a cliche; I see it as a national treasure.

212 - June CINEMA PAPERS

such a heavy canning by his critic?

It reflects badly on the paper because the critic is simply in­ accurate. Not only inaccurate but untruthful. * Burrowes: And one suspects, too, improperly motivated. Reviews in many cases have probably been attitudinally constructed before the Film has been seen. That is the most perfidious aspect.

It is an unfortunate by-product of the situation that we remember the cannings, not the praise — and so, u n fortunately, do other journalists.

ately and clearly. So I would com­ mend anybody who wonders what the hell’s going on journalistically in Australia to read the review of Duet for Four in Cinema Papers3 I’m an intelligent person, but I couldn’t Figure out what the fuck he was saying. Do people actually read that? It’s very strange.

Burrowes: Not many Films made in Australia have been made — and this is going to sound a bit pompous, but it’s not intended to be Ä Ü ft — with the craft levels that this one has. This Film breaks new ground in Australia in the way it intends to msm entertain. Most of the Australian Do you think that Australian critics Film milieu, both in the making and are too critical of Australian in the critical appreciation of it, has products . .. been more in the area of Film as culture, Film as art, than Film as Miller: They’re ignorant, they’re popular entertainment. low-grade. They pick up the What has grown up among the Bluffer’s Guide to Movies and use critics is a reluctance to depart about a dozen words out of it. from traditions. Hence, you have When they talk about the script the rantings and the renderings of being slight, they’re talking bull­ the Melbourne critic who pro­ shit. tested, methinks too much, that Burrowes: They haven’t a clue as Australian audiences aren’t flock­ to what a script does. They are ing to see such and such a Film, talking about lines of dialogue, not which he thinks should be compul­ about the script. The script is what sory viewing. That is indicative of generates structure, pace, flavor, the depth of idiocy in a critic. I feel. The Film is frankly the script mean, who is the jury: him or the with pictures. The notion, as some audience? have said, that the Film’s okay but It is also unfortunate that he and the script stinks is stupidity and his predecessor have fallen into the ignorance. It is an impossibility to trap of simply viewing Australian make a good Film out of a bad film purely as culture, not indus­ script. trial entertainment. The fact of the Miller: If it is a successful Film, it matter is, this is our daytime job.

Filmmakers got up and started to is so because the script is right. We don’t have a paper round. We dish back to the critics what we People who say the script is bad are have to make it pay. We had $3.5 have taken supinely for too long. wrong. million of other people’s money A lot of filmmakers — oh, that’s Burrowes: You can’t have full wrapped up in this, and it’s not for a stupid term — a lot of producers house after full house applauding a us to make profound statements. and directors don’t market their Film six weeks into its commercial The only statement they want to see Films. They rely entirely on the release unless they are powerfully is in black ink. critics and, to that extent, they have moved by the story — that is, by Miller: One of my proudest to bear the blame when their Films the script. There is no room for the moments was when Ken G. Hall die if they get bad crits. audience and the critics who said he thought the film was great. I We decided early on that this slammed us (such as Neil Jillett, don’t think anybody has addressed Film would probably get a critical John Hindle and Sandra Hall) to be himself to entertaining the public as panning. It didn’t matter to us right, when there is such flagrant much as Ken G. Hall. because we’d taken the decision to disagreement. The critics are con­ Burrowes: George Lucas is the market it properly. So the critics ducting an intellectual apprecia­ guy who, most of all, has it right. meant nothing to us. tion, but that is applying a judg­ He knows intuitively where to One can say, I think authorita­ ment to us to which we never chose apply his craft. tively, that most of the critics who to be a party. We have not gone out Miller: I think the most damag­ slammed us are wrong. N ot to make high-blown artistic state­ ing thing to the Australian Film because their taste is different to ments. We have not gone out to industry has been the auteur theory ours — that would be valid — but philosophize. We have not gone out of the director, which is just con­ because they are provably awry in to change the way in which people summate bullshit. A director is a their assessment of the craft think about the world. We have part of a team. elements in the film, and the gone out to entertain.

Directing in Australia has at­ criteria by which the film was There is one clown up in Sydney tracted the wrong sort of people. intended to be judged. whom I honestly cannot believe saw Everybody sees the director as the But it’s not all critics, incident­ the Film. He even gets the charac­ pinnacle of the creative thrust of a ally; the majority of critics have ter names wrong: he called Harri­ film, the auteur. So it attracts dealt very favorably, and some too son “ Hamilton” , and he — and his people who have ego problems. favorably, with the film. sub-editor — can't even spell Banjo Instead of “je suis un rock star” , it Miller: For me, it simply reflects Paterson. is “je suis un Film director.” They badly upon the newspapers they Miller: And he called me Dr are people so inextricably wound up work for. If a critic sees a Film to George Miller! in their own egos that they start which the general public gives a Burrowes: Yet that man is still telling their own stories. standing ovation, and then goes employed by the paper, Christ! If away and slams it, then that says we were that bad in our business, something about the accuracy, we’d never make another film. By the same token, you can do veracity and honesty of the critic, Thank Christ the audience has both . .. and about the integrity of the enough bloody sense not to be Concluded on p. 283 paper. How must the editor of The swayed by him.

Age feel when the most popular Miller: The First function of any 2. Sam Rohdie, Cinema Papers, No. 37, Film in Australian history is given journalist is to communicate accur­ pp. 169-170.

T H E A AW o f_______

MahinaMortes

Daniela Torsh The certiFication system was “not set up to overseas producers come in, put up a front one-day seminar for have of Australian control, write in the Opera House kookaburras . . .” (laughter). lawyers sponsored by andSkrzynski foreshadowed a review by Federal the Australian Film Treasurer, John Howard, in June this year of the tax incentives.

With the news published in the Commission and the College A ustralian Financial Review the day prior to the of Law in Sydney recently seminar that the incentives have so far cost an estimated $24 million, 12 times the had to turn people away. Treasury original costing by the then responsible Minister, Mr Ellicott, the promised review could More than 160 applications be an unpleasant event for the industry. for the seminar, “The Law Sydney commercial lawyer David Gonski explained the difficulties of using traditional of Making Movies” , were ways of structuring investments to get the beneFits of the new tax advantages. He said he received.

A

At the seminar, the general manager of the AFC, Joseph Skrzynski, told the lawyers he expected more private investment in future in development of film projects and in marketing.

These two areas had in the past been largely supported by government finance. He said, “We would not expect that to continue. In early 1981, 23 features went into production between January and May. They had a total budget of about $36 million. We expect this financial year, 1981/82, to be about $35 million [budget total].

“On the basis of that figure, allowing about 10 per cent as development costs, $3 to $4 million [is] spent annually on developing projects. In the past, this has been met 95 per cent by government funding. We expect in future only 50 per cent government funding for development, with directors, writers and producers carrying the cost in deferreds, and investors picking the costs up down the line.”

In his historical analysis of the Film industry, Skrzynski described the current tax incentives as “ an introductory offer” with the hope of attracting investors to the Film industry and keeping them. He said, “We are in Phase Two — trying to Find the right relationship between private industry and government.”

The certiFication system administered by the Department for Home Affairs was designed to avoid the problems of tax-based support, as seen overseas, especially in Canada where there was no regulation. “We don’t want to be a bit parts industry with offshore operators who don’t leave much behind”, he said. It may be appropriate to introduce foreign elements, such as an actor or writer, into a Film, but the litmus test of certification was creative control: is it Australian?

was disappointed that the same approach had not been used in the film industry as in the mining industry, where the person who invests in company shares is eligible for the tax deduction.

In the Film industry, because usually a company is the First owner of the copyright, it is the company which is eligible for the tax advantages.

Because of the problems under the New South Wales (and other states’) Companies Act of forming an investment structure with more than 20 investors (commonly known as the “section 14(3) problem”) many Films are using the Queensland Mercantile Act circa 1867 to set up their investment company. Gonski said it was upsetting and expensive to have to fall back on this out-of-date act in order to take advantage of the tax incentives. The problems he cited were: • the limit of seven years’ life for the company; • the high costs of advertising to conform with the act; • lack of provisions for assignment; and • doubt as to where liabilities and protec­ tion occur.

The general feeling among the lawyers present was that the Corporate Affairs Commission would not act on section 14(3), but having more than 20 investors could mean legal problems with contracts with third parties.

This session was clearly of most concern to the lawyers present, who included Ian Baillieu and Leon Gorr of Melbourne, both “Film lawyers” of some experience and co-authors of the Cinema Papers’ The Australian Film Producers & Investors Guide. A guarded exchange of information ensued over rulings by the Taxation Department and the Corporate Affairs Commission, as well as over the meaning of an association under section 14(3). Gonski

pointed out that, “One can be associated without being an association under 14(3).” As one of the significant criteria for an association was mutual rights and obligations, to avoid 14(3) problems one should avoid mutual rights and obligations in the investment structures in Film production.

The other topical question discussed by Gonski’s associate, Phillip Christensen, dealt with prospectus provisions which cover offering Film investments to the public. All those vaguelyworded advertisements, appearing lately in the press, may not escape the severe penalties of the companies acts, he warned. The court looks behind the cover of the vague invitation at the whole process, of what is given to people who reply to such ads, and even to letters to select groups purporting to be an offer not to the public but to friends, say, of the promoters — even though they may never have heard of them.

Stamping “ConFidential” across the top, or even saying, “This offer is not available to the public”, is not going to fool a court either, Christensen said.

Concluded on p. 281

17 Contractual Steps to a M otion Picture

by Tony Buckley Step 1. The Option Step 2. Writer’s Contract Step 3. Contract with AFC* for Development Funds Step 4. Contract with AFC* for Production Funding Step 5. Contract with AFC*, Distributor and Production Company Step 6. Contract with AFC*, Investor and Production Company Step 7. Contract with Actors Equity Step 8. Contract with Completion Guarantor Step 9. Contract with lead cast Step 10. General cast contract Step 11. Contract with composer Step 12. Contract with crew Step 13. Marketing loan contract Step 14. Contract with appointed agent Step 15. Contract with purchaser of Film Step 16. The one you’ll never see!** Step 17. Errors and Omissions policy * Or a State Film Corporation. ** Between distributor and exhibitor. Buckley challenged anyone present to a bottle of French champagne if they could produce such a contract. Apart from amused murmuring, no one did.

CINEMA PAPERS June - 213

I VORY, AUST E N. RIIYS A N D OTHER S

F I L MS Brian McFarlane

t would be a pity to write James Ivory off as a “ literary” director. He has, somewhat daringly, a novelist’s interest in and capacity for quiet, subtly-observed characterization; but he has none of the stiffness and self­ conscious wordiness that are often the negative aspects of directors seen as having a literary bent. However, I would very much like to see Ivory (and his usual collaborators) address themselves to such disparate works as Jane Austen’s Emma, E. M. Forster’s A Passage to India and Martin Boyd’s “ Langton” novels. He has shown himself unusually sensitive to the infiltration of one culture or class by another, and to the phenomenon of transition within a culture. This would not be enough reason for wanting him to have a go at two classics of the language or at the home­ grown pleasures of the Boyd chronicles of a vanishing class in a situation of conflicting cultural mores. The fact is that Ivory has exhibited a sensibility sufficiently acute to the nuances of others without losing his own distinctive voice in the process.

I

A

s one speaks of Ivory in this way, it is important to draw attention to the team which has been responsible for most of the films he has directed, With a fine arts background from the University of Oregon and as a graduate of the film department of the University of Southern California, he had some brief experience as a maker of short films before going to India in 1960. He formed there an enduring partnership 214 - June CINEMA PAPERS

with the local filmmaker Ismael Merchant who has produced almost all of Ivory’s subsequent films, and a perhaps even more important collaboration with Ruth Prawer Jhabvala. Jhabvala, a German-born author of Polish-Jew extraction, became Indian on marriage, and she is the author (or, with Ivory himself on several occasions, co-author) of all but two of his feature films.

The Ivory-Merchant-Jhabvala team not surprisingly has access to a good deal of inter-

James Ivory

cultural understanding — not just, say, of Anglo-India, but of the phenomenon of cultural inter-penetration or of the impingement of one culture upon another. They seem to me as con­ vincingly at home in Henry James’ New England, under siege to European sophistica­ tions, or the conflicting theatrical coteries of present-day New York, as in the echoing palaces of dispossessed Indian princes.

So much about their films is so attractive that there is a temptation to over-value them. There is something reassuringly civilized, perceptive and kindly about most of their films — or most that I have been able to see, and I regret distri­ bution-imposed gaps. Unclamorous auteurs, their work remains persistently small-scale (I am idiotically and punningly reminded of that remark of Jane Austen’s about working with “the little bit (two inches wide) of Ivory” 1), and it is hard to imagine its ever reaching a large popular audience. I am not suggesting that all their films are delicate little artefacts born to blush unseen, only that they seem less con­ cerned with gratifying audience expectations than most people currently — or at any time — involved in commercial filmmaking.

In their 12 feature films, there have been mis­ calculations: no one seems to have much liked The Wild Party (1974) set in Hollywood in 1929, an end-of-era account of a silent film comedian’s decline, and Quartet (1981) offers little scope for the team’s usual felicities. Nevertheless, even a failed Ivory-Merchant-Jhabvala film will not be vulgar, crass, glib or foolish. This isn’t intended wholly as praise; I’d rather see a lurid Vincente Minnelli ‘failure’ or a generous, sloppy piece of latter-day John Ford well below the master’s best than an Ivory failure. He and his partners have the kind of quiet intelligence and good taste that look sterile and centre-less when the enterprise as a whole seems outside the range of their sensibilities and temperaments.

The two latest Ivories have slunk into Mel­ bourne, for fleeting visits, within weeks of each other. The newer film Quartet, a British-French co-production, was finished in early 1981, and had a deservedly brief season here at the Rivoli Camberwell in February 1982. The earlier — and, appetites whetted by overseas reviews, more eagerly awaited — Jane Austen in Man­ hattan, a British-American co-production which opened in London in September 1980, has been given a two-Week Melbourne airing at the enterprising and pleasant Brighton Bay Twin Cinemas. Prior to these latest arrivals, The Europeans (1979) had a solid season of several months at the Rivoli — the best Melbourne innings so far for an Ivory film — whereas Hullabaloo over Georgie and Bonnie’s Pictures (1978) and, the team’s masterpiece, Auto­ biography of a Princess (1975) comprised a week’s double bill at the Universal Theatre Fitzroy in early 1980. Not exactly Star Wars treatment as to distribution and rightly not, but it is a little sad to think that such attractive work as the best Ivory seems doomed to be peripheral to mainstream cinema.

I

Wentworths in The Europeans. Cyril (James Mason), the English tutor in Autobiography of a Princess, knows that he was played upon by his master, the Indian prince. The three theatrical producers (Anne Baxter, Robert Powell and Michael Shawn) in Jane Austen in Manhattan are professional manipulators of other people, sometimes in the latter’s interests, sometimes not. These films seem to understand that a degree of acquiescence on the part of the “victim” can make the latter an inappropriate word for those being manipulated.

Quartet, the most recent film, is clearly inter­ ested in this theme, and in other recurring motifs in Ivory’s films. In recording a scene of transience, it is a triumph of decor, mood and atmosphere. There is nothing permanent in this 1920s Paris where the cast spends most of its time at cafes and nightclubs. It is no more likely to survive intact than the British raj or New England rigidities under an invasion by Europeans.

But in Quartet nothing works except on the level of glittering surfaces. Unlike those earlier examinations of societies in late autumnal glory, Quartet offers essentially an example of the embalmer’s art. No flicker of real life, no vigor

n one way or other, within or between cultures or coteries. Ivory’s films have shown a persistent interest in exploring some of the subtler — and sometimes notso-subtle — forms of exploitation and manipulation that can color and muddy the waters of human relationships. Eugenia Munster (Lee Remick) and her brother Felix (Tim Wood­ ward) set out consciously, and with a variety of motives, to woo their New England cousins the 1. Jane Austen’s letter to her nephew J. Edward Austen, December 16, 1816.

or passion threatens to disturb its exquisite art direction. It may be that the Ivory-Jhabvala sensibility is simply at odds with Jean Rhys’ original. I have not read Quartet (and feel strongly undrawn to it), but those Rhys novels I do know, angular explorations of put-upon waifs, depressed and depressing, sharp and grim, seem to have little in common with the percep­ tive, witty, quietly civilized works of the Ivory team.

The latter may have been drawn to the exploitative triangular relationship at the centre of the work. The husband of Marya Zelli (Isabelle Adjani) goes to gaol for trafficking.

She then is taken up by, and becomes waif-in­ residence with, H. J. Heidler (Alan Bates) and his wife Lois (Maggie Smith). Each of these plans, in his or her way, to exploit her — he to seduce, she to paint Marya — but Marya’s plight seems almost purposely drained of feeling.

She is not so much an enigma (that could be tantalizing) as a cipher. Perhaps Adjani is simply too lushly sensual to suggest Jean Rhys’ autobiographically-based orphan of the storm.

There is certainly more interest in the suppres­ sions and deceptions that flutter between Heidler (said to be based on Ford Madox Ford) and Lois and the wary opportunisms they practise.

Yet, even there, the film suggests lacunae that one suggests the novel fills in with those unfilmables of tone, of authorial description and analysis. There is something humanly sparse and under-textured in this authentic-looking and elegant evocation of times past.

In theory, perhaps, there was the opportunity for an interesting tension between the muted glitter of Paris 1927 and the emotional violence of its heroine. A tension, that is, recalling that between the autumnal beauty of New England and the restless, disruptive emotions at work in The Europeans. In fact, it doesn’t work that way at all. The serenity/disruption dichotomy was as organic to Henry James’ original as it is to Ivory’s film; and the film kept finding cinematic ways of expressing the novel’s central tension.

In Quartet, one’s attention is constantly fixed on the muted tastefulness of the decor, and the expectation roused by the piercing score heard CINEMA PAPERS June - 215

James Ivory

over the opening discretions of the camera is never gratified. The film remains more interested in its lovingly photographed mise-enscene, the camera dwelling on artefacts which resist revealing psychological and emotional states. For example: whereas Joseph Losey made a tea-pouring scene in The Go-Between imply a comment on the decorum of a way of life, a decorum at odds with its emotional instabilities, in Quartet a coffee-pouring scene is just — and exquisitely — about coffee-pouring.

It is ««resonant.

Everything then in Quartet is superb to look at. Nightclubs, restaurants, apartments, hotels, streets, costumes, hats, make-up: all are as per­ fectly conceived and executed as art direction can manage. (This is a characteristic Ivory virtue, by the way.) But as the camera lingers over a breakfast table laid with jugs and cups and croissants prior to cutting to the gaol where Marya’s husband is detained, one is aware of the stylistic effect of the contrast without having been made emotionally concerned about anyone.

The Film’s subdued grey-blue look catches, in a general and superficial way, Rhys’ usual bleak­ ness of mood, but Ivory and Co. have not been able to persuade us — perhaps not themselves — that there is any cause for pathos, let alone tragedy, in the aimless, dislocated life of Marya Zelli.

Manhattan, a year-and-a-half late reaching Australia, all these elements fuse seamlessly to make a witty and elegant entertainment. The arena here for the manipulative games is the off­ Broadway theatre scene and the McGuffin is a recently-discovered piece of juvenilia by Jane Austen — a melodramatic play, Sir Charles Grandison, based on Samuel Richardson’s novel. The play is bought at auction by George Midash (Michael Wager), a mother-ridden bachelor and chairman of a family art founda­ tion which decides to give the play and a grant to stage it to Pierre Cartier (Robert Powell), charismatic leader of the Manhattan Encounter Theatre Laboratory.

The Film’s central conflict is that between Pierre and his former teacher and lover, Lilianna Zorska (Anne Baxter), who also wants the play and the grant to stage her own operatic version of it. A young girl, Ariadne (Sean Young), is drawn into Pierre’s group — “kidnapped” by Pierre from her husband Victor (Kurt Johnson), a rising young musical comedy star. Ultimately, Lilianna entices off all Pierre’s acolytes except Ariadne, and, we understand, her production is to be performed.

The Austen fragment is about kidnapping, about the forcible manipulation of lives. “You shall be mine. Your fate is determined. I won you from my rivals” , sings Pierre as the abductor in an imaginery episode from Lilianna’s production. At the first rehearsal of hough it seems to me his least suc­ Pierre’s modernist/absurdist production, Pierre cessful, Quartet is still recognizably urges Ariadne as the victim to “think of a an Ivory film: thematically it is con­ kidnap scene in your own life” , and he pushes cerned with contrasting ways of life, her to recall that he “ forcibly took [her] away with evanescence, with manipulative from home” . Manipulation and exploitation are relationships; stylistically, it has thenotusual the same thing but they are related, and here accurate sense of place and period; and, as usual,manipulates Ariadne by exploiting a Pierre it elicits some subtly-effective performances painful memory in her own life to achieve the (from Smith, particularly), largely through response he wants in his play. As Ariadne recalls Ivory’s reliance on his actors’ faces, captured their first meeting, the day he “forcibly took typically in close-ups and two-shots. That it (her) away” from Victor, a flashback reveals doesn’t work may be due in part to a too-stately, Pierre conducting a workshop session in which not to say lethargic, rhythm, but mainly, I the actors, miming relationships, were then believe, because the film’s makers appear un­ “split” apart at Pierre’s command. He then asks interested in the lives they put before us. with a smile, “ How does it feel to be split from In the team’s penultimate film, Jane Austen in your other half?”

T

Marya and Lois Heidler (Maggie Smith), who desires to paint Marya. Quartet.

216 - June CINEMA PAPERS

Ariadne (Sean Young) and Pierre Cartier (Robert Powell), student and leader o f the Manhattan Encounter Theatre Laboratory. James Ivory’s Jane Austen in Manhattan.

A certain degree of Svengalism is no doubt not merely acceptable but necessary in a producer, but the film shows Pierre’s influence going well beyond the rehearsal room. His young company, for instance, passes over its variously earnt wages to him “to teach us how to give” and because “ He needs it for all of us.”

Yet, the Film does not fall for the cliche of making Pierre a mere stock figure — mesmeric theatrical con-man seducing the young with modern nonsense. First, there is the teasing way the Film winds among the three layers of exploitation: within the play (and within Lilianna’s imagined production); in the rehearsal scenes where Pierre enforces his will (e.g., through his reading all the lines while the actors, miming, assume a puppet-like status); and in the “abduction” of Ariadne into his troupe and in the constraints he places on the others (“ I thought we weren’t supposed to have personal attachments” , says Jenny (Nancy New), as she kisses her boyfriend hungrily).

Second, the actual performance by the laboratory group (staged in fact by avant-garde New York producer, Andrei Serban), while painful to some sensibilities, is clearly inventive and lively, perhaps as viable a treatment of a jejune melodrama as any other. Third, the Film frustrates schematism in relation to Pierre by having him surprisingly seem to lose interest, in the conflict with Lilianna and to advise his players to work for her.

Lilianna herself (Anne Baxter, 30 knowledge­ able years on from All About Eve and back in roughly the same territory) manipulates her students quite as Firmly as Pierre. One of the Film’s strengths — specifically a strength of the Jhabvala screenplay — is that it shows both Lilianna and Pierre in action with their followers, and neither of them is caricatured.

She is seen observing and influencing a student trying to act out an emotional moment and, shortly after, talking with former student, Victor, who suspects a conspiracy to keep Ariadne from him. Claiming that “ Pierre is a devil . . . the most destructive person I ever knew” (and the Film does not give evidence for this), Lilianna urges Victor with, “We must help each other. We’ll have to fight him” (to get Ariadne back). The point is that Lilianna is motivated by a wish less to help Victor or Ariadne than to get back at Pierre who has

James Ivory

Anne Baxter as Lilianna Zorska: “all the style and sharpness . . . that 40 years o f Hollywood stardom might be expected to bring’’. Jane Austen in Manhattan.

accused her of “doing shabby third-rate plays” and drawn out her love for him while his dim protege Billy (Charles McCaughan) is listening.

Pierre has thus insulted her both as a profes­ sional and as a woman.

The only manipulation that no one seems to mind — and it is part of the film’s generosity about the theatre, and its variety, to include this — is that illustrated in the rehearsals for Victor’s musical comedy, Here We Are Again. In the brief scenes devoted to this there is a convincing air of devotion to the routines devised by the choreographer, played by Michael Shawn as a satirical sketch of Bob Fosse (or of Roy Scheider as Bob Fosse). It is during the party following the successful opening night of Here We Are Again that Pierre, through the agency of Ariadne’s gloomy folk-singing friend Katya (Katrina Hodiak), manoeuvres Ariadne away from Filianna and Victor.

Filianna’s methods are less mesmeric than Pierre’s but they are just as calculated. They are seen at their most successful in a scene with George, which begins with her saying, “Utter rubbish and nonsense” , in close-up, in response to George’s feeble defence that, when he is with Pierre, he is convinced that Pierre is right. In a virtuoso shot, the camera executes an almost 360° pan which dramatizes the idea of Filianna’s encircling of George, as she, replying to his anecdote about a childhood seaside bully, lulls him with a promise to “help him fight bigger boys” . At this point the fantasy opera sequence denotes that Filianna is a stage nearer her goal, the suggestion of her imminent victory over Pierre signified by his singing the abductor role in this imaginary performance. She has won George by playing mother to him, in contrast to her denial of any maternal element in her former feeling for Pierre.

One by one she woos Pierre’s followers to her purpose: as she washes Ariadne’s hair, she com­ plains that Pierre is using and ruining her, whereas “ I could make something of you if you’d let me” ; seeking out Katya in the cafe where she sings, Filianna seduces her with “ I’m sure, so sure, you could be a great dramatic actress” and “ I can’t pretend I wasn’t like you at one time” (an in-joke here since the actress is Baxter’s daughter by John Hodiak).

Part of the film’s success is the superblyassured playing of Anne Baxter and Robert

Powell as the chief theatrical gurus and manipulators. She has all the style and sharp­ ness — and, it must be said, warmth — that 40 years of Hollywood stardom might be expected to bring, and she uses them to dazzling and sometimes touching effect. On a bare dark screen, her head rises up from the bottom of the frame as if from bowing to an imaginary audi­ ence, and in this gesture, and in the way she walks across the empty stage and surveys the auditorium, one feels that those 40 years have not been wasted. The older woman in love with the young man, who uses then finishes with her, is a character ripe for sympathy, but while Anne Baxter achieves this it is not at the expense of Filianna’s more calculating elements.

Powell is equal to the challenge of this per­ formance and it is important to the film’s multi­ layered tensions and conflicts that he should be so. W hereas Lilianna is all expansive “theatrical” gestures, Pierre’s charisma is a matter of the eyes, of a holding stillness, and Ernest Vincze’s camera knows exactly how to

deal with each. But though the two stars properly dominate, the entire cast — mostly youthful, mostly unknowns — is a pleasure to watch and listen to. The young ones are touching as they try to sort out their goals and allegiances; the older ones amusing, without resort to cari­ cature, as they wince from Pierre’s production.

In fact, nobody emerges as a caricature. There is a pervasive warmth and generosity about the writing, the direction and the playing that resists stereotype and simplism, and scene after scene resonates with intimations of real experience.

There is, for instance, a beautifully-played scene between Victor and Jamie (Tim Choate — Clifford in The Europeans), in which we rightly laugh at Jamie’s line, “ Pierre wants me to play this clergyman as a 10-year-old” , but can still see there might be a satiric point to Pierre’s interpretation. And we can feel for Jamie as he tries to work out the way “ Pierre has that effect on people” as Victor recalls how Ariadne had come so wholly under his spell. This gets a deeper emotional toning from Victor’s recollec­ tion of how they had first come to New York together, determined to make it in the theatre; she had been so “ardent” and, “The way she is about this [the play] is how she used to be about me.” The film is suddenly very affecting about young lives and plans gone awry.

Tike all the Ivory films I know, Jane Austen in Manhattan has a very sure sense of place. This is not Woody Allen’s Manhattan we are given here but it is just as real and, in its own way, just as romantic. Avoiding the usual Brooklyn-side view of the Manhattan skyline, Ivory and Ernest Vincze’s extraordinarily-delicate color photo­ graphy creates images of rubbish-strewn streets, backstage entrances and alleys, late-afternoon skyscrapers glimpsed through studio windows, that are a constant ravishment of the eye. Inside, camera and art direction (Jeremiah Rusconi) combine to discriminate precisely among the Faboratory’s rehearsal rooms, Filianna’s studio and apartment, George’s elegant dining-room, his loft nonchalantly stuffed with valuable artefacts, and the low-lit cafe where Katya sings.

The way places look in this — and other Ivory films — is part of the way the film means: con­ trasting lifestyles are suggested through the film’s unobtrusive, utterly confident attention to details of the mise-en-scene of which the charac­ ters are convincingly both extensions and producers.

Tim Woodward as Felix in James Ivory's The Europeans.

CINEMA PAPERS June - 217

James Ivory

Shashi Kapoor and dancers in James Ivory’s “lively satire o f India’s commercial cinema”, Bombay Talkie.

characteristically for himself and his status, not s the camera tracks through and for another person. above Bombay streets, western music But the centre of the film is Lucia, and is heard on the soundtrack. The Jennifer Kendal takes a superbly-written role by credits for Bombay Talkie, Ivory’s the throat and never lets go. She understands 1970 film, are announced on a series perfectly the compulsive predatoriness of this of huge film advertising boardings stuck up inwho regards other people — Hari, woman these city streets — and a red London bus Vikram, even her daughter at school in Switzer­ arbitrarily appears. The recurrent thematic land — and, indeed, India at large as being there interest in the impingement of one culture on for her gratification. She teases the besotted another is thus announced at the outset, visual Hari by, for instance, asking him to zip up her and aural signifiers explicitly, but also unobtru­ dress or by twice asking him about the “very sively, preparing the ground for the film’s inter­ handsome” actor whom he jealously despises; social emotional intimacies. and she has no intention of responding to Hari’s “ You want too much . . . but you must have passion for her. She exploits this, just as she had a lot of difficulties”, a fortune-teller replies exploits Vikram’s supposed love for her, because to Lucia Lane’s (Jennifer Kendal) questions it suits her inclination at the time. about her future. Lucia, a best-selling American Jennifer Kendal spares us nothing of Lucia’s novelist with four husbands behind her, has just exploitativeness, or her romantic superficiality written a book about Hollywood and has come about either India or the “decadent West” , or to Bombay to write her next. Self-centred, vain her vanity. Equally, though, she ensures that the and restless, Lucia is drawn to Hari (Zia audience will see the film’s chief drama in her Moyheddin), an impoverished aspiring writer crumbling composure. Clearly aging, extrava­ (his play is “symbolical of present-day India”), gantly dressed and coiffed, she is increasingly a and to Vikram (Shashi Kapoor), the handsome, pitiable figure. Both love and the serenity she conceited star of a series of foolish-lookfng has romantically supposed she may find in India films. elude her. She is at odds with the middle-class Hari is the most sympathetic of these three Indian ladies who have found a mild bland peace central characters but even he, in his soulfulness with their guide: her failed attempt to join in and apparent idealism, wants Lucia’s interest in their chanting signifies how at odds she is with and support for his work, and his sexual inten­ their ceremony. As for the two men, she all but tions towards her are not much different from Vikram’s: he simply wraps them up in more poetic utterances. Vikram can never resist a mirror, especially a triptych model which offers three views of his film star’s face. Used to women’s adulation, he has stopped offering any­ thing durable in return. He embarks on what seems a passionate affaire with Lucia but it amounts to no more than “playing Consenting Adults” .

In the end, he tells Lucia, “the party’s over” : his vanity has been gratified but she has not been able to touch him emotionally, and she taunts him about going back to his “nice little, dumb little wife” . Vikram is caught between a false notion of western sophistication (gleaned from the movies and from women like Lucia) and the marriage to Mala which has not yet yielded a son “to light [his] funeral pyre” . His concern is

A

218 - June CINEMA PAPERS

wrecks the foolish Vikram’s career and his marriage, and she leads Hari to the unexpected violence of the film’s ending.

Ivory has always chosen his actors with careful regard to faces and Jennifer Kendal is equal to the demands the camera makes of her.

Lucia is aware that she is still attractive, but in fleeting moments of despair the awareness of encroaching middle-age is there. Elsewhere, Kendal responds with wonderful accuracy to Ivory’s — and the camera’s — demands for suggestions of triviality, falsity, superficiality and sudden anger and haggardness. It is a per­ formance of remarkable detail and amplitude that owes as much to the actress as to her director and writer.

In spite of this exceptional central perform­ ance, Bombay Talkie is not one of Ivory’s major successes. At 105 minutes, it is perhaps a quarter-hour too long, but its chief fault is its tonal and structural uncertainty. It begins as a lively satire of India’s commercial cinema, with its Hollywoodian aspirations to Busby Berkeley production numbers or Venetian melodrama, but doesn’t subsequently capitalize on this. That is to say, the film fails to pull together tightly enough the foolish romanticism of the Indian cinema (influenced by a misunderstood notion of Hollywood) and the romantic triangle in which a much tougher, more insidious western influence goes disastrously to work on two Indian lives. It needs a more rigorous structuring for these two chief concerns to be seen as deriving from the same perception and therefore as offering a commentary on each other. Further, the tone wobbles from the amusingly satirical to what is, for this team, a rather strained seriousness: what is needed is a more pervasive bite.

Bombay Talkie is by no means a failure; it is just less sure-footed and less resonant between its levels of interest than one expects of an Ivory film.

Madher Jaffrey as the Princess in James Ivory’s 'indisputable masterpiece’’, Autobiography o f a Princess.

he indisputable masterpiece to have emerged so far from the IvoryMerchant-Jhabvala stable is Auto­ biography of a Princess (1975). In just under an hour, a whole life and a whole vanished way of life are revealed with understanding, compassion and economy.

Behind the credit titles, the camera gracefully spans and tracks up and down, to left and right, through the halls of an Indian palace, noting here a portrait of Queen Victoria, there some traditional dancing. The scene cuts to the cluttered interior of a Kensington apartment, dominated by a too-large chandelier and a large portrait of a decorated Indian prince; there are

T

James Ivory

also a laden tea-table, and — curiously — a film projector and screen. An Indian lady finishes dressing, and a denim-clad youth, talking to her with a cigarette in his mouth, re-arranges the equipment. The Indian scene is echoed by the narrow windows which here give on to other apartment blocks, these contrasting with the palatial spaces of the Indian scene. In narrative terms, the obvious question is: What is the connection between the two opening sequences?

Ah, one feels confident, this is to be a tale of transition and decline — and so it is, but it is also more than this. The other narrative question is: What are these preparations (the tea, the screen) for?

In the third sequence, an elderly visitor in western dress arrives to be met on the stairs by the Indian lady whose hand he kisses. She is “ My dear Princess’’, he is “Cyril Sahib” , and in her servant-less flat they drink a toast in tea to her father. A pervasive air of ritual is confirmed when she says “ Everything’s ready for the annual treat.” The annual event is a sharing of the memories of the old days in India, memories nudged by home movies of life in the Princess’ father’s palace where Cyril was tutor, and, this year, further kindled by wittily-contrived “ BBC interviews” with disinherited Indian aristocrats, peevishly describing the loss of their power and position.

The Princess maintains a running com­ mentary during the home movies (“Papa loved parties and fun. He never spared expense” , etc.), and her commentary and the movies recreate a luxurious and hedonistic past. But, as she chatters on, we are aware of waiting for some further tension to develop. Cyril, mouth slightly open, ready to laugh to please the Princess, kind, deferential, at first seems no more than an audience, a catalytic presence for the revela­ tion of the glory that was India. Increasingly though, it is clear that the camera is evenly divided between their two faces (and the movies), and a new tension enters the film as the Princess urges him to write about her father and their way of life.

From this point, it is apparent that the film is as much — more? — concerned with Cyril Sahib’s lost life as with the Princess’. He has spent years in patient unexciting research for a book on one Denis Lever, “an Englishman in India” , but a different sort of Englishman who knew a different India from Cyril Sahib’s. At the Princess’ prompting, he begins to reminisce and his memories provoke pain as well as nostalgia: “ I knew I'was living in undreamt-of luxury” , and the picture he calls up is criticism as well as evocation.

This is a film which tempts one to describe it in detail in the hope of making its pleasures vivid to more than the small audience one fears has actually seen the film. It is not possible here to do more than suggest that gradually Cyril Sahib emerges as the chief character; that his quiet watchfulness and growing agitation are at the heart of the film; that, as we watch him stirred, politely at first and then uneasily, by the home movies, we realize Ivory’s Chekhovian skill in sensing the drama of scenes where nothing much seems to be happening; and, perhaps above all, that James Mason as Cyril Sahib is giving the performance of his career and indeed one of the great acting performances of the cinema. Faintly shabby, without any driving purpose, with a deference still for the Princess, Cyril Sahib is a relic trying now to live with dignity in quiet retirement. The annual treat means something different for him from what it means to the Princess.

For him, it recalls the perplexity of his Indian life, not just the luxury and status he no longer enjoys and which is what it means to the Princess. For Cyril, the movies create a montage

of India: of appalling heat, of omnipresent crowds, of mystifying and mysterious cere­ monials (weddings and burials now all mixed together in his mind), of the sadness of dancing girls no longer in their first youth, of the transience of so much within the life of an Indian principality and of the painful transition from that tradition-ridden way to the harsh facts of the new. But above all, the movies force Cyril — gently but inexorably — to evaluate his life in India and his association with the Princess’ father, the Maharajah. .

As the camera pulls back to show Cyril wholly surrounded by artefacts belonging to the past, the Princess asks him why he did not speak up for her father when he was involved in a London hotel scandal. (A flashback showing this is the one clumsy note in the film.) Cyril’s plea that he “was only an Englishman who had stayed in India too long”, and was therefore powerless in the crisis, is only part of the answer.

The truth lies in the complexity of his relation­ ship with the Maharajah: recognizing his hanger’s-on status, he had nevertheless let himself be seduced by the offered luxury; humiliated by the Maharajah in front of the English (for being no good at games, for being a “degenerate”), he has also received “the most delicate personal attentions from the Prince” (e.g., at the time of his mother’s death). In the end, it doesn’t matter much to us what the Maharajah was like; what does matter is that Cyril Sahib’s life was wholly manipulated by him as he moved unpredictably between generosity and cruelty. In the process, Cyril has been irrevocably reduced, until now he has his “research, writing, and walks by the sea” .

What has been revealed is not so much the autobiography of a princess (wonderful though Madhur Jaffrey is in the role) but the reluctant biography of an Englishman who had stayed in India too long. Ivory and Jhabvala have achieved a subtle triumph in making us aware of the texture of the life behind this grey-suited, elderly man for whom the Princess packs cakes for him to take home. It is his western life, more than hers, that has been utterly shaken up, and Ivory and Jhabvala, with flawless precision and tact, dramatize the manipulation by his friend/master/perhaps lover, and his sober acceptance of the transitoriness of all experience.

The persistent Ivory concerns are all here and, as Cyril Sahib walks off into the grey English twilight, one is left to re-arrange one’s views on film narrative and film art. An elderly man visits a younger Indian woman, has tea, chats, watches home movies, recalls what was and adjusts to the disillusion of what is — and the result, as I began by saying, is a masterpiece, certainly one of the most nearly perfect films of my experience.

hen I first saw The Europeans (1979), it was my introduction to Ivory and Co., and I con­ cluded my review2 by saying: “The sensibilities,are clearly in tune with what they are doing and the result is a civilized pleasure indeed.” Having seen most of the other Ivory films since, I am happy to stand by that judgment: it was meant to suggest that James’ range of interests — in individuals and cultures — is very congenial to Ivory. In fact, these interests in the way people exploit each other, in the way one culture works on another, are, as I have shown, endemic in Ivory’s work.

In the case of The Europeans he has met the challenge of a master and emerged with credit, because he (and Jhabvala) are emotionally in tune with the original, whereas they appear to be not so in the case of that minor idiosyncrat Jean Rhys in Quartet.

A great author’s tone, the most intractably individual aspect of his achievement, tends not to be susceptible to visual translation. It would be surprising if it were. Other film versions of James’ novels — William Wyler’s handsome adaptation of Washington Square as The Heiress, Jack Clayton’s The Innocents (from The Turn o f the Screw), and Peter Bogdano­ vich’s Daisy Miller — have all been intelligent and stylish films. Nevertheless, .they have not found it easy to strike a visual equivalent for the fine ironic exactness of James’ prose, and, in consequence, the subtlety of his discriminations sometimes eludes them. Ivory, Jhabvala and Merchant in The Europeans have come nearer Continued on p. 287

W

2. Cinema Papers, No. 25, February-March, 1980, pps 67­ 68.

CINEMA PAPERS June - 219

How did “Heatwave” develop as a film?

The film Was originally con­ ceived by two architecture gradu­ ates, Tim Gooding and Mark Stiles. When I got to the script it was called King’s Cross, Tim Gooding was no longer working on it and Mark Stiles had done several drafts by himself. That was in December 1979 and, at that stage, it wasn’t set in a heatwave or around Christmas.

Although the central character was an architect, a consideration of th e dilem m a facin g a c o n ­ temporary architect was not as important to the screenplay as the political elements. For better or worse, I encouraged the screenplay to take the directions we see in the final film.

Mark Stiles worked with me on a number of drafts, and then Mark Rosenberg came into the project and worked with us. Eventually, Mark Stiles felt that the screen­ play reflected more of our taste, that is of Mark Rosenberg and myself, so we decided, amicably, to take the principal responsibility for it.

To what extent was the film inspired by recent political events in inner urban conflicts, particularly the dis­ appearance of activist Juanita Nielsen in the mid-1970s?

Many elements provided in­ spiration for the screenplay. The disappearance and alleged murder of Juanita Nielsen is perhaps the most controversial and well-known element. But just as important were such disparate events as the Hilton bombing, the crash of the NuganHand bank, the death of Frank Nugan and discussions I had with dozens of people.

Originally, Mark Stiles set out to make a comment on the disappear­ ance of Nielsen and the destruc­ tion of one particular street, but I felt that the film had the potential to be about a whole city.

This is reflected in the film by the emphasis on creating the atmo­ Eighty-five per cent of the film is sphere of the city. These stylistic underscored by music of one sort or and atmospheric concerns seem to an o th er, and the com poser, be just as important as the issues. . . Cameron Allan, the sound designer, Greg Bell, and myself had a very In Sydney, we are constantly close relationship. We considered scandalized by stories of alleged all the elements together in plan­ corruption, big business wheeler­ ning the whole soundtrack — that dealing and deals that are allegedly is music and sound effects — rather being done between politicians, than one team working independ­ unionists, sportsmen, entertainers, ently of the other. ad infinitum. It is always going on; I suppose one of the chief means it is a very paranoid city. People are by which a mood is created, and always looking over their shoulder again it is tied up with an attempt and wondering who is up to what. to create this feeling of paranoia, is And nobody, throughout all this the creeping camera, which is maze of almost paranoid rumors, almost like someone tip-toeing has been able to put it together. I through a place he is not meant to didn’t want to put it all together be in. either, because I thought, if no one You may have noticed that one else has been able to, why should I of the visual motifs is a converging presume that I could? camera, but it is not a fast con­ What I find interesting about all verging camera: it creeps forward this is the atmosphere that seems to slowly, which of course culminates be so prevalent in Sydney, the in the final shot of the film. paranoia of contemporary Sydney, where everyone has a little piece of These effects are apparent. The film information, but nobody has all the has an almost hypnotic rhythm and pieces that make up the jigsaw. a lot of care has been taken in the The film attempts, therefore, in structure. Australian filmmakers its structure of almost clipped have had, I think, quite a deal of montage and in its visual style, to trouble with structure, a difficulty in move cinematically from social sustaining a rhythm . . . realism — that is, a realistic inter­ pretation of characters and events This is something about which I — through to a much more dis­ am well aware. One of our original jointed type of surrealism. ideas, conceived in conjunction with our director of photography, Vince The surrealistic aspects, created by M onton, was that with every elements such as the music and the minute of the film the size of each camera movements, seem to be part of the characters in the frame of your attempt to emphasize a city should change. The film should sweltering in a heatwave . . . start out quite loose — and, of course, a loose frame doesn’t com­ Yes, the music plays a very municate tension — and then important part in the evocation of slowly creep in. This way the ten­ atmosphere; so do the camera sion builds up, until the last section movements. A number of pieces of of the film, which was to have been music were recorded as guide shot on long telephoto lenses that tracks before the film was shot, and isolated the characters from their played to the crew and myself while background. we were shooting so we could sort I eventually shied away from that of get into the same rhythm as the because we had gone to a lot of music we had planned. trouble to short-circuit charac­

terization by using decor and visual elements within the frame to tell our story. I felt that if we started to isolate the faces from the back­ ground, we would lose another thing we had been aiming for: to convey the idea that people’s actions are influenced by the decor and architecture of the rooms in which they live and think. So, in fact, we didn’t follow those original ideas through as far as we could have.

By those visual elements I take it you are referring to settings, such as the head office of Hausman’s empire, which had tiger rugs, and Kate Dean’s flat . . .

Yes, and her clothes, which may not be so readily recognizable to an audience outside Sydney. The T­ shirt she often wears, with the Waratah emblem, comes from a very exclusive boutique. Although she has set herself up as a savior of the lower classes, there are visual hints in the first half of the film that she is in fact from a middle-class background. Viewers who are con­ scious of a costume would realize that she was not wearing a $1 T­ shirt, and could not have, there­ fore, been genuinely a part of that working-class milieu.

Although those visual clues are present, on the other hand they are offset by the fact that she actually seems to be very uncomfortable in middle-class settings. In this respect, I was struck by the similarity between Judy Davis’ per­ formances in “ Winter of Our Dreams” and in “Heatwave” — this feeling of her being out of place in more wealthy surroundings . . .

Yes, but she is playing a charac­ ter who is caught in a class vacuum.

She has rejected her middle-class background and is trying to identify with the working class, which she would like to adopt. She is trying to change her spots, and a leopard can’t do that.

CINEMA PAPERS June - 221

Phil Noyce

So her chief characteristic would be her alienation . . .

sive than most actors. It is not that film to become a predictable she is more dedicated, but that she goodies versus baddies television almost becomes the character. She episode — the bad real-estate goes through a metamorphosis as developer and the good lowershe approaches a role. You can feel income workers who are his that the tensions running through tenants. Life is a lot more complex her body are quite different as she than that — although finally, approaches each film. perhaps, it boils down to black and white. But there is hell of a lot of Richard Moir had a much more sub­ grey in between. dued, passive role in comparison to We deliberately set out to make the one played by Davis . . . the character most of the audience would identify as the bad guy as the Richard is playing a character most attractive character in the that is the antithesis of the macho film. The audience then would be lead man we have come to expect in uncertain in their reactions to this cinema. Most of his action takes character. So, although they might place in his mind. He is not a like to hate him, they cannot help strongly physical person. The but like him. experience of working with Richard was a very pleasant one.

There were a couple of characters did seem stereotyped: Barbie Peter Hausman seems to be a who Lee, the King’s Cross prostitute, character for whom, despite his and Dick the shady strip­ materialism, you have quite a deal of club ownerMolnar, ... sympathy. He has a likeable larrikin aspect . . .

I suppose these characters could That is deliberate. It was written have been more developed, but they for Chris Haywood. In Mark Stiles’ deliberately weren’t. Molnar, the first screenplay the developer had strip-club owner, is a mythical been conceived as 55, balding and figure in Sydney. Stories of Mr Jewish — the stereotype of a real- Bigs and Mr Sins are always estate developer. But it is certainly around in that scene. We are always not true of the Sydney scene. Most hearing stories that such and such a of the real-estate developers, some guy runs the brothel scene, and such of whom I know quite well, are under 40. They are extraordinarily Judy Davis, Richard Moir and director Phil likeable people, and very dynamic.

What we didn’t want was for the Noyce on location for Heatwave.

David Parker

when we look at her, we suspend our disbelief. For me, Bryan Brown Yes, very much so. In fact, they is similar.

But the real question you are are the very words that finally pro­ asking how much autonomy vided the basis for Judy’s perform­ does anis:actor have? Under my ance. Judy said to me, “ I take it direction, an actor has as much that what you are aiming for is to autonomy as I can give them. No show my journey in this film as a one director, as far as I am con­ journey towards total alienation.” cerned, is ever going to be able to She summed it up better than I come up with more ideas than any could have. two actors. An actor studies his or That puts the relationship between her character, tries to work out a her and Stephen West in a interest­ logic for the behaviour as detailed in the script, and tries to communi­ ing perspective . . . cate, perhaps, a lot that is not Well, he is on a very different written in the dialogue. Actors try journey. He is, in a sense, an to make sense out of the progres­ opposite, an upward mobile. They sion or journey they are asked to collide at Christmas, then every­ undertake from the first to the last one goes back to their real homes, frame.

The director sets up the facility whether they are living in a for actors to study the background luxurious Harbour-side apartment or a tenement house in the inner of their characters — talking about where they would have come from, city.

I often meet people who come where they will be in 10 years, what from quite opposed backgrounds, school they come from, their and I am attracted to them for all religion, what they have studied, kinds of reasons: they tend to have the jobs they have done — all those sorts of things. If it is a profes­ a certain magnetism. sional interest, such as in Richard To what extent does an actress like Moir’s case, in acting the role of an Judy Davis assume autonomy for architect, I would encourage him to the role? How strongly does the undertake a fairly detailed study of force of her own personality and architecture, and meet a lot of architects. acting style come through?

Still, you would like all your Judy Davis is a star. She will actors to take flight — that is, to always be different, but she will inhabit the role, to take it over — always be Judy Davis. I think that and I guess Judy is more posses­

222 - June CINEMA PAPERS

Phil Noyce

and such a guy runs the drug scene, make it. At other times someone or that this guy is the king of crime gives you a script and you can’t put and vice. And all the kings of vice it down. The next film I am going are shadowy figures about whom to do is called The Umbrella the public knows very little. We Woman and it was just such a sometimes see their pictures in the script. It was given to me by paper, and there are allegations Margaret Kelly, who wrote the made about their associations with screenplay for Puberty Blues, and it people. was written by Peter Kenna, the We tried to make the character Australian playwright who wrote of Molnar a stereotype, inasmuch The Hard God. as he reproduced the average In many ways, it is a sort of Sydneysider’s relationship with a Antipodean Madame Bovary, it is Mr Sin — a man who comes and about a woman’s need to attain sex­ goes, but about whom not much is ual fulfilment in what she perceives known. as being a void or a gap. She fixes Barbie Lee is the one character her attention on a philanderer who we inherited from the original draft woos her and then rejects her. She Tim Gooding worked on. Is she a pursues him recklessly and relent­ stereotype? Well, I live in King’s lessly.

It is set in 1938 in a small Cross, and I think I have met a lot of Barbie Lees. They are stereo­ northern New South Wales logging types because heroin does strange town, but of course the emotions it things to people, in that heroin depicts are universal. So, it is going addicts tend to act in similar ways. to be quite a different film to Heat­ I am not suggesting that heroin wave, Newsfront or Backroads. leads people to commit murders; but there is a uniformity about their In the films you have made, despite characters, their obsessions and their different styles and structures, their speech patterns. So, I would there has always been a fairly signi­ say that she is a justified stereotype. ficant political content. You seem to be trying to get across certain social Why have you chosen to live in values. Do you find a conflict in the King’s Cross? ways in which you have to commer­ cialize and dramatize issues to make Most of my friends live there. I a marketable product? am a bit like Kate Dean; I covet a close neighborhood relationship Yes, of course. It is a conflict, with people, rather than the and it makes films on these subjects separateness of suburban living. difficult to finance and, to a lesser I have lived all over Sydney, and extent, to get audiences to see. in some beautiful places like Palm Whether we like it or not, cinema, Beach. But I really like being a as opposed to television, is pedestrian and living an inner-city primarily used by the audience as life where people can meet and talk, an escape device. People want to and get to know each other. Also, I escape the mundanity of their lives find that King’s Cross is a source of and buy a ticket to their dreams; enormous energy. It is the place they want to go somewhere else, where everyone in the country goes and don’t want to see their dirty to get their rocks off in one way or linen. Therefore, films that are-in another, whether they come from any way confronting, but particu­ Broken Hill or Darwin. It is the larly when they deal with con­ focal point for a 'certain type of temporary political or social issues, energy — it is all focused on that are even more difficult. strip in King’s Cross. I live just over So, there is a conflict. Perhaps if the hill from there, which means I we had a state-financed film don’t have to encounter it — I live industry, such as in a socialist in a quiet street — and yet I can country, and a socialized distribu­ draw from it. tion industry, Heatwave might have turned out to be quite a different Did you actually grow up in Sydney? film, with different elements. Of course, we would all like to rewrite I grew up in Griffith, in the the Hollywood rules, but unfortun­ Murrumbidgee irrigation area, ately we can’t just do it overnight which is not your average country — you can’t change audience town, in that more than 50 per cent expectations. And if you attempt to of the town is of Italian origin. The do it too radically, you find that town is also surrounded by small you have no audience, which landholdings of 8 to 20 hectare lots. defeats your whole purpose So, it is a much more European because you are communicating to setting than a normal Australian no one, and I guess that in Heat­ country town. wave there is an uneasy tension I moved to Sydney when I was between those elements.

12. My father was a lawyer and a However, there is a lot to be said farmer; he grew up on a farm, but for the discipline of having to com­ made most of his money as a municate to an audience. lawyer.

You have said in a previous inter­ Are you drawn towards a subject set view that, “carbon copies of Ameri­ in an area like Griffith? can films will not work. Australian cinema will only succeed in telling Not particularly. Sometimes you Australian stories in a style that think of an idea and you want to reflects the national character.” In

what ways does “Heatwave” fulfil these aims?

Stylistically it doesn’t obey that quote, in that it owes as much to film noir as it does to Film Aus­ tralia. But then it does owe some­ thing to Film Australia, in that the cinema verite or documentary school of filmmaking, from which a lot of the feature film directors emerged, has had an influence on the sort of humanism that Austra­ lian directors have brought to their films.

However, it is not true to say that there is an Australian film style.

Rather, there is a style adopted by individual Australian filmmakers, which, because of their experience and preoccupations, hopefully will not just be a carbon copy. If it draws on elements, whether they are genre elements or whatever, from earlier times, or from the cinema of other countries, hope­ fully it will be a valid reworking and extension of these elements.

What I was really talking about

Once again it is a case of trying to encourage everyone I work with to feel I . have given them their wings, so that they can contribute as much as their imagination allows. A director is like a circus ring-master, in that he or she is co­ ordinating the whole performance.

And each of the contributors to the night’s entertainment has a little segment and comes on and does it with as much finesse and origin­ ality as can be mustered. I guess that is what a director is like, too.

Someone has to be the arbitrator of when to say yes and no.

I worked quite closely with John Scott, the editor. Each one of us became, in a sense, an extension of the other; often John would be the starting point for my comments, negative or positive, and that would be the springboard for another approach to the scene.

Film is a great community art. It is one big collaboration, and more successful when harmonious. Any film is not really the director’s film, but is, or should be, the result of

there was the need for originality in general, and not necessarily the establishment of a national style, because I think that is impossible.

It is interesting to list the films that the cast and crew studied for months before the film. They were: Chinatown, Taxi Driver, Mean Streets, The Conformist, Parallax View, Big Sleep, Postman Always Rings Twice, Double Indemnity, The Fountainhead and a documen­ tary made by Pat Fiske in Sydney called Woolloomooloo. You draw inspiration from many sources.

many people’s work. The director' provides the common element, the overall direction, and is the creator of the atmosphere conducive to creative collaboration.

A striking feature of your work is its editing. “Newsfront” was in a sense an editor’s film, full of sharp cuts and a sustained rhythm. In “Heat­ wave” there is also a certain rhythm you try to get throughout the film — co-ordinating the music, sound­ track, editing and cinematography.

How much influence did you, as a director, have on the editing and those other elements?

Yes, as much as possible. It is really quite hard doing a film because you can be working with more than 100 people. The rela­ tionship you can have with any one person is severely limited by your time and energy; you have to split yourself up into so many areas of collaboration. So you tend to have a fragmented relationship with people. This is especially the case when you are working with actors.

Kate Dean (Judy Davis), "a character . .. caught in a class vacuum . . . She is trying to change her spots, and a leopard can’t do that. ’’Heatwave.

You have often used Vince Monton as your cameraman. Is this a col­ laboration that will continue?

CINEMA PAPERS June - 223

David Parker

Phil Noyce

The actor-director relationship is based on trust. It is unlike on the stage where the actor has the audi­ ence as a litmus paper to guide him in the effectiveness of his communication and performance.

On a film set, the actor has himself — and the director, who for better or worse is the person that the actor primarily turns to for guidance and assistance. And for an actor to really give all, to go out on a limb, to try the impossible, you need to have quite a close relationship.

In general, when I find people with whom I have a profitable rela­ tionship, I like working with them as much as possible — because the creative relationship develops over time. You can get to the stage when you can communicate in short­ hand, and with cinematographers, editors and composers you start to know what hidden tricks they haven’t yet pulled out, and you can encourage them to draw them out.

Of course, this could change on different types of projects where you want a fresh input, a different perspective. But generally you keep some collaborations going. Why should Peter Weir change Russell Boyd or Bruce Beresford change Don McAlpine as their cinemato­ graphers when together they have done their best work?

there is a concentration on creating took them many months to build. atmosphere, and using the elements, Of course, the building could be such as water, as a recurring built; it is practical. physical theme . . .

Pholeros remained on the set to give advice on arch itectu ral I wasn’t consciously aware of it; matters. The character of West was but I must have been aware, also helped along by advice from because there are some similari­ other architects, and by Richard ties, as you have pointed out. One is Moir’s interpretation. influenced by all the films one has seen, especially by Australian films The overall feeling to the film, and in my case, because they have more this may fit in with your view of direct relevance to my work. If one Sydney, is that ultimately everyone wants to create an eerie feeling, one is locked into a game. No one really of the main methods is music. I knows the solution — you can’t pin­ guess a major similarity of both point the real villain to the piece — films is the electronic scores. But it and one can’t come to grips with was never conscious. what is going on, even though there are some short-term resolutions. Do How did you arrive at the futuristic you see Sydney as some sort of Eden design? interlocking set of power relation­ ships?

We invited a couple of architects to submit designs and, quite by To a degree. Of course, there is accident, the one to which we some sort of conclusion in the end: responded best was designed by a the strip-club owner is shot dead. man whose experience paralleled But the story, in more ways than that of the film architect, Steve not, is open-ended.

West. The designer, Paul Pholeros, became the alter ego for Steve Do you see any major responsibility West. He walked into our office, as on behalf of the Housing Commis­ Steve West may well have done, sions and state authorities that have with a series of crazy drawings and been involved in so many housing a futuristic design for a building, conflicts and scandals in recent and within a short time he had con­ inner-city politics? vinced us that this was the one for us. So we gave him his blank I couldn’t have brought in any There are some similarities be­ cheque to build his 3-metre by 6- more elements. We tried to deal tween “ Heatwave”, and Peter metre model, and he set to work with so many as it is, although we Weir’s “Last Wave”. In both films with a team of model builders. It do refer briefly to the Housing 224 - June CINEMA PAPERS

Noyce instructs Davis during a break between takes.

Commission. Mary Ford says at the residents’ meeting that if they can stall this a little longer Hausman will go broke, and the Government will take over, which is a reference to public housing, the only real solution to the problem of Edens being built. Edens are going to continue to be built, and that means lower-income earners, people who are disadvantaged for whatever reason, will continue to suffer without some form of inter­ vention.

Violence is one form of inter­ vention, which has been mainly practised, at least in the Sydney experience, by people who have wanted to build the buildings rather than those who have opposed them.

But I think public housing is a more practical solution. We canvassed this only briefly.

Do you see a certain progression in your work, through the early docu­ mentaries to “Backroads”, “News­ front” and “Heatwave”?

I don’t see it, but inevitably there must be, because things happen by chance and they give rise to other events. But I just make them. I leave it to o th e rs to dr aw conclusions. ★

Suddenly your whole Ar i ^ nges

thc

AUJTRAimn DEGinmnc

The change starts with discovering ‘The Australian Beginning’. It is a whole new world of information.

At very small cost, the Australian Beginning gives you access to a vast range of computer services wherever you have a telephone... and you don’t have to be a computer whiz to use it. All the instructions are in everyday English. Even young children will enjoy operating this system.

In the home or in the office, just run your fingers over the keyboard. Within seconds, you can get the news before it is printed, you can shop, check airline timetables, obtain sports results or share prices, order the latest books, check a company’s financial status, compare supermarket ‘specials’, obtain farm reports, view weather bulletins and so much more.

For only a few dollars a day, you can be linked into a large, powerful computerised storehouse of information with nationwide communication.

The Australian Beginning can help you in your business. It can keep your stock records, run your accounts and help you with budgeting.There are thousands of programs available for your use. The Australian Beginning is also a valuable educational tool.

The Australian Beginning’s unique telex feature — you can send messages to any telex user, and receive messages back from anywhere in the world.

These features can save you a small fortune.

The Australian Beginning provides its services Australia wide. The list of services is enormous... and it is getting bigger day by day.

Right now, The Au your home or offic communication to

Subscribers can nc Over the next few the cost of a local exactly what to do,

The Australian Bee efficient visual disf no huge investmer

Change your whole of the low cost ‘Es

Australian Beginning is on call 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. For •ffice, The Australian Beginning provides you with information and i to help you survive and prosper in the 80’s. n now access this service through a Melbourne ’phone number, ew months most other Australian capital cities will have access for •cal call. Anyone can use this service. A simple guide explains do.

The A ustralian Beginning

Beginning and Sigma Data Corporation will put a proven, reliable, display terminal in your hands for a low monthly charge. There is nent to be made.

Access to information services

hole life today. Be a part of the computer revolution. Take advantage ‘Early Bird’ membership and equipment package... it has everything you need to start using the system, including:

■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■

• Permanent membership of The Australian Beginning.

• A modern, sculptured, desk­ top Sigma Data visual display terminal that is as easy to use as a typewriter.

• An acoustic coupler, which links your equipment to any standard telephone.

• An initial package of 60 hours of computer time*.

• 90 days parts and labour warranty throughout Australia.

• A simple step-by-step instruction manual and access to a round-the-clock telephone ‘Help’ service.

All this is available for only $20 a week for 60 months or for a special one-time payment of $2495 for the ‘Early Bird’ package. Also, if you use the equipment and services for producing an assessable income, your payments may be tax deductible.

This is incredible value... and your visual display terminal is backed by the full service facilities of Sigma Data Corporation, with its offices in the capital cities ■ Additional computer time available for $8 per hour Monday to Friday 8am 6pm... but only $3.60 per hour throughout the rest of the day and anytime weekends. *

-

VISUAL DISPLAY TERMINALS SUPPLIED AND SERVICED NATIONWIDE BY SIGMA DATA

News Weather Share indices and prices Airline schedules Government statistics A wide range of research data

Nationwide Communica­ tion to other Australian Beginning members Electronic shopping (24 hours a day — 365 days a year), including ■ ■ ■ ■ ■

Books Video tapes Office supplies Educational supplies Many other business and consumer products

Telex services ■ Send telexes with our equipment to telex owners ■ Receive telexes from telex owners

Access to software for ■ ■ ■ ■

Business Financial planning Educational Entertainment and games

information on ■ ■ ■ ■ ■

Appliances Business equipment Consumer goods Sporting goods and many more goods and services

THÉ AUITRAIIAA BEGinniAG

The Australian Beginning is changing every aspect of Australian life... in the office and in the home. You will need The Australian Beginning to stay out in front.

Your Sigma Data term inal.

Subscribe now!

No obligation!

To: The Australian Beginning (Vic) Pty. Ltd.

364 Latrobe St, Melbourne, Vic. 3000 Phone: (03)329 7533 Yes, I think the Australian Beginning is great. I want to take advantage of the ‘Early Bird’ membership and equipment package today.

I understand that, if I am not completely satisfied, I can (anytime within 7 days of receipt) return all of the equipment intact for a full and unconditional refund. □ i enclose $2,495 for the ‘Early Bird’ full package. □ I prefer to pay on terms. Please send me a weekly payment contract ($20 a week over 60 months). □ I also want a low cost, quality printer. I enclose an additional $749. □ I want the low cost printer and prefer to pay on terms. Please send me a weekly payment contract for both the ‘Early Bird’ package and a low cost printer. (Total of $25 a week over 60 months). □ Please charge my credit card (tick one) □ American Express □ Diners Club □ Bankcard Card No. Expires............Signature Name________________ Address______________ City__________________ State _______ Postcode Phone: Home Bus. Signature___________________________ □ I would like more information before I join. Please ring me. □ I do not want to join right now, but please keep me on your mailing list for future information.

I already have computer equipment.

A range of quality printers is available from $749.

Through your own telephone, The Australian Beginning gives you direct access to this huge com puter system. Be linked directly to this vast source of up-to-the-minute inform ation... and all for just a few dollars a day.

Today, take advantage of The Australian Beginning’s incredible introductory offer.

Sigma Data C orporation’s engineering services support your visual display term inals Australia wide. Sigma Data engineers are located in Melbourne, Sydney, Brisbane, Perth, Adelaide and Canberra.

Illlllllllllllllllllllllllll

llllllllllllllllllllllllllll

FILM FESTIVAL 1982 Mari Kuttna and Lesley Stern

iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii Many verbal brickbats were hurled towards Moritz de Hadeln in his third year as the director of this expensivelymounted, but artistically disappointing, F e stiva l. H ow ever, he ca n n o t be expected to run the Festival and make films for it. The brickbats should be directed at the Festival jury: in 1982, the grand prize, the Golden Bear, ought to have been withheld. But who could be nasty to gracious Joan Fontaine, who presided, or to ebullient Mrinal Sen, or to Sydney’s David Stratton? All the same, they should not have given such a prestigious award to Rainer Werner F a s s b in d e r’ s D ie eehnsucht der Veronika Voss, a clever-enough pastiche of 1950s melodrama, which offered little beyond its visual flair in glittering black and white.

The characters in Veronika Voss are inexcusably one-dimensional. Their loveless passions or greedy cunning are the staple ingredients of all Fassbinder works, re-Sirkled once again. One wet night in the park a youngish man (Hilmar Thate) offers his coat to a drenched woman. She scatters hints of mystery as if she were setting up a beagle trail, and the young man (he closely resembles James Mason when young) tracks her down in convoluted ways. Next time they meet, she is dolled up like a pantomime dame, in garments and make-up which spell allure. The reporter is duly allured, and the lady (Rosel Zech) turns out to be as tiresome as only an ex-filmstar who has taken to drugs could be.

There is some by-play about a broken vase, concerning a sad old couple who are probably the blonde star’s Jewish parents. Whether they are blackmailed, or whether the daughter has mortgaged them for drugs, they are also in the power of the sinister dark-haired woman, somewhat like an up-market beautician, who turns out to be a rapacious doctor ‘treating’ the addict, and whose ethics make the Mafia seem like the Girl Guides. The reporter checks her creden­ tials with a leading specialist who, not surprisingly for a Fassbinder film, turns out to be the lady d o c to r’s chief accomplice.

Some of the shots, like diagonal streaks of light in a dark street, or of creamy women in creamy interiors, linger in the memory, and the sound­ track, too, is used with Fassbinder’s usual thum ping-hom e skill. Besides, Fassbinder is very fashionable: his films seem to sell the largest number of tickets, and his secretary arranges the largest number of inevitably-clashing interviews. So giving him a main prize may be an inducement for him to keep finishing his films in time for festivals.

In a better year, the stilted acting and drama-school accents of The Killing of Angel Street may have been embar­ rassing. But, at least, Donald Crombie does deserve the ju ry ’s honorable mention for touching on a social problem of intense contemporary relevance.

In setting up as Australia’s Frank Capra, or even Sydney Pollack, Crombie was somewhat handicapped by com­ p e tin g a lo n g s id e the real a rtic le : Pollack’s Absence of Malice, which

reminded those who may have forgotten that there can be a valid excuse for one­ dimensional characterization: namely, to accommodate the larger-than-life per­ sonality of a star. Supported by Sally Field and Melinda Dillon, who are far from being mice, Paul Newman still towers as a star, the like of whom tends to be seen only in the retrospectives.

The Berlin retrospective was devoted to James Stewart, whose handsome, though ageing, presence still radiates stardom; and it was reassuring that even in B e rlin The P hiladelphia Story attracted crowds as easily as Fass­ binder’s camped-up film noir.

Almost every film in Competition above the level of ju s t-p la in -a w fu l received a Silver Bear for something or other. For instance, Wojciech Marczewski’s Dreszcze (variously mistranslated as Creeps, Shivers or Shudders) received its mantelpiece ornament for “ originality” , a quality which, in this case,

seems to have been confused with sincerity. Its subject has the hallmark of personal experience: it is about the indoctrination of a teenage boy in the Poland of 1955-56. His father is arrested, and his bookshelves reduced to rubble by the secret police just before the boy is chosen for a special training camp of Young Pioneers. The brainwashing is so powerful that, at a publicly-staged con­ fessional session, the boy betrays his closest friends, who have all been listen­ ing to Radio Free Europe.

Authentic as it is, to everyone who has seen Pal Gabor’s Angi Vera, Marczewski’s Creeps will seem a more diffuse, less dramatically-accentuated version of the same story. Even the preponder­ ance of golden afternoon light, over­ head shots of courtyards and stairs, and the film ’s end with a journdy away from the summer camp seem to stress the resemblance. ' Similar, not particularly original, but

w e ll-m a d e and m oving, H erm ann Zschoche’s Bürgschaft fur ein jahr (On Probation), from East Germany, is pleasingly intelligent and well-acted. The film ’s heroine is a commonplace pheno­ menon: a pretty good-time girl who finds, in her late twenties, that she must start living like a grown-up woman if she wants to retain control of her children. To protect them from being taken into care, she should conform and be a good citizen. She wants her children, though with the same inchoate, im pulsive emotion which characterizes her love affaires; but she begs for another chance.

An honest case of “ please God make me good but not just yet” , it is touch-andgo throughout the film whether she reforms fast enough to be judged a responsible parent. Although she is living with a nice, reliable young man, she falls headlong in love with someone else; when he too leaves her, she goes on a bender; but she does bounce back.

As with most good films, the audience is left to decide whether her final com­ promises mean a happy ending, or a defeat of hope and high spirits. If, as society presumes, the children must come first, then all is w e ll. . .

Anyway, K atrin Sass more than deserved her prize for the best actress.

Once in a while, an o ff-p u ttin g synopsis and equally off-putting publicity stills are redeemed by the film itself, which deals with the unpromising story with stylistic consistency, and has an un­ compromising integrity of script, direc­ tion and acting.

Hans A lfre d so n ’s Den enfaldige mordaren (The Simple-minded Mur­ derer) is such a tilm, with a story that sounds simplistic no matter how cleverly any synopsis would try to summarize it.

However, the relationship between the clumsy hero, branded an idiot, but fully capable of learning useful skills, is sketched in a period setting of the 1930s.

The unscrupulous villain of a landowner and the boy’s clever, amoral sister end as Nazis; the w e ll-m e a n in g , honest peasants, who are the family of a para­ plegic girl who befriends him and accepts his love, are presented with tenderness.

Stellan Skarsaard in the title role deservedly shared the prize for the best actor with the leading Eurostar, Michel Piccoli.

Piccoli plays the enigmatic, entrancing businessman who distracts a young advertising accountant from his wife, his friends and even his gambling in Pierre Granier-Deferre’s line etrange affaire (A Strange Affair), and lifts him to the dizzy pinnacles of retail management. Nathalie Baye as the wife tries to fight back, then sensibly decides not to bother. The poor young man (Gerard Lanvin) is left not high and dry, but low and wet.

As a parable on worshipping alien gods, the film works with smooth, not to say slick, French savoir-faire.

Another Silver Bear, for the best script, was given to Zoltán Fabri’s R equiem . I am h a n d ic a p p e d in appreciating this work by understanding every word of the Hungarian dialogue

CINEMA PAPERS June - 225

Berlin Film Festival 1982

Above: Wojciech Marczewski’s Dreszcze (Creeps): the brainwashing o f youth. Left: Zoltán Fabri’s Requiem, the love-life o f a beautiful Hungarian woman (Edit Frajt) during the 1950s.

Below: Stig Ramsing in Christian Braad Thomsen's Kniven i hjertet (A Stab in the Heart), about a lonely, introverted postman.

226 - June CINEMA PAPERS

Berlin Film Festival 1982

without being able to believe a syllable.

The story, set in the early 1950s, raises some expectation of political interest.

However, it is about the love-life of a beautiful young woman (Edit Frajt) whose first great love, possibly husband, was an underground Communist even before 1944, but he died in prison. It is only subtle signs which reveal that his imprisonment and death occurred after the Communists came to power.

The woman is now married to an older lawyer who had helped the left-wing youngsters under Fascism, but who was powerless when their own comrades arrested them in the 1950s. One night a young man whose speech and gestures remind her of her first love arrives, fresh out of prison. The resemblance is not coincidental: the two were cell-mates, and the younger boy admired his friend to the point of copying his gestures, adopting his thoughts and quoting his favored poets. The lady is unsettled, and decides to pack up and leave her husband, though whether to go with the boy, or just anyway, is not made clear.

And it does not seem to matter.

As a love affaire, their brief conjunc­ tion had every cinematic cliche, and not a single glimpse of mutual understanding.

However, Requiem has been highly praised as stylish and stylized.

This expectation, of seeing personal relationships handled with credibility and care by directors, and conviction by the cast, was satisfied by two Danish films, presented in the market.

Stepping Out, directed by Esben Hoilund Carlsen, is a lightly-handled comedy about couples re-pairing after the damages of divorce. The dialogue is like vintage Neil Simon, with non-stereo­ typed characters. There is a sensitive, intelligent but shy taxi-driver, who can offer tenderness and affection, but not the showier achievements of a competi­ tive society; and a highly-inteiligent lady doctor who needs to develop and mature sufficiently to value him, after the depredations to her self-esteem by her ex-husband, a flashy, philandering university lecturer. The children involved are charming, without being cute: the driver’s 10-year-old daughter is cynic­ ally knowing, while the doctor’s little son still has an unrepressed, unmanipulated Oedipal dependence. Woody Allen could not have done it better, or be so little patronizing.

A Stab in the Heart, by Christian Braad Thomsen, is about a lonely, intro­ verted postman who opens other people’s letters, to warm himself at other people’s love. He is picked up by a part­ time barmaid, who is a psychology student. Deeply touched by his needs, she offers him an intimacy which she cannot keep up for very long. After being emotionally relaxed and released by her, he has no defence mechanisms against the inevitable ending of their affaire. Step by step, the light romance changes into the portrayal of his emotional dis­ integration, and eventual, te rrib le tragedy. Nonetheless, the film is not depressing: truthful as it is, there is a final glimpse of kindness, and grace.

The rest of the interesting films were in the Forum of Young Films, reviewed elsewhere, and the only big discoveries of the New German Films series were prizewinners from other festivals, like Margarethe von Trotta’s marvellous Die bleierne zeit (Dark Times), which carried off the Golden Lion at Venice last year.

But the short films, neglected by most critics, had come up with one perfect gem of animation, virtually worth the journey to Berlin: Le ravissement de Frank N. Stein (The Ravishing of Frank N. Stein), by Georges Schwizgebel, from Switzerland. In nine-and-a-half minutes, it sums up the magic of cinematic ten­ sion, and the almost post-coital sadness when it is over.

MariKuttna

Esben Hoilund Carlsen’s Slingre valsen (Stepping Out), a “lightly-handled comedy about couples re-pairing after the damages o f divorce”.

Who Speaks of Realism Here?

Every day, at the Berlin Film Festival, someone asks, “Seen any good films today?” It is a moment of terror; you are under interrogation and have no answer, no alibi. You (I) cannot remember which theatre you were in, what films you have seen and what gossip you have over­ heard. The context frames the films, and the way one responds to them in a particular way. There is so much on offer that images become detached from films; films run into and out of each other and the frenzied critic runs into and out of films. The most vivid memory one has, once it is all over, is of hysterical amnesia.

One way of accounting for this is to posit a festival like Berlin as a super­ deluxe-market where items offered for instant g ra tifica tio n are rendered instantly perishable. If looks could kill, the look, in this context, kills the cinema and the cinema erases the viewer (as constituted by memory) in a gesture of visual overkill. All that would remain would be a black screen, a blank page and a critic with nothing to say.

But looking on the brighter side (the other side of the black screen), it is poss­ ible to perceive memory as not simply blocked by the plethora of films but pro­ voked into a different kind of function­ ing. Memory works to screen the abundance of images, in a process of projection, of superimposition, whereby images structured by the logic of memory are traced over the logic of techno-projection. What remains then is a memory screen, a blank page and a critic wondering how to say what remains to be said.

It is difficult to give an overall picture, to review what was on view, to answer the question which provokes this writing: seen any good films at Berlin? So what is offered is not a balanced picture, a realistic assessment; rather a super­ im position, som ething between an imposition and an afterthought. “ Vous oublierez. Vous oublierez” : the voice of Marguerite Duras speaks. The screen is black. There is an incongruity between the voice and the image, for at the very moment the warning/injunction is uttered, the moment that forgetful­ ness is voiced, memory is summonsed, the screen invites a projection, and a superimposition of memory traces over the black leader.The film, Duras’ L’homme Atlantique (The Atlantic Man), takes off from other films, other memories. Later in the film,

once again over black leader, the voice pronounces: “Vous etes reste dans I’etat d’etre parti. Et j ’ai fait un film de votre absence.” Who is the you that the film addresses? Is it ‘I’ the viewer, or an other ‘you’, the you that is always elsewhere, the lover addressed in absentia? If this is a lover’s discourse, it articulates a love story that revolves around the cinema as much as around two characters, I and You. The magic of the cinema is that it brings into presence that which is out of touch; the tyranny of the cinema is that -the image asserts its presence so insist­ ently. How to make a film about absence, how to trace the elsewhere in the here and now?

Between segments of black leader in this film there are images — of cold wintry seascapes, of a deserted hotel.

The images recall another Duras film, Agatha ou les lectures illimitees.

L’homme Atlantique is in fact com­ posed of off-cuts from the earlier film in which two voices retell, in various ver­ sions, their love, their memories.

Although there are no characters as such in either film, actors do appear: in Agatha, predominantly Bulle Ogier, and in L’homme, Yann Andrea. On one level, the figures on the screen can be read as a tracing of absence: the you addressed on the soundtrack is represented only by an image. But, on another level, the languid, melancholic elegance of the actors anchors the words, insisting on the supremacy of presence, on the embodiment and personalization of absence. But the questions remain: Is ‘you’ personal or impersonal? Is it a capital or small ‘I’?

Babette Mangolte’s The Cold Eye, framed in the same context as the Duras, can be seen to explore similar issues of address. The film opens with a naming and brief written description of the main characters. As the film develops, the practice of description itself comes under scrutiny, and the gap between scriptural and cinematic writing is ex­ plored. The central ‘character’ is never depicted, only given in her voice and her point of view.

The opening image is of a pair of h a n d s s o r tin g th ro u g h p a in te d canvases, while a voice muses on the colors, tones, combinations. It is not as though an identity is being posited between our point of view and that of the camera, so that the audience sees what the artist sees; rather, it is the space between that is marked out, for the different processes of painting, of filling up the canvas and of filling the frame are seen as disjunctive. What is left out as it were, what is absent in this study in black and white, is color, and it is the memory of film colors, of reproduced paint, rather than paint itself that is called into play.

The absence of the protagonist (absent from the screen, present off­ screen) seems one way of responding to or reacting against the sovereignty of the present, the immediacy of the image. Yet in The Cold Eye, even though the voice is disembodied, a process of substitution seems to be effected whereby the voice and look of the camera take the place not just of the represented body, but also of the character. So that the film is struc­ tured around a singular consciousness, and, paradoxically, although the other characters appear as actors, acting out a scenario, the central character becomes very central as character.

If there is an attempt to effect a distance between the filmic voice and the voice of the artist-as-heroine it doesn’t really work. What the audience is given is a very phenomenological exercise in point of view. But if the insistent self­ consciousness of the artist becomes irritating, pretentious, the attempt to develop a new kind of narrative is cer­ tainly intriguing — the intrigue having less to do with a formulated mystery and more with the articulation of space and place.

If it can be said of narrative cinema that events take place (adherence to the rules of continuity giving a place to the viewer as well), what takes the place of events in a deviation from orthodox narrative? Avant-garde cinema has a long history and short reply to this ques­ tion: dispense with the human figure, dispense with all elements of plot so that place and story are replaced by an abstract articulation of space and time.

If, however, there is some concern with the way in which the human figures in the cinema, the modalities of I and You, both personal and impersonal, a different way of figuring out space, of spacing figures, has to be found. Place, in such a scenario, becomes not just the ground­ ing for action, but a space of perform­ ance. It is the performance of the camera, speech as performance, and the performance of actors (as opposed to an acting out of the story) that is fore­ grounded.

The ideally lugubrious location for such explorations has emerged as semi­ empty hotels, decaying colonial man­ sions — from Last Year at Marienbad to Chantal Akerman’s Hotel Monterey and the Duras repetitions. The appeal of such locations would seem to lie in the fact that they represent places of imperman­ ence; like transit lounges, they locate the in-between times rather than the trajec­ tory of a journey and thus provide a way of representing empty space, of trans­ forming space into place in a way that is not diegetically motivated, where the human figure is often to be read through traces rather than immediate presence.

CINEMA PAPERS June - 227

Berlin Film Festival 1982

Somewhere between the Duras films of the Festival and The Cold Eye came a surprise hotel-film, Robina Rose’s Nightshift, described as lying “somewhere between vaudeville and Last Year at Marienbad”. The* film, in color, has a strange look, as though it has been filmed in Super 8 and blown up. While this suggests a certain mood or atmo­ sphere, it also works in with the dis­ course on looking. A night receptionist watches the comings and goings in a hotel foyer, while we watch her watching.

What is refreshing about the film is that it manages to avoid the underline of moralizing with which such filmic dis­ courses are often imbued. The film not only catches the tedium of suspended time, of empty space, but acknowledges the curiosity and superimposition of phantasy that such tedium provokes. The nightshift is punctuated by happenings: banal, bizarre, theatrical. Rather than characters, there are performances, a projection of phantasy and the fantastic.

Another film concerned, more overtly and in a more essayistic way, with the specifically-cinematic modalities of per­ formance was Jon Jost’s Stagefright. Or perhaps it was Stagefright that traced the question of performance over the other films. If there is an image that suggests the tenor of the film it is that of the custard pie frozen as it splatters over a performer’s face — the actor’s fear of performance, the audience's retaliation.

But in the cinema the audience does not throw custard pies at what is, after all, only an image, and in the theatre the gesture cannot be frozen. If stagefright implies a panic, a fear about forgetting lines, about acting out of character or being reduced to silence, Stagefright has, in part, to do with the way in which speech and gesture, sound and move­ ment are produced by the cinema in the service of character construction. The performers in Stagefright are never situated in a realistic place, and space is rigorously defined by the constraints of the frameline, which can also exclude the human form and reform it, reformulating a figuring out of the human.

I found Stagefright frequently mystify­ ing, difficult, but also demystifying in a way that was humorous rather than didactic. The humor is provoked largely by a subtext on entertainment, on the relation between magic and the cinema and politics. The magic of the cinema is double-edged: if it’s often a case of manipulation, the hidden magician, the film itself delights in manipulating sound and image, in exploring new cinematic possibilities in a modestly virtuoso way, the notion of new constrained by tonguein-cheek, visually-punning references to other filmmakers (Jean-Luc Godard, Jean-Marie Straub and Danielle Huillet, Donald Sharits) — an inflexion of image/homage.

Other films which foregrounded per­ formance and theatricality in different ways were Rosa von Praunheim’s Unsere leichen leben noch and Rote liebe (Red Love), and Ulrike Ottinger’s Freak Orlando. The von Praunheims use ‘real’ situations and actual people who act out versions of themselves in an extravagant display of exhibitionism. The interest of the films lies in this theatrical dimension as fed by the flamboyancy of the ‘charac­ ters’ and a utilization of shock tactics and tactics of seduction. While the films are fascinating (and attracted a cult audi­ ence of Berliners at the Festival) there is also a naivety in the let-it-all-hang-outon-the-road-to-liberation sentiment that informs them.

Unsere leichen features five gutsy women in their sixties, and Red Love combines a melodramatic dramatiza­ tion of a Kollontai novel and video inter­ views with a contemporary woman who has found sexual liberation in her sixties.

“Red Love is dedicated to the radicalism of two women’’ the program notes, but

228 - June CINEMA PAPERS

from certain feminist perspectives the reading of radicalism given by the film is at least ambivalent.

Perhaps Freak Orlando could be similarly chastized, but it is a film far less weighted with a message, far more bizarre; a film which is literally all over the place, littered with images and peopled with actors who appear as images rather than characters. The film takes off from Virginia Woolfs novel, Orlando, yet doesn’t attempt the imposs­ ible of a faithful and literary adaptation (as does Anette Apon’s The Waves, alas). Orlando, played by Magdalena Montezuma, metamorphoses into five identities: “ in Orlando Zyclopa’s skin, with and without a moustache, as a Fie and a She, as a lover and as a murderer of the Siamese twin Lena, who sucks the marrow out of her twin sister Leni’s bones; as a corpse of the Spanish inquisition and as an entertainer in a Playboy club” .

Delphine Seyrig as the love object, the locus of desire, also turns in a variety of delightfully-improvized performances, in part parodying her own image, dis­ integrating it into a number of phan­ tasms — from vampire victim to Playboy bunny. There is a wonderful scene where Montezuma, half her face sheathed in a scaly mask (suggestions of a creature arisen from the sea, but definitely no Aphrodite), gazes into Seyrig’s eyes (Seyrig in pink tutu) and attempts to take her into her arms for a romantic waltz.

The dance becomes an orchestrated comedy of errors as they are restrained

by Seyrig’s attachment, a very miffed and obstructive Siamese sister, played by Jackie Reynal — the eternal triangle.

This is not a film about absence, but it elaborates a kind of lover’s discourse, an implication of you and I and the cinema where there is always a body too much.

Most of the other German women’s films were set apart from Freak Orlando by a more overt feminism rendered in more orthodox narratives and dealing with the German experience. They included Helma Sanders-Brahms’ Die beruhrte (No Mercy, No Future), Margarethe von Trotta’s Die bleierne zeit (Dark Times) and Helke Sander’s Der subjektive faktor (The Subjective Factor). But the most interesting narra­ tive film of this kind came from Holland: The Silence Surrounding Christine M., a first film by Marlene Gorris. A murder gets the story going and an investigative framework is established. However, the framework soon emerges as precisely that — a recognizable structure from which deviations, an exploration of misrecognition, can proceed.

A man, the owner of a boutique, has been killed by three women who, it emerges, did not know each other before the event, before shopping or shoplift­ ing on the same day in the same place. A woman psychiatrist is summonsed to investigate motivation, to establish the psychological condition of the three women. They refuse to comply and what is interesting here is that the film similarly refuses complicity with psychological interpretation (thus differing markedly from Dark Times which, despite a complex discourse on the obsessions of sisterhood, has some facile psycho­ logical observations on the relations betw een e m o tio n a l and p o litic a l terrorism).

The three women are given char­ acteristics, but not filled out as charac­ ters. There is a shift from the investiga­ tion of the crime to an investigation of the main female character, a pattern familiar from film noir. But here the familiarity ends for the woman is also psychiatrist/investigator, and it is neither her psychology nor her sexuality that comes Top: Robin Rose’s Nachtschicht (Nightshift): “a night receptionist watches the comings and under scrutiny, but her way of seeing. goings in a hotel foyer." Above: Ulrike Ottinger’s Freak Orlando, inspired by Virginia Woolf’s 'Orlando ’.

Similarly, the viewer is caught up less in a process of id e n tifica tio n , more in

Berlin Film Festival 1982

Marlene Gorris’ De stilte rond Christine M. (The Silence Surrounding Christine MJ: ways o f seeing under scrutiny.

processes of recognition and mis- Festivals like Berlin tend to register the independent and more experimental recognition. national in a way that collapses the cinema should be thus positioned is less Women and crime and detection different production contexts and film­ the fault of the Berlin organizers than of figured elsewhere in the Festival. I did making practices of a given country into the Australian Film Commission. not see Angela Summereder’s Zeich- each other.

The one independent film which was meister, but by selected accounts it is a There was an attempt to break out of highlighted in programming was Corinne this dilemma in an event organized within and Arthur Cantrill’s Second Journey to film to look out for. It is based on an actual case of a woman who in 1949 was the framework of the Forum of Young Uluru, stills of which were used for the Cinema — a conference on Independent poster and program cover of the Forum. sentenced to life imprisonment for the Cinema, the first session dealing with It is a telling indictment of Australian film murder of her husband: questions of production, distribution and culture, in its broadest aspect, that such “The text of the film predominantly exhibition, the second with Infermental, cinema can only gain recognition elseconsists of excerpts from the official an international video magazine of ’where (though its screening at the Mel­ record, summary positions of the independent and experimental cinema, bourne Film Festival paved the way for attorneys, petitions, statements of and with the role of critics and educa­ Berlin)1. It was also the only Australian witnesses and material which the par­ tionalists. Such a conference was a film shown at Berlin that was produced ticipating witnesses, as well as Frau useful intervention, but in the context without any subsistence from the AFC. Zeichmeister, added anew as a result could only skate the surface. Mostly, the of their work with the ‘historical’ texts.”

In Britain, there is a much stronger bewildered viewers/voyeurs have to tradition of independent cinema, of a Melvie Arslanian’s Stiletto uses flash­ figure out for themselves the cultural political filmmaking practice informed by backs and flash-forwards and a frag­ determinants of any given film, and to theoretical considerations and sup­ mented voice-over narration to piece engage in this figuring-out process ported by the British Film Institute Pro­ together clues and evidence as blonde against the stream of images, of films duction Board. Out of this tradition bombshell Nadja Vidal arrives in New that flow in and out of each other, against comes So That You Can Live, made by York City to take revenge on the killers of the amnesiac drive. her sister Sasha. The film is stylish, but Cinema Action over a five-year period. It One can easily figure out that there is a is set in South Wales and, through a hovers uneasily between avant-garde substantial difference between New particular family, explores the interlock­ chic, film-feministo-no/r and the under­ German Cinema and what is called the ing histories of country, industry, family, ground. It is clearly from the same milieu New Australian Cinema. D ifferent work, education and learning. as Amos Poe’s Subway Riders, a more popularly-acclaimed film but one that is funding policies, forms of state support On first glance, it has the look of what (which implicate distribution and exhibi­ is now a recognizable and established more decidedly offensive in its under­ tion as much as production) and climate mode of the British alternative mise en ground recreation rather than trans­ of film culture make ail the difference scene. But what marks its difference is formation of the 1940s femmes fatale between the German films and those like something that makes it simultane­ (though superbly shot by Johanna Heer).

Gallipoli, Winter of Our Dreams and The ously very British and also complicates Chris Petit’s new feature, An Unsuit­ Killing of Angel Street. In Australia, at notions of nationalism, of a national able Job For a Woman, has a young present, the production of experimental cinema, even if it be of an alternative woman detective who gets caught up and feature film s like Heinz Em igholz’ variety. In paying attention to “a region carried away by a very British oedipal Normalsatz and Harun Farocki’s Etwas first ruthlessly exploited and then drama. The material is promising, the wird sichtbar is inconceivable. film disappointing, caught as it is deliberately discarded by market forces Though the New German Cinema is and a dominant metropolitan culture” , between the impulse of a new narrative not simply a paradise of heterogeneity, it the film tentatively breaks with a prac­ and the constraints of an old imperative: has a history of organization, struggle, tice of rigorously but austerely privileg­ box-office returns. dissidence, a reminder of which was the ing the notion of filmic discourse, where An international film festival, by its new Straub-Huillet, Zu fruh, zu spat (an discourse as a theoretical issue (gener­ very name, functions in part to denation­ Italian/French/German co-production). ated in the metropolis) subsumes all alize films, to present a continuum of images; but at the same time it serves to But there is another Australian cinema other issues. The film listens, and the that is positioned outside the category of viewer too has to listen very attentively to juxtapose ‘examples’ of national cinema.

Although there are problems in concep­ the New and which, in terms of exhibi­ the Welsh voices, where it is not just a tion at Berlin, becomes not an ‘other’ matter of tuning into a strange tongue tualizing a national cinema as a homo­ geneous entity, it is equally dangerous to cinema but a pale shadow of the ‘real’ but of listening to a different speech, a ignore the specific historical and cultural thing, the averted gaze of the public face of Australian cinema. That the contexts from which films are produced.

1. See review, Cinema Papers, No. 35, p. 497.

different mode of story-teiling, one which affects the telling of history.

This applies too to Traveller, a film made in Ireland by Joe Comerford. It is an elliptical narrative made about and with the co-operation of travellers or tinkers — outcasts in an already divided society. There is no synchronized sound, snatches of dialogue ‘appearing’ in voice-over, and the film is prefaced by a quote from Hans Magnus Enzenburger: “There is a dark and intimate connec­ tion between murder and politics.” It is a fascinating film, quite unlike anything else in contemporary British cinema.

From India and Japan there were two particularly exciting films, which though differing from other films from the same countries were nevertheless strongly informed by their cultural context.

Ketan Mehta’s Bhavni bhavai is based on an ancient folktale which tells of the exploitation and oppression of the Harijans or outcasts. It utilizes forms of folk drama with a Brechtian slant, juxta­ posing the past and the present through forms of parody, musical pastiche, spectacle, dramas of intrigue and news­ reel footage. The story concludes with two endings, the viewer left not so much with a simple choice but with an ending that is open without being empty.

Suzuki Seijun’s Kageroza was one of the most stimulating and provocative films I have seen in years: a rapturous unfolding of images, an elastic elabora­ tion of fictionality. I cannot remember the story (for the story is constantly being lost, revolving around the persistence of vision, the projection of phantasy and the treachery of memory) but images remain burnt into the mind’s eye, an eye left far from cold. The film is very much about representational modes, Western and Japanese (where the Japanese is seen not as a singular or pure system), yet it avoids being labored or didactic, it expands the boundaries of fiction rather than hovering guiltily on the edge as so much c o n te m p o ra ry e xp e rim e n ta l cinema does.

This is a very selective and impres­ sionistic account of the Festival, juxta­ posing and pulling films in and out of their structured contexts. Berlin is in fact highly structured, providing a number of sections: the main Competition, the Forum of Young Cinema (which in­ cluded screenings of Infermental, the conference and a Super 8 screening), a market section, an Info section, New German Cinema, Women Making Films, a Retrospective of Curtis Bernhardt, a Homage to James Stewart and a Festival of Children’s Films. It would be possibie to confine oneself to one section, one place, thus ensuring clear vision and a clear conscience as regards critical judgment. But categories are always problematic, always posited on exclu­ sion and absence. What is absent in one place may be present in another where presence is figured out differently by a different space.

Though amnesia and panic seem en­ demic to festival-goers, whose eyes are bigger than their memories, there is s o m e th in g e x h ila ra tin g in being propelled by the tide of images, in the screening process not just of the Festival but of one’s memory as it works in this context. Though it does not have a great deaf to do with reality, I am reminded of a sequence towards the end of Kageroza: the hero is in a makeshift theatre which has provided the space for a kabuki play performed by children, a bunraku play in which characters perform as puppets, and a site of flashback and prophecy. As props disintegrate, as costumes float away, they are transformed by cine­ matic magic into the backdrop (or super­ imposition) of the next scenario. The hero exclaims to no one in particular (or in particular to the audience), “Who speaks of realism here?” "k

Lesley Stern CINEMA PAPERS June - 229

A rom antic drama set against a panoram ic South E ast A sia background. I t is the story o f M organ Keefe (Bryan Brown), proprietor o f the Koala Club, who m eets again Jo Reeves (Helen M òrse), a form er lover and wife am bitious Australian jou rn alist P eter Reeves (John B ell), Far E ast is written and directed by John Duigan, fo r producer Richard Mason. It stars Bryan Brown, Helen Morse, John Bell, Sinan Leong, Raina McKeon, Henry Feist, Bill Hunter and John Gaden. â&#x20AC;&#x17E;

Clockwise from right: Former lovers Morgan Keefe (Bryan Brown) and Jo Reeves (Helen Morse) meet again; Peter Reeves (John Bell), a successful, ambitious, Australian journalist in South East Asia, and his wife Jo; Peter puts his life on the line to help political activist Rosita Constanza (Raina McKeon); Peter, Rosita and Morgan; Morgan at his Koala Club, part girlie club, part watering hole for Australians in South East Asia; Morgan and Jo. .

.

V, V i'

SHE: "Wasn’t Joan Fontaine wonderful . . . and she looked so lovely.”

HE: "She always does— and so do you!”

Collage based on a Lux advertisement In Better Homes and Gardens, May 1956.

J

oan Fontaine’s career as a Hollywood star of the so-called “golden age” follows an almost archetypal pattern: brief appren­ ticeship in the 1930s; instant, secure stardom after a major popular success (in “Rebecca”); a range of rewarding roles with some notable directors in the ensuing decade; and a gradual tailing off in the 1950s and ’60s as the old Hollywood declined.

Unlike some major stars, she did not have or seek a career as a character actress but chose to pursue a highly successful stage career — among a variety of other accomplishments. As a film star, she gave several of the most sensitive performances of the 1940s. Today, at 63, she is articulate and outspoken about the Hollywood system. She talks with Brian McFarlane.

In the pre-“Rebecca” days, it seemed to me there were three high spots: “A Damsel in Distress” with Fred Astaire, “Gunga Din” with Cary Grant, both directed by George Stevens, and “The Women”, directed by George Cukor. How valuable did you find it, at that very early stage in your career, working with such directors as Cukor and Stevens?

you didn’t even know you had. He gave you such confidence.

So his reputation, of being a great actors’ director and very sym­ pathetic with women, is really deserved . . .

“Women’s director” ! He was removed, if you will remember, from Gone With the Wind because Clark Gable and Leslie Howard went to David [Selznick] and said, I learned nothing from George “We can’t work with him, he’s Stevens, except I was madly in love primping the ladies all the time and with him, as everybody was — bothering about their crinolines; we Elizabeth Taylor, Shelley Winters. are not getting anything.”

We all fell madly in love with this one-fourth American Indian.

The ladies then went for Sunday He was inscrutable, but he was afternoon lessons with him, I under­ God, and I suppose God is pretty stand . . . inscrutable.

George Cukor had been a stage True. But you can understand director and taught me much, much why Clark Gable and Leslie more than almost all the directors I Howard wouldn’t understand him, have ever worked with. He was or he them. wonderfully warm and a person who was entirely for you and not in I particularly liked your perform­ any way what we call front-office. ance as Peggy in “The Women”.

He didn’t give a damn about bill­ How did you feel about playing that ing or contracts or anything, but part among so many more flam­ cared about you as a performer. He boyant roles, with people like would bring out things in you that Rosalind Russell, Mary Boland, Joan Crawford and Paulette The above interview was conducted when Goddard?

Joan Fontaine was in Australia as a guest of the Parkinson show. The Editor gratefully thanks the show’s producers for giving per­ mission for the interview.

I hadn’t come out of the egg yet; I didn’t know what it was all about.

CINEMA PAPERS June - 233

Joan Fontaine

It was devastating, apart from any­ thing else, to be with all these great people — not that I really knew they were great. How could I? I had been at school in Japan and never saw films or heard much about them.

I was not impressed by Holly­ wood, because in Japan you have lovely houses and servants and all that, and parties were much nicer in Tokyo than Hollywood. So I didn’t really know who these people were; nor did I understand that it was a very important industry. It seemed to me something lovely to do, which gave me moderate independence, and the ability to express myself in some way. But I had no idea it was an international obsession, because it wasn’t in Tokyo, where Kabuki was much' more important than a local cinema.

You were really being thrown in at the deep end, in a way, with “The Women” . . .

“ My G od, he lo o k s like a monkey!” Do you remember that? “ Do something to his eyebrows.”

Mr Goldwyn didn’t think Laurence Olivier was anything particular.

Do you think playing that role in “The Women” was influential in David Selznick’s decision to cast you in “Rebecca”?

I know that it was George Cukor who said, “ I have a young girl; take a look at her.” But I had met David anyhow. He was looking for a little, young, terribly naive English girl, which is exactly what I was. It was a case of absolutely the right place, right time, with the right sort of look and equipment, and every­ thing else.

It must have been very striking because you were chosen in prefer­ ence to, say, Margaret Sullavan, who was, at that time, a more estab­ lished star . . .

Above: Joan Fontaine (second left) with Norma Shearer, Rosalind Russell, Paulette Godard and Mary Boland in George Cukor’s The Women. Below: Joan Fontaine, Laurence Olivier, Gladys Cooper and Reginald Denny in Alfred Hitchcock’s Rebecca.

I had known them socially; we were part of that British colony in Hollywood and, my God, they all seemed older than the world. You know, when you are 20 and some­ body is 35, they have had it as far as you are concerned. They shouldn’t have been taking up room on the earth. I was surprised they could walk!

But was it an agreeable atmo­ sphere?

No, because Hitchcock and Selz­ nick made it very clear to me that Olivier wanted Vivien Leigh in the role, and that they were taking me on some sort of tolerance. I under­ stand that in her book Gladys Cooper refers to “this little Ameri­ can actress” ; well, I was English.

So there was that kind of con­ descension before we had even met, because they wanted Vivien.

Vivien was in the club, but I was not in that special club. That’s a very interesting aspect of the English — they are cliquey. So are the Germans and the Japanese.

They made it very clear that I, at 2 1 , was an outsider, an interloper, who had stolen this role from Vivien.

Well, whatever forces were at work, it gave you that marvellous impres­ sion of being overawed, vulnerable, shy . . .

Yes, but I really never knew about it. It didn’t hit me. For instance, when I did Rebecca I really didn’t know who Laurence Olivier was. He wasn’t anybody at that stage, was he?

On the stage, his reputation was something, and he had made “Wuthering Heights” by that time, which I suppose had made him a matinee idol . . .

He was not deemed by Goldwyn as being anything special; he said, 234 - June CINEMA PAPERS

But she was not English and she was much older.

You know that legendary remark of Hitchcock’s about actors needing to be treated like cattle. What do you think about his methods of handling actors? Did you find him helpful?

Absolutely, though he was in­ clined to tear people down in front of others. As I say in my book, No Bed o f Roses, he divided and conquered; he had that habit of

saying “this silly old actor over there” or “that idiot” or whatever it was, and probably did the same about me. But it was a very clever device. On both films I did for him we all ended up hardly civil because of these tactics.

You were very young and acting with his distinguished cast of British actors: Olivier, Gladys Cooper, Nigel Bruce, George Sanders and so on. Did you feel overawed by this?

. . . and self-effacing and apolo­ getic. All these things they actually did to me over and above the demands of the characters they were playing.

What about playing the role of Mrs De Winter when you must have known it was an immensely popular novel and everyone had ideas about this “lovely and unusual person with the lovely and unusual name”?

You are taking a lot for granted there because it was just another

Joan Fontaine

was paying me $500 a week, if that, so his profit was enormous and he was going to wait for that.

David didn’t care about the con­ sistency of my career because he had also signed Dorothy Maguire, Jennifer Jones, Ingrid Bergman, Joseph Cotten and the young actor married to Jennifer at the time [Robert Walker] — I think even he was under contract. He had the stable of actors and he was playing chess with us. He wasn’t doing any more than that.

And yet, as producers go, he does seem to be one of the few who left some kind of imprint of quality on his films . . .

Now look, how many films did he make?

Not enough. He spent a lot of time on them and wrote a lot of memos about them . . .

That’s right; but Gone With the Wind, Rebecca, Duel in the Sun — what else?

Joan Fontaine as Ivy in Sam Wood’s film o f the same name, ‘‘the sort o f woman who gives wickedness a good name”.

book that was out. It wasn’t at that time anything better or worse than Frenchman’s Creek or whatever else Daphne did. It was simply one of the many romantic novels of that period, and remember they were coming out pretty fast. Forever Amber was to come soon, and so on. No, it wasn’t a particularly over-exciting moment for that studio. All the other studios were grinding out other things.

It wasn’t, for instance, of the order of playing Scarlett O’Hara, where everyone had an image of the heroine?

David made them as important as possible because he was a very good showman. But, other than that, he didn’t think it was particu­ larly special.

You got your Oscar the next year for “Suspicion”, again with Hitch­ cock. Did you think you won partly because of your performance in “Rebecca”?

Yes, I think so. It’s often the case, isn’t it; Elizabeth Taylor and darling Ginger Rogers got it. You know there was a lot of sympathy in Ginger’s vote. She had separated from Fred Astaire and everyone was rooting for her because she had made a success as an actress. It was done with affection. We were rather enraged that Astaire’s wife had said Ginger really wasn’t quite the social image she wanted for Fred. That instantly changed the vote.

In the post-“Rebecca” period, were you in a strong position to choose your roles?

Not at all. I was under contract to David and that meant I had no opinion or choice whatsoever. As a matter of fact, as I look back, I am appalled he didn’t give me some of his other roles that were there to be had. David, having hired me for very little, was standing out for the most money he could, so he turned down all the other offers and kept me in a vault, as it were, until he got the price. He didn’t help my career.

I only made one film for him.

The 1950s “Farewell to Arms”, with Jennifer Jones and Rock Hudson

Oh yes, but I am talking about this period. Oh, he later became Jennifer’s manager and put her in films like Love is a Many Splendoured Thing and Tender is the Night. But I mean at this time. It was Jennifer who got him back to working — for her.

In that period he was such a success, and a social success as well. He had all that Long Island­ Virginia push behind him, and I think he entirely rested on his Yes, because you then went on to laurels. He b ecame a petty make quite different sorts of films. potentate, and he was determined Up until “Frenchman’s Creek”, you seemed to be developing this on­ screen image of a shy, unworldly, touchingly-restrained young woman

to have his way with us and tell us what we would do.

Was he responsible for putting you into films like “This Above All”, “The Constant Nymph” and “Jane Eyre”?

No, he didn’t put me into Constant Nymph. I did that on my own. I met Eddie Goulding one day and he said that he was looking for some little, flat-chested, freckle­ faced, 14 year-old girl who had also to be a star, because that was what Warner Bros wanted. I said, “ Well, how about me?” and he said, “You?” Well, I had just won an Academy Award, but I was in pig­ tails without make-up and he said, “You’re perfect!” That’s how I got that.

Goulding always sounded like a man of real culture . . .

I loved him, and he bucked the Hollywood system. His was one of the great tragedies — and there are many of course in Hollywood — where he told somebody off and, because of that kind of nepotistic thing that happens in Hollywood, he was barred from working any­ where. He died a very sorrowful man. It was a terrible system in many ways, good in others.

I’d like to take up your remarks about the studios because I am inter­ ested in your relation to them.

Unlike some actresses, like Bette Davis at Warner Bros, Claudette Colbert at Paramount and Rita Hayworth at Columbia, you never Continued on p. 297 Louis Jordan and Joan Fontaine in Max Ophuls’ Letter From an Unknown Woman, “one o f the high-spots o f all Hollywood”.

I hated Frenchman’s Creek and I went on suspension for months, but David had sold me to the studio for such an enormous amount that he wasn’t going to let me work in any­ thing else. And he was enough of a psychologist to know that, if actors aren’t working, finally they burst at the seams. So, one day I called him up and said, “All right, I’ll do the picture.” But he didn’t give me a raise. He didn’t do anything.

So I just hated seeing in the papers that I was difficult and I was refusing roles that were offered to me. I had nothing to do with it.

He used the press, which was a common thing in Hollywood, to beat down the actor/writer/producér/director, whoever it is, but that was part of the studio system, and he didn’t care if I had made six other films. He wanted that amount of money, and he got it from Para­ mount. I think he got $500,000, or something like that, for me and he CINEMA PAPERS June - 235

Film insurance is a subject usually taken for granted; rarely does it invite controversy or debate. But its importance cannot be ignored.

The Adair Insurance Broking Group was the first local broker to specialize in local films; Cinesure is the most recent. While only two of several important and experienced companies, they provide a good base for this first look at the state of film insurance in Australia and the issues facing film producers and investors.

In future editions, the range of topics covered will expand to include completion guarantees, and representatives of other local and overseas broking firms will be interviewed.

ADAIR

Ronald S. Adair, founder and chairman o f Adair Insurance Broking Group.

236 - June CINEMA PAPERS

The Adair Insurance Broking Group was established in 1961, w hen A ustralian insurance broking companies were only beginning to consolidate their position.

In 1972, Adair entered the Australian film industry as the first local broker to specialize in insuring local films, at a time when the film specialists were noticeably absent from the local scene.

In the past decade, Adair has insured dozens of Australian films. Beginning with Wake In Fright in 1972, the company has watched the insured value of Australian films jump from around $200,000 to in excess of $7 million per production. In the past few months alone, the company has insured more than $35 million worth of Australian film product. The stakes are high.

As the first A ustralian brokers to specialize in Australian film, Adair has recently expanded its base considerably through its appointment as sole representa­ tive in Australia and New Zealand for Albert G. Ruben and Co. of Los Angeles and The Fireman’s Fund Insurance Company. The Fireman’s Fund, founded in 1863, is the largest entertainment underwriter in the world today. More than 70 per cent of all insured films are covered by Ruben and The Fireman’s Fund.

Mike Channel talks to Ronald S. Adair, founder and chairman of Adair Insurance Broking Group.

Film Insurance

Up to the time of entry by the Adair Insurance Broking Group into the Australian film business, what had been your personal interest in the development of the local industry?

I have been involved with the Sydney Film Festival for more than 2 0 y e a rs and been on th e committee. There was a personal interest in Australian film, and the opportunity to become involved in the insurance side of the business was welcome indeed.

At the time, of course, film insur­ ance didn’t mean much in terms of premium income — and would not do so for some time. However, I decided to make the film business my specialty at a time when our company structure — and the film industry generally — was growing considerably. I personally handled all film matters for several years and remain directly involved today, although the division team has enlarged nationwide.

At that stage, how confident were you that ultimately there would be a reasonable premium income from the business, and that Australian film product would become a viable international commercial proposi­ tion?

There was no confidence in par­ ticular, and no real lack of confi­ dence. At the time, it was some­ thing new for me, and at that time we were seeking many new areas of development in the insurance busi­ ness. After all, our business as brokers was to develop any areas of insurance which were being neglected by other brokers — and few were interested in Australian film then. Naturally enough, we were also interested in our own growth.

O ur philosop h y was, and remains, that whatever a client’s needs — particularly if they are specialized needs — it is worth our delving into the business to learn what it is all about, hopefully obtaining a piece of that market through the growth of our own expertise. Belief in the product was, and is, paramount to that commit­ ment.

the need for comprehensive insur­ In today’s terms, was such early ance coverage in the early 1970s? insurance coverage relatively “superficial”?

As the needs arose, I think the industry was finding out for itself, It was not quite so sophisticated as much as anything else, what it as today’s insurances, but basically was all about. Australian investors it was similar. Film Producer’s were not conscious of the types of Indemnity, Negative All Risk — insurance packages which were the blueprint was available from the available for their protection — at working model overseas. first.

Remember, in the early 1970s, it How did you develop the capacity to was all such a new market for Aus­ provide these competitive insurance tralia. As our film producers rates? became involved with ' overseas interests — just as Lloyd Martin, There were no specialist brokers then managing director of NLT around until I began developing our Productions, had linked with U.S. facilities through the Lloyd’s connections — the international brokers in London. I was surprised parties were requiring full insur­ to discover, upon my first exam­ ance protection as part of the ination of the London market, that arrangement. a number of the old, established As Adair began to grow in the English insurance com panies industry, began to understand these carried specialist film divisions. insurances and develop the market All international film business, accordingly, we encouraged pro­ however, had to go through ducers to approach a local broker London. Affiliates in Australia and such as ourselves for quotes, thus elsewhere could not establish their taking advantage of our local own rates, or even quote on the knowledge of the area. By the way business. The specialist offices in we could word proposals, provid­ London kept direct control of the ing information for the under­ market; their own people outside writer that would not normally be London couldn’t touch the busi­ given by an overseas broker, we ness.

However, we found that once we were able to obtain competitive rates. And that was a recognizable established connections with the Lloyd’s brokers to effect the neces­ benefit.

sary introductions in the London market, we could reap the benefits of their accumulated claims experi­ ence and specialist facilities for our own marketplace. And that was the way we went.

I also visited the U.S. on that first exploratory trip and con­ tinued to do so each year. I knew all about Albert G. Ruben and Co. in Los Angeles and their underwriter, The Fireman’s Fund Insurance Company, which is the largest entertainment and film under­ writers in the world. It would be many years, however, before they moved into the Australian market.

Apart from differing rates for pro­ ductions, is there a percentage formula relating to the overall cost of a production which dictates the allocation for insurance expendi­ ture?

Yes. A rule of thumb is two per cent as a costing on film insur­ ances. This includes all insurances to be placed, including Worker’s Compensation and Public Liab­ ility, alongside the total protection coverage.

At what stage are you generally called in to consult on insurance Continued on p. 284

Were there many other Australian brokers operating in the business at the time?

No, except for one or two over­ seas-owned brokerages. Certainly, there were no specialist film insur­ ance brokers in Australia. Over­ seas brokers such as Sedgewick Collins and Hogg Robinson were doing some business here, but the sphere was very limited.

What was the level of awareness of CINEMA PAPERS June - 237

Cinesure, a new Australian underwriting agency, was launched in April to act for the first Australian insurance market to provide the full range of insurance coverage for the film and television industries. Cinesure is a division of Terence Lipman Pty Ltd, a Sydney-based insurance consultant.

The companies involved in the new m a rk e t are th e C o m m ercial U n io n Insurance Co. of Australia, QBE Insurance Ltd, AMP Fire and General Insurance Co. Ltd, and the Insurance Co. of North America (Australia) Ltd. The following interview, with Terry Lipman, chairman of Terence Lipman Pty Ltd, and Neil McEwin, head of Cinesure, was conducted by David White.

Specialist insurance has been avail­ able to Australian film and tele­ vision producers for some years. So what is the difference between Cine­ sure and those that currently operate in the film and television insurance field in Australia?

Top: Terry Lipman, chairman o f Terence Lipman Pry Ltd, and Neil McEwin, head o f Cinesure.

Above: Alan Arkin in Philippe Mora 's The Return o f Captain Invincible, which was handled by McEwin before joining Cinesure.

238 - June CINEMA PAPERS

Lipman: There are two major differences. First, Cinesure is an underwriting agency, which means we negotiate and write our own insurance policies. In' contrast, those already operating in this field in Australia are not underwriters but insurance brokers, which means they act as intermediaries between clients and the insurers.

The second major difference is that Cinesure is an Australian agency which acts for four of Aus­ tralia’s most substantial insurance companies, all of which are licensed under the Commonwealth Insur­ ance Act. This is the first time there has been an Australian insurance market to meet the full range of specialist needs in the film and tele­ vision industries. The contrast here is that, until now, Australian-based brokers have had to place almost all of this kind of insurance with overseas companies, which are generally not licensed under the Commonwealth Insurance Act. The Insurance A ct exists to regulate the Australian insurance industry in the interests of the Aus­ tralian public. So, until the estab­ lishment of Cinesure, most film and television insurance coverage for Australian producers has been outside the ambit of this Act.

What advantages, if any, are there in dealing with an underwriting agency directly rather than dealing with a broker?

Lipman: There are not neces­ sarily any financial advantages, because the terms from an under­ writing agency would be similar if negotiated directly by the client or indirectly through a broker. But, in practice, the client would probably have better communication and more flexibility in dealing directly because there would not be an inter­ mediary involved and this would leave less room for errors and mis­ understandings. I would also make the point that there are very few brokers in Australia who are proficient in the handling of film and television business. Therefore, there would be d istin ct dis­ advantages in dealing with an in­ experienced insurance broker.

McEwin: Looking at the experi­ enced brokers, Terry has made the point that they have had to place virtually all specialist film and tele­ vision insurance with overseas com­ panies, simply because, until we came along, there was no Aus­ tralian insurance market in this area. Now, a broker’s job is to shop around to ensure he gets the best ar­ rangements and deals for his client.

So, from this point on, any con­ scientious broker would have to check with us and not automati­ cally place his client’s business with a foreign company. In fact, already we have been delighted by the inter­ ested response by brokers.

Film Insurance

FILM INSURANCE At present the leading insurance brokers deal with some of the world’s biggest insurance com­ panies. Can Cinesure match the security that must flow from using such huge companies with enor­ mous assets?

Lipman: I think that’s the point.

If a bloke has a claim and he wants a quick settlement of a loss, which is after all what we are talking about, he could go to the office of all of these companies if he chose to. They are right here. He could thump on the counter and say, “ I Lipman: Absolutely. The com­ want my cheque.” Not that he’d bined assets of the four licensed need to, of course, as Cinesure Australian companies for which we would be paying his settlement as are acting are astronomical. The quickly as possible. On the other companies are the Commercial hand, he would not have that sort of Union Assurance Co. of Australia; access with an insurer on the other QBE Insurance; AMP Fire and side of the world.

General Insurance Co.; and the Insurance Company of North Cinesure has only just been estab­ America (Australia). As every­ lished. So how can it match the body knows, the AMP is a house­ experience of firms already hold name in Australia. However, operating in this field? it is not just a big Australian company; it is a big international McEwin: Cinesure certainly has company. The Commercial Union only just been established but, as is one of the largest insurers in the with any company, the experience world. QBE Insurance is one of the comes from the individuals major Australian companies, repre­ operating within the company. All sented all over the world. And the people in Cinesure have had long Insurance Company of North experience within the film industry America (Australia) is a subsidiary and have experience not only in of probably the largest single underwriting but in understanding insurance company in America. the needs of production companies.

Lipman: Neil is being modest.

How many of the four companies for There wouldn’t be anybody in Aus­ which Cinesure is acting are tralia who is more expert and quali­ overseas-owned? fied in handling film business than he is. Some of the films with which Lipman: Out of the four, only he has been associated before he one is overseas-owned. That’s the joined Cinesure are Heatwave, My Insurance Company of North Brilliant Career, The Pirate Movie, America (Australia). The other Mad Max, Mad Max 2, The Year three are all Australian companies, of Living Dangerously, Winter of substantially or entirely owned by Our Dreams, Far East, Puberty Australians. The AMP is by far the Blues, Starstruck, The Return of largest life assurance society owned Captain Invincible, Now and

by Australians. The Commercial Forever, Fighting Back and so on.

Union, which is listed on the stock exchange in Australia, has a sub­ stantial ownership by the National Mutual, which is the second biggest Australian mutual life insurer. The QBE, as one of the largest general insurers, is also listed on the stock exchange here.

We would be the first to acknow­ ledge that the major overseas groups who have been providing film and television cover until now are experienced and reliable insurers. But we believe our people have just as much sophistication and knowledge in this area. I think this country has developed to a point where we can offer services of this kind equal to anything in the world. If you want to insure your car, you don’t go to an insurance company in Los Angeles. Now there’s no necessity to take film and television insurance overseas.

has to get the money out of the insurance market and it then comes back via the overseas broker to your broker here. Add mail and paperwork delays and all of that takes time.

Lipman: We are not accusing anyone of inefficiency or neglig­ ence in any way. But there just are natural delays because of the insurers being so far away. One problem, for example, can be currency exchange delays.

Your literature has mentioned “competitive rates” and “keener” prices. Will Cinesure actually cost You say in your literature that less for film and television dealing through a broker with insurance? overseas insurers can mean delays in receiving documentation, settle­ McEwin: Not necessarily so. ment of claims and the like. Has this Being an Australian underwriting really been a significant problem for agency means that at Cinesure we film and television producers in know the producers. We know their Australia? experience and what their capabili­ ties are and certainly we’ll be Lipman: I believe it has and this looking at rewarding people who is one of the reasons we established have a very good track record. Not Cinesure in the first place. There everyone is going to get a cheap had been in some cases substantial rate. We are not here to give cheap delays in getting documentation, rates. We are here to use our which was embarrassing to people experience and expertise to make who were waiting for investment sure our clients receive the right moneys from financiers. Claims protection at a fair price, which is payments had often been held up the most important thing. A policy for two or three months, which only becomes a correct policy when brought a situation about where claims are made. films were put in jeopardy.

Lipman: With insurance, the McEwin: And there are natural price is obviously a very pertinent delays. Brokers here have had to consideration but it is certainly not use overseas brokers who then have the most essential consideration. I to place their business in overseas mean, when one buys insurance, markets. When you make a claim one is buying protection. If you are here, you go to your broker who Concluded on p. 284 has to go to an overseas broker who

Doesn’t a degree of overseas owner­ ship of these companies somewhat dampen your claim to being Aus­ tralian insurers?

Lipman: Not at all. Cinesure is a wholly Australian-owned agency.

And the important thing about the companies for which it acts is that they are all licensed to operate in Australia by the Federal Insurance Commissioner who is there to regulate all local insurance com­ panies on behalf of the Australian public. They are, by the Commis­ sioner’s exacting test, Australian licensed insurers.

McEwin: They are also all Aus­ tralian-based and this gives us a closer rapport than we would have if we were dealing with somebody sitting 15,000 or 2 0 ,0 0 0 km away.

Bryan Brown and Helen Morse in John Duigan's Far East, also handled by McEwin.

CINEMA PAPERS June - 239

The Australian Alternative Until now, Australian film and TV producers have had to place almost all their specialist insurance coverage with remote foreign insurers.

That’s where the business has generally ended up, even when they’ve dealt with Australian-based brokers.

That can mean delays, withholding taxes pushing up costs, as well as insuring with foreign companies which are often not authorised under the Commonwealth Insurance Act. Now there is an Australian alternative CINESURE is an Australian underwriting agency, backed by four of Australia’s most substantial licensed insurers. CINESURE provides complete coverage for film and TV productions—as extensive as that offered by any insurer in the world.

It can protect everything from major feature films to documentaries and commercials.

Because it is based right here in Australia, producers can expect speedier and more personal and flexible service.

Its rates are competitive and it rewards deserving clients. ^ Next time you want film and TV insurance, call us at CINESURE yourselves or get your broker to call.

The Australian Film & Television Insurance Specialists A Division of Terence Lipman Pty Ltd, Bridge House, 127 Walker Street, North Sydney.

PO Box 111, North Sydney, NSW 2060.

Telephone (02) 929 0611. Telex AA24696 (TELIP).

HLM CENSORSHIP LISTINGS January 1982

Films examined in terms of the Customs (Cinematograph Films) Regulations and States’ film censorship legislation are listed below.

3An explanatory key to reasons for classifying non-“ G” films appears hereunder: Frequency

Films Registered Without Eliminations

Infrequent

For General Exhibition (G) The Breaking of the Drought (16mm): F. Barret, Aus­

S (Sex) .............................

V (Violence).......................

L (Language) ....................

O (Other) ..........................

tralia, 900 m, National Film Theatre of Australia The Cheaters (16mm): M.C.D. Prods, Australia, 900 m,

National Film Theatre of Australia The Far Paradise (16mm): M.C.D. Prods, Australia, 900 m, National Film Theatre of Australia Girl of the Bush (16mm): F. Barret, Australia, 900 m, National Film Theatre of Australia (In Search of) Stallion of the Sea (16mm): J. Fairfax, Australia, 1371 m, J. Fairfax Kidstakes (16mm): Coyle-Ordell Prods, Australia, 900 m, National Film Theatre of Australia Krimhiide’s Revenge (16mm): UFA, Germany, 987.3 m, Valhalla Films The Man from Kangaroo (16mm): Carroll-Baker Prods, Australia, 900 m. National Film Library of Australia

Explicitness/lntensity

Frequent

i i i i

Low

f f f f

Medium

I I I I

m m m m

Purpose

High

Justified

Gratuitous

j j j j

g g g g

h h' h h

February 1982

Nic nie stoi przeszkodzie (Nothing Stands in the Way)

(16mm): Profil, Poland,' 950 m, Polish ConsulateGeneral On Our Selection (16mm): Southern Cross Films, Aus­ tralia, 900 m. National Film Theatre of Australia Passion (16mm): UFA, Germany, 990 m, National Library of Australia The Sentimental Bloke (16mm): Southern Cross Films, Australia, 900 m, National Film Theatre of Australia Siegfried (16mm): UFA, Germany, 987.3 m, Valhalla Films Silks and Saddles (16mm): J. Wells, Australia, 900 m.

National Film Theatre of Australia Sunshine Sally (16mm): Austral Superfilms, Australia, 900 m, National Film Theatre of Australia

Films Registered Without Eliminations For General Exhibition (G) Evening Rain: Shanghai Film Co., China, 2387 m, Comfort Film Enterprises Land of the Brave: Ming Chi, Taiwan, 2660 m, Joe Siu Int’l Film Co. Night Crossing: T. Leetch, U.S., 2880.15 m, GUO Film Dist.

Sunrise: A Story of Two Humans (16mm): Fox Film, U.S., 1283.49 m, Australian Film Institute Vanessa (16mm): New Part Film, Britain, 650 m, Parrabooks What 80 Million Women Want (16mm): Not shown, U.S., 734.99 m, Glenys Rowe Film Dist.

Not Recommended for Children (NRC) A Brotherhood of Heroes: Progressive Trading Co.,

Not Recommended for Children (NRC)

Hong Kong, 2780 m, Golden Reel Films, Vfi-l-j) Ke xana pros tin boxa trava: C. Carajopoulos, Greece, 3050 m, Apollon Films, S(i-l-j) L’age d’or: Vicomte De Noallles, France, 1657.57 m, Newhart Diffusion/Sharmill, Vfi-l-j) The Spy in the Palace: Not shown, Hong Kong, 2850 m. Golden Reel Films, V(f-l-j) Super Fool: R. Ng/K. Ip, Hong Kong, 2685 m. Grand Film Corp., O fadult concepts) Swimteam: J. Polakoff, U.S., 2203 m, Reid & Puskar,

The Adventure of the Heaven Mouse: Kelly Film (Hong

Kong) Co., Hong Kong, 2459.62 m, Comfort Film Enterprises, Vff-l-j) Aolei yilan Parts I & II: Shanghai Film, Hong Kong,

5480.67 m. Comfort Film Enterprises, Vfi-l-j) The Battle for the Republic of China: Shaw Bros, Hong

Kong, 2905.49 m, Joe Siu Int’l Film Co., Vff-l-j)

The Flower, The Killer: Lon Sun Film Co., Hong Kong,

V(i-m -j)

2379.41 m. Comfort Film Enterprises, Vff-l-g) Gregory’s Girl: Osprey Films, Britain, 2504 m, GUO Film Dist., L fi-l-i), Ofnudity) Impetuous Fire: E. Chang, Hong Kong, 2818 m, Golden Reel Films, Vfi-l-j) Maedchen in Uniform (Girls in Uniform) (16mm): Not shown, Germany, 910.51 m, Australian Film Institute,

For Mature Audiences (M)

Occupied Palestine (16mm): D. Koff, Britain, 921.48 m,

L(f-l-g), O fsexual innuendo)

Taps: S. & H. Jaffe, U.S., 3430 m, Fox Columbia Film

Dist.. Vfi-m -j). L(i-l-g) Wyrok smierci (Sentence of Death) (16mm): Film

Polski, Poland, 1020 m, Polish Consulate-General,

O fem otional stress)

Parrabooks, Vfi-l-j) Security Unlimited: M. Hue. Hong Kong, 2441 m, Joe Siu Int’l Film Co., Vfi-l-j) Wedding Bells, Wedding Bells: Golden Harvest, Hong Kong. 2667 m, Grand Film Corp., O fadult concepts) A Wife for Toto: R. Laurenti, Italy, 2029 m, Cinema Italia, O fadult theme)

Breakfast in Paris: J. Lamond, Australia, 2593.29 m,

Roadshow Dist., L ff-^g ), O(nudity) Butterfly: M. Cimber, U.S., 2956.13 m, Roadshow Dist., S(i-m -j), O fadult concept)

Chciatbym sie zgubic (I Would Like to Lose Myself)

(16mm): Film Polski, Poland, 1020 m, Polish Consulate-General, 0(nudity, em otional stress) CMA (The Moth) (16mm): Film Polski, Poland, 1000 m, Polish Consulate-General, 0 (em otional stress) The Deadly Sword: C. Ming-Show, Hong Kong, 2541 m, Golden Reel Films, Vfi-m -g) Dzien wisky (The Day of the Vistula) (16mm): Film Polski, Poland, 980 m, Polish Consulate-General,

Films Registered With Eliminations For Restricted Exhibition (R)

Buddy Buddy: MGM, U.S., 2621.47 m, Cinema Int’l Corp.. Lff-m -j), O fsexual allusion)

The Caper (16mm): Billboard, U.S., 658.32 m, 14th

Cute Foster Sister: S. Hsiao-YIng, Hong Kong, 2788 m.

The End of August (videotape): Jaconson/Sharp, U.S.,

Siu Int’l Film Co., Vff-m -g), O (occultism ) Cherry Hill High: Cannon Int’l, U.S.. 2370.48 m, Video Classics. Sff-l-g) Electric Blue 007 (videotape): Electric Blue, Britain, 60 mins, Electric Blue (A’asia), S ff-m -g) Flush (videotape): The Honey Co., U.S., 92 mins, Pacific Telecasters (Aust.), L ff-m -g ), O fs e x u a l

105 mins, TCN, O fadult themes)

allusions)

2679 m, Grand Film Corp., V(f-l-g)

mins. Pacific Telecasters (Aust.), Vfi-m -g) Great British Striptease (videotape): Amaranth Prod., Britain, 59 mins, Videocraft, Ofstriptease) .

Grocery Boy (16mm): Not shown, U.S., 548.6 m, 14th Mandolin, S ff-m -g) H.O.T.S.: Great American Dream Machine Movie Co., U.S., 2593 m, GUO Film Dist., Sfi-m -g), O fnudity) Jello Wrestling (videotape): Scripglow, Britain, 60 mins, Electric Blue (A’asla), Sfi-m -g) Kill Squad : Summa Vista, U.S., 2249 m, Roadshow Dist., Vff-m -g) Lady Stay Dead: Ryntare Prods, Australia, 2523.56 m, Ryntare Prods, Vfi-m -g), Ofnudity) Latex Slaves (videotape): Centurian Publishing Co., U.S., 60 mins, G. Mecak, O fbondage equipm ent) The Leather Mistress (videotape): Centurian Publish­ ing Co.. U.S., 60 mins, G. Mecak, O fbondage equip­

V(i-l-j), O fadult concepts)

The Emperor and His Brother: Shaw Bros, Hong Kong,

2905.49 m, Joe Slu int’l Film Co., V(i-m-g) Hired Guns: Golden Harvest Prod., Hong Kong, The Imp: Century Motion Pictures, Hong Kong,

2880 m. Golden Reel Films, O (horror) Kung Fu of Dammah Styles: Wei Kuen Film Co., Hong Kong, 2632.32 m, Joe Siu Int’l Film Co., V(f-l-g) La battaglia dei mods: Ultra-Roxy, Italy, 2521 m, Cinema Italia, V(i-m -j) Magnificent Ruffians: Shaw Bros, Hong Kong, 2893.29 m, Joe Siu Int’l Film Co., V(i-m-g) Modern Problems: Twentieth Century-Fox, U.S., 2459.62 m, Fox Columbia Film Dist., L(i-m -g), Ofsexual allusions)

Neighbours: Zanuck/Brown, U.S., 2621.47 m, Fox

Columbia Film Dist., O fadult concepts) The Notorious Eight: Shaw Bros, Hong Kong,

2899.08 m, Joe Siu Int’l Film Co., S(i-m -g) A Notorious Ex Monk: Projections Ltd, Hong Kong,

2439 m, Comfort Film Enterprises, Vff-l-g) Olimpiada 40 (16mm): Zespoe Filmowy, Poland, 1190 m, Polish Consulate-General, O fadult concept) Pit of Loneliness: Arthur Davis Prods, France, 2325 m, Australian Film Institute, O fadult concept) Reds: Paramount, U.S./Britain, 5186.59 m, Cinema Int i Corp.. S fi-m -j), O fadult concepts) Rollover: Orion/Warner Bros, U.S., 3154.45 m, Warner Bros (Aust.), S fi-l-i) The Shaolin Temple: Ghung Yuen Film Co., Hong Kong, 2729 m, Comfort Film Enterprises, Vff-m -g) Shoot the Moon: A. Marshall, U.S., 3393.17 m, Cinema Int’l Corp., Lfi-m -i), O fem otional stress) A Slap on the Face: Armen Film, Armenia, 2533 m, Ararad Enterprises, O fem otional stress) Une semaine de vacances: Sara Films, France, 2788.8 m, G.L. Film Enterprises, Lfi-m -i), O fadult con­ cepts)

Union City: Kinesis, U.S., 2219 m, Rock Film Dist.,

O fsexual allusions)

The Unseen: A. Unger, U.S., 2370.48 m, Star Video, Vfi-m -g)

W bialy dzien (In Broad Daylight) (16mm): Film Polski,

Poland, 1091 m, Polish Consulate-General, Vfi-m -i) Wizja lokalna 1901 (Inspection of the Scene of Action)

(16mm): Film Polski, Poland, 1061 m, Polish Consulate-General, Vfi-m -j)

For Mature Audiences (M)

For Restricted Exhibition (R) Bewitched: Shaw Bros, Hong Kong, 3017.38 m, Joe

Forced Entry (videotape): J. Sotos/H. Scarrell, U.S., 84

ment)

Not a Love Story — A Film About Pornography

(16mm): National Film Board of Canada, Canada, 756.93 m, National Film Board of Canada, S(i-h-j), O fadult theme)

122 Rue de Provence (French language version)

(videotape): Orffie Arts, France, 96 mins, Star Video, S fi-m -j)

Paul Raymond’s Erotica (videotape): Paul Raymond

Organization, Britain, 85 mins, Electric Blue (A’asla), Sff-m -g)

Pay Off: Golden Harvest, Hong Kong, 2775 m, Grand

Film Corp., Sfi-m -g), Vff-l-g) Penelope’s Education (16mm): E. Everett, U.S., 592.38 m, 14th Mandolin, Sff-m -g) t Revenge in Hong Kong: Not shown, Hong Kong, 2539.82 m, Comfort Film Enterprises, Vff-m -g) Revenge of the Corpse: Shaw Bros, Hong Kong, 2659.45 m, Joe Siu Int’l Film Co., Vff-m -g) Sensual Pleasure: Shaw Bros, Hong Kong, 2778.96 m, Joe Siu Int’l Film Co., Sfi-m -g), Vfi-m -g) Sharky’s Machine: Orion Pictures, U.S., 3319.03 m, Warner Bros (Aust.), Lff-m -g), Vff-m -g), Ofdrugs) Sweeping Call Girls: Lomar Prods, Hong Kong 2298 m, Golden Reel Films, Sff-m -g), Ofnudity) Visiting Hours: C. Heroux, Canada, 2807 m, Fox Columbia Film Dist., Vff-m -g)

Mandolin, S ff-m -g) Deletions: 18.8 m (1 min. 43 secs) Reason for deletions: Sfi-h-g) Teenage Swingers (16mm) (pre-censor cut version) (a): T, Taylor, U.S., 603.46 m, G.L. Film Enterprises, Sff-m -g)

Deletions: 1.3 m (6 secs) Reason for deletions: Sfi-h-g) (a) Previously shown on December 1981 list.

Films Refused Registration Chopstix (pre-censor cut version): W. Dancer, U.S.,

2097.3 m. Cinerama Films, Sff-h-g) I Feel It Rising (videotape) (a): D. Eagle, U.S., 79 mins, Anjohn Int’l, S ff-h-g) Ladies Night (videotape): H. Lewis, U.S., 65 mins. Star Video. Sff-h-g) The Master and Ms Johnson (pre-censor cut version): Belladonna Films, U.S., 1852.8 m, Cinerama Films, S ff-h-g)

One for the Money (16mm): Tudor & Taylor, U.S., 610.5 m, 14th Mandolin, S ff-h-g) Sensual Fire (pre-censor cut version): Diamond Films, U.S., 2345.8 m, A.Z. Associated Theatres, Sfi-h-g) Splendor in the Sack (16mm): Not shown, U.S., 592 m, ^14th Mandolin, S ff-h-g) Upright Action (16mm): Venus Prods, U.S., 598.5 m, 14th Mandolin, Sfi-h-g) White Shadow Episode 33 Gonna Fly Now (16mm): M. Tinker, U.S., 585 m, Columbia Pictures Television, O fdrugs)

(a) Previously shown on October 1981 list as Temptations

Films Board of Review Teenage Sex Kitten (a): Superbitch Prods, U.S.,

1716.4 m. A.Z. Associated Theatres Decision reviewed: Refusal to register by the Film Censorship Board.

■Decision of the Board: Uphold the decision of the Film s Censorship Board. (a) Previously shown on December 1981 list.

Note: Length of the film Roadgames shown as 2482.03 m (February 1981 list) should read 2715.57 m.

Length of the film Scanners shown as 3374.45 m (April 1981 list) should read 2743 m.

Lilond, Vff-m -g) Empty Suitcases (16mm): B. Gordon, U.S., 548 m.

Australian Film Institute, Vfi-m -g), Lfi-m -g) Flesh on Glass (16mm): I. McLaren/Swinburne Institute of Technology, Australia, 460.74 m. Victorian Film Corp., O fadult concepts) Freedom: Endeavour Communication, Australia, 2788.8 m. Roadshow Dist., Vfi-m -g), Lff-m -j) Hard Country: D. Greene/M. Bing, U.S., 2788.8 m, Hoyts Dist., Vfi-m -j), L fi-m -j) Hello Late Homecomers: Golden Harvest, Hong Kong, 2905 m. Grand Film Corp., Vfi-m -g), O fsexual allusion) The Informer: Bang Bang Film Co., Hong Kong, 2491 m, Joe Siu Int’l Film Co., Vfi-m -g). Ofnudity) Lonely Hearts: Adams Packer, Australia, 2621.47 m, Adams Packer Film Prod., Sfi-m -j), O fadult theme) Making Love: A. Adler/D. Melnick, U.S., 2967.58 m, Fox Columbia Film Dist., O fadult concepts) Mephisto: Hungarofilm, Hungary, 3932.21 m, Rock Film Dist., S fi-m -j) Mr Big: Golden Harvest, Hong Kong, 2797 m. Grand Film Corp,, Vff-l-g), Ofnudity) Return of the Secaucus Seven (16mm): J. Nelson, U.S., 1173.79 m, Valhalla Films, Lfi-m -j), O fadult concepts)

Sitting Ducks: M. Dor, U.S.. 2352.63 m, New Horizon

Films, S fi-l-j), Lfi-m -g)

For Restricted Exhibition (R) The Beast Within: United Artists, U.S., 2620.03 m,

United Artists (A’sia), Vff-m -g), O fhorror)

Blonde Velvet (modified version (videotape): D. Eagle,

U.S.. 49 mins, Anjohn Int’l, Sff-m -g) Channel X (videotape): Red Tape Prods, Britain, 58 mins. Electric Blue (A’sia), Sfi-m -g), Ofnudity) The Club: Verdull Ltd, Hong Kong, 2237 m, Joe Siu Int’l Film Co., Vff-m -g) Confessions of a Sexy Photographer (videotape): Not shown, W. Germany, 72 mins, Photape. Sfi-m -g), Ofnudity)

Devil Killer: Golden Sun Film Co., Hong Kong,

2482.03 m,

C o m fo rt

Film

E n t e r p r is e s ,

Sfi-m -g), Vff-m -g)

The Erotic Three (videotape) (a): C. Dewey, U.S., 86

mins. Video Classics, Sfi-m -g) Exoristos stin kentriki leoforo (videotape): Not shown.

Greece, 61 mins, Special Broadcasting Service, Sfi-m -g), Ofdrugs)

Concluded on p. 281 CINEMA PAPERS June - 241

Tony W illiam s ta lk s about

NEXT OF KIN ■ Interview by Scott Murray ■

Next of Kin was originally going to be a horror film in the genre of Texas Chainsaw Massacre — quick turnaround and quickly financed.

Michael Heath [scriptwriter], Tim White [co-producer] and myself had been influenced by what Tobe Hooper did with Texas Chainsaw and enjoyed the genre. But when John Carpenter started to make his films, and there was the deluge of Carpenter imitators, the whole thing got very sickening. By the time Friday the 13th had set the 242 - June CINEMA PAPERS

formula for the genre, we had turned completely off that style of film. We were faced with the decision of whether to drop the film completely or go off on another tangent.

It was about that time we were making contact with the U.S., and every time we submitted another draft to contacts over there, we would get replies requesting more violence, more shock, more horror.

Finally, an American genre writer said to us, “ Look, why don’t you do

what you want to do and make a European-style film. Forget about the U.S. market, because if you are going to make an American horror film, you would be better off to go to the U.S. and use American actors.”

Was your first version a violent film or a send-up?

The original treatm ent was tongue-in-cheek, just like Texas Chainsaw Massacre. But something

happens when committing a black comedy idea on paper to the screen. People recoil in horror, and the thought of having to out-do Texas Chainsaw Massacre, which is virtually what people were saying we must do, was too much. I just wanted out.

When you say more European than American, how would you define that in terms of genre?

The sort of films I used to enjoy

Tony Williams

in the suspense genre were Les diaboliques, Blood and Roses and The Innocents — in other words, a more subtle, mysterious film, with little explicit violence and more teasing suspense.

Our film has gone through three phases. When we started off as “ Sticky Ends” , with money from the New Zealand Film Commis­ sion, it was about a catering com­ pany of madmen that went around the country poisoning people’s 2 1 st birthdays, weddings and such. It was quite funny and violent. Then, it became slightly more respect­ able as “ Before the Night is Out” , but still definitely Carpenter territory.

By that time, we had approached the New South Wales Film Corporation for funds and their American advisers were trying to force us to become more violent.

Finally, we ended up with Filmco, making Next of Kin. Even then, we have been under a lot of pressure to keep the action going, to get more violence into it.

Basically, what I wanted the film to be was a trip, a voyage, where you sat back and got sucked into the mystery, the suspense.

what is working until you see it in a darkened theatre with an audience.

Even now, I am quite amazed if someone happens to suddenly jump out of his seat at a point where I had forgotten there was supposed to be a fright.

Some directors, like George Miller, have said that they view this type of film as a kind of cathartic experience. You take the audience close to death, they don’t die, and they feel relieved afterwards. Do you see it in those terms?

I really don’t want to be involved in making genre films, though the attraction of doing one was the manipulative force of the suspense film. It is fun to wave the wand and manipulate the audience, to see whether you can have them falling off their seats.

This type of genre film can be either terribly easy to make — if you just stick with the formula laid down by Friday the 13th, with a violent murder every seven minutes — or an extraordinarily difficult film, if you choose to ignore the formula, the cliches. This is the

I don’t think you can test it until pet fantasies, as if it is their right all the elements are together, and because the film is “genre” . You by then it is often too late. If I ever feel you are under quite a lot of do a similar type of film again, pressure, not from individuals which I doubt, I would build into necessarily, but from groups of the budget a period of testing after people all wanting to go in different the film is mixed, with enough directions. I am sure now that it is flexibility to go back and re-cut better to leave the filmmaker alone some areas. When we did test- and encourage personal vision screen the film to ourselves, people against committee vision. didn’t really get involved because there wasn’t any music and it didn’t By “group” do you mean Filmco? have the right effects. .

What we did find was that it was very finely balanced. If we put one Filmco or anyone. We were shot in front of another, a scene calling in script advisers. At one would come to life. If we reversed stage we had people who had the order, the scene would go flat. worked at Crawfords looking at it.

It is very hard to gauge what makes They wanted to go towards the the goose-pimples rise. logical all the time, and the investors were pushing for more traditional genre elements. But I Perhaps this is the sort of film that is largely made in the editing. You don’t think audiences want this type can arrange all the pieces until it of film to be logical. They want to creates the right effect, whereas escape, to take an amazing voyage. with a straight dramatic film you This is why I realized there was can’t change the linearity that potential to go off into other, bizarre dimensions. By the end of much . . . the film, where Linda (Jackie Kerin) is sitting in a cafe, building That is true; we spent hours on enormous towers of sugar cubes, the editing, and it was interesting and there are ballroom dancers on

When you decided to change d irections, did you change scriptwriters?

No, we struggled through ourselves. Maybe my only regret would be that we didn’t completely bury “Sticky Ends” , rather than try to retain elements of it.

What aspects of ‘Sticky Ends’ remain in “Next of Kin”?

I suppose the final revealing of Rita (Bernadette Gibson). I think it is going to work all right, but I would have liked, at that point, to have taken off and gone either totally supernatural or totally schizophrenic. Until the denoue­ ment, we avoided all the cliches of the shoulder coming into frame, or the hand with the knife quivering in the shadows. The aim was to create a claustrophobic atmosphere, in which you didn’t really know if things were real or whether the whole thing was imagined by the girl. Then, all hell breaks loose.

It is a very strange kind of film to make because it is not until you get all the elements together, until the effects tracks and the music tracks have been laid, that you really know if the film works 100 per cent.

When I saw Halloween the first time, I was on the edge of the seat and had goose-pimples up and down my spine. When I saw the film again at home on 16mm, I thought it was appalling. Suddenly I could see all the tricks and the games, and it had no interest for me beyond that.

In a way, there is a similar process with Next of Kin. We are dealing with people’s fears and frights. And once you have made the film, you really don’t know

Director Tony Williams behind the Arri on location fo r Next o f Kin. It is his second feature, and follows Solo.

hardest film I have been involved with, because you are dealing with something that is supposed to be a mystery, supposed to be suspenseful, but without a strong plot or strong dialogue. You really have to use all the resources of the filmmaking technique to move the audience.

To help determine that audience reaction, are you audience-testing the film?

because Max Lemon, who cut this television dancing to Strauss’ film, also cut Picnic at Hanging “ Kaiser Waltz”, the whole world Rock and The Last Wave. Lemon has gone a bit crazy. So, it was a said he had gone through similar pity anything needed to be processes with those films — explained at all. Maybe the whole namely, they really didn’t know thing could have been in her head. what they had until they got into the mixing theatre, and added the How would you rate other atmosphere, pan pipes and so on. Australian attempts at the suspense A funny thing about genre films genre? is that because they are fantasy based, people who can influence a I c a n ’t s p e a k wi t h any production all want to include their knowledge, because I don’t think I CINEMA PAPERS June - 243

Tony Williams

Toby Phillips lines up the Steadicammounted camera fo r a shot o f Christina Marshal. Next o f Kin.

have seen any, except Nightmares, which I thought was dreadful. I may be speaking out of turn, but I felt that was an example of the e a s y - t o - m a k e h o r r o r film.

However, if you are going to make a film to fill a gap with a certain kind of an audience, then that is probably the way you should go.

I don’t know if our film is going to be successful commercially, because we broke all the rules.

Were you tempted during the shooting to play it safe and show the needle go into Rita’s eye, or have a bit more sex in it?

No. By that time we were aboard the train and going in the direction we wanted to go; we weren’t prepared to deviate.

I believe it is an important part of the whole process of making films and I can’t escape it. In whatever I do, I always have to see the other side of the coin. Steven Spielberg is excellent in this because if he is doing a big spectacular entertainment film, he is brilliant at dropping in the belly laugh at the moment you are least expecting it. It relieves tension and then you rock on again in the direction you were once travelling.

I don’t think there is nearly enough bizarre humor, particularly in Australian films. Sometimes we take ourselves far too seriously.

PRODUCERS You have mentioned the involvement of Filmco. When did you become involved with a producer?

I was originally involved with One thing your commercials and Michael Heath and Tim White this film have in common is an when it was just going to be a fast element of black comedy, such as in turnaround horror film and a bit of the cafe or the talking koala . . . a laugh. Then it became obvious it 244 - June CINEMA PAPERS

was going to involve special effects and stunts, and it was going to be bigger than something that could be shot in four weeks. Because Tim, at that stage, hadn’t produced a feature film, one of the conditions of my being involved was that we had another producer who had experience in the finance and legal side. So Tim agreed to involve Robert Le Tet. Robert then became executive producer as well, and really looked after that side of things. He was the strength behind keeping the production together.

How do you see the relationship between a producer and a director?

It changes on every film.

Essentially, there are two types of productions; a producer’s film whereby the producer has the inspiration, owns the property, c o n t r a c t s the di r e c t or and essentially dictates what he wants; and a director’s film where the director has the creative control, which is the way I prefer to work.

This is not to say you don’t respect the views of your producer, but

ultimately the film becomes one erson’s vision. I would hate to ave a film re-edited against my wishes or behind my back.

But whatever approach you adopt, it is essential the director and producer are sure they are making the same film before they start.

It is like a love affaire: you meet, get into bed together, then end up at each other’s throat. You have to survive the highs, the lows, the disasters, the critics, the box-office and so on. It can certainly put a friendship to the test.

One of the problems working with a finance company, when you don’t have your own money, is that you can find yourself getting i n v o l v e d wi t h c o m m i t t e e viewpoints. The ideal situation is to be able to work with one producer who understands the needs of the creative side of the business and also has a very good grip on the financial and contractual side. The moment you start to involve more and more people, you begin to dissipate the personal time. I’ve seen too much of that in television

Tony Williams

when I worked at the BBC, and in making commercials, dealing with agencies.

MUSIC The music is being written by Klaus Schulze and one of the greatest buzzes of the film has been working with him. He saw our film totally in terms of sound, and immediately understood what we were trying to do. He wants to take effects that have been recorded for the film and turn them into music through a computer synthesizer he uses in Ger many. It is an experiment, in that we don’t know what we will have until the tapes arrive in the mail.

Why did you choose Schulze?

When we were wrestling with the problem of writing the last version of the script, we found that when we tried to analyze the structural problems but came up against dead ends, a Klaus Schulze record would suddenly dissipate the problems and the way ahead seemed clear.

The atmosphere of the music was

what the film was all about. But even at that stage we didn’t consider Klaus writing the music.

There were quite a few Australian composers we were interested in, but they weren’t available.

During the shooting of the film, we used Klaus’ music as playback for Jackie Kerin as motivation.

Even so, it really wasn’t until we went to post-production that we thought of approaching Klaus. We felt he would be too busy, but he leapt at the chance of doing a suspense genre film.

What other films has Schulze done?

Apart from his own recordings, he has done a lot of documentary work. He also worked on The Man Who Fell From Earth and a film with Rainer Werner Fassbinder. He is about to do the music for Paul Mazursky’s The Tempest with John Cassevetes.

What sort of machine does he use?

Basically it is a digital computer.

It is the only kind in the world, because it has been specially built for him. Among the electronic composers, he is considered by many to be the most advanced.

Linda (Jackie Kerin) walks tentatively up the stairs. Who knows what evil hides at the top? Next o f Kin.

How does he score a film?

Composer Klaus Schulze at his digital computer.

The same way as a normal composer. We went through the film, decided what themes were going to be used and where each theme should begin and end. We then transferred the film to videotape and, at his studio in Berlin, he will project the videotape on to the wall.

In computer music, nothing is written down. He can recall any sound he wants if it is stored on his floppy discs. Once he has found the theme, he can put that into his computer, recalling it later and doing variations of it.

So, from the timings that we have decided, and from having viewed the film, he will then compose a score on the keyboard which will be recorded on tape.

In some cases, he will take a sound effect, and from that make a beat.

This is then synthesized. When the effect is repeated over and over again, and it eventually becomes a tone, the tone can be stretched into chords. Then, all of a sudden, you can have a Wagnerian chorus — and all you actually started with was the sound of a water-hose splatting on and off.

It h as been so fascinating working with Klaus, and I would really like to do another film, only this time start with his involvement

during pre-production. All too often we leave the soundtrack until the film is shot. But you can consider the soundtrack from the start. And with computers, it is just amazing just what the possibilities are, because you don’t necessarily need an orchestra. All you need is one man and his machine. You can spend more time playing with ideas.

In fact, if we do another film, there is no reason why Klaus can’t travel with his computer. As long as he can lock into a s t udi o somewhere along the line, he can just sit in front of the film and create any effect or sound you want.

LIGHTING STYLE The film has a distinctive visual style, particularly in the lighting . . .

Yes. Well, the other buzz on the film was working with Gary Hansen, who shot it, Toby Phillips, who was the Steadicam operator, and Noel MacDonald, who built the special crane rig for the end shot. On the visual side of the film, those three people did Concluded on p. 291 CINEMA PAPERS June - 245

THE JOHN BARRY GROUP... is pleased to announce that as from June 1,1982 their appointment as exclusive importers/distributors throughout Australia of all Arri products manufactured by Arnold & Richter of Munich.

GROUP â&#x20AC;¢ AUSTRALIA

Head O ffice:

105 Reserve Road, Artarmon NSW 2064. Sydney Australia.

Telephone: (02) 439 6955 Telex: 24482 _ Cable Address: Barrysydney

Rental Only:

82 Reserve Road, Artarmon NSW 2064.

Telephone: (02) 439 6955

John Barry Group Pty. Ltd.

Also in Melbourne (03) 699 9055 Adelaide (08) 211 8444 Perth (09) 325 5233

Interactive Video Disc The fu tu re use o f video disc, and producing m a teria l fo r the L a ser-o p tica l system in A ustralia.

The Sony advertisement above that appeared last year in various U.S. maga­ zines and newspapers stated more than just Sony's decision to put its efforts behind the promotion of video cassette (although Sony had c o n s id e ra b le development money involved in pro­ ducing optical video-disc players). The advertisement reflected the video-disc systems’ promoters’ main problem in gaining the widespread sales that they had gambled hundreds of millions of dollars upon, which was an inability to convince the public of the superiority of a replay-only video system that could only show a limited catalogue of software consisting almost entirely of entertain­ ment movies.

• Combined with a confusing battle for market share by three different systems (see inset boxes), there seemed little hope of any of the systems surviving based on home sales alone. All the manufacturers were involved in apply­ ing the v id e o -d is c research and development towards what seemed a surer market of industrial and other applications. Philips, which developed the laser-optical technique, has worked with Sony to produce a high-quality Compact Digital Audio Disc (CDAD), and the proponents of the VHD system have announced a decoder that allows digitally-encoded audio discs (AHD) to be played on their video players. IBM has taken its experience in the Discovision partnership into the rapidly-growing area of computer storage.

With the unstable consumer market and no sign of a release of PAL standard

equipment suitable for Australian use, the announcement last year that Mel­ bourne video production house AAVAustralia was producing, in quantity, video discs for General Motors-Hoiden dealers around Australia seemed like just another example of out-of-step tech­ nology. When a growing body of informa­ tion from overseas pointed the way toward the educational and instructional use of interactive video systems, I asked Andrew Pittendrigh, the manager of the Communications Group at AAV, for a demonstration of the system.

eventually won’t play back. Also, the Teldec played 15 minutes a side, while the RCA plays an hour.

The Teldec only lasted six months on the market in Germany, and we had a machine here at that time to show the direction that electronics was headed, although we knew the Teldec had serious limitations. One of the people we had here was Theodore Konat, an American communications expert, who gave a talk about the future developments of optical video disc, which have since come true.

We were pushed into our involvement with optical discs by GMH, although we were keeping a watching brief on it. Bob Fine, who was brought out as a tem­ porary chief executive when we first set up, and whom we still retain as a con­ sultant, was keeping us informed with developments. Our own engineering people also go overseas regularly to keep up with developments, but we didn’t believe that we would really be involved in video-disc production for a number of years yet.

In September 1980, Kevin Hoolihan, the GMH sales promotion manager, came and looked around at what we were doing in audio-visual and video, and he seemed particularly interested in the frame-accurate computer editing. I didn’t realize what was going on in his mind at the time, when he said he was investigating a project and he would be back. He went over to the U.S. to Disco­ vision and had a look at how General Motors was using video disc, because GM was the first big network user in the world.

As I understand it, Pioneer was by contract not allowed to sell its players to the public until it had filled the GM order.

GM was after a training and information medium that would allow it to leap ahead of the old Super 8 system it was using and leap ahead of video cassette. GMH here said, “Yes it is working, it does have more to offer than video cassette, and if a way could be found to get over the problem of producing in PAL and finishing on NTSC then it is a goer.”

Kevin Hoolihan came to us then and asked if we could do it? We sent two of our engineers over to the U.S. to study the process, and when they came back we went into a huddle with GMH and said, “ If you give us some real indications of

The story of how AAV came to produce the first Australian video disc also gives some idea of the rapid change in video technologies . . .

When AAV started in 1975, the idea was to impress everyone with a display of the latest state-of-the-art equipment. We introduced the first video projection equipment, the Advent machines; we promoted the laser tape to film transfer system at Image Transform, which is still an industry standard; and we intro­ duced the first video-disc system to be released commercially, the Teldec. This was a joint venture of Telefunken and Decca, hence the name. But the system didn’t survive.

There is not a lot of difference between the Teldec and the system RCA has used in its system. RCA uses a needle-in-thegroove type disc that has to be enclosed in a protective cardboard sleeve, because if you touch it with your fingers it

your intentions, we believe we can do it. We would then be prepared to invest in the considerable amount of equipment to allow us to be able to verify, once we have gone through standards conversion, all the frames and write a computer program for it and then play back on tape what we have programmed into it.”

It took us about six months to solve that problem and early in 1981 we said we could go. From the time GMH said go ahead, it was less than a week before we were shooting.

What was on the first disc?

Virtually a straight consumer disc. On one side George Paterson’s had pro­ duced a film of the Repco Round Aus­ tralia Rally. It was a really nice produc­ tion. Side two was made up of a number of sections of existing material on light commercial vehicles, and we shot a seg­ ment on brake pad replacement on the Commodore. So, you had all three uses on the disc: a straight consum er presentation, a general salesman’s product inform ation arrd technical training.

GMH then used that as a sell-in disc to get the dealers to invest in the equip­ ment, with a demonstration of actual use and not just a promise. GMH hoped to get about 250 dealers in the network, but they are in the area of about 300 in the first year, which makes GMH the biggest single network of users outside of the U.S. Some of the networks in the U.S. are enormous — for example, Avon has a 26,000 player network, IBM also has a pretty big network — and for a lot of industries it has become a way of life. It is not expensive when compared to the other available technologies and, once you get into the three to four hundred disc order, they are considerably cheaper than video-cassette copies.

Most of the comments I have heard about the laser discs say that the major problems are in the pressing of the discs Yes. The original partners in Disco­ vision were IBM, Music Corporation of America (MCA) and Pioneer. Quite recently Pioneer bought out its partners, and IBM has gone off to use the tech­ nology for use as storage for computer data. Pioneer has upgraded the facilities considerably, if you can take the discs we get now as an example. They started by producing discs in their factory in Japan at Kofu, which were considerably better than the U.S. product. They shut down the U.S. factory for a short period and in­ stalled new equipment, which is now running.

One of the problems of the early video-disc production was to improve the yield of good discs as against rejects, even after they had launched it on the market. That was where some of their financial problems came, because they couldn’t get the yield of acceptable discs that the Japanese have been able to.

The audio quality as demonstrated is excellent. Do the GMH discs use stereo tracks?

Andrew Pittendrigh with a video-disc player.

All the GMH discs are produced with

CINEMA PAPERS June - 247

New Products and Processes

done in Japan that we have used after a bit of playing around, while some of them we had to re-do. So you can often adapt existing audio-visual material. You couldn’t discard out of hand U-matic material, for example.

The material that is assembled at this stage, according to the needs of the client, then undergoes a standards con­ version. You mentioned the difficulty that the different frame rate of 30 frames a second causes. How do you check that you haven’t lost or gained frames?

mono audio, although we are capable of producing stereo tracks. The reason is the NTSC conversion at ATN-7 in Sydney doesn’t have the capacity to handle dual audio tracks. If stereo is required, we would have to send film to the U.S. with stereo double-head soundtracks to be transferred to tape there. In that case, we would lose some of the control, which GMH doesn’t want to do.

psychologists tell us that there is a decided down curve after eight seconds; if the function takes longer than that, people lose interest. Nothing on this machine takes as long as that.

When you are in Play mode and you hit Scan, you see the material at about 60 times the normal speed. If you hit the Stop button first, then Scan, it goes slower at about 6 times normal.

Does AAV produce all the material for the GMH discs?

Does the need for a short response time affect your programming?

We don’t necessarily produce all the individual segments, but all the master­ ing is done here.

Formatting the disc does not always involve putting the main Index at the head and questions at the end. The questions are often put amongst the material so that if it needs to be reviewed there is no pause, and the disc is pro­ grammed to skip over these areas until all the material is finished.

As an alternative, instead of repeating the section when a wrong answer is given, you can have a routine that says, “You have chosen number two but you will see that if you do that such an,d such will happen.” On an IBM example we have, they have actually programmed a 30-second piece for each of the answers given. If you have say six questions with say three alternatives, you could have 18 little half-minute segments.

It is a fairly extravagant way to do it, because it uses up disc space, but it allows you to give everyone a different response pitched at the level of their mis­ understanding of the question.

Are all the GMH discs for use by the dealers?

Yes, but they are often a mixture of material for showing to consumers and for sales training, or technician work­ shop training. They try not to mix them up too much to reduce the risk of con­ sumers seeing something that they shouldn’t be or are not interested in.

For cost effectiveness, you have to mix them up a little bit to make maximum use of disc space. Almost all the discs are double-sided. I can remember one where the material for the second side was not ready in time and was released single-sided.

Some of the specific functions of the keys could be confusing to the average user, but most of the usual video cassette recorder (VCR) functions operate the same way. I noticed there was sometimes a “jitter” on the freeze frame . . .

The reason that the freeze frame is un­ stable is a result of the two video fields that are interlaced to make the image.

The machine has trouble deciding which field to choose for a stable picture, but It is a true still frame.

One revolution of the disc is one frame with two fields. The VHD disc, I think, reads four frames in still mode and is very distracting if there is movement in the picture. On the later’ model optical machines in still frame, you have “still field” which stops any of that jitter.

As for the other keys, there is a detachable plastic cover that can prevent the inexperienced user from accident­ ally hitting the wrong keys. If you hit the Index frame in conjunction with other keys, it will give a different result, but by pressing Index alone you will go straight to the Index on that disc.

The latest disc players have the maxi­ mum search time down to one-and-ahalf seconds; this player takes about four-and-a-half seconds. The training

248 - June CINEMA PAPERS

From the NTSC conversion we pro­ duce a VHS-NTSC dub that has all the frames identified. This lets us at least check it, even though we can’t actually run the program. The ability to see every frame through allows us to write the program for Pioneer video to incor­ porate in the final microprocessor information stamped into the final-disc.

We write what should happen at each frame, whether it should' stop for 10 seconds or branch off to a different section, or repeat, etc. Once we have made up that chart, it is almost like typing in the details at Pioneer. All it requires of us is a knowledge of com­ puter programming techniques, while they do the actual electronics.

When Kevin Hoolihan went to Disco­ vision and said that he wanted to pro­ duce here and end up oh an NTSC disc, and be able to verify the result before going into production, the Discovision people tried to talk him out of it, saying it couldn’t be done. They said he would have to wait for PAL systems. Kevin is a fairly persistent fellow and was deter­ mined to get on to it, knowing it was so much better for the GMH applications.

I think GMH has been amazed that we have been so successful. GMH has problems dealing with the NTSC cus­ tomers in an NTSC market and to worry about being frame accurate with the added problem of a conversion from PAL, they just didn’t think it would work.

Do you have any information about a PAL video-disc introduction?

Nine images from a GM H training video disc.

The people at Pioneer say that they can’t see it happening here inside two years, but I wouldn’t be surprised if it isn’t under that. We know the plant in Kofu Is now capable of producing PAL discs and is doing so for the introduction; secondly, the consumer response to purchase of video-disc players has been poor, due to the economic climate and the accept­ ance of VCRs. This has been balanced by the growth in industrial areas and for data storage, so they are reorganizing their energies into those areas.

This whole technology has given rise to many things. You might have seen details recently of the new Pulse Code Modulation (PCM) audio discs, which use the same technique of a laser reading small pits pressed into the disc.

In the computer applications, they can store more information and read it faster than on floppy disc.

The gas lasers used in these players are expensive to produce and I have read that the manufacturers are sub­ sidizing the cost of these in the hope of

AAV is setting the standards for the final master, but, on some of the material you have shown me, there is some poor quality 16mm footage that was obviously included because of its information content. Without the restrictions of complying to the set broadcast standards, would this open the way to cheaper disc program production on lo w -b an d c a s s e tte fo rm a ts , for example?

Our responsibility to GMH is for overall quality control, and If you have the capacity on the disc for high-quality images then you try and make sure that your base material is good. It is a fine and arguable line that you have to draw; you have to be familiar with the degradation that the NTSC standards conversion will make, and from that point on there is not much you lose on the disc, even though you do go through another process at the end.

What we are likely to say to other people is what we said to GMH: “ If you have other material you have produced but not necessarily for video disc, let’s look at it first to see if it’s suitable.” There were some training slides that Isuzu had

Laser-optical Philips developed the system and released it through its U.S. affiliate Magnavox in 1978. It uses a low-powered gas laser that is aimed by servocontrolled mirrors and tracked across the underneath surface of a reflective metal-coated disc. Small pits in the surface alter the reflection of the laser which is read by a photoconductor and the digital signal Is then converted to a television signal. The disc has a protective plastic coating that allows it to be handled, and dust and scratches on the surface do not affect the image. The speed of the discs used for long playing films, etc., changes from the outside to the inside spirals, and the discs used for interactive programming run at a faster speed with one frame per revolution and have a 30-minute capacity. The discs can store more than 14 billion bits of information, or about 48,600 separate frames. They carry high-quality stereo audio tracks and, because there is no stylus contact, can hold a freeze frame indefinitely. Manufacturers who have shown prototypes or produced laser machines include Philips, Pioneer, Sanyo, Sony (some industrial models) and Hitachi.

Publicationsfrom CINEMAPAPERS SOON FOR RELEASE

ORDER NOW

The Documentary Film m r A n o n v \at rt p n n n m l Documentary Lifilms occupy a special place in the history and development of Australian filmmaking. From the pioneering efforts of Baldwin Spencer to Damien Parer's Academy Award winning Kokoda Front Line, to Chris Noonan's Stepping Out and David Bradbury's Frontline, Australia's documentary filmmakers have been acclaimed world-wide.

The documentary film is also the mainstay of the Australian film industry.

More time, more money and more effort goes into making documentaries in this country than any other film form â&#x20AC;&#x201D; features, shorts or animation.

In this, the first comprehensive publication on Australian documentary film, 50 researchers, authors and filmmakers have combined to examine the evolution of documentary filmmaking in Australia, and the state of the art today.

-

Each rwion case study examines, in detail, the steps in the production of the documentary, and features interviews with the key production, creative and technical personnel involved.

Australia

The Australian Documentary: Themes and Concerns An examination of the themes, pre-occupations and film forms used by Australian documentary producers and directors.

Repositories and Preservation Documentary Producers An examination of the various types of documentaries made in Australia, and who produces them. A study of government and independent production. The aims behind the production of documentaries, and the various film forms adopted to achieve the desired ends. This part surveys the sources of finance for documentary film here and abroad.

A survey of the practices surrounding the storage and preservation of documentary films in Australia.

Comparisons of procedures here and abroad.

The Future A look at the future for documentary films. The impact of new technology as it affects production, distribution and marketing. A forward look at the marketplace and the changing role of the documentary.

The Marketplace

Producers and Directors Checklist

The market for Australian documentary films, here and abroad. This section examines broadcast television, pay television, theatrical distribution, video sales and hire, box-office performances and ratings.

A checklist of documentary producers and directors currently working in Australia.

Making a Documentary

Reference information for those dealing with, or interested in, the documentary film. This section will include listings of documentary buyers, distributors, libraries, festivals, etc.

A series of case studies examining the making of documentaries. Examples include large budget documentary series for television; one-off documentaries for television and theatrical release; and educational and instructional documentaries.

Useful Information

Published by Cinema Papers in association with the Victorian Film Corporation.

Please send me [...] copies of The Documentary Film in Australia Cheques, money orders or Bankcard only.

Contents The History of the Documentary: A World View

$9.95.

Name . Address Postcode

International landmarks, key figures, major movements

Bankcard No. Expires

/

ZZ CZCZ ZHZ] EZHZCZ I II II II II I[ I

/

The Development of the Documentary in Australia

Total amount enclosed: $

A general history of the evolution of the documentary film in Australia, highlighting key films, personalities and events.

Make cheques or money orders payable to Cinema Papers, 644 Victoria Street, North Melbourne, 3051 Telephone: (03) 329 5983.

Allow 4 weeks for processing.

Signature

1

AUSTRALIAN

MOTION PICTURE YEARBOOK

1981/82

AUSTRALIAN

A U ST R A L IA N

MOTION PICTURE ' YEARBOOK

MOTION PICTURE YEARBOOK

1983 Edited by Peter Beilby and Ross Lansell . . an invaluable reference fo r anyone with an interest — vested or altruistic — in the continuing film renaissance down under . . . ” Variety

‘‘The most useful reference book fo r me in the past year . . . ” Ray Stanley Screen International “The Australian Motion Picture Yearbook is a great asset to the film industry in this country.

We at Kodak fin d it invaluable as a reference aid fo r the industry. ” David Wells Kodak “. . . one has to admire the detail and effort which has gone into the yearbook. It covers almost every conceivable facet o f the film industry and the publisher’s claim that it is ‘the only comprehensive yellow page guide to the film industry’ is irrefutable. ” The Australian “Anyone interested in Australian films, whether in the industry or who just enjoys watching them, will fin d plenty to interest him in this book. ’’ The Sydney Sun-Herald “This significant publication is valuable not only to professionals but everyone interested in Australian film. ” The Melbourne Herald “May I congratulate you on your Australian Motion Picture Yearbook. It is a splendidly useful publication to us, and I ’m sure to most people in, and outside, the business. ” Mike Walsh Hayden Price Productions

“The 1981 version o f the Australian Motion Picture Yearbook is not only bigger, it’s better — as glossy on the outside as too many Australian films try to be and as packed with content as many more Australian films ought to be . . . ’’ The Sydney Morning Herald “1 have been receiving the Cinema Papers Motion Picture Yearbook for the past two years, and always find it to be full o f interesting and useful information and facts. It is easy to read and the format is set out in such a way that information is easy to find. 1 consider the Yearbook to be an asset to the office. ” Bill Gooley Colorfilm “. . . another good effort from the Cinema Papers team, and essential as a desk-top reference for anybody interested in our feature film industry. ’’ The Adelaide Advertiser “Indispensable tool o f the trade. ” Elizabeth Riddell Theatre Australia

The third edition of the Australian Motion Picture Yearbook has been totally revised and updated.

The Yearbook again takes a detailed look at what has been happening in all sections of the Australian film scene over the past year, including financing, production, distribution, exhibition, television, film festivals, media, censorship and awards.

As in the past, all entrants in Australia’s most comprehensive film and television industry directory have been contacted to check the accuracy of entries, and many new categories have been added.

A new series of profiles has been compiled and will highlight the careers of director Peter Weir, composer Brian May, distributor/exhibitor David Williams, art director David Copping and actor Mel Gibson.

A new feature in the 1983 edition is an extensive editorial section with articles on aspects of Australian and international cinema, ^ including film financing, special effects, and a survey of the impact our films are having on U. S. audiences.

OUT OCTOBER — ORDER NOW Please send me I---- 1 copies of the 1983 Motion Picture Yearbook @ $19.95 plus $1.55 postage and handling — total: $21.50.

Outside Australia: $35 (surface mail); $45 (airmail).

Name ..................................................................................

Address Postcode

2

Enclosed Australian $................................... f. ...........................

Note: All Remittances in Australian dollars only.

Please make cheques or money orders out to Cinema Papers Pty Ltd, 644 Victoria Street, North Melbourne, 3051.

Telephone: (03) 329 5983 Telex: AA 30625 and quote “ Cinema Papers ME230”

m

Bankcard No. □ □ □

Expires

□ □

Signature

□ □ □

□ □ □ □ □ □

CINEMA PAPERS in association with Thomas Nelson

AUSTRALIAN TV The firs t 25 years records, year by year, all the important television events. Over 600 photographs, some in full color, recall forgotten images and preserve memories of programmes long since wiped from the tapes.

The book covers every facet of television programming — light entertainment, quizzes, news and documentaries, kids’ programmes, sport, drama, movies, commercials... Contributors include Jim Murphy, Brian Courtis, Garrie Hutchinson, Andrew McKay, Christopher Day, Ivan Hutchinson.

AUSTRALIAN TV takes you back to the time when television for most Australians was a curiosity — a shadowy, often soundless, picture in the window of the local electricity store. The quality of the early programmes was at best unpredictable, but still people would gather to watch the Melbourne Olympics, Chuck Faulkner reading the news, or even the test pattern!

At first imported series were the order of the day. Only Graham Kennedy and Bob Dyer could challenge the ratings of the westerns and situation comedies from America and Britain.

$14.95 Then came The Mavis Bramston Show. With the popularity of that rude and irreverent show, Australian television came into its own.

Programmes like Number 96, The Box, Against the Wind, Sale of the Century have achieved ratings that are by world standards remarkable.

AUSTRALIAN TV is an entertainment, a delight, and a commemoration of a lively, fast­ growing industry.

Fill out order form fo r Australian TV on page 8 o f this special insert.

3

The first comprehensive book on the Australian film revival

(B

208

S ili

I

pps, 28 cm x 20 .5cm (ii" x 8 ")

In this major work on the Australian film industryâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s dramatic rebirth, 12 leading film writers combine to provide a lively and entertaining critique. Illustrated with 265 stills, including 55 in full color, this book is an invaluable record for all those interested in the N ew Australian Cinema.

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), Childrenâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Films (Virginia Duigan), Avant-garde (Sam Rohdie).

4

ù ù i In November last the Film and Television Production Association of Australia and the New South Wales Film Corporation brought together 15 international experts to discuss film financing, marketing, and distribution of Australian films in the 1980s with producers involved in the film and television industry.

The symposium was a resounding success.

Tape recordings made of the proceedings have been transcribed and edited by Cinema Papers, and published as the Film Expo Seminar Report.

Copies can be ordered for $25 each.

Contributors

Contents

Arthur Abeles Chairman. Filmarketeers Ltd (U S.)

_

.

Barbara D. Boyle Executive Vice-President, and Chief Operating Officer, New World Pictures (U.S.)

Ashley Boone Worldwide Marketing and Distribution Head, Ladd Company (U S )

Mark Damon

Theatrical Production The Package: Two Perspectives Perspective I: As Seen by the Buyer (i)

Partial versus complete packaging, or starting from scratch with an idea. (ii) Evaluating for different markets, different costs (budgeting).

Speakers: Barry Spikings; Mike Medavoy

President, Producers Sales Organization (U.S.)

Perspective II: As Seen by the Seller

Michael Fuchs

The role of the agent in packaging.

Speaker: Harry Ufland

Senior Vice-President, Programming, Home Box Office (U.S.)

Samuel W. Gelfman Independent Producer (U.S.)

Klaus Hellwig President, Janus Film Und Fernsehen (Germany)

Lois Luger Vice-President, Television Sales, Avco Embassy Pictures Corporation (U.S.)

Professor Avv. Massimo FerraraSantamaria Lawyer (Italy)

Mike Medavoy Executive Vice-President, Orion Pictures (U.S.)

Theatrical Production Business and Legal Aspects (i)

Sources of materials (published, original screenplays, etc.). (ii) Forms of acquisition agreements and/or writer's agreements. (iii) Talent agreements (“ pay or play" defer­ ments, “ going rates” , approvals). (iv) Insurance. (v) Guild and union requirements (foreign and domestic production). (vi) S ubsidiary ' rights. P ublishing music, merchandising, etc.

Speaker: Eric Weissmann

Distribution Outside the United States Distribution terms. Relationship and terms with sub-distributors and exhibitors. Recoupment of expenses. C ross-collateralizing territories Dubbing. Censorship Speakers:Arthur Abeles: Klaus HellwigiNorthern European perspective); Massimo Ferrara (Italian and European perspective)

Television Production and Distribution Production for network or syndication Deficit financing. Tape versus film Licensing “ off-net­ work". United States and foreign. Commercial versus public broadcasting Speaker: Lois Luger

Financing of Theatrical Films Major Studios Control, approvals, overhead, over-budget provi­ sions, total or partial financing. Negative pick-up Speaker: Rudy Petersdorf

Financing of Theatrical Films Independent Studios Rise of independent financing. Tax motivated and otherwise. Completion financing.

Speaker: Sam Gelfman

Simon O. Olswang

Distribution in the United States

Presale of Rights

Solicitor, Brecker and Company (Britain)

(i)

Separating rights by media. Pay television, free television (network syndication).

Speaker. Michael Fuchs

Rudy Petersdorf President and Chief Operating Officer, Australian Films Office Inc. (U.S.)

BarrySpikings Chairman and Chief Executive, EMI Film and Theatre Corporation (Britain)

Eric Weissmann Partner. Kaplan, Livingston, Goodwin, Berkowitz and Selvin

Harry Ufland President, The Ufland Agency (U.S.)

Mapping the distribution sales campaign When and where to open. How to allocate advertising budgets. Number of theatres.

70mm and stereo. Reissues. Ancillary markets — hold back for pay and free television. (ii) Exhibition terms. Advances and guaran­ tees; split of box-office (90-1 0 with “ floor” “ house-nut” , etc.); blind bidding; policing Speaker: Ashley Boone

Producer/Distributor Relationship Terms: Differences where distributor financed production. How d istributor expenses are recouped. Distributor fees. Advertising commit­ ment, if any. Outside sales representative.

Speaker: Barbara Boyle .

Presale by Territory Advantages and problems. Interim and comple­ tion financing. Term of distribution rights.

Speaker: Mark Damon

Multi-National and Other Co-Productions Availability of subsidies. Treaties. Tax incentives Government investments.

Speaker: Simon Olswang .

Fill out order form fo r the Film Expo Seminar Report on page 8 o f this special insert.

5

BACK ISSUES Take advantage of our special offer and catch up on your missing issues. M ultiple copies less than half-price!

Number 1 January 1974

Number 2 April 1974

David Williamson. Ray Harryhausen. Peter Weir.

Gillian Armstrong. Ken G. Hall. Tariff Board Report.

Antony I. Ginnane. The Cars That Ate Paris.

Number 3

Number 5 March-April 1975

July 1974

Violence in the Cinema.

Alvin Purple. Frank Moorhouse. Sandy Harbtitt.

Film U n d e r AH ende.

Nicholas Roea. Between Wars

Jo h n P a p a d o p o lo u s.

Willis O’Brien. The McDonagh Sisters. Richard Brennan. Luis Buñuel.

The True Story of Eskimo Nett

Jennings Lang. Byron Haskin.-Surf Films. Brian Probyn. Sunday Too Far Away. Charles Chaevel. index* Volume 1

Number 9

Number 10 September-October

June-July 1976

1976

Milos Forman. Miklos Jancso. Luchino Visconti.

Robyn Spry. Or. Mad Dog Morgen. Jean Long.

'

Nagisa Oshima. PtSIlippe Mora. Gay Cinema. John Heyér. Krzysztof Zanussi.

Marco Ferrari. Marco Bellocchio.

Index: Volume 2

Number 11 January 1977 Emile de Antonio. Aus­ tralian Film Censorship.

Sam A rk o ff. Rom an Polanski. The Picture Show Man. Don’s Party.

Storm Boy.

CIMBÄ

Number 12 April 1977

Number 13 July 1977

Number 14 October 1977

Number 15 January 1978

Number 16 April-June 1978

Kenneth Loach. Tom Haydon. Bert Deling. Piero Tosi. John Scott. John Dankworth. The Getting

Louise Malle. Paul Cox. John Power. Peter Sykes.

Bernardo Bertolucci. F.J.

Phil Noyce. Eric Rohmer.

John Huston. Blue Fire

Tom Cowan, Francois Truffaut. Delphine Seyrig.

Holden. In Search of Anna Index: Volume 3

Lady.

Chinese Cinema.

The irishman. The Chant of Jimmie Blacksmith. Sri Lankan Cinema. The Last Wave

Patrick. Swedish Cinema.

John Duigan. Steven Spielberg. Dawn! Mouth to Mouth. Film Period­ icals.

of W isdom . Journey Among Women.

S u m m e rfie ld .

. * w

Ä%Xsti yM -OT1I

... 1JP

W:

Number 17 August-September 1978

Number 18 October-November 1978

Bill Bain. Isabelle Hup­ pert. Polish Cinema. The Night the Prowler. Pierre Rissient. Newsfront. Film Study Resources.

John Lamond. Dimbooia Indian Cinema. Sonia B o rg . A la in T a n n e r.

Cathy’s Child. The Last Tasmanian.

Index: Volume 4

C IN E M A

Tape**

Number 19 January-February 1979 A n to n y I. G in n a n e .

Jeremy Thomas. Blue Fin. Andrew S a rris. Asian C in e m a . S p o n s o re d Documentaries. '

Number 20 March-April 1979

Number 21 May-June 1979

Number 22 July-August 1979

Ken Cameron. French Cinema. Jim Sharman.

My Brilliant Career. Film Study Resources. The

Mad Max. Vietnam on Film. Grendel, Grendel, Grendel. David Hemmings. The Odd Angry Shot. Box-Office Grosses.

Snapshot

Newsfront. Film Study R e s o u rc e s . K o s ta s .

Money Movers. The Aus­

Night the Prowler.

Bruce Petty. Albie Thoms.

tralian Film and Tele­ vision School.

Index: Volume 5

Number 23 September-October 1979

Number 24 December 1979 January 1980

Australian Televisio n .

Brian Trenchard Smith.

Last of the Knucklemen.

Palm Beach. Brazilian

W om en Film m a k e rs.

Japanese Cinema. My

Cinema. Jerzy Toeplitz.

Community Television.

Arthur Hiller.

Brilliant Career. Tim. Thirst. Tim Burstall ■

CINEMA

Number 26 April-May 1980

Number 27 June-July 1980

The Rims of Peter Weir.

Charles Joffe. Harlequin.

Nationalism in Australian Cinema. The Little Con­

The New Zealand Film Industry. The Z Men. Peter Yeldham. Maybe This Time. Donald Richie.

victindex: Volume 6

G r e n d e l, Grendel

G r e n d e l,

Number 29 October-November 1980

Number 32 May-June ,1981

Number 33 July-August 1981

The Films of Bruce Beresford. Stir. Melbourne and Sydney Film Festivals.

Breaker Morant. Stacy Keach R o a d g a m es .

Bob Ellis. Actors Equity D eba te . U ri W indt.

Judy Davis. David William­ son. Richard Rush. Cuban Cinema A Town Like

John Duigan on Winter of Our Dreams. Government and the Film Industry. Tax and Film. Chris Noonan.

Robert Altman., Gallipoli.

A lice

Flash

Channel 0/28.

Gordon

Roadgames Grendei

f £/?££

'¿S/0F

Number 37 March-April 1982 Stephen MacLean on Starstruck, Jacki Weaver, Peter Ustinov, Women in Drama, Reds, Heatwave.

'

Note: issues number 4, 6, 7, 8, 30, 31 34 and 35 are out of print.

Reaction. David Puttnam. Cen so rship.

Stir. Everett de Roche.

Touch and Go. Film and Politics.

Chain

mm

Number 28 August-September 1980

Cruising. The Last Outlaw. Philippine Cin­ ema. The Club.

Number 25 February-March 1980

1 3 5 7

or or or or

2 copies $4 4 copies $3 6 copies $2 more copies

Number 36 January-February 1982 Kevin Dobson, Blow Out. W om en in D ra m a , Michael Rubbo, Mad Max 2. Puberty Blues.

each each (save $1 per copy) each (save $2 per copy) $1.80 each (save $2.20 per copy)

Fill out order form fo r Cinema Papers back issues on page 8 o f this special insert.

Losetheburdenoflei timeandsobscribeto 1 year ( 6 issues) $18 2 years (12 issues) $32 Save $4 on single issue purchase price 3 years (18 issues) $46 Save $8 on single issue purchase price S u b s c r ip t io n s Zone 1. New Zealand Niugini

6 issues $25.20

(Surface) $ 32.50

2. Malaysia Singapore

3. Hong Kong India Japan Philippines China 4. North America Middle East Canada -

5. Britain Europe Africa Sth America NOTE

12 issues

.

Bound V o lu m e s

E z ib in d e r s

B a c k Is s u e s

(each)

(each)

(to the price of each copy, add the following)

18 issues

$46.40

$67.70

$33.30

(Surface)

(Surface)

(Surface)

$19.00

$1.20

(Surface)

(Surface)

$65.00

$92.70

$36.50

(Air)

(Air)

$19.90

$2.80

$67.60

$33.30

(Air)

(Air)

$25.20

$46.40

(Surface)

(Surface)

(Surface)

(Surface)

(Surface)

$36.70

$72.00

$105.30

$37.10

(Air)

(Air)

$20.95

$67.60

$33.30

(Air)

(Air)

$19.00

$1.20

.

(Surface) $3.50

(Air)

(Air)

$25.20

$46.40

(Surface)

(Surface)

(Surface)

(Surface)

(Surface)

(Surface)

$42.60

$80.40

$117.90

$40.00

$22.00

$4.10

(Air)

(Air)

$25.20

$46.40

(Surface) $48.90

(Air)

(Air)

$25.20

$19.00

(Air) .

$1.20

(Air)

(Air)

$67.60

$33.30

$19.00

(Surface)

(Surface)

(Surface)

$1.20

(Surface)

(Surface)

$88.80

$130.50

$43.20

$23.95

$5.15

(Air)

(Air)

$46.40

$67.60

$33.30

(Surface)

(Surface)

(Surface)

$53.10

$93.00

(Air)

(Air)

(Air)

.

(Air)

(Air)

(Air)

(Air)

(Surface)

$19.00

$1.20

(Surface)

(Surface)

$136.80

$45.00

(Air)

(Air)

$25.00

$5.85

.

(Air)

(Air)

A ‘Surface Air Lift" (air speeded) service is available to Britain, Germany, Greece, Italy and North America Subscriptions: 6 issues — $43.80; 12 issues — $83.60; 18 issues — $1 23.40. Bound Volumes (each) - $35.20. Ezibinders (each) — $20.75. Back Issues — add $4.30 per copy.

BOUND VOLUM ES

E Z IB IN D E R S

ORDER VOLUME 7 NOW (numbers 25-30)

Volumes 3 (9-12), 4 (13-16), 5 (17-20) and 6 (21-24) are still available.

Handsomely bound in black with gold embossed lettering Volume 7 contains 5I2 lavishly-illustrated pages of • Exclusive interviews with producers, directors, actors and technicians.

• Valuable historical material on Australian film production • Film and book reviews.

• Production surveys and reports from the sets of local ' and international production.

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

• Includes I2pp Index per volume

S TR IC TL Y L IM IT E D E D IT IO N S PLEASE NOTE: Volume I (numbers l-4) and Volume 2 (numbers 5-8) ARE NOW UNAVAILABLE.

F ill out order form overleaf fo r Cinema Papers Subscriptions, G ift Subscriptions, Bound Volumes and Ezibinders.

Cinema Papers is pleased to announce that an 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.

7

Subscriptions

Please enter a subscription for 6 issues ($18) □ Please start □

d

renew

1 8 issues

12 issues ($32)

($46) □

my subscription with the next issue. If a renewal,

please state Record No. (Details)

Delivered to your door post free

Subscriber’s name Address ..............

Office use only NP

Postcode

G ift Subscriptions

If you wish to make a subscription to C inem a P a pe rs a gift, cross the box below and we will send a card on your behalf with the first issue.

□ Back issues

OK

1 3 5 7

Gift subscription from (name of sender)

or or or or

2 copies $4 4 copies $3 6 copies $2 more copies

Overseas rates overleaf

$

each each (save $1 per copy) 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 number you require in the appropriate box. .

□ 1

Bound volumes Allow fo u r weeks fo r processing.

Ezibinders

□ □ 2

□

□

26

27

□ 3

□ 28

□

5

□

□

□

10

11

9

□

□

29 32

□ 33

□

Please send me □

□

□

□

□

□

□

□

□

□

□

□

37

Note: issues num ber 4, 6, 7, 8, 30, 31, 34 and 35 are out of print. O V E R S E A S R A T E S O V E R L E A F

Please send me bound volumes of

at $30 per volume.

□

13 14

□ 36

□

12

□

15

16

3 (issues 9-1 2)

17

d

18

19

20

21

4 (issues 13-16)

22

d

23^ 24

25

$

7 (issues 25-30)

Volume 5 (issues 17-20) and Volume 6 (issues 21-24) out of print.

$ $

copies of C inem a P a p e rs ’ Ezibinder at $15 a binder.

2. Australian M otion Picture Yearbook (a) Please send me

d

(b) Please send me □

copies of the 1981 /82 Yearbook at $19.95 a copy (Foreign: $30 surface; $40 airmail).

$

copies of the 1980 Yearbook at $19.95 a copy (Foreign: $30 surface; $40 airmail).

3. Australian TV, The First 25 Years Please send me □

$

copies of Australian TV at $1 4.95 a copy (Foreign: $1 7 surface; $26 airmail).

4. The N ew Australian Cinema Please send me

d

$

copies of The New Australian Cinema at $14.95 a copy (Foreign; $17 surface; $26 airmail).

5. Film Expo Sem inar Report Please send me

d

$

copies of the Film Expo Seminar Report at $25 a copy (Foreign: $27 surface; $32 airmail).

Name....

Address ................ ........................................................ Postcode...................

A ll foreign orders should be accompanied by bank drafts only.

Total amount enclosed:

A ll quoted figures are in Australian dollars.

NB: Please make all cheques to: Cinema Papers P/L, 644 Victoria St, North Melbourne 3051.

Offers close July 31, 1982

New Products and Processes

V.H. Commodore

' ■* A c c e s s a rie s . preseet& fiee

A number of alternative answers are given.

Select your answer by

' :r

ttie responi^'W um be#^

C3S) V.H. AlrcondltiOOing

,

an # enter that number by pressing the matching number on your touch pad.

~ S ervi ee Treiufttg

C40H neyiéw Q yeettons

« Sérviee rrnimm

A itim i

«*»*

developing an inexpensive, solid-state laser. Philips has just announced the successful development of a solid-state laser that also has the power to provide a strong-enough burst to provide a burn in for a record disc system.

I have no doubt that all the manufac­ turers are working on record discs. A newsletter we subscribe to in the U.S., which has a pretty good track record, claims also that there is a company in Florida that says it has the investment to set up a disc-pressing plant. If that is the case, although I have my doubts, it indicates the direction that things are moving.

The optical video disc is such an obvious answer to many audio-visual needs, and its ability to store frame-by­ frame information that can be accessed faster than you can shuttle tape, gives it immense value for data storage. What are your feelings about the future con­ sumer use of these discs?

My feelings are different to a lot of the

Tb- be&invthe questions»

advocates of home video disc. I honestly think that the interactive disc has a greater future than they are currently predicting for discs as a replay-only source of entertainment. The sound quality of disc is superb and with the quality of the pressings coming out of Japan, added to speed of search com­ pared to tape, discs have tremendous advantages.

But I have doubts if that is enough to put discs ahead of tape at this stage.

Though once people have had their tape machines for a few years, and have got a little bored with them as toys, maybe they can be persuaded to buy interactive disc.

Tape machines are still being bought at a great rate, and they are still a novelty to consumers, so in the current market it is hard for video disc to try and penetrate unless it has something unique to offer, and that’s where the interactive disc has something to offer.

People will be looking fo r se lf­ improvement programs, which disc is perfect for, with its ability to test you. We are in the so-called Information Age, and

the disc can store a hell of a lot of information that you can retrieve very quickly. Kids are growing up today with interactive video games and are used to that technology as part of their enter­ tainment. I think they are going to demand that in their own homes. ★

Software and Soft Porn

2 How is lubrication o f th e com pressor a c h ie v e # ?

(O) By re frig era n t R12 <1)By th e special oil ca rrie d by R12 (2>By th e special oil

could soon be matched by exclusive material aimed at the type of consumer who wants hi-fideiity sound and superior image quality. This, and special discs like the just-reieased interactive disc for children that contains games, cartoons and interactive learning segments, will be necessary if the home consumer market is to eventually become a reality.

QmoNdEJi

The marketing of the various disc systems has often depended on what and how many film titles could be offered compatible with the system. Without the discs to play, the public is not interested. The video-cassette market successes are still based on a large percentage of so ft-co re porn and R-rated films. The disc manufacturers must have regretted their stand to reject any such unsavory material from their releases. When Pioneer launched the LaserDisc players in Japan recently, the best-selling disc was a Japanese-made (very) soft core disc, and the U.S. market will probably follow. The sales of the sophisticated Philips/Pioneer systems

Grooved Capacitance Disc (CED)

Video High-Density, Grooveless Capacitance (VHD)

RCA wanted to release a low-cost (less than $500) player that is being sold in discount stores for less than $400. The savings were made by using a grooved, conductive vinyl disc to track the stylus accurately. The stylus is diamond with a thin metal rear surface that detects the difference in capacitance between the flats and hollows on the floor of the groove. The disc has to be loaded and removed while inside a protective plastic jacket, and the disc and stylus are subject to wear. This prevents holding still frames for long periods and the still frame is actually a sequence of four frames. Although low cost and lacking special effects, it provides image quality superior to 1/2 -inch video cassette.

Manufacturers are RCA (SelectaVision), Sanyo and, probably, Tandy.

This was introduced by the Japan Victor Corporation (JVC) and combines the electrode stylus of the CED with a grooveless surface that allows the freeze frame, fast-forward and reverse scanning and slow-motion modes of the laser disc. The stylus is wider, which reduces wear and disc pressure. The audio is stereo and with an optional decoder can become an ultra hi-fi AHD (Audio High Density) system that can carry three channels and lower-resolution still images.

Manufacturers include JVC, Sanyo (again), National Panasonic, Sharp, Toshiba and the Super 8 manufacturer, Elmo. There is a possibility of some compatibility as laser techniques are used to read the CED and VHD discs in the laboratory.

CINEMA PAPERS June - 249

INTERCINE

Electronic control of motor speeds forward and reverse Transistorised amplifiers give high quality sound reproduction

six-plate for 16mm and 35mm film

Double size 16mm and 35mm sprockets for track

• VARIOUS FORMATS AVAILABLE • ATTRACTIVELY PRICED • BROCHURES SUPPLIED ON REQUEST

six-plate for 16mm film

Film loading in a straight pattern

NO W REPRESENTED B Y

StudioSoundSystems SOLE A USTRALIANAGENTS

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION RING JOHN FARMER (02) 888 1746 13 KEPPEL RD RYDE2112

Publicity..................................... Blast Off Inc., Synopsis: Guy Hamilton, an Australian Broadcasting Service journalist, arrives in Los Angeles Jakarta during a time of political upheaval.

Unit publicist ............................ Blast Off Inc. PRODUCTION There he is befriended by an enigmatic Studios...............................................Columbia Australian Asian, Billy Kwan, and they pro­ Mixed at .............................................. Horizon foundly influence each other's destiny. He Laboratory .......................................Definition becomes increasingly involved with the B udget............................ $8,000,000 approx.

PRE-PRODUCTION THE YEAR OF politics of the country and with Jill Bryant, Length ..............................................126 mins LIVING DANGEROUSLY an English Embassy secretary. Eventually, Gauge ....................................... 16mm Swank as these interests diverge, he must choose Shooting stock......................... Eastmancolor Prod, company ..................Wayang Prods. between them.

Scheduled relea se..........September 1982 ABRA CADABRA Dist. company ......................................MGM Cast: Ali MacGraw (Carmen Fuller), John Producer...................................Jim McElroy Prod, company ..................... Adams Packer Cassevetes (Bull Ballard), Aleck Sheckter D irector..........................................Peter Weir Film Prod. (Burke Fuller), Kelly Collins (Lee Mills), Scriptwriters.................... David Williamson, Producer................................................. PhillipAdams POST-PRODUCTION Christina Grisanti (Tina Joyce), Ellie Kandor Peter V/eir, D irector...................................Alexander Stitt (Samantha Joyce), Graeme Orr (Hugh Christopher Koch, Scriptwriter.............................Alexander Stitt Morgan), Holly Kidman (Georgia Semmler), with additional material Based on the original David Rowlands (Police Officer Irish),

by Alan Sharp BROTHERS idea by ...............................Alexander Stitt Elizabeth MacRae (Beth).

Based on the Sound recordist ................ Brian Lawrence, Synopsis: Modern day smugglers attempt novel by ....................................C. J. Koch Prod, company ....................Areflex Prods AAV Australia to land a boat-load of Cocaine on the West Photography............................Russell Boyd Dist. company ...........................IMC-ISRAM Com poser.................................... Peter Best Cost of U.S.A. from their base in Hawaii. A Sound recordist ......................Gary Wilkins Producer ................................Terry Bourke Exec, producer .......................Phillip Adams sea-based adventure to be shot in Sydney, E d ito r........................................Bill Anderson Director ..................................Terry Bourke Assoc, producer ...................Andrew Knight Hawaii and Los Angeles.

Art director............................Herbert Pinter Scriptwriter ............................Terry Bourke Prod, secretary .......................... Janet Arup MGM rep........................... John Hargreaves Based on the novel by ........Roger Ward Animation director ................. Frank Hellard Prod, supervisor.....................................MarkEgerton Photography ............................Ray Henman BUSH CHRISTMAS Key anim ators.........................................AnneJolliffe, Prod.

Sound recordist ....................Bob Clayton Gus McLaren, co-ordinator . . . Carolynne Cunningham Editor ...................................... Ron Williams Prod, company ....B u s h Christmas Prod.

Steve Robinson, Prod, manager ....................Tim Saunders Dist. company ........................Barron Films, Composer ..................................Bob Young Ralph Peverill United Artists Location manager.................John Wiggins Exec, producers ................ Brock Halliday, Painting supervisor ............Marilyn Davies (Syd.) P roducer................................Gilda Barrachi Frank Wilkie Director special fx Unit manager ...................... Murray Francis Assoc, producer ....................John Hipwell Director ..................................Howard Rubie photography....................................... MikeBrowning (Syd.) Prod, managers .................. Ken Metcalfe Scriptwriter................................Ted Roberts Art director.............................Alexander Stitt Based on the novel .................Ralph Smart Prod, secretary ....................Lynda House (Philippines), Musical director .........

Peter Best (Syd.) Exec, producer ..........................Paul Barron Judith West (NZ/Aust.)

Tech, advisers......................................... MikeBrowning, Prod, secretary ..................Sally Blaxland B udget.........................................................$1.1 million Unit manager ............................Tim Higgins Volk Mol (Philippines) Prod, secretaries ....................Mitch Griffin, ...................................................96mins Studios................................................... Al et al Length Business manager ............Michael Wilcox Gauge .....................................................35mm Victoria Christie (Aust.)

Laboratory ...............................Victorian Film Scheduled release ......................Dec., 1982 Prod, accountant ............. Elaine Crowther Prod, accountant ....................... Ross Lane Laboratories Prod, assistant................... Ken Richardson Company accountant ............Neil Drabsch Synopsis: A re-make of the Australian Length ...........................................

90 mins cinema classic. An adventure involving the 1st asst director ................... Mark Egerton Prod, assistant ............ Roy Harries-Jones Gauge .......... .................35mm Panavision, (Syd.) Insurance/Completion manager and lead singer of a band that Triangle 3D goes bust. Four teenagers set off to pursue 1st asst director ....................Wayne Barry guarantors .............. Halliday & Nicholas Shooting stock........................ Eastmancolor (Manila) 1st asst director ............ Bosie Vine-Miller the two rogues who, “stranded" without Scheduled release ........................Late 1983 funds, are forced to turn to a life of crime 2nd asst director.......................Chris Webb 2nd asst director ............Andrew Williams Voices: Jacki Weaver, John Farnham, 3rd asst director..........Michael Bourchier and steal a valuable racehorse.

3rd asst director ..................Peter Kearney Hayes Gordon, Gary Files, Jim Smilie, (Syd.) Continuity ............................Jenny Quigley Hamish Hughes.

3rd asst director............... Ken Richardson Director’s secretary . Jennifer Woodward Synopsis: Will Abra Cadabra thwart the THE PERCY GRAINGER STORY (Philippines) Casting .............................Roger Ward (NZ) plans of rotten B. L. Z'Bubb and nasty Klaw, 2nd unit (working title) Casting consultants ................... Eric Cook the Rat King, to control all of the known and 1st asst d irector...................Ian Goddard Camera operator .......................David Burr unknown universe? Of course he will, with Prod, company ..............Trifilm/Artis Films Continuity ..................................Moya Iceton Focus puller ..................Malcolm Burrows the help of beautiful Primrose Buttercup, D irector.................................................... TomHaydon Production a sst................. Ken Richardson Clapper/loader ....................Conrad Slack Mr. Pig and Zodiac the space dog, among Scriptwriter ............................Tom Keneally (Syd.) Key grip ..................................Lester Bishop others. But not until the end.

Exec, producers ....................Barry Merton, Producer’s secretary........Wilma Schinella Reynolds (Aust.), Tim Smart Casting..................................... Allison Barrett Asst grips . . . . NicholasDennis Cullen (NZ) Co-producer .............................Tom Haydon Extras casting consultant........Sue Parker Gaffer ..........................................Pav Govind ANGEL CHASE Budget........................................................ $4.5million Extras casting a sst........................Jo Hardie Electricians ..........Mark Friedman (Aust.), Prod, company . . . . Sheldon Marvin Films Synopsis: The life of the eccentric and Camera operator ..................Nixon Binney Johnathan Hughes (Aust.), volatile composer, Percy Grainger.

Dist. company ....................Columbia Films Focus p u lle r..................Peter Menzles jun.

Neil Campbell (NZ) P roducer.........................................................AlRuban Clapper/loader .....................Geoff Wharton Boom operator ..........Graham McKinney D irector............................ John Cassevetes Key g rip ..........................................Ray Brown Art director ..............: ............... Paul Tolley PHAR LAP Scriptwriter ....................John Cassevetes, Asst grip ..................................Stuart Green, Asst art director .................. Rachel Rovay Freyer Thomas Prod, com pany..........John Sexton Prods Geordie Dryden Costume designer ................. David Rowe Based on the original Gaffer............................... Brian Bansgrove P roducer...................................................JohnSexton Make-up ........................ Robern Pickering idea by ............................ Freyer Thomas Electricians................................ Colin Chase, Hairdressers ............Willi Kennick (Aust.), Scriptwriter......................... David Williamson Photography................................ Technicolor Paul Moyse (Syd.), B udget.............................................. $3 million Trish Cohen (NZ) Sound recordist .......................... Sil Gordon Scheduled release ..........................June '83 Peter O’Brian (Manila) Ward, assistant ....................... Rima Rowe E d ito r.............................. Michael Deveridge Boom operator ................... Mark Wasiutak Standby props ........David Findlay (Aust.), No further details supplied.

Prod, designer...................... Martin Franks Design consultant.....................Wendy Weir Chris Paulger (NZ) Com posers................................................. EricBreit, Asst art director ................Annie Browning Special effects ...............Reece Robinson RIMAU Ros Haward Costume designer ..................... Terry Ryan Asst editor ..................Annabelle Sheehan (working title) Exec, producer ............................... Al Ruban Costume supervisor.............Anthony Jones Musical director .................... Bob Young Assoc, producer ......................Dick Franken Make-up .......................................Judy Lovell Mixer ........................................ Peter Fenton Prod, company .................................... SAFC Prod, supervisor............Emmett Richards Make-up a sst........................................... JoanMostyn Stunts co-ordinator ............ Frank Lennon Scriptwriter .......................Thomas Keneally Unit manager...............................................BillFranklin Quan make-up design.........Bob McCarron Stunts ......................................Frank Lennon, Prod, secretary ........................ Kathy Kellett Hairdresser............................................ CherylWilliams Grant Page, Prod, accountant ....................Roy Winson Wardrobe mistress................................ JenniBolton Peter West, THE SUNBEAM SHAFT 1st asst, director......................................JackPeters Standby wardrobe .................... Phil Eagles, Zenda Graves, Roger Monk 2nd asst, director........Collyn Zimmerman Jade Clayton, Prod, company ..........................R.M.L. Prod Continuity ....................................Sheila Dunn Producer............................................. MirandaBainProps b u ye rs......................................StewartWay, Kerry Blakeman, Paddy Reardon, Script assistant..................... Marsha Merrill Marty Takarang, D irector...........................Richard Lowenstein Mark Statescu, Producer’s assistant...............................AndyHollick Rangi Nikora, Scriptwriter.................... Richard Lowenstein Casting.............................Faces International Sally Campbell Chris Hession Photography..................... Andrew De Groot Inc. — Tim Doyle Sound recordist ..................... Lloyd Carrick Standby p ro p s........................................ ClarkMunro Still photography ......................David Miller Casting E d ito r............................................... Jill Bilcock Standby props asst ..................Jenny Miles Transport supervisor ........Barry Branson consultants........ Faces International Inc. Opticals ................................. Acme Opticals Exec, producer .......................... Chris Oliver Art dept asst ..........................Alan Dunstan Lighting cameraman .................Wiliam Jest Assoc, p ro ducer................................... JennyCadd Scenic artists........................Billy Malcolm, Title designer ..........................Larry Wyner Michael Chorney Tech, adviser .............................. Hine Grey Camera operator ............ Michael Zabretti Prod, manager ..................... Robert Kewley Clapper/loader ..........................Sean Oakes Carpenters ............................

Paul Vosilianis, (Maori songs) 1st asst director .................Tony McDonald Ron Sutherland, Best boy .............................Graham Mulder Camera assistant ..................... Miffy Collins Script assistant................................. BarbaraMazel Derek Wyness, Key g rip ........................................................RexHuntly Lighting cameraman ....................Paul Elliot 1st unit runner ........................... Chris Cole Geoffrey Spence 2nd unit runner ......................Stuart Miller Asst, g rip .....................................................FredThacker Clapper/loader .............................John Elliot Set construction ............... Peter Templeton Location nurse . . . . Glenise Brady (Aust.), 2nd unit photography ................. Alan Rolle Camera assistant ............Steve McDonald G affer.......................................................ChuckPalgamin 2nd unit photography ............Dave Collyer Asst editor .......................... Jeanine Chialvo Catering ..........David Williams (NZ, Aust.)

2nd asst editor ............................. Lee Smith Mixed at ................................United Sound Boom operator ....................Mel Gibsthorne Boom operator ..........................Jacqui Fine Art director............................................... KellyHong Art director........................... Josephine Ford 3rd asst editor........................... Karin Foster Laboratory ............................................. Atlab Asst, art director.................. Vince Zedretti Gauge ................................................... 35mm Wardrobe .....................................Rose Stone Edge num berer.......................................PeterErskine Costume designer ............ : Kathy Binham Special effects.................. Conrad Rothman Sound editor ......................... Andrew Stuart Screen ratio ......................'................... 1:165 Sound editing a s s t...................Robin Judge Shooting stock ....................... Eastmancolor Make-up .........................................Joy Roche Sound editor ................: . . . Terry Rodman Hairdresser.................. Mary Lou Simmons Cast: Chard Hayward (Adam), Margaret Mixer ...................................... David Harrison Still photography........................................JimTownley NSWFC prod. man.

Wardrobe ............................ Maggie Wheeler Runner....................Michael Clayton-Jones Laurence (Lani), Ivar Kants (Kevin), Alison attachment.......................................Sandra Alexander Ward, assistant.....................Ziff Hendrenn Best (Jeanine), Jennifer Cluff (Alison), Les Laboratory ............................................ V.F.L. Tech, adviser...........................................PudjiWaseso Props........................................ Morrie Draper Foxcroft (Jim), Joan Bruce (Maureen), Len g th ..........*............................................. 100mins Best boy ....................................Paul Gantner Standby p ro p s....................................... MabelRonghetti James Elliot (Rev.), Moira Walker (Connie), Scheduled release ............February, 1983 Special effects.................. Roberto Grimaldi Synopsis: In 1936, the miners in the small Runner................Monica Petellizzari (Syd.) Ricky May (Bill).

Unit publicist ..........................Babette Smith Synopsis: Two brothers escape the Set decorators........................Jo Harwood, South Gippsland town of Korumburra Alain Caleb barricaded themselves in the main shaft of Catering ....................Joh and Sue Faithful massacre of five fellow Australian news­ Set construction ............ Horizon Sets Inc. the Sunbeam Colliery, demanding better Studios................................................ Artransa men in Asia, but their lives are still charged Asst, edito r........................................ElizabethBergeron pay and working conditions. Their story is Post-production................. F.P.S.-Alan Lake with emotion and futility in a small New Musical director ...................... Phil Curnow Zealand town as^hey try to escape the holo­ that of the Australian Labour Movement in Camera/lighting equip............Samuelsons Mixed at ...................................United Sound caust of their nightmares.

Music performed by .............. Bo Harwood the 1930s. & Others Laboratory ........................................Colorfilm Lab. liaison...................................................BillGooley Sound editor ...................... Dave Armstrong THE CLINIC Length ............................................ 105 mins.

Editing assistants ................. Tom Cornwell, Toy Visel Gauge .....................................................35mm Prod, company ................The Film House/ Shooting stock......................... Eastmancolor Mixer .........................................Merv Harrage Generation Films Scheduled release ..........................Late '82 Asst, m ixe r.................................................WesNeville Producers.............................. Robert Le Tet, Ca st: Mel G ibson (G a ry Ham ilton), Stunts co-ordinator ............ Robert Marley Bob Weis Still photography.................... Erich Kolfmar Signourney Weaver (Jill Bryant), Phipps Director .................................. David Stevens Best boy ........................... Michael Edwards Hunt (Billy Kwan).

Scriptwriter ................................Greg Millen Runner...................................... Tom Gadden

FEATURES

PRODUCERS, D IR E C T O R S AND P R O D U C T IO N C O M P A N IE S 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.

Editor's note. All entries are sup­ plied by producers/production com­ panies, or by their agents. Cinema Papers cannot, therefore, accept responsibility for the correctness of any entry.

Based on the original idea b y................................................Greg Millen Photography ................................... Ian Baker Sound recordist....................................... JohnRowley Editor ..................Edward McQueen-Mason Prod, supervisor................... Michael Lake Prod, co-ordinator..................................Trish Foley Prod, accountant .......................Groliss Fyfe 1st asst director .........................David Clark 2nd asst director.........Hamish McSporran 3rd asst directors.................................AlisterBinger, Jonathon Balmford Continuity.......................... Caroline Stanton Producer's assistant__ Margo McDonald Casting.................................The Film House Casting consultants__ M & L Consultants Focus puller ............................ Clive Duncan Clapper/loader.................. Leigh McKenzie G rip s ....................................................... BarryHansen, Ian Benallack G affer..........................................Brian Adams Electrician.............................. Michael Tanner Boom operator..................................... StevenHaggarty Art director ...................................Tracy Watt Make-up .................................. Kirsten Vessy, Di Biggs Wardrobe ....................................Rose Chong Ward, assistant ............................Gail Mayes Props buyer................................................CliffKelsall Standby p ro p s.................. Andrew Mitchell Carpenter........................... Danny Corcoran Construction m anager.............Ray Pattison Still photography..............Vladimir Osheron Title designer ...................................Alex Stitt Best boy .............................. Michael Adcock Catering..........................Anne Dechaineaux Studios.......................Melb. Prod. Facilities Length .............................. .’ ................90 mins Gauge..................................................... 35mm Shooting stock.......................Eastmancolor

DESOLATION ANGELS Prod, company ............Winternight Prods Producer ....................................Chris Oliver Director ..................................Chris Fitchett Scriptwriters ..........................Chris Fitchett, Ellery Ryan Photography ..............................Ellery Ryan Cast: Karen West, Kim Trengrove, Kerry Mac. No further details supplied.

DUSTY Prod, company .......................Dusty Prods.

Dist. company ............ Kestrel Film Prods.

Producer..........................................Gil Brealey D irector..................................................... JohnRichardson Scriptwriter ..................................Sonia Borg Based on the novel b y .............................. Frank Dalby Davison Photography ............................ Alex IVIcPhee Sound recordist...................... John Phillips Editor ............................................David Greig Prod, designer..................... Robbie Perkins Exec, producer ................ John Richardson Assoc, producer .................... David Morgan Prod, manager............................ Mark Ruse Unit manager .............. Michael McGennan Prod, secretary ..................Elizabeth Syme Prod, assistant......................... Jan Tourrier 1st asst director ................... Colin Fletcher 2nd asst director......................................JakeAtkinson 3rd asst director.......................Gaye Arnold Continuity............................... Andrea Jordan Casting..........................................................LeeLarner Lighting cameraman............. Alex McPhee Focus puller .......................... Brendan Ward Clapper/loader............................ Chris Cain Key g rip .................................. Ian Thorburne Asst g r ip ...................................Terry Wilcox Gaffer . . ...................................Ian Dewhurst Boom operator.............................Ray Phillips Art director .............................. Ivana Perkins Make-up ................................Deryk De Niese W ardrobe..................................................MaryHarris Props ........................................Nick Seymour Asst e d ito r.............................Warwick Crane

CINEMA PAPERS June - 251

Sound editors................... Louise Johnson, Steve Lambeth Still photography.................. Bruce Haswell Dog trainer............................ Mary McCrabb W rangler....................................... John Baird Best boy ..................................Bruce Towers Runners..................................Mary Sdraulig, Amanda Walker Catering..................................Wolfgang Graf Mixed at .................................. United Sound Laboratory.................................................. VFL Length ............................ ................... 90 mins Gauge.......................................................35mm Shooting stock......................................... 5247 Cast: Bill Kerr (Tom), Noel Trevarthen (Harry), Carol Burns (Clara), John Stanton (Railey Jordan), Nick Holland (Jack), Dan Lynch (Ron), Kati Edwards (Mrs Muspratt), Will Kerr (Jim).

Synopsis: The story of a sheepdog in the Australian outback, based on the classic novel by Frank Dalby Davison.

Carpenter .......................Geoff Thomlinson Editor ...................................Richard Hindley Casting ..................................... Susie Malzels Gaffer .......................... Graham Rutherford Asst, editor..................................Judy Rymer Electrician .................................. Mark Verde Art director ............................ Richard Kent (Mitch Consultancy) Neg. matching........................................ ChrisRowell Boom operator .....................Toivo Lember Composer ................................Laurie Lewis Camera operator .......................David Burr Still photography......................................AlanHoward Prod, co-ordinator ....................... Catherine Art dept co-ordinator ........Janene Knight Focus puller ........: ..................Ben Seresin Best boy ................................. Richard Curtis Asst art director ..........Richard Houghton Clapper/loader ............................ Derry Field Phillips Knapman Publicity..........................Michael Hohensee Make-up ..................................Carol Devine Prod, manager ............................Irene Korol Camera grip ................... Graham Litchfield Catering.............................. AM/PM Catering Unit/location manager ...........Roger Wylie Car grip ................................... Wally Wilmott Wardrobe ...................... Ruth de la Lande Laboratory ............................................ C F L Prod, accountant ...........Graeme Dowsett Gaffer ....................................Miles Moulson Ward, assistant ......................Kathy James Lab. liaison............................ Jack Gardiner Electricians ........................... Stephen Dean, 1st asst director ..................Martin Cohen Props buyers ......................David Bowden, Length ............................................ 100 mins.

Richard Oldfield Geraldine Royds 2nd asst director ..................... John Rooke Gauge .................................................... 16mm •Boom operator ..........................Noel Quinn Standby props ....................Nick McCallum Continuity ................................Sian Hughes Shooting stock..............Eastmancolor 7247 Special effects . . . ..'............Alan Maxwell, Casting ....................................... Felippa Pate Art director ................................ Greg Brown Cast: John Jarratt (Fluteman), Emil Minty Make-up .............................. Monica Fetzer Peter Evans Camera operator ......... David Williamson (Toby), Aileen Britton (Beatrice Peachley), Choreography ..................Elizabeth Burton Focus puller ........................Jeremy Robins Hairdresser __ John Woodhouse-Wayne Michael Caton (Oswald Snaith), Patrick Carpenter ...............................Robin Warner Clapper/loader ........................ Tracy Kubler Wardrobe ................................ Roger Monk Dickson (David Hanson), John Ewart t Set construction , ............................... DenisDonelly Standby wardrobe ...........Jenny Miles Key grip ...............................Graeme Mardell (Clarence Quint), Ron Graham (Frank ' Asst editor ............................ Robert Grant Asst grip ..................................Garry Carden Standby props ........................ Colin Gibson Timms), Peter Gwynne (Mayor Cooper), Special effects .................. Reece Robinson Addn unit Dubbing editor ............................Greg Bell Sheila Kennelly (Myra Hanson), Debra Asst dubbing editor ..............Helen Brown cameraman .............. Matthew Flanagan Scenic artist ............................ David McKay Lawrance (Sally Cooper).

Set construction ................. Kieran Hanson Stunts co-ordinator ...................Vic Wilson Gaffer .........................................Alan Walker Synopsis: Fluteman is a modern day Aus­ Asst electrician .......................Alan Walker Asst editor ................................Doug Fraser Still photography ..........Geoff McGeachln tralian version of the Pied Piper of Hamelin Dialogue consultant ............Jack Rozycki Boom operator ...................Andrew Duncan Stunts co-ordinator ............Frank Lennon interspersed with incidents to delight family Mechanic ..............................David Thomas Make-up ............................Rina Hoffmanis Mechanics ............................... Barry Moore, and children.

Wardrobe .......................................Liz Keogh Best boy ................................Alan Glossop FAR EAST Steve Courtney Runners ................................... Janet Mclver, Props buyer ........................... Jamie Mirams Best boy ................................ Richard Curtis Prod, company ............ Alfred Road Films Paul Arnott Standby props ............................Jon Fabian Runner ...................................Annie Peacock GINGER MEGGS P roducer..............................Richard Mason Publicity ..........Brooks White Organization Transport manager .................. Tim Sayers Catering ........................................ Ray Fowler D irector.......................................John Duigan Please see previous issue for details.

Catering ....................................Mark Neylon, Editing assistant .................. Christine Spry Laboratory ...........................

Atlab Australia Scriptwriter.................................John Duigan Robyn Hartigan Stunts co-ordinator .................. Grant Page Lab. liaison ..............................Greg Doherty Based on the original Mixed at .................................United Sound Tutor ..................................Victor McKeown Length .............................................. 104 mins idea by .................................. John Duigan Animal handler ....... Bernadette Hamilton Laboratory ......................................Colorfilm GOING DOWN Gauge .................................................. 35mm Photography..............................Brian Probyn Lab. liaison .................................. Bill Gooley Helicopter pilot .....................Alan Edwards Shooting stock .................................... Kodak Sound recordist .......................Peter Barker Prod, company ............................... X-Prods Budget ............... $2,583,924 Best boy ................................ Alleyn Mearns Budget .............................................$2 million E d ito r...................................... Henry Dangar Producer................................Hadyn Keenan Runners .........................................Ric Bower, Length ............................................100 mins Cast: Terry Serio (Mike), Debora Conway Prod, designer............................Ross Major Monica Pellizzari D irector..................................Hadyn Keenan Gauge ................................................... 35mm (Julie), Vangellz Mourikis (Tony), Richard Exec, producer .................................... Filmco Scriptwriters................................Julie Barry, Cast: James Laurie (Steve), Gia Carides Unit publicist .............................Felippa Pate Moir (Fox), Max Cullen (Rebel), Grahame Assoc, p ro d u cer....................... John Mason Moira Maclaine-Cross, (Ruth), Max Cullen (Tomas), Bruce Spence Catering .............. Take One Film Catering Bond (Jagger), Geoff Rhoe (Ram), Kris Prod, manager ......................Julia Overton . (Anne Harris) Melissa Woods (Wimpy), David Argue (Rabbit), Tony Barry Greaves (Starter), Jerry Sont (Victor), Unit manager............... Corrie Soeterboek Laboratory .....................................

Colorfilm Photography................... Malcolm Richards (Howard), John Clayton (Vincent), Graeme Penne Hackforth-Jones (Dave), Prod, secretary ........................ Julie Forster Sound recordist ..................... Lloyd Carrlck Blundell (Sidebottom), Jonathan Coleman Cast: Paul Winfield, Rod Taylor, Beau Cox, Synopsis: A young factory worker, Mike,, Prod, accountant ..................Peter Sjoquist Additional recordist ................Peter Barker Ray Meagher.

(Wayne), John Godden (Chris the Rat). and his obsession with cars and someone 1st asst director .................Michael Falloon E d ito r..........................................Paul Healey Synopsis: The story of young people, their else’s girl, Julie. The film follows Mike’s 2nd asst director................................. SabinaWynn Assoc, producer ........................Julie Barry Sunshine City car ‘culture’, the motor struggle to win Julie and survive the 3rd asst director..................................Gerald Bostock Prod, manager ........Mitou Pajaczkowska speedway and the criminal world of car-part THE PLAINS OF HEAVEN challenge of her vicious boyfriend to a Continuity ......................................Jo Weeks Location manager.................Julian Russell stealing. series of illegal street races.

Producer’s assistant........... Michael Falloon Prod, secretary .............................Gai Steele Prod, company .............. Seon Film Prods.

Casting.................................................... MitchMathews Prod, accountant ......... Andrew Snedden Producer................................ John Cruthers Casting consultants............ Mitch Mathews 1st asst, director......................................PetaLawson D irector........................................Ian Pringle A SLICE OF LIFE Camera operator ....................... Peter Moss 2nd asst, director..............Chris Maudson Scriptwriters.................................. Ian Pringle, MOVING OUT Focus p u lle r............................Andre Fleuren Casting.............................................Tim Burns, Doug Ling, Prod, company ......................John Lamond Clapper/loader .......................... Colin Dean Ian Gilmour Elizabeth Parsons.

Producers..........................Jane Ballantyne, Motion Picture Enterprises Key g rip ....................................................... RayBrown Camera operator .................. “Race” Galley Ray Argali Dist. company ..............................Roadshow Michael Pattinson Photography...............

Asst grip/s .................. .-......... Stuart Green Focus puller.............................................. PaulGiasetti Bruce Emery Director .............................Michael Pattinson Location sound ...............

Distributors Australia G affer..................................... Warren Mearns Key g rip ..................................Nick Reynolds E d ito r........................................................... RayArgali Scriptwriter....................................Jan Sardi P roducer...................................Jofrn Lamond Electrician................................Alleyn Mearns 2nd unit photography ..........“Race" Gailey Com poser.......................... Andrew Duffield Based on the original D irector.....................................John Lamond Boom operator ............................Keir Welch Gaffer............................................Peter Galley Assoc, p ro ducer................ Brian McKenzie Idea by ........................................... Jan Sardi Scriptwriter..............................Alan Hopgood Asst art director ..............................Igor Nay Boom operator ................Chris Goldsmith Prod, supervisor...................... MarkThomas Sound recordist .........................Paul Clarke Photography........................Vincent Monton uostume designer .................. Jan Hurley Art director.........................Melody Cooper Prod, assistants.................. Cristina Pozzan, E d ito r...............................................Jill Rice Sound recordist ........................Geoff White Make-up ........................ Margaret Lingham Asst, art directors.............Steven Teather, Daniel Scharf, Com poser......................................Brian May E d ito r..................................................... RobertMartin Wardrobe ..............................Robina Chaffey Christine Flin, Robbie Ashhurst. Exec, p ro d u ce r............Cinema Enterprises Prod, designer......................... Neil Angwin Props b u ye rs...............................................IanAllen, David McKay 1st asst, director.....................Mark Thomas Assoc, pro ducer................................ MichaelHirsch Com posers........................................UmbertoTozzi, Peta Lawson Make-up ..................................Karla O'Keefe Danny Beckerman Continuity ............................... Chris Johnson Prod, supervisor..................................... John Chase Standby p ro p s......................................... JohnDanlell Asst, editor......................................Gai Steele Assoc, producer ......................Julie Monton Camera assistant .................Renee Romeril Prod, secretary ............................Ann Mudie Carpenter ......................................Terry Lord Sound editors ........................... Paul Healey, Prod, consultant ..................Rosa Colosimo Gaffer.....................................John Whitteron Prod, accountant ................Graeme Wright Set construction ....................Danle Daems Ashley Grenville Prod, secretary ..................... Beverley Frost Boom operator ............ James Dunwoodie Prod, assistant...................................DeborahHanson Asst editor ..............................Pam Barnetta Mixer ......................................... Peter Fenton Prod, accountant ..........Natalie Hammond Art director....................................... ElizabethStirling 1st asst director ..................Ross Hamilton Neg. m atching..................................Colorfilm Stunts co-ordinator ............. Frank Lennon Electronic design ...............David Durance 1st asst, director..................................Robert Kewley 2nd asst director.................... Euan Keddie Sound editor ....................... Andrew Steuart Fights co-ordinator.......................David Brax 2nd asst, director................ Alan Mackenzie Set construction ................ David Durance, 3rd asst director..................... Stuart Wood Editing assistant .......................Robin Judge Stunts.................................Reece Robinson, Anthony Bignall, Continuity ......................................Julie Bates 3rd asst, director ........................Ian Fowler 2nd sound a s s t......................Julie Gelhard Peter Kulesa, Casting......................................................HelenWatts Ian Lind Continuity .......................... Catherine Sauter Still photography....................David Parker, Mars McMillan. Lighting cameraman ......... Ross Berryman Still photography..........Robert McFarlane, Focus p u lle r..........................................RobertMurray Carolyn Johns Asst, edito r.............................................

DanielScharf “Race” Gailey Clapper/loader ................ Christopher Cain Focus p u lle r.................................................IanJones Title designer............................. Fran Bourke Runner..................................Greg Stephens Soundtrack d esign............................... BruceEmery Key g rip ..................................................... GregWallace Clapper/loader ....................Brian Breheny W rangler................................................. ElaineMason Sound editors ..............................Ray Argali, Key g rip ...................................................... NoelMudie Catering.................................Merle Keenan, Asst, g rip ..........................

Michael Madlgan Runner............................ Anthony Heffernan Bruce Emery ;Asst grip .....................................Barry Brown Donna Sims Gaffer.........................................Trevor Toune Publicity.................... : . . . . Rhonda Galbally Mixer .......................................... Bruce Emery Gaffer........................................ Lindsay Foote Mixed at ...................................United Sound Boom operator ........................Grant Stuart Catering.....................................................PeterDrury Laboratory ...............................................Atlab Still photography..........Tom Psomotragos Costume designer ...............Frankie Hogan Boom operator ................Chris Goldsmith Studios............................................... SupremeSound Runner.......................................Julian Darling Art director................................................ PaulJones Length ................................................. 90 mins Make-up/hair............Amanda Rowbottom Mixed at ...................................United Sound Shooting stock......................... Eastmancolor Publicity...................................................Jenny Darling Make-up ...................................... Jose Perez, Laboratory ........................................Colorfilm Scheduled release .......................June 1982 Stand-by wardrobe ............ Frankie Hogan Props buyer ...............................Harry Zettel Catering................................Kristina Frohlich Joan Petch Lab. liaison...................................................BillGooley Cast: Tracey Mann (Karli), David- Argue Stand-by p ro p s ........................ Harry Zettel Mixed at ................................. Tony Paterson Hairdresser................................................Jose Perez Length ............................................ 100 mins (Gregg, Trixie, the Hood, the Sprooker), Post-Production Wardrobe ....................................Anna Jakab Set finisher.........................Nick Hepworth Gauge ............................................ •.. . 35 mm Verra Plevnlk (Jane), Moira Maclaine-Cross Carpenters ....................................Baz Props, Laboratory ......................................Colorfilm Ward, assistant..................................MelanieVelinos Shooting stock......................... Eastmancolor (Ellen), Julie Barry (Jackie), Esben Storm Dennis Lee Lab. liaison.............................................. KerryJenkin P ro p s ...................................................MatthewCummings Cast: Bryan Brown (Morgan Keefe), Helen (Michael), Ian Gilmour (Shadow), Henk Length ..........................., ..................80 mins Set construction Standby p ro p s..................Helen Kavanagh Morse (Jo Reeves), John Bell (Peter Johannes (Ian), Mercia Dean-Johns (Ned), manager ........................... Ken Hazelwood Gauge ....................................................16mm Set decorator..................... Ashley Leighton Reeves), Slnan Leong (Nene), Raina Ian Nimmo (John).

Shooting stock................................Fuji 8527 Asst, editors............................................ CraigCarter, Set construction ___Phlummup Film Sets McKeon (Rosita), Henry Feist (De Cruz), Bill Synopsis: “The Iron tongue of midnight Mark Atkin Cast: Richard Moir (Barker), Reg Evans Set designer ................... Geoff Richardson Hunter (Walker), John Gaden (Talbot). hath toll’d twelve. Lovers, to bed; ’tls almost Sound editor ............................ Martin Jeffs (Cunningham), Gerard Kennedy (Lenko), Construction manager ................Ian Doig Synopsis: A political thriller which exposes fairy time, I fear we shall outsleep the John Flaus (Landrover owner), Jenny Mixer ........................; . . . Julian Ellingworth Stunts ............................................. Phil Brock the violent and exploitative realities of multi­ coming morn As much as we have this night Cartwright (N urse), Adam Brlscombe Still photography.....................................Suzy Wood Asst editor ............................Peter Carrodus national companies in a South-East Asian o’er watched. This palpable gross play hath Titles....................................Optical & Graphic (Soldier on train): Still photography...................... David Parker country. Against this background, three well beguiled The heavy gate of night.

Synopsis: Two men work in a satellite relay Dialogue c o a c h ...................................... PeterSardi Australians ricochet between stability and Sweet friends, to bed.” station on the Bogong High Plains, one of Best boy ..................................Gary Scholes Best boy .............................Werner Gerlach Runners.....................................................Brian Gilmore, desperation.

Catering............................Chavelle Exquisite Australia’s most isolated and haunting land­ Mike McIntyre Studios............................ Soundstage Fitzroy scapes. Each is obsessed in his own way, Catering...................................... Helen Wright and the film follows the working out of these Mixed at ..................................................Atlab MIDNITE SPARES FLUTEMAN obsessions in the men’s responses to the Studios..................Port Melbourne Studios Laboratory ..............................................Atlab vast and elemental landscape of the plains Laboratory ........................................ Cinevex Prod, company ..........Independent Prods.

Prod, company ........................Wednesday Lab. liaison............................................... GregDougherty Length .............................................. 100 mins P roducer............................ Brendon Lunney Investments, L en g th .................................................91 mins of heaven.

Gauge .................................................... 35mm D irector................................. Peter Maxwell A Filmco Presentation Cast: Vince Colosimo (Gino), Kate Jason Cast Robin Nedwell (Toby), Juliet Jordan Scriptwriter........................... Charles Stamp Producer ..................................Tom Burstall (Mrs Condello), Peter Sardi (Lino Condello), (Wendy), John Ewart (Hughes), Jane Clifton Photography........................Phil Pike A.C.S. Director ............................Quentin Masters Sylvie Fonti (Mrs Simonelli), Luciano RUNNIN’ ON EMPTY (Fay), Caz Lederman (Sally), Dina Mann Sound recordist ..........Rowland McManis Scriptwriter ...............................Terry Larsen Catenacci (Mr Simonelli), Brian James (Mr (Barbara), Amanda Muggleton (Eva), Julie (working title) E d ito r.......................................... Tim Wellburn Photography .............................Geoff Burton Aitken), Ivar Kants (Mr Clarke), Sandy Gore Nihill (Pam), Lulu Pinkus (Addy), Gwen Com poser................................John Sangster Sound recordist ....................Lloyd Carrick (Miss Stanislaus), Sally Cooper (Sandy), 3rod. company ............... Film Corporation Soares (Mei Linn).

Exec, producer ..........................Gene Scott Editor ................................... Andrew Prowse Maurice de Vincetis (Renato). of Western Australia Prod, manager ............................ Jan Tyrrell Prod, designer .................... George Liddle Synopsis: Two turbulent adolescent weeks Producer ....................................Pom Oliver Prod, co-ordinator .................... Dixie Betts Composer ............................ Cameron Allen In the life of a teenage migrant Italian boy Director ........................................ John Clark WILDE'S DOMAIN Location manager................Michael Fuller Exec, producer ................ John Fitzpatrick living in Melbourne’s inner suburbs. For this Scriptwriter ............................ Barry Tomblin Prod, secretary .......................... Fiona King Prod, co-ordinator . . . . . . .Cathy Flannery fortnight two families live In the one Based on the original idea Prod, com pany.......... Independent Prods.

Prod, accountant ................... Peter Layard Composer ............................ Cameron Allen crowded terrace: the recently arrived family by .............................................. John Clark P roducer...............................Peter Benardos 1st asst, director..............Tony Wellington Prod, manager ..........................Jenny Day from Italy who will take over the house, the Photography ...........................David Gribble Director ..................Charles “Bud" Tlngwell 2nd asst, director............. Paul Callaghan Unit manager .......................... John Warren current family who are preparing to leave. Sound recordist ...............Syd Butterworth Scriptwriter................................Ted Roberts 3rd asst, director . . . . Hamish McSporran Financial controller ..........Richard Harper Gino must come to terms with giving up his Editor ................................ Stuart Armstrong Based on the original ■ Continuity .......................... Caroline Stanton Prod, accountant ...................Karen Volich hard-won Inner city life, accept his Italian Exec, producer ..........................David Roe idea by ..............................

Marcia Hatfield Casting............................Mitch Consultancy background, and start a new kind of life, Assoc, producer ................... Mark Egerton 1st asst director ..........Derek Seabourne Photography........................Phil Pike A.C.S. Clapper/loader ................. Sean McClory 2nd Asst director ..............Peter Willesee hopefully one more step towards maturity. Prod, manager ................... Barbara Gibbs Sound recordist ..........Rowland McManis Camera assistant ..................... Keith Bryant 3rd Asst director .......................... Ian Kenny Unit manager .................Michael Bourchier E d ito r...........................................................BobCogger Key g rip ........................... Grahame Litchfield Continuity ...................................Ann Walton Prod, secretary ...................Adrienne Read Com poser...............................................SimonWalker 2nd unit photography ................Phil Dority Producer’s assistant . .. Margaret Roberts Prod, accountant ......................Craig Scott Exec, producer ..................Brendon Lunney ON THE RUN Gaffer.................. : ..................... Derek Jones Director’s assistant ..........Mardi Kennedy Prod, co-ordinator ....................Dixie Betts Boom operator ......................... Jan McHarg Casting consultants ..........Michael Lynch, Prod, company .............. . ..Pigelu Pty Ltd NSW Film Corp. attachment Prod, manager ............................ Jan Tyrrell Art director..................................Ken James Rae Davidson Producer ................................. Mende Brown Prod, secretary .......................... Fiona King (trainee 1st asst Costume designer .................Fiona Spence Focus puller ...................... David Foreman Director ...................................Mende Brown Prodi accountant .................. Peter Layard director) ..........................

Deuel Droogan Make-up ...................................Fiona Spence Clapper/loader ...................... Gillian Leahy Scriptwriters .......................Mende Brown, 1st asst, director........Charles Rotherham 1st asst director ................... Mark Egerton Ward, assistant............... Kerry Thompson Key grip ...................................Lester Bishop 2nd asst director .............Tony Wellington 2nd asst, director..............Paul Callaghan Michael Fisher P ro p s .......................................Brian Edmonds Asst grip ..............................Nick Reynolds Photography ........................... Paul Onorato 3rd asst director .................Richard Hobbs 3rd asst, director ..............Hugh McLaren Standby p ro p s........................................... IgorLazareff 2nd unit photography ___Bill Grimmond Sound recordist ................. Ken Hammond Continuity ........................Therese O ’Leary Continuity ......................................Pam Willis

252 - June CINEMA PAPERS

Asst art director ................David Bowden Casting............................Mitch Consultancy Focus puller ..........................Steve Dobson Character voices: Barbara Frawley (Dot), Standby p ro p s.............................. Tony Hunt Make-up ..................................Viv Mepham Ross mggins.

Special effects .....................Brian Olesen, Clapper/loader ......................Sean McClory Clapper/loader ..................Robyn Peterson Wardrobe ....................................Liz Keogh Synopsis: The continuing adventures of Dot Alan Maxwell, Camera assistant ..................... Keith Bryant Key grip ...............................Geordie Dryden Ward, assistant ....................Fiona Nicholls and her search for the missing joey.

Dot Peter Evans Key g rip ..................................Robert Verkerk Asst grip ...................................Terry Jacklin Props buyer ................................Jeff Bruer meets with a hobo in her outback home Carpenters ..........................Russell Jones, Gaffer ...........................................Pav Govind 2nd unit photography ................ Phil Dorlty Standby props ....................Nick McCallum town, the hobo becomes Santa Claus, Garry Maunder Boom operator .......................... Ray Phillips Morris Evans, Special effects ................ Conrad Rothman and takes Dot on a wonderful adventure Hans Heidrich Make-up .......................................Liz Michie Adrian Storey Carpenters ..................James Thompson, witnessing various Christmas ceremonies Set construction .....................John Parker, Gaffer....................................................... DerekJones Hairdresser ................................. Liz Michie Max Feutrill, around the world.

Michael Osborne Sound editor ..............................Bob Cogger Wardrobe ................................. Jenny Miles Michael Patterson Ward, assistant ................Miranda Skinner Mixer ..............................Andrew McFarlane Asst editor .................. Catherine Sheehan Set construction ........................Fred Kirk, Still photography......................................AlanHoward Props buyer .........................David Bowden Neg. matching ........................Gordon Peck Ian McGrath Tech, adviser .......................Stafford Bullen Standby props ............ Karan Monkhouse Musical director ......................Mike Harvey DOUBLE DEAL Additional editing ......................Alan Lake Animal trainer ........................... Jules Bullen Special effects ......................... Ivan Durrant Music performed Asst editor ............................Julia Gelhard Best boy .................................... Matt Slattery Asst editor ............................ Christine Spry by ..................................Doug Parkinson, Prod, company ............... Rychemond Film Neg. matching ......................................Atlab Catering.................................................... JemsCatering Sound editor .......................Vicki Ambrose Naomi Warne, Productions Musical director ............... Cameron Allan Dist. com pany.............................. (overseas) Boom operator ......................... Jan McHarg Still photography .........................Bliss Swift Malcolm McCallum, Sound editors ......................Paul Maxwell, Art director...................................................IanMcGrath Best boy .......................................Andy Reid David Spall, Hemdale Leisure Corp.

Anne Breslin, Producers..........................Brian Kavanagh, Costume designer .................Fiona Spence Runner ..................................Mark Lamprell Steve Kiely Jeff Bruer, Catering ..........................Cecil B. de Meals Ward, assistant................Kerry Thompson Lynn Barker Sound editor .............................Klaus Jaritz Peter Foster, Director ................................Brian Kavanagh on Wheels P ro p s ....................................Brian Edmonds Editing assistant ...................Terry Mooney Julia Gelhard, Scriptwriter.....................’ .Brian Kavanagh.

Special effects..........................Allan Maxwell Studios ............................................ Mort Bay Mixer ..............................................Phil Judd Elizabeth Haydon Based on the Choreography ....................... Tanis Pierson, Cast: Gary Day (Ed Ballinger), Penny Stunts co-ordinators .. .Peter Armstrong, Mixer ............................Julian Ellingsworth Sydney Youth Ballet Downie (Cindy), Kim Deacon (Jane), John Herb Nelson original idea b y ............... Brian Kavanagh Stunts co-ordinator ............Frank Lennon Photography..........................Ross Berryman Stunts ........................................... Glen Davis, Ewart (Mr Stollier), Jill Forster (Mrs Stollier), Asst, editor.........................................MichelleCattle Still photography ................Carolyn Johns Peter Collingwood (Mr Hollister).

Neg. matching........................................ ChrisRowell Sound recordist ....................John Phillips Bev Teague, Opticals ................................Rick Springett, Laboratory ............................................C F L Matthew Hessian, E d ito r............................................. Tim Lewis Optical & Graphic Pty Ltd Com poser........> ................ Bruce Smeaton Lab. liaison................................................JackGardiner Dee James, Title designer ............................ Mike Berry Exec, producer ............................ John Daly A DANGEROUS SUMMER Length ............................................ 72 mins.

Chris Hessian, Best boys .............................Alleyn Mearns, Assoc, p ro ducer..................... Carlie Deans Gauge ....................................................16mm Rocky McDonald Prod, company ..........McElroy & McElroy Geoff Maine Prod, supervisor ...................... John Chase Still photography .................... Chic Stringer Shooting stock.........................Eastmancolor7247 Producer ............................James McElroy Runner .............................. .RichardHobbs Prod.

Progress ............................. Post-production Opticals .................................Andrew Mason Publicity ...........................Elizabeth Johnson Cast: Kit Taylor (Dan Wilde), June Salter Director ............................Quentin Masters co-ordinator . . . Carolynne Cunningham Title designer............................................MikeBerry Catering .............................. Fillum Catering Prod, accountant ..................... Lynn Barker Best boy .....................................Peter Wood (Hannah Wilde), Lenore Smith (Alex Wilde), Scriptwriters ......................David Ambrose, Quentin Masters Mixed at .................................................Atlab Prod, assistant.............................. Lyn Devine Runner .................................. Mardi Kennedy Steven Grives (Yuri), Jeannie Drynan (Liz), Laboratory ............................................. Atlab 1st Asst dire cto r..................Ross Hamilton Publicity .................... Carlie Deans Pty Ltd Henri Szeps (Shenko), Ivar Kants (Curtis), Based on the novel by ............Kit Denton Photography ...........................Peter Hannan Lab. liaison ............................. Greg Doherty 2nd Asst director ......................... Bill Baster Alan Lee (David Wilde), Martin Vaughan Unit publicist ................Elizabeth Johnson Sound recordist ................... Don Connolly Length ..............................96 mins 46 secs (Tom), Tim Eliot (Andrew Wilde).

2nd unit director.................................... BrianKavanagh Catering .................................. Paul Sargent, Editor .......................................Richard Clark Gauge ................................................... 35mm Continuity ...............................Shirley Ballard Synopsis: Drama about the entrepreneu­ Eric Larsen, Shooting stock ....................... Eastmancolor Producer’s assistant........Helen Kavanagh rial Wilde circus family involved in every­ Prod, designer ..........................Bob Hilditch Shelleys, Cast: Alan Cassell (Ray Sangster), Anna Focus p u lle r.................................. Ian Jones thing from lion parks to live theatrical pro­ Composer .............................. Groove Myers Plum Crazy Jemison (Nicky), Svet Kovich (Mike Clapper/loader .............................Phil Cross motions. Alex Wilde’s love affaire with Prod, co-ordinator ............Terry Fogharty Mixed at ................................United Sound S angster), Diana Davidson (Martha Special fx .......................... Conrad Rothman Laboratory ........................... Atlab Australia visiting Russian ballet dancer becomes a Prod, managers ..............Peter Appleton, Greg Ricketson Sangster), Rowena Wallace (Liz Llewellyn), Gaffer........................................Lindsay Foote Lab. liaison ..........................James Parsons matter of concern to the family when it has a Ric Hutton (Sam Bitel), Oriana Panozzo Boom operator .......................... Ray Phillips Length ..............................................90 mins dramatic effect on several of the business Unit manager ......................... David Findlay Prod, secretary .................Wilma Schinella (Susan Bitel), Sean Myers (Peter), Sally Art director....................................Jill Eden enterprises.

Gauge ..................................................35mm Prod, accountant ............Elaine Crowther Cooper (Sally), Jon Darling (Bob Henning). Asst art director ......................... Phil Eagles Shooting stock ..........Eastmancolour 5247 1st asst director ............Michael McKeag Synopsis: A contemporary story of sexual Make-up .............................Deryck De Niese Cast: Diana McLean (Val Meadows), Jon .2nd asst director ....................John Rooke rivalry and obsession: of lost youth and Hairdfesser................................Pietra Robins Blake (Peter Meadows), Jan Kingsbury 3rd asst director ..........................Ian Kenny false manhood. A triangle which leads to Wardrobe WITH PREJUDICE ...............................

AnnaJakab (Peg Prentice), David Franklin (David Continuity ..........................Roz Berrystone disaster.

P rentice), Daniel Cum erford (Jo e y Props b u y e r.......................... Nick Hepworth Prod, company ....................Sirocco Visual Casting ....................................Rae Davidson Meadows), Guy Doleman (Mike Hayes), Standby p ro p s...........................................KenHazelwood Programming Camera operator ..................Keith Woods Joanne Samuel (Chris), Kit Taylor (Paul Special effects..................

Conrad Rothman Dist. company ......................Sirocco Visual Focus puller ............................Steve Mason DEAD EASY Construction....................Geoff Richardson, Sloane).

Programming Clapper/loader ....................... Stuart Quin Ian Doig Synopsis: A suburban community is bliss­ Producer.....................................John Weiley Producer ..............................Don Catchlove Key grip ................................... Don Andrews Asst editor ..............................Ken Sallows fully unaware that a killer stalks the streets.

Director .................................... Esben Storm Asst grip ..................................Phil Shapiera Director .......................................Bert Deling Photography ........................ Michael Molloy, Still photography.........................Suzy Wood A mother and her two sons survive in a dis­ Scriptwriter ........................ Leon Saunders Electrician ................................. Derek Jones integrating relationship. These two ele­ Tom Cowan Best boy ..................................Gary Scholes Photography ................................Peter Levy Boom operator ..........Graham McKinney Runner......................................Stuart Wood ments come together to form the basis of Editor ............................................ John Scott Sound recordist ......................Mark Lewis Asst art director ..................... John Carroll this mystery-thriller.

Publicity....................................Carlie Deans Composer.............................................

William Motzing Editor .................................. Michael Noonan Costume designer ............Marta Statescu Unit publicist ..........................Peter Murphy Exec, producer ........................ Jim George Make-up ......................................Jose Perez Length ............................................... 92 mins Laboratory .......................................

Colorfilm Gauge......................................................

35mm (1.85:1) Prod, manager ..................Carol Williams Hairdresser ..................................Jose Perez Lab. liaison..................................... Bill Gooley FIGHTING BACK Prod, accountant ..............Connie Dellios Ward, assistant ................. Catriona Brown Cast: Scott Burgess, Rosemary Paul, Tim Budget.............................................. $1 million Prod, assistant ..........................Juliet Cobb Props buyers ................................. Ian Allen, McKenzie, Tony Barry, Max Phipps, Jack Shooting stock......................... Eastmancolor Prod, company . . . . Samson Productions O’Leary, Joe Martin, Barney Combes.

1st asst director ................ Mark Turnbull Sue Hoyle Producers .................................Sue Milliken, Cast: Angela Punch McGregor (Christina 2nd asst director ...................Keith Heygate Standby props ............................ Paul Jones Tom Jeffrey Stirling), Louis Jourdan (Peter Stirling), Continuity ....................................Jo Weekes Special effects ..............Conrad Rothman, Director ......................... .Michael Caulfield Diane Craig (June Stevens), Warwick Casting .......................................

Forcast Chris Murray, DOT AND SANTA CLAUS Comber (young man), Bruce Spence (Doug Scriptwriters ........................

Michael Cove, Lighting cameraman ................Peter Levy Alan Maxwell, Tom Jeffrey Mitchell), Peter Cummins (Detective Mills), (Further Adventures of Dot and the Clapper/loader ...................... Gillian Leahy Peter Armstrong, Based on the novel by . . . .John Embling Patty Crocker (Christina's mother), Kerry Kangaroo) Camera assistant ..................... John Brock Jonathon David Director of Walker (Sibyl Anderson), Danee Lindsay Key grip ................................ John Whitteron Set construction ..................... John Parker (junior secretary), Jun e Jago (M rs photography ..........................John Seale Gaffer ......................................... Reg Garside Asst editor ............................... Doug Frazer Prod, company ......................Yoram Gross Film Studio Sound recordist .......................Tim Lloyd Coolidge).

Boom operator .......................Steve Miller Sound editor ............................ John Foster Dist. company . .. Satori Productions Inc., Synopsis: A psychological thriller, its plot is Editor .......................................Ron Williams Art director ......................................Bob Hill Stunts co-ordinator ............Frank Lennon New York a mystery of manipulation and double­ Exec, producer .....................Phillip Adams Make-up ................................... Lloyd James Still photography ..........Geoff McGeachin Producer ................................Yoram Gross dealing about the elegant, beautiful Prod.

Wardrobe .................................... Lyn Askew Best boy ...................................Matt Slattery Director .................................. Yoram Gross Christina Stirling, her urbane, successful co-ordinator . . .Carolynne Cunningham Standby props ................... Jock McLachlin Runner .................................. Richard Hobbs Scriptwriters............................ John Palmer, m an-of-the-w orld husband, Peter, a Prod, manager .....................Su Armstrong Set construction ....................Dick Weight Unit publicist ......................Babette Smith daunting, sensuous young man and Peter's Location manager.................Tony Winley ' Yoram Gross Asst editor ............................Duncan Taylor Catering ................................Nene Morgan, efficient, devoted secretary.

Producers’ secretary ..........Mary Williams Based on the Neg. matching .......................................Atlab Christina Norman Prod, accountant .. Moneypenny Services original idea b y .................... Yoram Gross Tech, adviser ..............................Irina Dunn Laboratory ....................................Colorfilm (Craig Scott) Photography..........Bob Evans (animation), Best boy ...............................Sam Bienstock Cast: Tom Skerritt (Howard Anderson), Ian 1st asst director ................Steve Andrews Chris Ashbrook (live action) EARLY FROST Runner ..................................Greg Fitzgerald Gilmour (Steve Adams), James Mason Sound recordist 2nd asst director ................

Chris Maudson for Catering ...............................Rosie Van Ewyk (George Engels), Wendy Hughes (Sophie Prod, company .....................David Hannay 3rd asst director ..........................Phil Rich character v o ic e s........Julian Ellingworth Studios ............................................ Mort Bay McCann), Kim Deacon (Maggie Anderson), Character Continuity ........................Caroline Stanton design ..................Ray Nowland Productions Mixed at .................................................Atlab Ray Barrett (Webster), Norman Kaye (Percy poser................................Mervyn Drake Producers ..............................David Hannay, Casting consultant ..............Helen Rolland Laboratory ............................................. Atlab Farley), Guy Doleman (Julian Fane), Martin Com Assoc, p ro ducer.....................

Sandra Gross Geoff Brown ■ (HR consultant) Lab. liaison ........................... ..DonM osely Harris (Curly Chester), Michael Petrovitch Prod, manager ......................Virginia Kelly Extras casting ............................ Dina Mann Scriptwriter ..........................Terry O'Connor Budget ..............................................$250,000 (Joe Laliniei).

Focus puller ................Richard Merryman Prod, secretaries/ Based on an original Length ............................................ 72 mins Administration.......................Meg Rowed, Clapper/loader .......................... Derry Field idea by ...........................

Terry O’Connor Gauge ..........

16mm Margaret Lovell Photography .............................David Eggby Key grip ............................... Paul Thompson Shooting stock ............................7247, 7293 Prod, accountant ..................William Hauer Asst grip ...........................Brendon Shanley Sound recordist .......................

Mark Lewis THE DARK ROOM Cast: Max Cullen, Richard Moir, Paul Producer’s assistant................Kelly Duncan Editor .............................................Tim Street Gaffer ........................................Reg Garside Sonkila, Chris Haywood, David Slingsby, Boom operator ...................Jack Friedman Casting..........................International Casting Prod, designer ..........................Bob Hilditch Prod, company ....................Nadira Pty Ltd John Ley, Terry Serio,-Scott Burgess, Tony Services Composer ................................Mike Harvey Art director ..............Christopher Webster Dlst. company ..................... Filmco Limited Barry, David Downer.

Camera operator ........................ Bob Evans Exec, producer .................John Fitzpatrick Make-up .........................................Jill Porter Producer ..................................Tom Haydon Synopsis: A dramatized reconstruction of (Filmco) Wardrobe ..................Robyn Schuurmans Director ................................... Paul Harmon Camera assistant .......... Lynette Hennessy the trial, in February, 1979, of Tim Art director..............................Ray Nowland Prod, manager ..................... Julia Overton Ward, assistant ........................Jenny Miles Anderson, Ross Dunn and Paul Allster, the Scriptwriters ....................Michael Brindley, Props buyer ......................Michael Tolerton Paul Harmon Scenic artist..........................................AmberEllisUnit manager ............................Di Nicholas three Ananda Marga members charged Standby props .........................Colin Gibson Neg. matching.................................

Margaret Cardin Prod, secretary ..................Belinda Mason Based on the original idea with conspiracy to murder Robert Cameron.

Set construction ......................Hans Theile Prod, accountant............Howard Wheatley by ......................................... Paul Harmon Chief animator........................Ray Nowland 1st asst director ................Stuart Freeman Asst editor ........................Cathy Sheehan Photography ............................Paul Onorato Anim ators..................................................PaulMcAdam, Andrew Szemenyei, 2nd asst director ..........Michael Bourchier Neg. matching .................. Margaret Cardin Sound recordist .................Ken Hammond Athol Henry, 3rd asst director .................Annie Peacock Stunts co-ordinator ..............Heath Harris ♦Editor ....................................Rod Adamson Cynthia Leech, Continuity ............Margaret Rose Stringer AWAITING RELEASE Action vehicle Prod, designer .................... Richard Kent Nicholas Harding Producer’s assistant ........Vanessa Brown manager ............................Barry Bransen Composer ........................... Cameron Allan Lighting cameraman ............David Eggby Asst animator............................................. KayWatts Still photography ....................Jim Townley Assoc, producer ............Michael Brindley Camera operator ................... David Eggby Actors tutor ............................Wilfred Flint Prod, co-ordinator ................... liana Baron Background artist................................AmberEllis Focus puller .......................... David Connell Mechanic ................................. Dave Thomas Prod, manager ................Michael McKeag Painters..................................................... RuthEdelman, CROSSTALK Kim Marden, Clapper/loader ......................... Erika Addis Best boy ..............................Sam Bienstock Unit manager . ........................Ian Kenny Steve Hunter, Runner ................................Richard Ussher Camera assistants ........Salik Silverstein, Prod, secretaries ....................... Lyn Morris, Prod, company ........................Wall to Wall Nerissa Martin, Publicity .................................... David White Sally Eccleston Terry Fogarty Producer .................................. Errol Sullivan (Brooks White Organization) Margaret Butler, Key grip ...........................Merv McLaughlin Prod, accountant.... Moneypenny Services, Director ....................................Mark Egerton Catering .................................. Nene Morgan, Kim Craste Asst grips ..........................Brett Robinson, Androulla Photography .......................Vincent Monton Christina Norman In betweeners ..................

Vicki Robinson, Robert Verkerk 1st asst director ............... David Bracknell Sound recordist ..................... John Phillips Studios ......................John Morten Studios Astrid Brennan, 2nd unit photography ............Peter Levy, 2nd asst director , ..................................JohnRooke Editor ........................................ Colin Waddy Mixed at ...........................

United Sound Brenda McKie, 3rd asst director ...............Ken Richardson Sam Bienstock Prod, designer ..................Larry Eastwood Paul Maron Gaffer .........................

Roger Wood Laboratory ....................................Colorfilm Continuity ............................ Roz Berrystone Composer ..................................... Chris Neil Lab. liaison ...................................Bill Gooley Animation assistant ........Robert Malherbe Electrician ........I ....................... Peter Wood Camera operator ..........David Williamson Exec, producer ..................Ross Matthews Focus puller ........................ Jeremy Robins Checkers and cleaners .. Animation Aids, Boom operator .........................Steve Miller Length ........................................... 100 mins Prod, manager ........................Julie Monton Bruce Warner, Art director ..........................: . Bob Hilditch Gauge .................................................. 35mrr Clapper/loader .................Robyn Peterson Unit manager ........................... Tony Winley Jan Carruthers Asst art director ....................Robert Jones Shooting stock ............ Eastmancolor 524r Key grip ..................................Robin Morgan Prod, secretary ........................Cara Fames Asst grips .........................Graeme Shelton, Laboratory ....................................... Colorfilm Make-up ............................... Rina Hofmanis Cast: Lewis Fitz-Gerald (John), Paul Smith Prod, accountant ..................... Penny Carl Hairdresser ........................... Rina Hofmanis (Tom), Kris McQuade (Tom's mum), Caro­ Robert Verkeck Length ................................................80 mins 1st asst director ................Steve Andrews Bob Lloyd line Gillmer (Rosemary), Catherine Wilkin Gaffer ................................... Warren Mearns Gauge .....................................................35mm Wardrobe ...........

2nd asst director ....................... Phil Rich Shooting stock.........................

Eastmancolor (Mary), Ben Gabriel (Moreland), Wyn Ward, assistant ................ Robina Chaffey Electrician ................................ Doug Woods Continuity .......................................Jo Weeks Boom operator .................Andrew Duncan Scheduled release ..................March, 1982 Props ......................................... ..T o n y Hunt Roberts (Payne).

Casting ...........................Mitch Consultancy Cast: Drew Forsythe (Santa Claus).

Synopsis: A remarkable relationship beProps buyer ..................................

Ian Allen Art director ............................. Richard Kent Camera operator .........David Williamson

CINEMA PAPERS June - 253

A brilliant new transportable audio recorder from the world leaders in film location sound recording.

FEATURES • Interchangeable head unit.

• Servo-controlled tape tension.

• SMPTE sync, system.

• Pilotone sync, system.

• Four speeds.

• Servo-controlled editing. « Full remote control.

• AC/DC operation.

CINEM A T R A IL E R S * T V T R A IL E R S A D I V I S I O N O F S U S A N N E TURNER PRODUCTIO NS PTY. LTD. 26 SE RPENTINE RD., GREE NWIC H P O I N T NSW 2065 A U S T R A L I A PHO NE (02) 438 2213

The Nagra T-A udio is available from Rank Electronics, the Australian distributors of Kudelski recorders fo r the film industry.

• Nagra 4-2L Full track • Nagra IV-S Stereo • Nagra IS-L Compact • Nagra SN Miniature

R ank E le c tro n ic s SYDNEY ROY RUDDER MELBOURNE PAUL BROOKER BRISBANE JOHN SULLIVAN ADELAIDE LES NEWBERRY PERTH TREVOR JANSEN •

(02)4495666 (03)5418444 (07) 440251 (08)2950211 (09)4431811 RE 106

n B B H H Ü iH iM

IF IT MOVES WE'LL SHOOT IT Tasmanian Film Corporation.

1-3 Bowen Road, Moonah, Tasmania, Australia 7009 Telephone (002) 30 3531 Telegrams: Tasfilm Hobart. Telex: Tasfilm 57148.

*

tween a young teacher and a deeplydisturbed 13 year-old boy. Tom is written off as a delinquent by most adults until John, the teacher, fights against all odds to straighten out his life.

Electrician............................................... JasonRogers Synopsis: A young woman, looking after Dist. company ..................................... Filmco Editing assistants ....................Diana Priest, Marianne Rodwell Boom operator .......................... Ray Phillips her sister's house while she is away on loca­ Producer................................. Robert Le Tet Mixer ........................................United Sound tion, is unaware that her sister and the care­ Director ................................. Tony Williams Art director...............................................JohnCarroll Still photography....................Chic Stringer taker have been murdered. The murderer Scriptwriters ........................ Michael Heath, Asst art director ....................Judith Russell returns to kill the woman, and so begins a O pticals............................................. Colorfilm Costume designer ........... Judith Dorsman Tony Williams battle of wits.

Based on the original idea Best boy ................................Richard Curtis Make-up .................. Lesley Lamont-Fisher Hairdresser.................................Willi Kenrick b y ............ Timothy White, Michael Heath Runners......................Geraldine Catchpool, Julie Plummer Ward, assistants .........................Lyn Askew, Photography.............................. Gary Hansen GOODBYE PARADISE Publicity....................................................... ReaFrancis Kerri Barnett Sound recordist......................... Gary Wilkins LONELY HEARTS Prod, company ..........Petersham Pictures Props bu ye rs..............Stephen Amezdroz, Catering..................................Lisa Hennessy Editor ............................................Max Lemon Pty Ltd Billy Allen, Prod, company .....................Adams Packer C o-producer.......................... Timothy White Mixed at ...................................United Sound ' P roducer....................................... Jane Scott Laboratory ....................................... Colorfilm Sue Hoyle Film Prods Prod, supervisor................... Michael Lake Director ........................................Carl Schultz Standby p ro p s............................Paul Jones Lab. liaison .................................. Bill Gooley Producer............................... John B. Murray Prod, co-ordinator.......................Trish Foley Scriptwriters.................................... Bob Ellis, Length ..............................................98 mins Special effects........Almax Special Effects Unit manager .....................Marcus Skipper D irector............................................ Paul Cox Denny Lawrence Choreography ...................... Anne Semmler Gauge ................................................... 35mm Prod, accountant .................... Wendy Miller Scriptwriters.............................................JohnClarke, Based on original idea Shooting s to c k ....................... Eastmancolor Scenic artists............................ Ned McCann, Paul Cox 1st asst director ............ Philip Hearnshaw by ....................................Denny Lawrence Cast: Carol Kane (Rose), Warren Mitchell Joyce MacFarlane Asst directors............................ Paul Healey, Based on the original Sound recordist ..............Syd Butterworth (Morris), Myra De Groot (Mother), Tony Carpenters ..............................Len Metcalfe, Tony McDonald idea by ........................................Paul Cox E d ito r...................... Richard Francis-Bruce Owen (Norman), David Downer (Michael), Hannes Finger Photography..................................Yuri Sokol Continuity.................................................AnneMcCleod Prod, designer........................George Liddle Set construction ..................Richard Weight B a rry O tto (C h a rle s ), S a ndy G ore Casting............................

Mitch Consultancy Sound recordist .................. Ken Hammond Com poser......................................Peter Best (Maureen), Virginia Hey (Girlfrield).

Asst editor ....................Annabelle Sheehan Steadicam operator............... Toby Phillips E d ito r..............................................Tim Lewis Prod, co-ordinator ...............F ion a Gosse Synopsis: Norm an is a s e n sitiv e , Neg. matching................... Margaret Cardin Camera operator ...................

Gary Hansen Prod, designer...........................................NeilAngwin Prod, manager ..........................Jill Nicholas Still photography................................. PatrickRiviere precocious 13 year-old preparing for his Focus puller ............................ Phillip Cross Com poser.............................. Norman Kaye T ransport/ Bar Mitzvah. Sister-In-Law Rose, the object Best boy ..................................... Ian Plumber Clapper/loader...............John Jasiukowicz Exec, producer ......................Phillip Adams Unit manager.................................... PeterLawless of his passion, becomes pregnant to the Runner............................... Annie Peacock Assoc, producer...........................ErwinRado Key grip................................Noel McDonald Prod, secretary ....................... Lyn Galbraith Publicity.......................................................ReaFrancis great surprise of husband Michael (for Asst g rip ................................................Wayne Marshall Asst producer ......................Fran Haarsma Financial controller............Richard Harper years unable to satisfy her desire for Laboratory ....................................... Colorfilm Prod, manager .................. Jane Ballantyne 2nd unit photography............Toby Phillips Prod, accountant .................. Karen Volich Lab. liaison.................................................. BillGooley children), to the delight of parents-in-law Prod, accountant ..........Natalie Hammond Gaffer......................................................... MickMorris Location manager..................Janene Knight Progress ........................................Production who at last can bask in the many 1st Asst director.................. Bernard Eddy Gen. op.....................................Gary Plunkett 1st asst director ............. .Neill Vine-Miller exclamations of "Mazeltov!”, but Norman’s Cast: Liddy Clark (Kitty O'Rourke), Val Continuity ..............................Joanna Weeks Boom operator...................... Mark Wasiutak 2nd asst director.....................................PeterWillesee response raises a preposterous question — Art directors ..................... Richard Francis, Lehman (Lil Delaney), John Stanton (The Camera operator ................Barry Malseed 3rd asst director.................................... PeterKearney who is the father?

Nick Hepworth Bagman), Gerard McGuire (Cyril Vikkers), Focus p uller..........................Nino Martinetti Continuity ......................................Pam Willis Make-up .............................

Elizabeth Fardon Collette Mann (Doris de Salle), Reg Evans Clapper/loader ............................ Chris Cain Casting....................................Michael Lynch (Chicka Delaney), Kylie Foster (Sarah Key g rip ..................................... David Cassar Special prosthetic Casting consultants .. Forcast Consultants Jones), Ted Hepple (Sam), Danny Adcock make-up..............................Bob McCarron NOW AND FOREVER Gaffer......................................... John Engeler Camera operator ..........Danny Batterham (Thomas), John Ewart (The Train Driver).

Boom operator ........................Grant Stuart Hairdresser .........................Suzie Clements Focus p u lle r.............................. Steve Mason Synopsis: A period comedy drama set in Prod, company .............. Now and Forever W ardrobe...................................Jenny Arnott Make-up ................................... Viv Mepham Clapper/loader ....................Russell Bacon Film Partnership Sydney about two crime queens, Kitty Hairdresser................................ Viv Mepham Ward, assistant ........................... Gail Mayes Key g rip .................................. Paul Thompson O ’Rourke and Big Lil Delaney. Together, Producer ................................Treisha Ghent Props buyer..........................................

Harvey Mawson Wardrobe ..............................Frankie Hogan Asst grip .......................... Brendan Shanley these two remarkable women ruled the Director.......................................Adrian Carr Props b u y e r.............................Phillip Eagles Standby p ro p s.........................................JohnPowditch 2nd unit photography ..............Jan Kenny, Scriptwriter .........................Richard Cassidy Special effects........................

Chris Murray underworld of sly-grog shops, gambling Asst editor ..............................Peter McBain Based on the novel Frank Hammond houses, prostitution and hold-up merchants Special effects Neg. matching.................. Margaret Cardin Gaffer..............................Graham Rutherford in the rip-roaring 1920s, playing, laughing b y.........................................Danielle Steel assistant............................... David Hardie Music recording ..........Alan Eaton Sound Boom operator ..........................Noel Quinn Set decorators................... Harvey Mawson, Photography .......................... Don McAlpine and fighting with a gusto the city has never Sound editor ........................Peter Burgess Sound recordist................... Kevin Kearney Art director................................John Carroll Ken Hazelwood known since.

Asst sound edito r............Chris Ratnarajan Art dept, c le rk ................................ GeraldineRoyds Supervising editor ..................Adrian Carr Construction manager.......... Ray Pattison Mixer ....................................... Peter Fenton Make-up .................Lesley Lamont-Fisher Composer ............................ Bruce Rowland Still photography.....................Robert Colvin Asst Hairdresser................................Jenny Brown construction manager Danny Corcoran Prod, designer................Rene & Rochford Title designer....................................... Al Et AJ LADY, STAY DEAD Wardrobe ......................................Kate Duffy Exec, producer .........Carnegie Fieldhouse Best boy .......................... Michael Madigan Construction services.......Domenic Villella Ward, assistant ................Lesley McLennan Assoc, producer ........................ Rea Francis Runner........................................Tom Bacskai Asst editor............................... Ken Sallows Prod, com pany........ Ryntare Productions Props assistant ...............................Igor Nay Neg matching................................. Filmsync Prod, co-ordinator............... Lyn Galbraith Catering....................................................Kerry Byrne P roducer..................................................Terry Bourke Props b u y e r....................................Ian Allen Prod, manager..................... Carol Williams Sound transfers.........................Gary Wilkins Sound editors................... Louise Johnson, Director ..................................... Terry Bourke Standby p ro p s..........................Igor Lazareff Frank Lipson Unit manager ............................ Tom Blacket Post-production facilities . . . . The Joinery Scriptwriter..........................

Terry Bourke Special effects........................Chris Murray Dubbing assistant....................................RossChambers Prod, secretary .......................Carol Hughes Mixed at ..................United Sound Studios Based on the original idea Special effects assistant . . . . David Hardie Prod, accountant .......... Spyros Sideratos Laboratory ....................................... Colorfilm M ixer................................. Julian Ellingworth by ..........................................Terry Bourke Choreography ......................Ross Coleman Fight co-ordinator................. Gus Mercurio Asst accountant..................... Connie Dellios Lab. liaison.................................................. BillGooley Photography............................

Ray Henman Scenic artist........................... Ned McCann Length .................................................95 mins Stunts......................................................... PaulAlexander, Producers' assistants .............. Neil Green, Sound recordist ......................Bob Clayton Carpenter .............................. Robin Warner Archie Roberts, Gauge .................................................... 35mm Lee Walker Set construction manager ..Denis Donelly E d ito r...........................................................RonWilliams Matt Burns Shooting stock.........................Eastmancolor 1st asst director ................. Stuart Freeman Asst editor .................................. Mark Darcy Com poser....................................Bob Young Cast: Wendy Hughes (Patricia), Norman Still photography..................................... SuzyWood 2nd asst director.......................Chris Short Exec, producer ........... Alexander Hopkins Sound editor ..................... Andrew Stewart Kaye (Peter), Jon Finlayson (George), Julia Title designer........................................... AlexStitt3rd asst director................Bob Donaldson Assoc, producers ..................John Hipwell, Editing assistant ..............Ashley Grenville Best hoy ................................. Alan Glossop Continuity.............................. Shirley Ballard Blake (Pamela), Jonathon Hardy (Bruce).

Eric Cook Stunts co-ordinator ................Dennis Hunt NSWFC continuity Synopsis: A tragi-comic love story about Catering....................................Helen Wright Prod, supervisor.....................................JohnHipwell Stuntmen.....................................Vic Wilson, attachment ................................Liz Barton Peter Thompson, a middle-aged bachelor, Studios........................ Cambridge, York St. Prod, secretary .......................... Pam Brown Mike Read, Prod, accountant .........................Ross Lane and Patricia Curnow, a 30-year-old Mixed at ...................................................Atlab Producer’s assistants.........Maggie Scully, Ian Lind. Prod, assistant............... Mary-Anne Halpin Laboratory................................................. VFL Jaana Cassidy spinster.

Dog handler..............................Dennis Hunt Length .................................................95 mins Extras casting...................... Miriam Freeman 1st asst director ..................Eddie Prylinski Still photography......................Jim Townley Gauge...................................................... 35mm1.66Casting consultants.......................... Forcast 2nd asst director..............David Trethewey Best boys ..............................Jack Kendrick, Shooting stock.........................Eastmancolor Lighting assistant................... Guy Hancock Continuity ................................June Henman Alan Glossop Casting.........................................................Eric Scheduled release..................... June, 1982 Camera operator ...........Danny Batterham Cook MYSTERY AT CASTLE HOUSE Runner......................................... Meryl Cronin Casting consultants ......................Eric Cook Cast: Jackie Kerin (Linda -Stevens), John Focus puller ........................ Andrew Lesnie Prod, company ........................Independent Publicity..........Brooks White Organization Ja rratt (B arn ey), Charles McCallum Management Productions (Lance), Gerda Nicolson (Connie), Alex Clapper/loader..................... Robyn Petersen Unit publicist ..............................David White Lighting cameraman ............. Ray Henman Key grip ..................................................... MervMcLaughlin Producer............................ Brendon Lunney Catering....................................John Faithfull Scott (Dr Barton), Bernadette Gibson (Mrs G rip ................................................... Pat Nash Camera operator ................... Ray Henman D irector.................................. Peter Maxwell Studios................................................Artransa Ryan), Robert Ratti (Kelvin), Vince Deltito Asst g rip ................................... Erik Pressley Focus p u lle r............................................ PeterRogers Scriptwriters..........................

Stuart Glover, Mixed at ...................................United Sound Clapper/loader ..................Robert Marriott iNico), Debra Lawrence (Carol), Tommy Camera dept Michael Hohensee Dysart (Harry).

Laboratory ....................................... Colorfilm Camera assistant ....................Peter Rogers attachment ............ Geraldine Catchpool Based on the original idea Lab. liaison......................................Bill Gooley Key g rip ....................................Peter Mardell, G affer............................................Rob Young b y ............................................. Geoff Beak Budget............................................$1.8 million Second Film Unit Photography....................................Phil Pike Length ..............................................110 mins sound recordist ....................John Franks Asst grip ..............................Michael Nelson Sound recordist ..........Rowland McManis Gauge ....................................................35mm Boom operator................................... GrahamMcKinney Gaffer..................................Chick McDonald NORMAN LOVES ROSE Shooting stock . . .Eastman Color Negative Electrician o n e ....................... Alleyn Mearns E d ito r......................................... Bob Cogger Art director ....................... Rene & Rochford Exec, producer ..........................Gene Scott Scheduled release ........................Mid 1982 Electricians tw o ........................................ BudHowell, Assoc, pro ducer.................... Russell Hurley Prod, company . . . . Norman Films Pty Ltd Art dept co-ordinator.......................... PennyLang Cast: Ray Barrett (Stacey), Robyn Nevin Make-up ................................... Sally Gordon Douglas Wood Prod, co-ordinator .................. Peter Abbott Dist. company ....................................... GUO (Kate), Janet Scrivener (Cathy McCredie), Hairdresser .......................... Jan Zeigenbein Boom operator ............................Keir Welch Prod, manager ........Christopher Gardiner Producer’ ................................Henri Safran, Kate Fitzpatrick (Mrs McCredie), Lex Art director........................................Bob Hill W ardrobe............................Rene & Rochford Prod, secretary..............Wendy Chapman Basil Appleby Marinos (Con), John Clayton (Bill Todd), Ward, assistant ............................ Lyn Askew Make-up ....................................Sally Gordon Prod, assistant...................... Sean McLoury Director ..................................... Henri Safran Guy Doleman (Quiney), Paul Chubb Buyers/dressers ...............Sandy Wingrove, Hairdresser...........................Jan Zeigenbein 1st asst director . . . .Christopher Gardiner Scriptwriter................................Henri Safran (Curly).

Bob Hill, Wardrobe ............................Catriona Brown Based on the 2nd asst director......................................PaulCallaghan Synopsis: She was all any old fool could ask Props b u y e r......................Sandy Wingrove Ken McCann original idea b y ....................Henri Safran Continuity .......................... Catherine Sauter ■for— a beautiful masochist with an Electra Standby props.......................................BevanChilds, Standby p ro p s.........................................

AlanFord Photography............................................VinceMonton Casting............................Mitch Consultancy complex. She knew her life was a great pre­ Set decorator.................... Rene & Rochford Nick McCallum Camera assistant ..................... Keith Bryant Sound recordist ......................Ross Linton destined adventure, and, if it ended like Special effects..................Reece Robinson Scenic artist ............................

Ned McCann E d ito r...........................................................DonSaunders Key g rip ............................Merv McLaughlin Bonnie and Clyde, so be it. It was for girls 1st asst editor ........... Antoinette Wheatley Asst scenic artist ..................Helen Hooper Dority, Prod, designer..........................Darrell Lass like this that old fools like Agamemnon died 2nd asst editor .................... Moira McLaine 2nd unit photography ................Phil Set construction ................... Dig by Stewart Com poser.................................................MikePerjanik Garry Maunder Agamemnon and Mike Stacey. Ex­ Art dept runner ................... Sherre Volich Neg. matching........................Gordon Poole Gaffer.................................................Ray Ang Exec, producer ........................Max Weston Deputy Police Commissioner, Michael Musical director ......................... Bob Young Boom operator ........................Jan McHarg Asst edito r....................... Louise B. Johnson Prod, supervisor..................................... BasilAppleby Stacey QBE. Music performed by ................. Bob Young Art director............................... Jakob Horvat Prod, co-ordinator ....................Susan Wild Dubbing editor................... Bruce Lamshed Orchestra Wardrobe ................................ Fiona Spence Unit manager............................Kim Anning Dubbing assistant................... Craig Carter Still photography..................................PatrickRiviere Sound editor ............................Paul Maxwell Prod, secretary ...........

Suzanne Donnolley P ro p s ..................................... Brian Edmonds Editing assistants ....................Peter Foster Dialogue coach ........................Alice Spitvak Asst editor ....................... Mickey O’Sullivan Prod, accountant . Moneypenny Services, KITTY AND THE BAGMAN Mixer ........................................Peter Fenton Best boy ................................Colin Williams Alan Marco Neg. matching............................Chris Rowell Laborer ....................................... Sean Killen Prod, company . . . Forest Home Films for Stunts co-ordinator ............. Frank Lennon Still photography................... Fiona Spence, 1st Asst director................................... SteveConnard Unit runner............................................Murray Francis Adams Packer Film Prods. Stunts............................................Grant Page, Garry Maunder 2nd Asst director ..........................Ian Page Dee Jones, Production runner ................... Jenny Sharp P roducer............................ Anthony Buckley 3rd Asst director.....................................MarkThomas Publicity................................................. WendyChambers Chris Hession Laboratory ................Cine Film Laboratory Continuity ........................... Therese O’Leary D irector.............................. Donald Crombie Unit publicist...........................................AnniePage Still photography........................David Miller Lab. liaison..................................................CalGardiner Scriptwriters...................... Phillip Cornford, Catering...................................Kaos Katering Casting......................................................MitchMatthews John Burnie Title designer................Optical & Graphics Lighting cameraman ............Vince Monton Studios..............................................Mort Bay Length ............................................... 85 mins Director of photography .. .Dean Semmler Dog w rangler.......................... Evanne Harris Gauge .....................................................16mm Camera operator ....................Nixon Binny Unit doctor.................................... John Hilton Sound recordist ...................... John Phillips Camera ga ffe r.........................Conrad Slack Shooting stock......................... Eastmancolor Focus p u lle r...............................................KimBatterham Post-production ...................... Sound sense E d ito r................................. Timothy Wellburn Runner........................................................AlexPoliak Cast: Aileen Britton (Miss Markham), Henri Clapper/loader ...................Robyn Petersen Laboratory........................................ Colorfilm Prod, designer.......................Owen Williams Publicity.........................................................LizJohnston Szeps (Mr Wilberforce), John Cobley Key g rip .....................................................GregWallace Lab. liaison ................................... Bill Gooley Exec, producer ...................... Phillip Adams Catering.................................................... KaosKatering (Morris), Ray Meagher (Stakovich), Simone Asst grip/s ............................... Phil Shapeira Gauge .....................................................35mm Mixed at .................................. United Sound Buchanan (Kate), Scott Nicholas (Ben), Gaffer........................................................ MilesMoulson Assoc, p ro d u cer..........Jacqueline Ireland Stock ......................................... Eastmancolor Prod, manaaer.......................... Lynn Gailey Laboratory .............................................. Atlab Jeremy Shadlow (Spider), Robert Geammel Generator operator ..............Dick Oldfield Cast: Cheryl Ladd (Jessie Clarke), Robert Lab. liaison......................... Greg Dougherty Prod, secretary................ Antonia Barnard Boom operator ........... Graham McKinney (Rocco), Tony Lee (Ah Leong).

Coleby (Ian Clarke), Carmen Duncan Budget........................... $610,000 Synopsis: When three children cross the Art director................................Darrell Lass Prod, accountant ..........Howard Wheatley (Astrid Bonner), Christine Amor (Margaret Length ................................................92 mins 1st asst director ................Stuart Freeman harbor to explore Castle House — a Make-up .................................. Tricia Cunliffe Burton), Aileen Britton (Bethanie), Kris 2nd asst director.................... Colin Fletcher Gauge .....................................................35mm strange, unoccupied mansion — they en­ Hairdresser........................ Jan Zeigenbeim McQuade (Spencer), John Allen (Martin Shooting stock..............5247 Eastmancolor 3rd asst director........................ Chris Short counter sinister baddies, a kidnapping and Wardrobe ..........................Jenny Campbell Harrington), Tim Burns (Kent), Henri Szeps Ektachrome a hilarious, eccentric lady. Excitement, Ward, assistants....................................HelenHooper, Continuity .................................... Jo Weeks (York).

Scheduled release ..........December, 1981 Casting..................................Mitch Matthews Cheyne Phillips Synopsis: The story of a stylish Sydney mystery and non-stop action and roll-in(Japan) the-aisle comedy for children.

Camera operator ..........Danny Batterham P ro p s ........................................John Daniell, boutique owner and her husband, a Cast: Chard Hayward (Gordon Mason), Focus p u lle r............................................SteveDobson Tony Hunt promising writer who has not as yet Louise Howitt (Jenny NoJan), Deborah Clapper/loader ................Andrew McLean Props b u y e r.............................. Martin O ’Neill achieved financial success. On the surface, Coulls (Marie Colbey), Les Foxcroft (Billy Key g rip ............................ Merv McLaughlin Set decorator............................ Martin O'Neill they appear to have a perfect relationship.

NEXT OF KIN Shepherd), Roger Ward (Officer Clyde ColAsst grip/s ................................. Pat Nash, Set construction ..............Stan Wolveridge However, their marriage is shattered when Brian Edmonds lings), James Elliott (Patrolman Rex Prod, companies.............. The Film House, Asst editor .....................................Ian Munro he is accused of rape after a casual indis­ Dunbar).

Gaffer......................................................... JohnMorton S.I.S. Productions Sound editor .................................Ian Munro cretion one afternoon with another woman.

CINEMA PAPERS June - 255

Their relationship disintegrates as they struggle to prove, and for her to continue to believe in, his innocence.

Camera operator ....................... Lou Irving tion), Martin Vaughan (Cranky Member), Prod, secretary ........................ Angela Rea Weaver (Dolly Grey), Kim Lewis (Ida Cornelia Francis (Member for Southdown). Prod, assistant.......................Yvonne Visser Focus p uller........................... Peter Rogers Pender), Robert Hughes (Harvey), Steve Clapper/loader ......................... Stuart Quin Synopsis: A young girl taking photographs 1st asst director ....................Andrew Jones Bisley (Cutmore), Cul Cullen (Stokes), Alan of her pet cockatoo is prevented from 2nd asst director................... David Collyer Key g rip ............................... Graeme Mardell Cassell (Brophy), Michael Long (Piggott), leaving a lonely island by an illegal Camera assistant ................... Murray Ware Grip .............................................Gary Cardin Tony Rickard (Dutch), Simon Thorpe Front projection operator . . . Paul Nicholla immigrant, who fears deportation. After a Key grip..................................... Ian Thorburn (Paddy).

THE PIRATE MOVIE widespread search, she manages to escape 2nd unit photography.............Butch Sawko Front projection a s s t................Ken Arlidge Synopsis: A film based on the life of the with the help of a boy scout. Sympathetic to Aerial photography ................... Tim Smart Gaffer........................................................BrianBansgrove notorious Melbourne gangster of the 1920s, Prod, company ............... JHI Productions 1st electrics ............................... Colin Chase the immigrant’s problems, she pleads his Boom operator............................ Tom Lowe "Squizzy” Taylor.

Producer ................................. David Joseph Boom operator ..................Andrew Duncan cause in Parliament.

Costumes.....................................Alpine Ski, Director .................................... Ken Annakin Art directors....................... Owen Paterson, Casa Alpina Scriptwriter ..........................Trevor Farrant, TURKEY SHOOT Ron Highfield W ardrobe................................Yvonne Visser Photography ........................Robin Copping Asst art director ................Robyn Coombs THE SEVENTH MATCH Special effects..................Peter Armstrong Prod, company ..................... Second FGH Sound recordist ......................... Paul Clark Art dept asst ....................... Vivienne Elgie Scenic artist/carpenter ............ Paul Casey Film Consortium Prod, designer ......................Jon Dowding Prod, company .Yoram Gross Film Studio Asst editor.........................Bruce Shipstone Art asst ................................. Phillip Colville Dist. company (foreign) ..............Hemdale Composer ............................... Terry Britten in association with Neg. matching ................. Warwick Driscoll Costume designer ..................... Kate Duffy Leisure Corporation Exec, producer ..................... Ted Hamilton Make-up ........................... Robert McCarron Sarah Enterprises Music performed b y ............ Aspen Flyers, Producers ..................... Antony I. Ginnane, Assoc, producer ............. David Anderson and the AFC Make-up asst...........................Robyn Austin contemporary Aust. musicians William Fayman Prod, executive ....................Richard Davis Hairdresser............................... Jenny Brown Producer............................................... YoramGross Sound editor..........................Steve Edwards- Director ................ Brian Trenchard Smith Prod, co-ordinator ............Renate Wilson Director................................................. YoramGross Asst hairdresser ................Cheryl Williams Editing assistants....................... Tom Lowe, Scriptwriters ............................ Jon George, Prod, secretary .....................Anne O'Leary Ward, assistant............... Jenny Carseldine Scriptwriter........................................... YoramGross Yvonne Visser Neill Hicks Prod, manager ..........................Tom Binns Standby wardrobe ....................... Lea Haig Photography . . . Lloyd Freidus (New York); Mixer........................................ Steve Edwards Based on story by .......George Schenck, Location manager ....................Helen Watts Props b u ye r..................... Derrick Chetwyn Jenny Ochse, Stunts co-ordinator.............. Andrew Jones Robert Williams, Prod, accountant ........G&S Management Standby props.......................... Igor Lazareff Bob Evans (animation) Narrator....................................................GeoffKelso David Lawrence Services Special effects supervisor . Monty Feiguth Sound recordist . . . Gary Rich (New York) Still photography......................... Sue Helme Photography ..........................

John McLean Accounts assistant ....................Peter Dons Special effects asst ...............Steve Courtly E dito r........................Christopher Plowright Publicity............................................Eve Ash, Sound recordist .......................... Paul Clark Prod, assistant ............... Michael McIntyre Special asst ........................ Robert Hilditch Director of animation............................ AtholHenry Sue Helme Editor ............................................Alan Lake 1st asst director ................Murray Newey M u sic..................Vivaldi's "Four Seasons” Scenic artist............Elizabeth Leszczynski Catering................................. Sundance Inn, Prod, designer ..................... Bernard Hides 2nd asst director ................Andrew Morse Assoc, producer................................ SandraGross Asst set finisher ..................Brian Nickless Falls Creek 3rd asst director ................Murray Francis Construction manager........Danny Burrett Prod, co-ordinator ....................Meg Rowed Mixed at ................................. Tony Paterson Composer .....................................Brian May Exec, producers .........................John Daly, Continuity ............................Jenny Quigley Prod, managers ..........David B. Appleton Asst- construction manager .. Roger Clout Post Production Services David Hemmings Producer's secretary .. Ginny Muldowney Carpenters ......................... Paul Vosiliunos, (New York); Laboratory.....................R.G. Film Services Assoc, producer .......................Brian Cook Casting ................................. Helen Rowland Jeanette Toms, Lab. liaison ....................... Andrew Johnson Roger Briggs, Camera operator ...................... David Burr Kelly Duncan, Budget...............................................$420,000 Unit manager ....................... Michael Fuller Gordon McIntyre, Prod, secretary .......................Jenny Barty Yolanta Pilllch (animation) Length ...............................................85 mins Focus puller ........................Barry Halloran Philip Chambers Facilities manager ................... Chris Short Clapper/loader ......................Ben Seresin Location manager..........Mitchell Klebanoff Shooting gauge...................... Super 16mm Stage hands....................... Stephen Volich, Prod, accountant ........................ Dean Hill Key grip ............................................ Ian Park (New York) Release gauge......................................35mm Timothy Higgins Prod, assistant .................Barbara Williams Prod, secretaries..............Margaret Lovell, Asst grips ............................... Kerry Boyle, Asst editor ............................... Linda Wilson Shooting stock.........................Eastmancolor 1st asst director ................Terry Needham Janelle Dawes Cast: Lance Curtis (Wayne Simpson), David Richard Tummel, 2nd asst editor.......................................HelenZivkovic 2nd asst director .....................John Rooke Asst directors..................... Jan Carruthers; Jaime Lechie Music consultant................Lance Reynolds Argue (Darren Kernox), Geoff Kelso (Uncle 3rd asst director ..................... Mark Jaffee John Palmer (New York) Jack), Peppie Angliss (Pepi), Jeanine Gaffer ................................... Stewart Sorby Stunts co-ordinator ....................Max Aspin Script editor............................. John Palmer O'Donnell (Pam), Eddie Zandberg (Hamish Continuity .......................... Therese O'Leary Electricians ..................... David Parkinson, Projectionist....................................Jim Jones Producer’s assistant .......Sylvia Van Wyk Story editor/dialogue..........Elizabeth Kata Geoff Main, Still photography..........................Bliss Swift McAlpine), Peter Moon (Bruno SchiezenDialogue editor ......................... Moya Wood hausen), Tom Coltraine (Bruce Braun), Ian Casting ................................Carmen Duncan Phil Golomdick, Stills processing .....................Color Control Camera operator .......................David Burr Casting........................... Mitch Consultancy Tex Foote Black and white ........................ Dark Room McFadyen (Ian), Scott Fullmer (skier).

Focus puller ........................ David Brostoff Camera assistant ................... Neil Haynes Playback operator .................. Greg Steele Model m akers............................... Tad Pride, Synopis: Darren and Wayne, two likeable Clapper/loader ......................... Ben Seresin Boom operator .............. Chris Goldsmith (New York) larrikins, decide on a ski holiday when they David Pride Publicity .......: ............Carlie Deans (Aust.), Grip ......................................... Bob Shulman win a “cash and car” competition. They Art directors ..........................Tony Wollard, Asst model maker ......................John Cox Dennis Davidson & Assoc. (L.A.) (New York) head off for Falls Creek ski resort, where Nic Hepworth Artists’ transport..........................Cabcharge Unit publicist .............................Ben Mitchell Electricians............................... Raffi Feruci, Art dept manager .....................David Searl Unit c a rs ....................... Thrifty Rent A Car they create havoc among the other skiers Catering .................................

David Williams Tom Drake, during a carnival weekend.

Costume designer .. .Aphrodite Dowding Best boy ................................. Paul Gantner Laboratory ...................................... Colorfilm Harvey Rich (New York) Make-up ............................Lois Hohenfels Runner..................................... Meryl Cronin Lab. liaison .................................

Bill Gooley Make-up ....................................David Forest Make-up assistants ............... Patty Payne, Unit publicist .........................Sherry Stumm Length ............................................... 94 mins (New York) SOUTHERN CROSS Nick Doming, Catering....................................................JohnFaithful Gauge ............................35mm Anamorphic Hairdresser............................................. DavidForest Robyn Pickering Asst catering ............................. Sue Faithful Panavision (New York) Prod, company ............................. Southern Hairdresser ............................... Joan Petch Security................... Wormald International International Film.

Shooting stock .........Kodak Eastmancolor Wardrobe ............................. Marsha Patter Asst hairdressers .................. Kerrie Davis, Equipment supplies................. Samuelsons Shinnihon Eija Cast: Steve Railsback (Paul Anders), Olivia Models................................... Phillip Einfield, Amanda Rowbottom Insurers................................................... Adair Hussey (Chris Walters), Noel Ferrier • John Hull Producer................................. Lee Robinson Wardrobe ................................. Pam-Maling Sound transfers..................Film Production (Mallory), Carmen Duncan (Jennifer), Asst editor ............................... Linday Trost D irector................................. Peter Maxwell Standby wardrobe .................. Davjd Rowe Services Scriptwriters.........................

Lee Robinson, Lynda Stoner (Rita), Michael Craig Neg. matching................... Margaret Cardin Ward, buyer .................................Viv Wilson Laboratory .......................................Colorfilm Suzaki (Thatcher), Roger Ward (Ritter), Michael Music performed by ..................... I Musici Standby props ..............................Barry Hall Cast: Alan Arkin (Capt. Invincible), Chris­ Petrovich (Tito), Gus Mercurio (Red), John Clarinet music Special effects ....................R. J. Hohman, topher Lee (Mr Midnight), Kate Fitzpatrick, Ley (Dodge), Bill Young (Griff). played/performed ..........Glora Feidman John Egget, Bill Hunter, Graham Kennedy, Michael Synopsis: The year 1995 — the world is run Conrad Rothman Pate, Hayes Gordon, John Bluthal, Maggie Dubbing editor ..................... Denise Hunter SQUIZZY TAYLOR by a strict regime. If you step out of line you Mixer ...............................................Phil Judd Special effects asst ....................Rick Clise Dence, Norman Erskine. are labelled a "Turkey". Further failure to Still photography................Mike Burnhaut Choreography .........................David Atkins Prod, company __ Simpson Le Mesurier Synopsis: A madcap, musical comedyconform means you are a candidate for the (New York) Asst choreography ........Camille Edwards Films adventure where the flying super hero "Turkey Shoot”.

Principal animators .................Athol Henry, Dist. company ............................. Filmways Set dresser ......................................Jill Eden crushes Nazis, threatens bootleggers, helps Cynthia Leech, Producer .......................Roger Le Mesurier Scenic artist ......................... Billy Malcolm boy scouts and battles Moscow.

Andrew Szemenyei Director .................................Kevin Dobson Carpenters ............................... Dennis Lee, WE OF THE NEVER NEVER Sarah's character design . . . . Athol Henry Scriptwriter ........................ Roger Simpson Alan Fleming.

Addit. animation ............Irena Slapczynski, Based on the original idea Rory Forest.

Prod, companies ................. Adam's Packer Ty Bosco Ilmar Kgruso, Productions, by .....................................Roger Simpson RUN REBECCA, RUN! Asst animators....................Astrid Brennan, Photography .............................Dan Burstall Hodges & Richter Film Corp. of W.A. Maria Brinkley, Construction managers ..........Phil Worth, Prod, company ..................... Independent Sound recordist ........................Phil Sterling Producer...................................................GregTepper Marian Brooks, Editor .................................David Pulbrook Ken Hazelwood Productions Director .........................................Igor Auzins Diane Farrington, Prod, designer .....................Logan Brewer Ships liaison officers ..........Ian Goddard, Producer ......................... Brendon Lunney Scriptwriter........................... Peter Schreck Eva Helischer, Composer .......................... Bruce Smeaton Gordon Kirby Director ................................. Peter Maxwell Photograph...............................................GaryHansen Brenda McKie, Exec, producer ................Roger Simpson Musical arrangers ................Peter Sullivan, Scriptwriter .......................... Charles Stamp Sound recordist ............... Laurie Robinson Paul Marron, Prod, supervisor ............ Brian D. Burgess Roger Savich Based on the original E d ito r.......................................... Cliff Hayes Kaye Watts Prod, manager .......................Christine Suli Dubbing editor ....................Terry Rodman idea by ................................Gary Deacon Prod, designer...............................JosephineFord Stunts co-ordinator ................Grant Page Photography ................................. Phil Pike Color design........................... Susan Speer Location manager ...............Warwick Ross Exec, producer ...................... Phillip Adams Painters/tracers................Margaret Butler, Fencing instructor ................John Fethers Sound recordist .........Rowland McManis Prod, secretary .......................Ann O’Leary Assoc, producer.................................... BrianRosen Kim Craste, Prod, accountant ........................Patti Scott Still photography ..................... Barry Peake Editor ....................................... Bob Cogger Prod, co-ordinator ................Janet Mclver Pari Dounis, Prod, assistant ....................... Wendy Miller Best boy ............................... Peter Moloney Composer ..............................Simon Walker Unit manager............................................PaulArnott Ruth Edelman, 1st asst director .......... Philip Hearnshaw Best boy (2) ..........................Colin Williams Exec, producer ....................... Gene Scott Prod, secretary ....................... Toni Barnard Lynette Hennessy, 2nd asst director .......................Paul Healey Prod, accountant ....................John Foster Runner ........................... Keith Hanscombe Features manager . . . . Wendy Chambers Steve Hunter, 3rd asst director ............... Marcus Skipper Publicity ..................................... David White Prod, supervisor ................Chris Gardiner Prod, assistant................Michael Bourchier Ellen Jackson, Continuity ............................. Anne McCleod (Brooks White Organization) Prod, manager .......................Peter Abbott Transport manager ............Gary Reberger Kim Marden, Lighting cameraman ..............Dan Burstall Prod, secretary ..............Wendy Chapman Catering ......................... Harold Jene Koch Construction manager.............Ray Pattison Narelle Miels, Camera operator ................... Dan Burstall Cast: Kristy McNichol, Christopher Atkins, Prod, accountant .................. Peter Layard Asst construction Krystyna Mikita, Focus puller .......................Barry Halloran Ted Hamilton, Gary McDonald, Bill Kerr, Prod, assistants ..................Sean McClory, manager............................................ DannyCorloran Charmaine Shelton Price Clapper/loader .....................Warwick Field Fiona Marks Maggie Kirkpatrick.

1st a6st director ......................Tim Higgins 1st asst director .....................Kevin Powell Backgrounds ............Zbigniew Dromirecki, Key grip ............................. Paul Ammitzbol Synopsis: Loosely based on Gilbert and 2nd assist director..........Brendan Lavelle Amber Ellis, .Asst grip ............................... Peter Kershaw 3rd asst director......................................JessTapper Sullivan's “The Pirates of Penzance”. Film 2nd asst director ................Paul Callaghan Kolorkraft Lab. Gaffer ........................................Brian Adams Continuity ............................. Christine Lipari includes five Gilbert and Sullivan songs, Continuity .........................Catherine Sauter Recording studios................................. Atlab Boom operator ........................ Geoff Wilson Camera operator ....................Gary Hansen and six new ones. Story has a con­ Casting .......................... Mitch Consultancy temporary beginning ¿nd end; most is a Camera assistant ................... Keith Bryant Recorded by ................Julian Ellingsworth Art director ........................... Logan Brewer Focus puller....................Peter Van Santen Key grip ............................ Merv McLaughlin Sound recording long fantasy sequence.

Asst art director .................... Frank Jakab Clapper/loader .............................Phil Cross (New Y o rk )....................... Magno Sound 2nd unit photography .. . .Gary Maunder, Costume designer ..................Jane Hyland Key g rip ................................. Noel McDonald Phil Dority Mixed at .................................United Sound Make-up ............................... Lois Hohenfels Asst g rip s ............................................. WayneMarshall,.

Laboratory ..................................... Colorfilm; Hairdresser ........................ Suzie Clements THE RETURN OF CAPTAIN Gaffer ............................................... Ray Ang John Jasiukowicz Movielab (New York) Wardrobe ................................. Jane Hyland Gaffer.........................................................Mick Boom operator ..................... Jan McHarg INVINCIBLE Morris Cast: Mia Farrow (Sarah).

Art director ........................, . Jakob Horvat Ward, assistant ..................Margot Lindsay Gene operator......................................... TomRobinson Voices: Joan Bruce, John Faassen, Ron Props ................Nicholas van Roosendael Producer............................................. AndrewGatyMake-up ............................... Fiona Spence Boom operators .......................Greg Steele, Haddrick, Shane Porteous.

D irector...............................................PhilippeMora Wardrobe ............................. Fiona Spence Props buyer — Nicholas van Roosendael Malcolm Cromie Scriptwriters....................................... AndrewGaty, Ward, assistant ............... Kerry Thompson Synopsis: The poignant story of a young Standby props .......................... Harry Zettel Asst art director ..........Graeme Duesbury Steven de Souza Props ................................. Brian Edmonds child, orphaned by war, and her struggle to Special effects ................ Konrad Rothman Costume designer ........ Camilla Rountree Based on the original Asst editor ............................. Gina Lennox survive. It is representative of the plight of Set decorator ....................Patrick Reardon Make-up ................................... Sally Gordon idea by ................................. Andrew Gaty Neg. matching .........................Chris Rowell children in war-torn countries and acts as Set construction .................... Rowan Flude Make-up assistant ........Robern Pickering Photography............................. Mike Molloy Sound editor ............................Bob Cogger the voice of all children against the suffer­ Asst editor ........................ Brett Southwick Hairdresser................................................WilliKenrlck Sound recordist ..................Ken Hammond Mixer ............................... Julian Ellingworth Sound editor ...................... Louise Johnson Seamstress 1 ...............................Ruth Tickle ing and hardships imposed by all wars.

Editor ............................................John Scott Still photography ..............Garry Maunder Editing assistant ................. Ann Beresford Seamstress 2 .....................

Ruth Munroe Prod, designer........................ DavidCopping Animals arranged Still photography ..................... Susy Woods Wardrobe assistant ............Fiona Nlcholls by ........................Animal Talent Pty Ltd M u sic............................................... Bestall & Best boy ................................. Gary Plunkett Stand-by p ro p s........................... : .Ro Bruen SNOW Reynolds Management Catering ...................Sally Greville-Smith Runner ....................................Jake Atkinson Stand-by props assistant . . . .Greg Nelson Assoc, producer............ Brian D. Burgess Mixed at ................................................ Atlab Prod, company .......Snowfilm Productions Publicity .......................... Lynette Thorburn Special effects...................................... ReeceRobinson Unit manager....................................WarwickRoss Laboratory ..............Cine Film Laboratory Producer...........................................Eve Ash Catering .......................... Ann Dechaineaux Asst special effects .................. Peter Gloss Prod, secretary............Rosslyn Abernethy Lab. liaison ........................Calvin Gardiner Studios .....................................................AAV, Art department assistant . Steve Fullerton Director..................................Robert Gibson NSWFC prod, a s s t............Joanne Rooney Length ............................................. 85 mins Scriptwriters ..............................Geoff Kelso, Open Channel, Art department animals ............Earl Gano Prod, accountant .....................Lea Coljins Gauge ...................................................16mm Port Melbourne Studios Horse m aster.......... V............ Ray Wlnslade Lance Curtis, Shooting stock ..................................... 7247 Asst accountant..................Kate Highfield Robert Gibson Mixed at ................................. United Sound Asst editor ............ ( ..........Karen Whiter Laboratory ........................................ Cinevex Still photography...................................PennyTweedie 1st asst director .............. Bosie Vine-Miller Scheduled release ............... January 1982 Based on the original idea Lab. liaison ............Stanely Lopuszamski b y........................................................RobertGibson, 2nd asst director..................... Keith Heygate Cast: Henri Szeps (Manuel), Simone W ranglers....................................................JimWilloughby,' Buchanan (Rebecca), Adam Garnett (Rod), 3rd asst director.....................Peter Kearney Eve Nash Budget ...................................................$1.7m Barry Groves Mary Ann Severne (Mrs Porter), John Photography ........................Martin McGrath Length ............................................105 mins Continuity ..................................... Linda Ray Wranglers’ assistant........... ,,-. Jan Mitchell Gauge .................................................... 35mm Best boy ..................................Richard Curtis Telephonist......................... Marguerite Grey Stanton (Mr Porter), Peter Sumner [Mr Sound recordist..................................... SteveEdwards Dimitros), Ron Haddrick (Speaker of Parlia­ Editor .....................................Robert Gibson' Shooting stock ....................... Eastmancolor Unit runners.........................................AntonyShepherd, Producer's secretary . . . .Sandra Wheatley Prod, manager.....................Andrew Jones Cast: David Atkins (Squizzy Taylor), Jackie Casting........................................... Liz Mullinar ment), John Ewart (Minister for Immigra­ Ian Billing

256 - June CINEMA PAPERS

Unit n u rse................................................. SallyWalker Sound recordist ___Scott Hartford-Davis Aboriginal adviser....................Vikki Christie E d ito r............................................Craig Wood D riv e r.........................................................PeterBourne Com poser..................................... Peter Miller Laboratory ........................................Colorfilm Camera assistant ..........Josephine Phillips Lab. liaison.................................................. BiltGooley Appliance make-up .............. Lewis Morley Length .......................................... . 90 mins Special props.......................... Jennifer Hale Gauge ..................................................... 35mm Sound editor ....................Andrew McPhail Shooting stock......................... Eastmancolor Mixer .............................................Peter Miller Cast: Angela Punch McGregor (Jeannie Still photography............... Hugh Hamilton Gunn), Arthur Dignam (Aeneas Gunn), Tony O pticals.....................................................Atlab Barry (Mac), Martin Vaughan (Dan), Lewis Laboratory ...............................................Atlab Fitz-Gerald (Jack), John Jarratt (Dandy), Budget..................................................... $3000 Cecil Parkes (Cheon), Danny Adcock Length ................................................ 15 mins.

(Brown), Tommy Lewis (Jackaroo), Donald Gauge .....................................................16mm Blitner (Goggle Eye).

Shooting stock......................... Eastmancolor Synopsis: A story of the hardship faced by Progress ...............................post-production newly-married Jeannie Gunn which recalls Cast: Andrew McPhail (Tim) the courage, vitality and humor of early Synopsis: A young man is shown the details cattlemen and Aboriginal stockmen in a of his own death. harsh, but memorable Northern Territory environment.

DOCUMENTARIES SHORTS SHORTS THE PERMANENT BOOKING Dist. company ............................... Roadshow Director ............................. Anthony Bowman Scriptwriter....................... Anthony Bowman Photography......................Hans J. Heidrich Sound recordist ........................ Ross Linton E d ito r................................................Gil Serine Assoc, producer ....................Chic Stringer Prod, manager .. Margaret-Rose Stringer Prod, assistant.......................... Nigel Abbott Casting consultants . . . Mitch Consultancy Camera assistant ........... Peter Lipscombe Boom operator ..........................Allan Beven Mixer .................................... Brett Robinson Title designer.............................Rei De Haan Catering............................................Homechef Mixed at ..............................Sound On Film Laboratory ...............................................Atlab Length ...............................................15 mins.

Gauge ..................................................... 16mm Progress ............................ awaiting release Scheduled release .........................June '82 Cast: Robin Bowering (George), Sean Scully (Ric), John Cobley (Harvey), Alfred Bell (Rob), Belinda Grose (Jane).

Synopsis: A comedy involving the "social game”.

REFLEX Prod, company ..................Woodbee Films D irector........................................Craig Wood

AGEING — SOME PROBLEMS, SOME ANSWERS Prod, company ..............Metro Television Producer ..................................Kelly Donlon Director ..................................Tom Zubrycki Photography ..........................Tom Zubrycki Sound recordist ......................Nick Power Exec, producer ....................Peter Dimond Length ............................................. 17 mins Gauge ..........................%” color videotape Synopsis: Describes some of the problems encountered by old people and some of the services provided by the Department of Youth and Community Services to try to meet the needs of the aged.

THE BASKING SHARK Prod, company ...................Seawest Prods Producer ..................................Walter Deas Director ................................... Walter Deas Based on the original idea by ..........................................Walter Deas Photography .............................Walter Deas, Eddie McConnell Sound recordist ..................Louis Kramer Exec, producer ...................... Larry Freels Assoc, producer ....................Monty Priede Prod, supervisor ........................Jean Deas Prod, accountant .................. Doug Harris

Producer’s assistant ...................Jean Deas Dist. company ......................Nomad Films Camera assistant ............ Andy Fairgrieve International 2nd unit photography ............Jean Deas, Director ................................... Casey Jones Andy Lucas, Scriptwriter ..................... Frederick Foikard Jim Buchanan Based on the original idea Narrator ................................Dr I. G. Priede by ..................Nomad Film International Still photography ......................Walter Deas Photography ......................Martin McGrath Tech, advisers .................. Dr I. G. Priede, Sound recordist ................... George Craig Walter Deas Editor .........................................Paul Howard Publicity .................................Seawest Prods Exec, producer ................ Douglas Stanley Laboratory ................Studio Film & Video Prod, co-ordinator ................. Pam Wilson Lab. liaison ....................................Jim Tibbs Special fx photography ......... Jim Frazier, Length ............................................... 56 mins Mantis Wildlife Films Gauge ................................................... 16mm Neg. matching ........Cinevex Laboratories Shooting stock ........................Eastmancolor Sound editor ......................Michael Minter Progress ...................................... Production Mixer ....................................David Harrison Scheduled release ..........December 1982 Still photography ................Kathy Atkinson Synopsis: The basking shark of Scotland, Mixed at ..........................Film Soundtrack Ireland and Japan is the second largest fish Laboratory ......................................Cinevex in the world. The douementary examines Length ................................................46 mins the sharks, observes their lifestyles, works Gauge .............................................. 16mm with the scientist who knows them, and Shooting stock ........................Fuji 8527/28 interviews the people who depend on them Progress ........................................ In release for their livelihood.

First released ............................... June 1982 Synopsis: Documentary feature about the Dai people, a minority nationality living in THE FRIGATE DARTMOUTH the farthest corner of Yunnan Province, in Prod, company ..........Walter Deas Prods the south-west of China on the borders with Producer ................................... Walter Deas Burma and Laos.

Director ..................................... Walter Deas Based on the original idea THE INTRUDERS by ......................................Jim Buchanan, the Bristol Undersea Archaeology Group Prod, company ....................Nomad Films International Photography ............................ Walter Deas, Jim Buchanan Dist. company ......................Nomad Films International Sound recordist ......................Walter Deas Prod, accountant ................... Doug Harris Producer ........................... Douglas Stanley Producer's assistant ...................Jean Deas Directors ................................. Casey Jones, Jeremy Hogarth Underwater cameramen . . . .Walter Deas, Jim Buchanan, Scriptwriter ....................Frederick Foikard Based on the original idea Crawford Grier by ................Nomad Films International Tech, advisers ........................Colin Martin, St Andrews Institute of Photography ......................Martin McGrath Maritime Archaeology Sound recordists ................Sean Meltzer, Michael Minter, Laboratory ................Studio Film & Video George Craig, Lab. liaison ..................................Jim Timms Steve Edwards Length ............................................... 27 mins Gauge ................................................... 16mm Editors ............................. Jeremy Hogarth, Paul Howard Shooting stock ..................................... 7247 Progress ...................................... Production Prod, co-ordinator .................. Pam Wilson Special fx photography ..........Jim Frazier, Scheduled release .................. March 1983 • Mantis Wildlife Films Synopsis: A documentary about the survey Sound editor .....................

Michael Minter and excavation of the frigate HMS Dart­ mouth, wrecked October 9, 1690, on Eilean Mixer ................................... David Harrison Still photography ................Trevor Pinder, Rudha an Ridire, near the Isle of Mull, Daryl Pinder Scotland.

Neg. matching ........Cinevex Laboratories Mixed at ..........................Film Soundtrack Laboratory ..................................... Cinevex THE HIDDEN LAND Length ..........; ........................... 6 x 24 mins Prod, company ....................Nomad Films Gauge ................................................. 16mm International Shooting stock ........................Fuji 8527/28

Progress .......................................In release First released ............................... May 1982 Synopsis: Six programs which explore the

history and impact the horse, camel, goat, rabbit, donkey and cow have had on Australia’s ecology and environment since being introduced to the country in the 19th Century.

LAND OF THE DRAGON Prod, company ....................Nomad Films International Dist. company ......................Nomad Films International Directors ..........................Jeremy Hogarth, Joe Connor Scriptwriter ....................Frederick Foikard Based on the original idea by ................Nomad Films International Photography ..........................Alex McPhee, David Olney Sound recordists ................Sean Meltzer, George Craig Editors ..............................Jeremy Hogarth, Paul Howard Exec, producer ................Douglas Stanley Prod, co-ordinator ..................Pam Wilson Prod, manager ......................Bob Ashford Camera assistants ................John Ogden, John Hall Neg. matching ........Cinevex Laboratories Sound editor ................ Michael Minter Mixer ....................................David Harrison Still photography ................Martin Pollard, Steven Kennedy Mixed at ..........................Film Soundtrack Laboratory ........................................Cinevex Length ........................................4 x 24 mins Gauge ................................................... 16mm Shooting stock ........................Fuji 8527/28 Progress .............................Post-production Scheduled release ......................July 1982 Synopsis: Four programs for television which, for the first time, look at the people and countryof Bhutan, “ Land of the Dragon”. The series, through the eyes of a Monk, Yak-herder, farmer and wildlife ranger, travels from the Himalayas to the jungles of the south.

THE OUTBACK AUSTRALIANS — A Harder Way Of Life Prod, company ..MacDonald Hunt Prods Dist. company .........

Australian Outback Prods Producer ........................... Ian MacDonald Directors ..............................Malcolm Hunt, Tim Parsons Scriptwriter ..............................Tim Parsons Photography .........................Malcolm Hunt

r It makes COMMONSENSE To contact SOUNDSENSE For All Your Production Requirements C o m p le te film o r v id e o d o c u m e n ta ry p ro d u ctio n s Fully e q u ip p e d 3 5 m m & 1 6 m m e d itin g ro o m s for hire O ff lin e v id e o e d itin g suite S o u n d transfers P ro d u ctio n o ffices for hire D aily rushes syncing service

mm C h a p p e ll m u s ic

□ WMm

m

INTERSONG MUSIC INTERSONG PTY. LTD.

CHAPPELL A CO.I. (AUSTRALIA) PTY. PTT. LTD.

uustcPUBLISHERS

99 FORBES ST. W OOLLOOM OOLOO NSW 2011 PHONE 3563322

AT.T. C O M P O S E R S

OATS: 01 JUNE 1 9 8 2

YOUR k£îL

^ J E N N IF E R W R IG H T

o u * »

JW .0 1 6 8 2

C U TTIN G C O N TA C TS . . .

An a n s w e r a n d a v a ila b ility service to m o re th a n 40 o f th e to p fre e la n c e Editing p erso n n el.

F IN A N C IA L A N D

C R E A T IV E A D V A N T A G E S

You don’t needus to tellyouabout th e changes in A u stralian Filins over th e last.few T ears, b u t maybe we can fill you in on th e changes in m usic publishing, w hich can help y o u T here are m any FIN A N C IA L and CREATIVE advantages in using a p u blisher for film scores, so w hy n o t give u s a call an d find out how you can benefits. ueu-L get som e real --------

343 Sailors Bay Road

Norltibridge Sydney NSW2063 SOUNDSENSE P.O. Box 97 Norltibridge NSW2063

Film Productions Pty. Ltd. Telephone (02) 958 1088 (3 lines)

CINEMA PAPERS June - 257

c A M . _ JP M .

FOOD FOR BUSINESS On-site film and television catering

FOOD FOR PLEASURE Production parties

FOOD FOR EVERY OCCASION Phone (02) 981 1622 (02) 997 5171

P.O. Box 26 9 , Newport Beach,

When G eoff S t i l l s s h o o ts s t i l l s , he makes o th e r s t i l l s lo o k l i k e t h e y Tre s ta n d in g s t i l l .

2 10 6

G eoff S t i l l s .

SALES • RENTALS • SER VICE -L IG H T IN G FILM • TELE VISION • STAGE

John B. Masson & Associates Pty. Ltd. 78-80 STANLEY STREET, COLUNGWOOD VICTORIA, 3066. AUSTRALIA. Telephone: ( 0 3 ) 41 4 2 4 5 A fter hours: ( 0 3 ) 8 5 0 2 0 2 0

MOVIE STILLS. S t i l l a v a il a b le on (0 2 ) - 698 4871 or (02) - 958 1733.

MILLER

5

0

For cameras weighing up to 5 0 lb (2 2 .6 8 kg) H F u lly v a r ia b le c o u n t e r - b a la n c in g s y s t e m ■ T h r e e p r e - s e t d r a g p o s i t i o n s p lu s “ f r e e ” p o s i t i o n s in p a n a n d t i l t a c t i o n s ■ T w o c a m e r a p la t f o r m s ( q u ic k r e le a s e a n d / o r s lid in g ) ■ P o s itiv e b u ilt - in d is c lo c k s in p a n a n d t i l t a c tio n s

■ H a n d le s , le f t a n d r ig h t , v e r t ic a lly a n d h o r iz o n t a lly a d j u s t a b l e ■ W e ig h t 8 lb 8 o z Cat. 114

R.E. M iller Pty. Ltd. 30 Hotham Parade, A rtarm on 2064, N SW . T e le x AA23655 Phone: (02) 439 6377

Sound recordist ...............Maurie Akinson Editor ................................... Ian MacDonald Exec, producers ................... John Hegarty, John Elmgreen 2nd unit photography ----- Andre Biunden Neg. matching ................... Marilyn Delaney Mixed at ............................... Sound On Film Laboratory .................................... Cine Film Length ............................................ 60 mins Gauge ................................................... 16mm Shooting stock ....................................... 7247 Progress ............ ................Post-production Scheduled release .................... June 1982

THE RUNNING GAME (working title Room To Move)

baby breakthroughs, in particular the freeze-thaw, human embryo research.

TOWER ONE Producer .........................New South Wales Institute Technology Director ....................Post-production only: Garry Lane Scriptwriters ............................... Garry Lane, Peter Gray Editor ................

Garry Lane Composer ...............................Janie Conway Exec, producer . . John Corderoy (NSWIT) Assoc, producer .. Les Cridland (NSWIT) Prod, supervisor ___Dr Saulkes (NSWIT) Neg. matching .............. Negative Thinking No. of shots ...............................Approx. 90 Music performed by .......... Janie Conway Sound editor .............................. Garry Lane Mixer .......................................Palm Studios Narrator .....................................Tracy Hardie Mixed at .................................Palm Studios Laboratory .............. CFL, Artarmon, NSW Lab. liaison .............................Cal. Gardiner Budget .................................................... $4000 Length .................................................13 mins Gauge .................................................... 16mm Shooting stock ........................... Ektachrome Scheduled release ......................June 1982 Synopsis: Technical documentary on a comprehensive and unique study of the changes, due to concrete creep and shrinkage, in a m odern concrete sky­ scraper. The School of Civil Engineering at N S W IT has built into the structural members of the NSWIT “Tower” building a series of strain gauges, to m easu re distortions in the building over a large number of years. (Production of this film was started in 1972, and post-production, late last year.)

Prod, company .......... Smart Street Films Dist. company ............ Smart Street Films Producers ..........................Hadyn Keenan, Peter Fenton Directors ................................. Peter Fenton, Hadyn Keenan Photography ..........................“Race" Gailey Sound recordist ....................Dean Gawen Editor ....................................Denise Haslem Composer ..........Andrew Thomas Wilson Prod, manager ....................Julian Russell Prod, secretary ........Mitou Pajaczkowska Prod, accountant ........Andrew Sneddon Casting ................................Bob Templeton Asst editor ............; ......... Leslie Mannison Mixer .......................................Peter Fenton Narrator ...................................Gordon Bray Mixed at ................................United Sound Laboratory ....................................Colorfilm Length ..............................................48 mins Gauge ................................................. 16mm Shooting stock ................Fuji 8528 (A250) Progress ............................Post-production Scheduled release ......................May 1982 Cast: The Australian Rugby Union Touring Party, Britain, 1981-82.

Synopsis: There’s a spirit in the Wallabies mere words cannot describe, It’s as if they had descended from some legendary tribe; There’s a kinship, a tradition, as in days so long since past, Of crusades, of knights in armor, and of Project Development Branch men before the mast.

There’s a thrill you can’t appreciate, a pride Projects approved at Australian Film you cannot tell, Lest you wear a golden jumper and you Commission meeting on April 28, wear it really well; 1982 When you mark before the forward rush, so Script and Production Development doing turn the tide, When you make that vital tackle and your Investments line is open wide.

But it isn’t just the winning, nor the scoring, Script Development nor the cheers, Copycat — Eureka Productions, Cinetel It’s the friendships and the memories that Productions; cinema feature; funding to last you through the years; write new 1st draft — $10,000 It’s the cameraderie that’s born of valor, not For Love Alone — Margaret Fink Films; of fame, cinema feature; final pre-production It’s the striving for your colors that makes funding — $30,000 the running game.

Heat Haze in Half Life (Approaching Mid­ night) — Leslie Murray, Vic Hunter; cinema SUN COMES UP feature; script development funding — $3350 (working title) Mark Twain Upside Down — Cecil Holmes; Prod, company ..........................Jotz Prods television feature; 3rd draft funding — Producer ..................................Ursula Kolbe $4500 Director ..................................Tom Zubrycki Pais — Tasmanian Film Corporation; tele­ Scriptwriters ..................... Ursula Kolbe, vision series; script development funding — Michael Atherton $3250 Photography ........................Fabio Cavadini Pearl Fever — Polygon Pictures, June Sound recordist ................Russ Hermann H arley; cinema feature; survey and Editor ..................................... Jim Stevens treatment — $5401 Composer ........................Michael Atherton The Ridge and the River — PNG Ridge Exec, producer ....................Peter Dlmond River Films; cinema feature; script/project Boom operator ........................Jackie Fine development funding — $21,612 Length ............................18 mins (approx.)

Shame — Beverly Blankenship (Dramatic Gauge ................................................. 16mm Services); cinema feature; 2nd draft funding Shooting stock ......................Eastmancolor — $9000 Synopsis: The Institute of Early Childhood Vocations — Samson Productions; cinema Studies demonstrates that while listening, feature; 3rd draft funding — $6000 singing, dancing and playing instruments to given music are all important activities, the Production investment process of discovering, exploring and playing with sound forms are an essential For Love or Money — Flashback Films (Jeni part of the early childhood music education Thornley, Megan McMurchy, Margot Oliver); television documentary; production program. funding — $35,929

AUSTRALIAN FILM COMMISSION

TOMORROW’S CHILD Prod, company ......................Nomad Films International Dist. company ........................Nomad Films International Producer ............................Douglas Stanley Director ............................. Douglas Stanley Scriptwriter ............................. Gerald Lyons Based on the original idea by ......................................... Gerald Lyons Photography .............................David Olney, Martin McGrath Sound recordist ................ Michael Minter Editor ..................................Jeremy Hogarth Camera assistant ................... John Ogden Special fx photography ..........Jim Frazier, Mantis Wildlife Films Neg. matching ........Cinevex Laboratories Sound editor ...................... Michael Minter Mixer ....................................David Harrison Narrator ................................ John Stanton Still photography ..............Gianni Marzella Optlcals ................... Cinevex Laboratories Mixed at ..........................Film Soundtrack Laboratory ..................................... Cinevex Length ........................................... 45 mins Gauge ................................................. 16mm Shooting stock ..............................Fuji 8528 Progress ..................................... In release First released ..............................April 1982 Synopsis: A film special on the human and scientific aspects of the latest test-tube

Creative Development Branch Projects approved at Australian Film Commission meeting on December 16,1981 (not listed in previous issue) Script Development Terry Downs (NSW); grant to complete 2nd draft of Yoke — $3100 Clem Gorman (NSW); grant for further treatment of A Night in the Arms of Raeleen — $400 Una Clarke (NSW); grant to script edit The Young Trappers — $400 Dean Taylor, John Martin, Tony Sanderson (NSW); grant to bring Gee Force to first draft — $3000 Phillip Roope (NSW); grant to develop 1st draft of New Guinea-Niugini — $2400 Surresh Ayyar (NSW); grant to redraft treatment of The Defector A Confession — $400 Walter Cerquetti (WA); grant to further draft The Legend of Varischetti — $1600 Madelo.n Wilkins (WA); grant to further draft You & Me — $2000 Ian Mortimer (NSW); grant for a revised treatment and script edit of Buttered Buns

—$1200

Shannon Leigh (NSW); grant to bring Risin Over to 2nd draft — $4000 Michael Moses (NSW); grant to revise

treatment of Po’s Way Home — $1000 Richard Tipping (NSW); grant to bring Lassetter to 1st draft — $3200 Antoinette Wheatley (NSW); grant for script edit on When Early Winter Comes — $400 Karen Hughes (NSW); grant to research Mystery People — $2000 Robert Fodgen (NSW); grant for revised treatment of Jimmy Rush — The Bully it Took a Town to Kill — $400 Melissa Woods (NSW); grant for treatment on untitled script — $400 Stephen Johnston, Kenneth Matthews (NSW); grant to bring Dirty Money to 1st draft — $4000 Melissa Mitchell (NSW); grant to research and scrip t a docum entary entitled

Director................................... Sue Cornwell Scriptwriter..........................Ian McFadyen Photography............................ Kerry Brown Sound recordist ....................Howard Spry E d ito r..................■..............Peter Somerville Asst, producer.................... Nigel Saunders Lighting ................................... Bruce Gailey Asst, director..................................Judy Fox Length ............................................. 10 mins.

Gauge .................................................... 16mm Shooting stock....................................... 7247 Progress ..................................... Production Release date ............................. June, 1982 Synopsis: A dramatized training film produced for Telecom to encourage an awareness of on-the-job safety.

STREET KIDS

Prod, company ........................Film Victoria in association with York Street Films Dist. company ..........................Film Victoria Producer......................... Kent Chadwick D irectors....................................Leigh Tilson, Rob Scott Scriptwriters............................. Leigh Tilson, Rob Scott, Kent Chadwick, Adrian Tame Photography..............................Leigh Tilson Sound recordist ..........................Rob Scott E d ito r..............................................Rob Scott Research adviser ................Alex McDonald Survivalist Down Under — $1500 Research assistant................................LindaJoseph THE MIGRANT EXPERIENCE Jan S h a rp ( NSW) ; grant for sto ry Length ............................................... 72 mins conference for Island of the Gods — $400 Prod, com pany........Australian Institute of Gauge .................................................... 16mm Bruce Pederson (NSW); grant to develop Progress .............................. Post-production Multicultural Affairs, and storyboard Murrai — $3000 Scheduled release ......................June 1982 Film Australia Julia Featherstone (NSW); grant to revise Producer...............

Synopsis: A documentary on the urban Malcolm Smith treatment of Sheila — $400 , street life of homeless children in Mel­ Directors.................................................... BenLewin, Neil Pritchard (NSW); grant to revise The bourne. Made for television release.

Karl McPhee Gandalph Syndrome — $400 Scriptwriters.............................................. BenLewin, Susan Midgeley, Oliver S.trewe (NSW); Karl McPhee THROUGH A LOOKING GLASS — A grant to research and write a documentary Asst, producer..........................................PamEnnor FILM ABOUT DRAMA entitled Ashes of Death — $800 Prod, asst............................Patricia L’Huede Jeff Ansell (Vic.); grant to further draft Prod, accountant ................... Neil Cousins Prod, company .........................Film Victoria Transmission — $1500 Liaison...................................Richard Brown, in association with Robyn Walton (Qld); grant to revise treat­ Josef Szwarc Vincent O’Donnell Productions ment of The Beco Rodeo — $1000 Key research ....................... Heather Forbes Dist. company ...........................Film Victoria John Stephenson (Qld); grant for a revised Film research........................................... TomZubrycki D irector................................................VincentO’Donnell treatment of Private O’Hara is Dead — $700 Research.................................................... SueCram, Exec, producer .................... Kent Chadwick Dr Paul Memmot (Qld); grant to further Judith Levine Length ............................................... 20 mins research The Conflict of the Kalkadoone — Length ........................................ 6 x 55 mins.

Gauge .....................................................16mm $5000 Gauge ...................................

16mm Progress .................................

In release Richard Lowenstein (Vic.); grant to further Progress ....................................... Production Synopsis: A film for drama teachers about draft Wonthaggi — $3000 Scheduled release................................. 1983 the elements of drama. Made for the Henry Tefay (Vic.); grant to further draft Synopsis: The 200-year history of migrants Education Department.

White Fire — $1400 in Australia.

Miranda Bain (Vic.); grant to further draft

THE UNSUSPECTING CONSUMER

Hera & Other Refugees — $1200

Russell Porter (Vic.); grant for further draft of Intelligent Life — $2450 John Hillcoat (Vic.); grant to further draft

Prod, company ........................Film Victoria in association with Red Nose Revival Jungle of the Cockatoo — $2100 Dist. com pany.......................... Film Victoria Ray Bartram (SA); grant to attend writing D irector......................................

Peter Green seminar — $700 Scriptwriter................................ Peter Green David Harris (SA); grant to attend writing Exec, producer ..............Vincent O’Donnell seminar — $700 ANIMATED MUSIC FILM Length ............................................... 12 mins Stephanie McCarthy (SA); grant to attend Gauge ...................................................

16mm writing seminar — $700 Prod. Company..........................Film Victoria Shooting stock........................ Eastmancolor in association with Progress ..............................Post-production Grahame Jackson Animation Dist. company .......................... Film Victoria Scheduled release ......................June 1982 Synopsis: An animated film on the pitfalls of Com poser............................... David Hertzog the marketplace. Made for the Department Exec, producer .............Vincent O'Donnell of Music adviser.................................... LorraineMilne Consumer Affairs.

Length .................................................16 mins Gauge .................................................... 16mm AUSTRALIAN MYTHOLOGIES Progress ....................................... Production Feature Film and Television Synopsis: An animated film about music for Prod, company ..........Martin Williams P/L Brisbane educational distribution. Made for the Development Ballet TV Series — Film Victoria is cur­ Dist. company ........................ Film Australia Victorian Education Department. rently developing a major television series Producer..................................................PeterJohnson to be produced for the Australian Ballet; Director..................... ...Jonathon Dawson CRIME DETECTION ; the Series: 13 x V4 hour episodes of an S c rip t..................................... Ron Johanson Prod, company .........................Film Victoria j action/adventure format highlighting the E d ito r..........................................................BobDawson Scriptwriter................................... Lyn Ogilvy 1essentials of dance capability; concept and Unit manager.......................................... JohnStainton scriptwriting in progress Length ...............................................50 mins. Exec, producer ............. Vincent O'Donnell Gauge .................................................... 16mm Prod, co-ordinator ...................Don Dennett Slim Dusty — Chadwick McMahon Film Shooting stock................... Eastmancolor Length .................................................25 mins j Productions (Kent Chadwick, Terence Progress ..............................Post-production Gauge .................................................... 16mm McMahon); cinema feature; scripting Release date ......................December 1982 Progress ....................................... Production ! Breakfast Creek — Ben Lewin; cinema feature; scripting Synopsis: A film to show how the great Scheduled release ............November 1982 Australian myth — “the Sunbronzed Synopsis: A training film on the technique The Last Star Model — Forrest Redlich; Anzac”, “the beautiful rural bush settings”, of crime detection. Made for the Victoria cinema feature; scripting : The Caravan Park — Brian McKenzie; etc. — is being prolonged through Police. cinema feature; scripting Australian advertising in an attempt to Your Place or Mine — Patrick Edgeworth; create a truly Australian image.

HAIR OF THE DOG cinema feature; scripting (working title ALCOHOL ABUSE) Haxby’s Circus — John McRae; cinema BETTY VIAZIM feature; scripting Prod, company ........................ Film Victoria Blockbuster — Adams Packer Film Pro­ Prod, company ..................

FilmAustralia in association with ductions (Phillip Adams, John Clarke); Dist. com pany.......................................... FilmAustralia OCP Ltd cinema feature; scripting Producer ........................... Elisabeth Knight Dist. com pany.......................................... FilmVictoria Family Matters — Roger Dunn, Maggie D irector.............................. Daro Gunzburg Director........................... Michael O’Connell Miller; cinema feature; scripting Photography..................... Peter Viskovitch Scriptwriter.............................Russell Porter Sound recordist .......................... Leo Pollini Photography............................................. AlanColeEverybody’s Talking — Adrian Tame, Philip Ackman; television special; scripting E d ito r......................................... Sue Horsley Sound recordist .................. Ian Jenkinson West Side Brief — Channel 0/28, Film Vic­ Asst, producer......................................... PamEnnor E d ito r.......................................David Hipkins Lighting......................................Bruce Gailey Exec, producer ...............Vincent O’Donnell toria; television mini-series; scripting ■ Camel Train Downstream — Highland Pro­ Length ..................................... ......... 60 mins. Prod, co-ordinator ............Joanna Stewart (John McIntosh); television docu­ Gauge ...................................................16mm (Film Victoria) ductions mentary; post-production Progress ......................................... Shooting Prod, assistant The First Fleet — First Fleet Films (JohnRelease date ............................. June, 1982 (OCP L td ).........................................MarionCrooke athon King); television mini-series; scripting Synopsis: A one-hour program sponsored Camera assistant ............Brendan Lavelle The Sunbeam Shaft — see survey by the Australia Council for its archival Gaffer.......................................Stewart Sorby program recording, Betty Viazim, a Make-up ............................... Carla O ’Keefe Documentaries Milliner.

Neg. matching..................................WarwickDriscoll Mixer .............................................Peter Frost Thom astown — a docum entary on Medical adviser.................... Dr Jan Fraillon Thomastown School, its special structure INTERNATIONAL TRADE Laboratory . . . Victorian Film Laboratories and relation to established educational DEVELOPMENT CENTRE Length .................................................20 mins procedures Prod, company ...................... Film Australia Gauge ................................................... 16mm Dist. company ........................ Film Australia Progress ..................................... Production Producer..............................Elizabeth Knight Synopsis: A short film about the early Director....................................Sue Cornwell detection of alcohol abuse. Produced for Photography............................Kerry Brown, the Health Commission.

John Hosking Asst, producer........................... Pam Ennor THE 1934 LONDON TO Length ...............................................10 mins.

MELBOURNE AIR RACE Gauge ............................................ . . , 16mm “ALIVE” Progress ............................. Pre-production Prod, company ......................Film Victoria, Scheduled release ................August, 1982 Outrider Films London Prod, company ..................................... TFC Synopsis: A film sponsored by the Dept, of Director (British unit)................Mike Harris Dist. company ........: .............................TFC Trade and Resources to inform overseas Scriptwriter............................. Jeremy Press Producer ............................... Don Anderson tra d e rs about the fa c ilitie s at the Exec, producer ............;Vincent O'Donnell Director ................................. Don Anderson International Trade Development Centres in Prod, co-ordinator .................Don Dennett Scriptwriter ............................Don Anderson Sydney and Melbourne.

Length ............................................... 48 mins Photography ....................Russell Galloway Gauge ................................................... 16mm Sound recordist ..................... Ian Sherry Progress ..................................... Production Editor ..............................Mike Woolveridge LOOK ALIVE Synopsis: A dramatized documentary Prod, assistants ....................... Peter Cass, Prod, company ......................Film Australia about the classic air race being filmed in Joel Peterson Producers......................... Macek Rubetzki, Australia and England for Victoria’s 150th Gerry Letts Anniversary celebrations.

FILM VICTORIA

FILM AUSTRALIA

TASMANIAN FILM CORPORATION

Concluded on p. 277

CINEMA PAPERS June - 259

O

, yromy Blacksmith The Chant Of Jimmy Blacksmith The Chant o f Jim m y Blacksmith O ^ ^ h y 's Child The Picture Show Man The Picture Show Man The Picture Show M an Mad Max II Mad Max II M ad M ax li Puberty Blues Puberty Blues Puberty Blues 0 fik. Town Like Alice My Brilliant Career My Brilliant Career M y B rillian t C areer y jtty And The Bagman K itty And The Bagman Mad Max Mad Max M ad M ax

These productions had one thing in common!

AD A R THE AUSTRALIAN INSURANCE BROKING GROUP 1982 marks the tenth year of service by Adair Insurance Broking Group to the Australian Film Industry. It has been a decade of growth in imagination, professionalism, expertise and international commercial stature for Australian film product. A decade in which Adair is proud to have participated.

Adair remains THE specialist insurance brokers to the Australian film industry. Adair's close affiliations with the world's premier entertainment underwriters, including Lloyds and London M arkets and as sole representatives for A lb e rt G. Ruben & Co Inc of Los Angeles (in association with the Fireman's Fund Insurance Co), ensures the finest global connections and facilities are available to Adair clients.

In 1981, Adair was appointed sole correspondent in Australia and New Zealand for Ruben and th e Fireman's Fund â&#x20AC;&#x201D; the largest entertainment underwriters in the world â&#x20AC;&#x201D; considerably broadening Adair's servicing base to the industry. Ruben's 20 year association with film, TV and general entertainment insurance, coupled with Adair's Australian experience, places Adair clients at the forefront of the latest developments in effective protection.

The Adair team of film and TV specialists knows how the business works. Knows the pitfalls and omissions which can leave crucial gaps in your coverage. And knows how to plug those gaps with rates that keep your budget looking healthy.

Adair Insurance Broking Group looks forward to its next decade of successful involvement with the Australian Film Industry. As our list of client productions shows, we've been with you all the way.

SYDNEY Ron A d a ir Tom Laskas Ja m e s C. A lla rd ice Adair Insurances Pty Ltd GPO Box 3884 Sydney 2001 Phone (02) 290 1588

MELBOURNE W ayne Lewis

BRISBANE Bob Cook

PERTH N oel C lairs

AUCKLAND NZ Brian M ahony

Adair Insurances (Vic) Pty Ltd GPO Box 74B Melbourne 3001 Phone (03) 61 2485

Adair Insurance (Old) Pty Ltd GPO Box 1371 Brisbane 4001 Phone (07) 229 2494

Standfast Insurance Brokers (WA) Pty Ltd 44A Kings Park Rd West Peith 6005 Phone (091 321 8791

Mahony & Associates Insurance Brokers GPO Box 676 Auckland NZ Phone 773 766

The Man From Snowy River Arnold Zable The Man From Snowy River has received the th um bs down from m any A ustralian critics. Jo h n Hindle of The N a tio n a l T im es called it a “ tragedy, a costly awful mess” . Neil Jillett (in The A g e ) scathingly referred to it as a “ W allaby W estern ” , and went on to dismiss the film with the terse state­ m ent: “ T h e ho rses a re go o d , th e scenery is great, and that is all that can be said about The Man From Snowy River.” T h e film has been ridiculed as soap opera in a bush setting, and as a crassly comm ercial venture, aimed at creating an A ustralian equivalent to the A m erican Western, with a little help from overseas actor Kirk Douglas.

O ther critics have preferred to stay clear of it completely.

Yet, much can and should be said ab ou t this film, not only- about its faults, but also ab ou t its virtues, for there are m ore positive aspects than m o s t critics have been willing to acknowledge. But, above all, there is a need to probe its weaknesses because, failure or not, this is an im p ortant film in term s o f the future of A ustralian films on historical themes. One needs to ask, for example, whether it is possible to create an A ustralian genre, based on local myths and environment, with a distinctive style and themes, that sets it ap art from the dom inating A merican genre of the Western.

The film ’s best m om ents come in the climactic chase after the wild brumbies.

This realization of the Banjo Paterson poem alm ost makes it all worthwhile.

The re m a rk a b le skills of the horsemen are m atched by the skills of the film crew. A t times man, horse and environ­ m ent seem to weld' together into a flowing stream of stunning action. Even the most hardened heart leaps to the m outh as the hero battles his way a cro ss rivers, steep ravines and treacherous pitfalls.

These scenes are only m arred by som e ab ru p t cutting, which severs the

flow at times, and there is an all-toobrief glimpse of the daring downhill leap th at leaves the M an from Snowy R iv er in lo n e p u rs u it o f th e wild brumbies.

There are som e other fine m om ents to do with horses — especially the m a g ­ nificent colt from old Regret, a proud and fierce thoroughbred — and two of th e actors: th e little-k n o w n S igrid T h o r n t o n as J e s s i c a , a n d T o m Burlinson as Jim Craig, the M an from Snowy River. Both actors are able to transcend the banalities of the script — T ho rnto n through her quiet passion and intensity in the role of a spirited and strong-willed young w om an born and reared at the foot of the high country, and Burlinson as the raw mountain man, who gradually evolves into a man o f independent strength and resource­ fulness, not easily cowed by the more sophisticated lowlanders.

The photo graphy is at all times adequate, and at times quite stunning in capturing some of the vast variety of terrain and the atm ospheric' changes that see the mountains change from glorious sun-bathed scenes of idyllic beauty to treacherous storm -lashed slopes barely visible through cloud, mist and hail. Those m ore familiar with the m any moods of the high country may be a bit disappointed at the range of climatic change — one sees little of the extremes, such as the blizzards and snow storms that have claimed victims over the years, and fiery heatwaves that have become raging bush infernos.

But, despite these virtues, and the inspired idea of taking a great ballad of A ustralian folklore and using it to give a glimpse of the rich tradition of the high-plains cattlemen, the film goes w ro n g . T h e m a j o r p r o b l e m s a r e obvious. T he scripting is riddled with cliches and soap o p e ra b a n a litie s, except for some welcome m om ents of local hum or, and the direction is u n a d ­ venturous and lacking in drive. And one can add the music to this list of woes.

The soundtracks of films such as Picnic at Hanging Rock, The Last Wave and Heatwave have employed music and sound effects to emphasize aspects of the A ustralian environment.

Clancy o f the Overflow (Jack Thompson) and Spur (Kirk Douglas). George Miller's The Man From Snowy River.

M ost recently, for example, C am eron A llan’s experimental score in Phil N o y c e ’s H eatw ave high lig h ted the mood of oppressive, relentless m id­ sum m er heat. This was augm ented by a subtle soundtrack th at allowed the occasional shriek of the cicada, or crackle of a radio broadcast, to float in and add to the sense of atm osphere. But in The Man From Snowy River one does not get a chance to hear the mountains speak. Instead, there is what some composers call “ musical wall­ p ap er” . The music is concocted to a Hollywood formula. It lacks a subtlety and , in stead of c o m p l e m e n t in g or emphasizing the formidable gran deur and mystery of the high country, words and music tend to pollute the a tm o s ­ phere — the mountains recede behind the m elo dram a, and, when the grandeur is all too obvious, the words appear redundant.

A pparently, a lot of work went into the scripting —- a year o f plotting, and two dozen drafts over a period of two years — before Fred Cul Cullen and John Dixon settled for their final script.

Using clues provided by the poem, and aiming to structure the film to climax with the epic ride, the plot centres on the fate of two A m erican brothers, the H a r r i s o n s ( b o t h a c t e d by K i r k Douglas).

One brother makes a fortune when, as the poem put it, Pardon won the Cup, thereby winning the hand of local belle M atilda, and becoming a wealthy cattle dealer. The other brother. Spur, has unsuccessfully looked for his fortune as a prospector. After 20 years he is still up in the mountains looking for gold.

Spur is som ething of a ‘c h a ra c te r’, a well-intentioned, likeable old chap who hobbles around, having had one of his feet shot off by the jealous b rother who had suspected an affaire with his wife M atilda m any years earlier. This is the grim secret, held from rich H a rris o n ’s daughter Jessica, born to M atilda who d i e d a t c h i l d b i r t h . H a r r i s o n is

CINEMA PAPERS June - 261

The Man From Snowy River

tormented by the possibility that Jessica is Spur’s daughter.

This is obviously a very contrived script based on well-worn formulas with an eye to the commercial market.

But even within this plot there is a lot of potential. The two Harrisons could be seen to represent two different views of the land, and man’s relationship to it.

The rich cattle dealer and station owner, with his hardened views on development and exploitation of the land for profit, can be seen as the genesis of the type of man that formed and continues to form the nucleus of the National Country Party, and the powerful graziers that have dominated so much of Australian politics and economics. This is the line that leads to the Doug Anthonys and Malcolm Frasers of today.

Spur can be seen as the more environmentally-conscious man — a man that lives in harmony with, rather than trying to tame, the land. Clancy of the Overflow, who occasionally appears for a bush muster, and the Craigs also have this deeper respect, although they are also inevitably part of the world of cattle economics — as skilled horsemen available for mustering.

These themes emerge in the scripting, but all too briefly. Some of the potential is eroded with the use of Kirk Douglas as Harrison and Spur. He does a competent enough job in both roles, but surely Australian actors could have been found at much less expense and with much more potential at creating truly Australian characters. Spur sits too uneasily close to a Disney concept of ‘character’, and Harrison takes one into the territory of the Texan rancher.

The raw material for a great film lies at the source. Just as the text of Paterson’s poem provides the basis for the most authentic and enthralling scenes of the film, the source of a script with dialogue, characters and situations that could create an Australian genre can be found in the poems, ballads and stories of writers such as Banjo P aterson, Henry Lawson, Joseph Furphy and Frank Dalby Davison.

Also, it can be seen in the considerable collections of oral and local histories, and in the living traditions of high­ plains cattlemen who still continue their annual musters, and hand on their skills to the next generation of mountain men.

The filmmakers are to be congrat­ ulated in seeking the advice of legen­

Mephisto

dary mountain men, such as the Lovick brothers, in finding suitable horsps, and horsemen, and giving some indication of their enormous skills and resource in bushcraft. It is a pity that the Lovicks’ skills as yarnspinners, and their insights into the character of the mountain men, were not used to provide the model for the roles of Spur and Clancy, and to provide the basis for the dialogue. It is also regrettable the filmmakers did not use some of Paterson’s other writings as a guide. Take for example this Paterson description of the bushman, and compare it with what one sees of Spur: “The eyes wgre . . . very keen and piercing . . . deep set in the head; even when he was looking straight at anyone he seemed to be peering into endless space through the man in front of him. Such eyes men get from many years of staring over great stretches of sunlit plain where no colour relieves the blinding glare — nothing but dull grey clumps of saltbush and the dull green Mitchell grass . . . When he spoke he used the curious nasal drawl of the far-out bushman, the slow deliberate speech that comes to men who are used to passing months with the same com­ panions in the unhurried Australian bush. Occasionally he lapsed into reveries, out of which he would come with a start and break in on other people’s conversation, talking them down with a serene indifference to their feelings.”

The great potential is also evident in two recent collections of stories of the exploits of the cattlemen: Tor Holth’s C a ttle m e n o f th e H ig h C o u n tr y and Harry Stephenson’s C a ttle m e n a n d H u ts o f th e H ig h P la in s. Both books were published in 1980, well before the filming began. They provide the material out of which myths and legends are made.

Holth records stories of men such as Billy Faithful, ‘the Critter’, who died in 1975. He is described as a “bushman, vagabond philosopher, local vet, and one time rodeo rider . . . with the pioneer’s spirit and humour he was characteristic of the type.”

Numerous characters emerge in these accounts, such as the mountain bard Don Kneebone from Milawa and the legendary Bogong Jack, who is said to have haunted the mountains with his band of horse rustlers, making their home base in the rugged ranges near Omeo. John Sampson, alias Bogong

Jim (Tom Burlinson) and Jessica (Sigrid Thornton) at Spur’s hut. The Man From Snowy

River.

262 - June CINEMA PAPERS

Jack, is described as “a great writer and universal. But to have any integrity arid singer of comic songs and a consum­ any pretensions towards being a truly mate horseman”.

Australian expression of these themes, Stephenson records the life of John a bit more courage, thought and Riley, the man said to be the direct research is necessary. inspiration of the poem The Man from In his Epilogue to Cattlemen of the S n o w y River.

High Country, Tor Holth, who spent a These accounts also give an insight of number of years talking to the cattle­ the extremely broad range of skills that men, immersing himself in their the cattlemen and bushmen possessed. environment and observing some of Not enough of them is shown in the their skills, reminds one of the rich, film. The visual medium calls for more source that the high plains hold as a scenes where the landscape is revealed repository of legend and mystery: “. . . They have been the liveliest of through action. Rather than having places and seethe with the doings of people gushing out how beautiful or terrifying the landscape is, there could the mountain cattlemen. Old past have been more scenes of the imagining too . . . mighty ghosts ride mustering, and a greater range of situa­ the tops, spurs, valleys and plains which echo still to the events they tions revealing the skills of survival and bushcraft. Kurosawa’s classic Dersu enacted. No one could be indifferent Uzala is an example of how character to them; they are the most wonderful and environment are revealed through a of places and sometimes the most minimum of words and a maximum of awesome. confrontation between a bushman and “The mountain cattlemen’s abiding the mysterious elements. affection for the Bogongs leaves In a sense, the shortcomings of the undimmed the memory of times film reflect a deeper problem. There when they must have assuredly has always been a tendency of the urban detested them. With calm indiffer­ ence the Bogongs have known all Australian to over-romanticize the bush. The early European colonists there is to know of the mountain were essentially afraid of the Aus­ cattlemen’s heart. tralian outback and bush. With the “They are the repository of secrets exceptions of some of the more daring . . . They hold theirs . . .” squatters, explorers, overlanders and bushmen, the early settlers quickly built replicas of the European city and huddled in the urban areas. Very soon, in terms of the percentage of popula­ tion, Australia was the most urbanized country in the world.

The essence of the Australian bush experience is one of remarkable dich­ otomy between city people and the handful of true bushmen that con­ fronted the environment. Unlike the American experience, there was no con­ tinuous frontier and, instead of Indian nations, the Australian pioneer faced a more subtle nomadic people in the Aboriginals — a confrontation that ended in shameful massacre, except for the few bushmen who gained some insights into the enormous skills that these nomads possessed.

The European in the Antipodes was much more drawn towards radically taming the land, towards clearing and burning and fencing off. But in the process a bushlore did emerge.

When the city dweller ventured out into less-tamed areas he came across people with tremendous skills and a love-hate relationship with the land.

The bushman had his peculiar brand of humor — dry, sardonic, detached — and his code of ethics between people based on co-operation in adversity.

This is the essence of the writings of Banjo Paterson and other Australian writers, who at the turn of the century spent so much time trying to capture and portray this.outback tradition for the ears of the city dweller. Paterson wavered between city and bush, trying to comprehend the rugged realities of areas such as the high country.

These are some of the themes that could lie at the heart of an Australian genre of cinema about the bush and outback experience. These are themes that have a continuing relevance in an age when the forces of unchecked development and conservation are facing a confrontation with very high stakes. The resurrection of bush legends, such as the Man from Snowy River, can act as a mirror for self­ understanding and a deeper under­ standing of our contemporary reality. I also suspect that, in the long run, such themes will also find an audience in other countries — for they are

The Man From Snowy River: Directed by: George Miller. Producer: Geoff Burrowes. Executive pro­ ducers: Michael Edgley, Simon Wincer. Screen­ play: John Dixon, Fred Cul Cullen. Director of photography: Keith Wagstaff. Editor: Adrian Carr. Production designer: Les Binns. Music: Bruce Rowland. Sound recordist: Gary Wilkins.

Cast: Kirk Douglas (Harrison, Spur), Jack Thompson (Clancy), Tom Burlinson (Jim), Sigrid Thornton (Jessica), Lorraine Bayly (Rosemary), Chris Haywood (Curly), Tony Bonner (Kane), David Bradshaw (Paterson), Gus Mercurio (Frew), Terry Donovan (Henry). Production companies: Michael Edgley International, Cambridge Films.

Distributor: Hoyts. 35mm. 100 mins. Australia.

1982.

Mephisto Brian McFarlane It may suit one’s purposes to believe that any right-thinking — that is to say, left-thinking — artist must have wanted desperately to leave Nazi Germany.

Istvan Szabo, working from Klaus Mann’s novel, Mephisto, suggests a more complex reading of the situation than that in this brilliant HungarianWest German co-production.

The film’s protagonist is Hendrik Hofgen (Klaus Maria Brandauer), an actor loosely based on Gustav Grund­ gens with whom Klaus Mann was closely associated. Hofgen is an ambitious actor in Hamburg in the 1920s and, along with left-wing col­ leagues, he visualizes a “theatre that will involve everyone” . “ We must prove,” he urges, “that theatre has a political function.” Following his marriage to Barbara (Krystyna Janda), the daughter of a liberal Jewish pro­ fessor, he joins the State Theatre Company in Berlin, and when Nazi influence begins to be felt he is whole­ hearted, it seems, in his denunciation of “these murderous thugs”.

Having left the comparative security of Hamburg behind, Hofgen is seen signing contracts in Berlin, edging his way around a theatrical party until the London Times' critic (played by the Times' critic, David Robinson) notices him and warns him to “beware of Bol­ shevism”, singing an anti-bourgeois song in cabaret, and signing his alleg­ iance, as Comrade Hendrik Hofgen,

Mephisto

with the proletariat. The film builds up his leftist sentiments very skilfully, shows how he wins the Berlin workers’ hearts, and disturbs all this careful preparation by a marvellous montage o f self-preening performances in all of which he looks identically pleased with himself.

Hofgen’s egoism and egotism have, of course, been adumbrated from the start: he is forever considering himself in mirrors; his black dancing teacher girlfriend Juliette (Karin Boyd) tells him he can’t even order a beer without being actorish about it and taunts him during love-making by saying he only loves himself; in an ovation after a performance, the camera insists on a contrast between the faces o f the dour director and of Hofgen glowing with pleasure; and Hofgen sums up these touches by saying, “ The future of the Hamburg Art Theatre is m e."

Hofgen declares his love for Barbara in a tranquil forest, but by now the film has suggested his capacity to love is dubious. He wants “ an end to passive watching” in the theatre because the workers should see “ total theatre” , not just a peepshow; but, nevertheless, he wants to be observed all the time. He rages against the Nazis (though his chief rage is for an actress who forgets her lines because, he claims, the Nazis have “ put her up to it” ); but his obses­ sion with him self as an actor is so great that we wonder whether he is capable of political commitment.

It is, therefore, not an unprepared shock, not just a crude plot device that his playing o f Mephistopheles in Berlin should mark the turning point in his career and his life. The staging of the scenes from Faust is superb: Szabo films the actors from behind so as to keep the audience in sight, so as to make clear that their approval (in a standing ovation) works hand in glove with the actor’s egoistic need for it to reduce everything else in his life to a secondary place. An actress who tells him “ You were born to play Mephisto” is leaving Germany and urges him to do so. “ Why?” he asks, “ There’ll always be th e a t r e w h a tev er h a p p en s in Germany.”

Hofgen’s performance of Mephisto is greatly admired by a leading Nazi General (R o lf Hoppe) and now, on the verge o f major success, he must try to persuade himself that the opposition parties will keep Hitler in order. His wife, anxious that people will say he does not “ care about life beyond the footlights” , urges “ a definite stand” , but the definite stand he arrives at — and it is wholly convincing and at the heart o f the film’s meaning — is “ I am an actor in Germany always.” When we imagine that any real artist, anyone of integrity, m u st have left Germany at the rise o f Nazism, we perhaps haven’t adequately considered the force o f a remark like that. When the political crunch comes, Hofgen is an actor first, a political activist second.

In Budapest, making a frivolous film when the N azis actually take over in 1933, he is persuaded to return to Berlin (rather than join his wife in Paris) on the understanding that the Nazis will tolerate a famous actor. With his return in grey morning light and his dealings with authorities over, he has thrown in his lot with the new regime, and with the intercession o f the G en era l’s mistress, Lotte (Christine Harbort), he plays Mephisto again.

The symbolism o f the choice o f play is obvious, but in no jejune way: it w o rk s, its resonances are powerful and this is partly due to its placement at this

is to be forgotten — and that his wife is “ working against the fatherland” . In Mephisto. professional and personal matters he has passed the point of compromise and given himself over to the one enduring stage o f Hofgen’s compromise with his role o f his life. erstwhile political principles and o f his “ H ow can you live in Berlin?” estrangement from his wife.

Barbara asks him, and his answer, “ I The whole sequence is superbly d o n e ,' live in the theatre” , carries its own with its opening shot o f the theatre’s weight. It may not do for most o f us, interior wjth the lights going down; the but Szabo and his great star actor, top Nazis arriving and receiving defer­ Klaus Maria Brandauer, force us to ence from others; the General inviting consider it for Hofgen. It is their Hofgen to his box in a scene which, by achievement never to let Hofgen totally its adroit use of alternate close-ups, lose audience sympathy. His quarrel in creates the sense o f confrontation and Les Deux Magots with Barbara, who incipient complicity. The General talks has lost her country but kept her prin­ of “ foreign elements poisoning German ciples, is, like the film as a whole, culture” and asks, “ Isn’t there a bit of toughly and intelligently written. She Mephisto in every German?” can’t see what he is achieving by staying As Hofgen stands beside him, his red in Berlin and his reply — that he must Mephisto cloak outspread and seeming interpret his country — detains us to embrace the General, the irony is because we can’t be sure whether this is that the roles are really reversing them­ sincerity or just self-delusion. selves. There is certainly more than a The Tim es' critic turns up again and “ bit” of Mephisto in the General. The slaps his face, but when Hofgen asks, film suggests that, if this is so, there is “ What could I do in Paris?” — that is, more than a bit o f Faust in every actor, as actor — there can be no easy answer, that the need to act (in his own lang­ if his commitment to his profession is uage, in his own culture?) may well be allowable. his most irrepressible impulse — his This commitment is not, the film price, in fact. The need to act and the makes clear, a matter of high-minded need for approval, even against a back­ dedication. Hofgen is as he is because it ground o f N azi flags prominently is all he can be: that is, it is a matter of displayed, is stronger than any attach­ impulses that go beyond political ment to political views. loyalties that have been arrived at When his old colleagu e Miklas either cerebrally or emotionally. When (Gyorgy Cserhalmi) tells him to go to he makes his vain attempt to save Otto the Devil, he has of course already done by going on his behalf to the General, so. He now talks of having “ flirted with the latter tells him to “ stop meddling” , the left” and he is powerless to save and screams at him “ Get out actor.” As a n o th e r old friend, O tto (P eter an actor he may have some political Andorai), from the Nazis. He allows importance in interpreting the classics the General to tell him that his back­ so as to suit the prevailing climate ground with the Revolutionary Theatre (.H am let as “ a populist work” ), but Klaus Maria Brandauer as the ambitious actor, Hendrik Hofgen. Istvan Szabo’s

direct political intervention is another matter.

In other words, having put his career as an actor before his integrity as a human being he has become a puppet for the N a zis and the film ’s last episodes pull all this together with effortless power. The opening night of H am let is followed by wild applause and then a party in the theatre’s foyer, where the architectural grandeurs are dwarfed by huge red Nazi flags. Lajos Koltai’s camera pans and tracks, zooms in and out, as it fastens on close-ups of the gossiping crowd or pulls back in stunning overhead shots that reveal the dominating swastikas. Hofgen makes a speech of thanks to the General as his patron and master, who removes him from the crowd to the top o f the Berlin Olympic Stadium. Here Hofgen is caught in the dazzling crossplay of powerful lights while the General cruelly taunts him with, “ How do you like this limelight?” Hofgen’s reply is plaintive but consistent: “ What do they want of me? After all, I am only an actor.” .

It is difficult in reviewing a film which is so densely textured in its writing, direction and playing to give a satisfactorily full sense of its richness.

One wants to detail scene after scene, whereas all I have been able to do is to give (I hope) an account of its irres­ istibly-involving narrative, and its use of its central symbol — the stage and the Mephisto role — to illuminate a life and a response to life.

The film is perhaps still too long (its 160 minutes have been reduced to 142), but it is hard to single out specific scenes for pruning. The camera is sometimes carried away by the bravura possibilities of the scene, and. just as one is admiring some marvellous effect, one occasionally wonders what its point is. These are, however, captious nigglings in the light of what Szabo has achieved.

Mephisto is simply the most intel­ ligent film in a long time. Szabo has the advantage o f a superb screenplay by Peter Dobai and treats it with the respect it deserves. That is not to say that Mephisto becomes a matter of talking heads, but that Szabo trusts his cast to deal with the sustained argu­ ment the screenplay offers. In Klaus Maria Brandauer, he has found an actor equal to the complexities of the role of Hofgen, a man in whom moral choice is increasingly threatened and ultimately supplanted by ambition and by his actor’s needs. It is a great film perform ance in which Brandauer’s physical presence works with his em o­ tional and intellectual control of the role to create a sense of a whole life.

The rest o f an internationally chosen cast supports him admirably: Rolf Hoppe, as the Goering-like general, is almost as remarkable as Brandauer, exact in suggesting the man’s tastes and pleasures and the brutal power held in reserve. The three main women in Hofgen’s life — Barbara. Juliette and Nicoletta (Ildiko Bansagi), Hofgen’s second wife, an actress who shares his life’s priorities — are sharply and subtly defined by their attitudes to poli­ tical matters and their relationship with Hofgen.

In the end, Mephisto is less a political drama than a drama of conscience (and its defeat). Part of its fascination is in the way it raises the question of whether an artist, perhaps especially an actor — given the nature of his vocation — is capable of political involvement on any but a superficial level.

Perhaps the film’s chief image is its

CINEMA PAPERS June - 263

A M ost Attractive Man

first one. It begins with a musical comedy singer (Nicoletta) singing of “love’s sweet song”, and an adoring audience responding to the star who bathes in their approval. The camera pulls back to suggest the enclosed-ness of the theatre world: it is a darkened box, lit at one end with characters moved around, in stylized patterns, to provoke applause. Nothing could look more insulated from the real world and Szabo contrives to make the audience appear as accomplices in creating this insulation. In doing so, he reduces our capacity for complacency in consider­ ing Hofgen.

Absence o f Malice

Dorian, who calls himself a “presenta­ tion stylist”. Some of them even make a good living. Dorian, however, scrapes along somewhat poorly on the dole and on his good looks. Reminders that even this meagre capital is starting to fade provoke him to catty, and even violent, protest.

Hartman illustrates this nicely in the opening sequence, when Dorian tussles playfully, but petulantly, with Frances (Carole Skinner), the homely un­ married mother upon whom he battens.

(One presumes that they had been lovers, but the relationship is now merely one of bludging convenience on

of her thwarted needs is the remark, during a bout of playful teasing by Dorian: “It’s just like the good old days.” Dorian may be the more pitiable character, but Frances is to be pitied, too.

The extent of Dorian’s insecurity is plumbed tellingly when he confronts Frances’ supportive male friend Mick (Dennis Miller) in the latter’s musicstore. His bluff called when he claims to be a pianist, Dorian is reduced to utter puerility. He is a “nothing”, presum­ ably a would-be gigolo with a florid technique but a lean batting average.

Frances probably gets more from life

leave on a wave of indignation so intense that he mistakes Frances’ distress over an accident to one of her children for regret about his departure, there is an apparent last-minute reconciliation. But the final shot is of Dorian walking away from the house.

The implication, however, is that he will be back, and sooner rather than later. For a variety of reasons, most of them outside society’s accepted tenets, the pair needs each other. But there is a further implication — that, though the sexes are more or less equal in emotional needs, one still has the clout to demand more of the other.

Mephisto: Directed by: Istvan Szabo. Supervising producer: Lajos Ovari. Screenplay: Peter Dobai, Istvan Szabo. Based on the novel by Klaus Mann.

Director of photography: Lajos Koltai. Editor: Zsuzsa Csakany. Production designer: Jozsef Romvari. Musical arranger: Zdenko Tamassy.

Sound recordist: Gyorgy Fek. Cast: Klaus Maria Brandauer (Hofgen), Ildiko Bansagi (Nicoletta), Krystyna Janda (Barbara), Rolf Hoppe (General), Gyorgy Cserhalmi (Miklas), Peter Andorai (Otto), Karin Boyd (Juliette), Christine Harbort (Lotte), Tamas Major (Oskar), Ildiko Kishonti (Dora).

Production company: Mafilm (Studio Objektiv), in association with Manfred Durniok Productions.

Distributor: Frank Cox. 35mm. 142 mins.

Hungary. 1981.

A Most Attractive Man Keith Connolly Rivka Hartman’s A Most Attractive Man has an unmistakable feminist theme, be it overt or covert. It is also subtle and moving, a little (471/2minute) gem of which its director may take great pride . . . and others should take even greater notice.

On an obviously tiny budget, Hart­ man makes excellent use of limited means and a capable cast. If, occasion­ ally, cramped settings dictate a certain repetitiousness of movement (an impression heightened by some rather mannered editing), Erika Addis and Paul Tait’s lighting tends to make a virtue of it.

A Most Attractive Man is a shortfeature fiction debut comparable to Gillian Armstrong’s The Singer and the Dancer and Stephen Wallace’s Love Letters from Teralba Road, films with which it shares some common ground.

Similarities with Teralba Road are the more obvious. Both are about estranged couples, even though Wallace’s film deals with a broken marriage and Hartman’s pair is near the end of a very tenuous relationship.

Though more oblique, the affinities with Singer and Dancer (which also features a couple on the verge of break­ up) are, in a broad sense, feminist. In both films, female characters who have been put down by men receive solace and support from other women.

But the main reason I read Attrac­ tive Man as feminist, even though the titular character is a rather pitiable male, is that it points up how their con­ ditioning — social, psychological, emotional, educational — prompts women to evaluate themselves in the eyes of men. The other side of this thematic coin is that the “attractive man” has “value” only to the extent that others, most of all women, accept his ludicrous, false front.

That this front, as conceived by Hartman and conveyed with vulner­ able bravado by Grigor Taylor, is so artificial, in keeping with the film’s jocularly poignant tone, detracts not a jot from its pertinence. We all know real-life parallels to Taylor’s posturing 264 - June CINEMA PAPERS

Dorian (Grigor Taylor), the ‘‘presentation stylist”, and Frances (Carole Skinner), ‘‘upon whom he battens". Rivka Hartman’s A Most

Attractive Man.

his part and resentful resignation on hers.) Dorian injures Frances when she replies to his taunts about her appear­ ance with a jibe about his own. She is less concerned about the injury, which requires hospital treatment, than his in­ ability and unwillingness to contribute to the household expenses (“Gas bill!” she hisses whenever their verbal wrangles deadlock).

They live in a decaying tenement in Sydney’s Ultimo, where Frances battles to bring up three children (“not mine, all different fathers”, claims Dorian) on a single-mother’s pension. Dorian occupies the best room in the house and gives little- in return, other than un­ flattering comments on Frances’ inadequacies. He is truculently defensive, however, in the presence of her friends.

For her part, Frances — while knowing full well how she is being used — needs the vestigial comforts of Dorian’s presence, in spite of his slights and insults. An indication of the extent

through her children, friends and rosecolored ambitions of a legal career.

But, in the odious words of a television commercial of a few years back, she lacks “the thing that matters most” — the attentions of “an attractive man”, even a peanut like Dorian.

When the dogged Mick diffidently suggests that she needs someone like himself, Frances replies with an irony that belies her self-exasperation: “Ah, but I love another!” Yet, earlier, she can’t bring herself to mouth that magic Mills’n’Boon password when Dorian demands it — even though she has just covered up for him over what could be grounds for a criminal action. And when, after an interlude that briefly rekindles their old sexual camaraderie, Frances goes to Dorian’s room only to find his bed already occupied, she is furious with herself.

Finally, as her friends urge, she gives him the boot and, surprisingly, he goes — to shack up with the simpering Sue (Anne Tenney), an even more pitiable example of sex-role conditioning.

The film’s somewhat abrupt end (did Hartman have other ideas that were curtailed by limited means?) is wryly ambivalent. When Dorian begins to

A Most Attractive Man: Directed by: Rivka Hartman. Producer: Gillian Coote. Screenplay: Christine Stanten. Directors of photography: Erika Addis, Paul Tait. Editor: Denise Haslem.

Production designer: Jeff Bruer. Sound recordist: Pat Fiske. Cast: Grigor Taylor (Dorian), Carole Skinner (Frances), Julie McGregor (Judy), Anna Volska (Vija), Dennis Miller (Mick), Cathy Downes (Merryl), Morgan Lew (Billy), Jane Weir (Jane), Bradley Miller (Toby), John Stone (Clerk).

Production company: A Most Attractive Man Prods. Distributor: Sydney Filmmakers Co-op.

16mm. 4714 mins. Australia. 1982.

Absence of Malice Debi Enker The title of Sydney Pollack’s film refers to a legal defence which protects the news gathering media, in this case a newspaper, when a story that they have published is challenged and a law suit is threatened. The defence is based on the time-honored, illusory concept, so effectively employed by the media, to suggest that isolated facts, even those gleaned by the most unorthodox and often dubious methods, can be objec­ tively and dispassionately stated and produce a form of truth. The entire

Absence o f Malice

process of news gathering and publica­ tion, its ambiguous motivations, its unlimited licence to edit information that is deemed superfluous and even the fallacious notion of objectivity become irrelevant if the newspaper can prove that a questionable article was printed without malicious intent.

The title also delineates a number of relationships constructed by the film.

Its examination of professional ethics, private motivations and their poten­ tially destructive consequences under­ lies a narrative where even the most malevolent situations are the product of c o n fu s e d a ll e g ia n c e s rather than malicious resolutions.

Megan Carter (Sally Field), a senior reporter em ployed by The M ia m i S ta n d a rd , believes that she has dis­ covered a leak from an FBI Strike Force team, led by Elliot Rosen (Bob Balaban). W e b ecom e aware that Rosen has actually engineered the leak in order to publicize the investigation and h a r a s s its t a r g e t , M i c h a e l Gallagher (Paul N ew m a n ). Megan knows that for the past six months the Strike Force has been exclusively involved in an investigation of the dis­ appearance o f Joseph Diaz, leader of the Longshoreman’s Union in Miami.

She learns accidentally that they are viewing a surveillance film shot at the funeral o f Diaz’s major rival, “ Big T o m ” Gallagher. When a fruitless interview with Rosen concludes, she notices a file on G allagh er’s son, M ich ae1, on Rosen’s desk and assumes that he is a suspect in the Diaz case.

Her subsequent article on the inves­ tigation of Michael Gallagher and casual dismissal of the possible motiva­ tions behind the leak, with the support of her editor McAdam (Josef Sommer), provide the narrative trigger for a film that examines and questions some of America’s most powerful organiza­ tions: the legal system, the media, the mafia and two of its revered icons, the cowboy and the career woman.

In a style that is characteristic of the director, and his ability to work simul­ taneously within and around tradi­ tional genres, the central narrative deals obliquely with the variety of themes that are evident in his previous films: the role of the past in Bobby Deerfield; the importance of loyalty and trust in Three Days of the Condor; the anachronistic cowboy in Jeremiah Johnson and The Electric Horseman; the dislocated society, dominated by

self-serving political and legal institu­

The cowboy and the journalist: Michael Gallagher (Paul Newman) and Megan Carter (Sally Field). Sydney Pollack’s Absence o f Malice.

The Way We Were and Three Days of the Condor; and the sensitive,

tions in

yet unsentimental love story, occurring in a host of disparate environments, that concludes in separation or with death.

In Pollack’s films, characters not only struggle against powerful, oppres­ sive institutions, including the family in This Property is Condemned, but are simultaneously caught in relationships where one partner possesses a clear perspective on himself and his society, while the other contends with the 'com­ plexity of issues that lead to self-aware­ ness. The skill and subtlety with which Pollack enables his characters to interact within the love story allows these distinctions to establish them­ selves, and then to overlap, resulting in the type of endings that are on one level ambiguous, or fatalistic, yet clearly

defining a resolution of the doubt and

Gallagher and his ‘‘single concession to the p a s t. .. a boat called Rum Runner". Absence o f Malice.

confusion that has plagued one of the central characters throughout the film.

Gallagher is thrown into a situation comparable to his predecessor, Turner (Robert Redford), in Three Days of the Condor, the unsuspecting victim of an action initiated by a seemingly omni­ potent, unknowable organization that purports to perform a positive social function. Yet Absence of Malice begins at the point that Condor concludes, a newspaper office, and Gallagher is not simply reacting against a duplicitous agent of the FBI, but against a situa­ tion in which the law, the media and the mafia become synonymous. They are the powerful, well-organized, essen­ tially self-regulating hierarchies with the resources and lack of scruples to define their own rules.

Ironically, in Absence of Malice, it is the law enforcement agency and the press which become partners in crime, by initiating the spurious campaign against Gallagher, while the mafia, personified by Gallagher’s corpulent uncle, Mald erone (Luther Adler), e m e r g e s as th e o n ly i n f l u e n t i a l character with sufficient knowledge and insight to perceive the situ ation ’s ramifications, and supply his nephew with information necessary for effective retaliatory action. When the film concludes, the law and media are dis­ credited while the mafia sits amiably by, cognizant of the entire situation, yet untarnished by its outcome.

From his first entrance, Gallagher’s retaliation surpasses the blind, reactive pursuit o f revenge that dominates Turner (in Condor) and his contem­ poraries in a series of films examining institutional crime (The Parallax View, Blow Out, Nightmoves). He strides purposefully through The S ta n d a rd 's office, clad in Levi’s and boots, toward his first showdown. His demeanor and his direct, assertive questioning of Megan immediately throw her off­ guard. Our confidence in her capability as a journalist is eroded as she becomes cocky and defensive. Shielded by her status as a reporter and supported by her lawyer and editor, she is never­ theless threatened and disoriented when a confrontation is initiated in circum­

stances beyond her control.

This is a pattern duplicated in scenes throughout the film. Gallagher ceases to be the innocent victim as he system­ atically identifies his well-camouflaged accusers, adopts their tactics and, in the final showdown, triumphs morally and professionally. Virtually singlehanded, he discredits The S ta n d a r d , forces Rosen’s dismissal and the resignation of the District Attorney, Quinn (Don H o o d ) , w h o had g iv e n R o s e n ’s campaign tacit support in the hope that pressure on Gallagher would result in a solution to the Diaz case, and improve his public image. Throughout the film, Gallagher takes people unaware, acting with independent strength and deter­ mination, resourcefully initiating action and forcing reaction on his own terms.

In attitude and appearance, he is the classic cowboy, transported to modern Miami, yet operating according to the values of a Western; challenging corrup­ tion, prematurely terminating the reign of unprincipled officials, and, in the final shot of the film, riding out alone at su n set. He is a man who “ g o e s hunting” for information, who has rejected marriage and family life, yet as a result of his family and its past con­ n ection with the m afia finds it n ecessa ry to r e-estab lish fam ily contacts, in an effort to clear his name.

Gallagher’s single concession to the past is a boat called Rum Runner, owned by his father and previously used to ferry bootleg liquor into Miami.

When he takes Megan to lunch on the boat, we witness a^facet of his character that makes him a truly formidable opponent: skilful control balanced by­ alert awareness of his environment. He knows when his conversations are being slyly recorded, when he is being followed, yet his responses are con­ trolled. The cowboy closely observes his e n v i r o n m e n t and r e s p o n d s w ith econ om ical, effective action when required.

Our glimpses of his personal life complete the image. As his relation­ ship with Megan develops, he admits to being in the “ Stone A ge” on the sexual frontier, feeling comfortable only when he takes the initiative. Her allegation

CINEMA PAPERS June

- 265

FILM FOR SALE

Cine Film Laboratory Pty. Limited

53,000 feet of raw 52 4 7 in 1,000 foot rolls for sale.

P R IC E N E G O T IA B L E

14 WHITING ST., ARTARMON, 2064, TELEPHONE: (02) 439 4122

Phone The Year of Living Dangerously Production Office on (02) 888 3408 or (02) 887 3578

SERVICES PROVIDED NIGHT

FOR SALE_______ 16mm-35mm Animation Stand $42,500.00________________________

Double columns stand with four track tabletop. Panning & double rotation rings — Rotoscope projection.

ENQUIRIES: Animation Stand P.O. Box 49 Brookvale 2100 Or Phone 93 5536

Q hl.M EQUIRMEffl SERMICE R e p a ir s to a ll 16 & 3 5 m m C in e c a m e r a s , P r o je c to r s , E x p o s u r e m e te rs , S p lic e r s , R e w in d e r s , T rip o d s , S y n c h r o n is e r s . R e p a ir s to a ll fix e d & Z o o m le n s e s , C o llim a tio n & T e s tin g , S p e c ia l c u s t o m - b u ilt N I-C A D B a t t e r y p a c k s & C h a r g e r s . M o d e r a te h o u r ly R a te s , w e e k e n d s e r v ic e , m a n y p a r ts s to c k e d .

A

7247/FU JI/AG FA PROCESS & WORK PRINT 7240/50 PROCESS & WORK PRINT

DAY Full 16mm service:7247/FUJI/AGFA PROCESS & WORK PRINT. 7240/50 PROCESS & WORK PRINT. B/W NEG. POS WET GATE (AT NO CHARGE), ANSWER PRINTING ON E/COLOR & EKTACHROME. WET GATE (AT NO CHARGE), CRI, 1/NEG, 1/POS, INTERDUPE. BULK RELEASE PRINTING. SOUND TRANSFERS, MAGNETIC TO OPTICAL. SOUND RUSHES Va in. TO 16/17.5/35 mm.

NEG MATCHING.

G. F. K. L IE D T K E F o r e n q u irie s c o n ta c t o n e o f o u r e x p e rie n c e d d ire c to rs :

1 O ra v e l S tre e t, N o rth B a lw y n , 3 1 0 4 A u s tr a lia .

T e le p h o n e : (0 3 ) 8 5 7 6 5 4 3 A ll h o u r s

, C i ne F ilm L aboratory

Jack Gardiner — Quality Control Cal Gardiner — Production/Customer Liaison.

NIGHT RECEPTION IN

rRECEPTION day > 14 WHITING ^STR EET J Raw son Transport S ervice Supplier o f Period A ircraft and M otor Vehicles to the Television and Movie Industry.

• • • •

Motor Cycles Cars Vans Trucks

1910-1952

THE TRANSPORT SYSTEM WITH A DIFFERENCE THAT WILL GET THE MACHINE TO WHERE THE ACTION IS. BRIAN RAWSON P.O Box 16 Armadale, 3143.

Absence o f Malice

that he prefers his women nice and quiet seems accurate and perceptive. In the scenes between Gallagher and his childhood friend, Teresa (Melinda Dillon), he is at ease with a woman.

Paternal and protective, he stubs her cigarettes with distaste, cooks her spaghetti with gusto and clearly adopts the role of guardian in a relationship based on mutual loyalty and respect.

Teresa is the epitome of the vulnerable, passive woman; repressed by religion and family obligations, she is a vivid contrast to Megan’s assertive career woman image. Her unquestion­ ing loyalty to Gallagher and her willingness to trust Megan in an effort to clear Gallagher, by providing a legi­ timate alibi that would end the FBI investigation and media speculation, make her the Film’s true victim. Her suicide as a result of an article Megan publishes, announcing her abortion in Atlanta and Gallagher’s presence there, supporting his childhood friend through a crisis on the day Diaz vanished, are occurrences that spur Gallagher’s subsequent revenge. He seeks not simply to clear his name, but to force an admission of responsibility for her death.

His relationship with Megan, while more emotionally complex, begins with the precept of career woman encoun­ tering cowboy, and it is clearly the cowboy who defines the moral core of Absence of Malice.

Sally Field’s performance as Megan recreates the archetypal portrait of an am bitious career woman. Her passionate dedication to her work masks a series of naive, simplistic values that Gallagher identifies and exposes. She sincerely believes that accurate facts provide the public with the impartial truth of a situation, that news serves an indispensable social function. Her instinct for newsworthy occurrences, her energy in the pursuit of a story and her ability to manipulate contacts are balanced by the alert, attractive, jaunty aggression that has typified newspaperwomen since Rosa­ lind Russell’s depiction of Hildy in His Girl Friday.

Unfortunately, the contemporary career woman cannot exist without the mandatory implication that her ambition and determination have taken their toll on her private life. For most of the film Megan appears to live exclusively in The Standard's office, or in bars frequented by her colleagues.

When finally shown in her apartment, she has surrendered her suits and high heels for jeans, but is hunched over a typewriter in a neat, modern flat that suggests a hollow existence with its clinical decor.

In many films (e.g., Woman of the Year, June Bride, My Brilliant Career, Private Benjamin), the career woman is forced to examine her professional commitments and forfeit either her private life or her ambitions after a process of evaluation involving the man she loves. In Absence of Malice the process is internalized, as Megan’s most serious confrontations arise from her inability to divorce professional ethics from private values and desires.

Her relationship with Gallagher provides the catalyst, but the cause is not simply her involvement with him.

He represents a more substantial perspective on society; a type of morality involving loyalty and trust and a definition of truth that shows her to be fatuous. It is his attitude to the law, his cynicism about the media and his concept of truth, involving subjectivity

Angels o f War

and emotion, that we recognize as valid.

When his retaliation necessitates an adoption of nefarious tactics and he resorts to illicitly taping telephone conversations, implicating District Attorney Quinn, whose only mis­ calculation has been to trust Rosen’s discretion, he is vindicated by the values that he represents. The film makes it acceptable, even laudable, for Gallagher to select a weak link in the Justice Department, as he had been selected as target in the Diaz investiga­ tion, and manipulate it to his advan­ tage. His duplication of Rosen’s tech­ niques is viewed as commendable from the single righteous character in the film.

In the climactic scene, where Teresa meets Megan in an effort to clear Gallagher, Megan is faintly contemp­ tuous of Teresa, ignoring her obvious distress, misinterpreting her vulner­ ability and even resorting to the type of bullying for information that experience has obviously proved effective. In her zealous quest for the exclusive scoop, she callously negates any personal responsibility for pub­ lication of the story, flatly informing Teresa that she is not confiding in another woman, or even talking to an individual with a personal sense of evaluation. By stating, “I’m a reporter.

You’re talking to a newspaper right now. Do you understand?”, she con­ veniently renounces any personal obligation for her actions, and defines a conception of herself, as individual and journalist.

Megan is not simply willing to repress personal convictions when professional gain is at stake, but finds her role synonymous with the ability to seek out and process details in a moral vacuum. Her priorities and attitude to herself are contrasted to the sensitive, vulnerable Teresa, a woman motivated by loyalty and love, baring her most acute, private fears to another woman so busy scribbling notes that she fails to see what we recognize as a character disintegrating before our eyes.

The scene forces a perspective of Megan as remorseless and insensitive, using her position as a shield from the most basic, humane considerations, diminishing any sense of personal responsibility with the rationale that publication of the story will clear Gallagher of suspicion. Even in this extreme case, she believes a revelation of Teresa’s abortion is performing a useful social function.

In this confrontation of polarities, Megan’s attitude refers to the film’s title. Her reprehensible actions are more the product of confused alleg­ iances to Gallagher, and to her function as a reporter, than to any malicious intention toward Teresa. By reducing Teresa to the category of reliable source, she simply ignores the implica­ tions of her actions in the pursuit of a story.

While the opening titles usher us through the mechanical production of a newspaper, and Megan supplies this distasteful depiction of the press in action, the film provides two additional characters to represent the mental processes that lead to news publica­ tion. The least sympathetic is The Standard's lawyer, Davidek (John Harkins), an imposing, unemotional figure, to whom questions of truth are irrelevant. A veneer of fairness can sub­ stitute for impartiality, and his sole concern is that facts are defensibly accurate, or that legal recourse is

possible when they are not.

The editor, McAdam, is more genial, but ultimately more insidious. He personifies the rational, dispassionate ethics of news. Unlike Ben Bradlee (Jason Robards) in All the President’s Men, his concern with factual accuracy is superficial. He is prepared to casually dismiss the motivations of his sources, and the political and social ramifica­ tions of the articles that he publishes.

While Bradlee relentlessly pressures his reporters to examine and question their sources, and the implications of their work, McAdam carelessly encourages Megan to submit stories that he recog­ nizes may destroy innocent people, without the preliminary research and analysis for which he is responsible. His approach to his work, and his implicit faith in its value, are comparable to Rosen’s.

Both editors belong to organizations that purport to exist as guardians of the democratic system, yet their improper decisions affect individuals who are blameless. Hiding behind the rationale of merely doing a job, protected by their status in enormously powerful institutions, both are able to diminish responsibility for and accountability to their victims. Both demonstrate a willingness to ignore ethics and correct procedure when deemed necessary and compound such dangerous action with the belief that it is somehow inherent in the nature of their work. McAdam’s pleasant disposition and apparent worldliness conceal a series of erroneous assumptions: that isolated facts can be strung together and create a form of truth, and that a blatant disregard of motivation and social consequence is necessary in news com­ pilation. When challenged, McAdam’s feeble defence is that transgressions are an inextricable hazard of the news process.

The chain of events commencing with Rosen’s unfounded suspicion of Gallagher, his manipulation of Megan, and her publication of stories that cast doubt on Gallagher, provoke Teresa’s suicide, and finally associate him with the District Attorney, weaves a web of ambiguous information, misguided loyalties and deception. American society is reduced to a number of institutions, dominated by objection­ able individuals with dubious inten­ tions, who are eventually exposed by the actions of a single man.

Towards the conclusion of the narra­ tive, James J. Wells (Wilford Brimley), senior Justice Department Attorney, an avuncular, tobacco-chewing figure, reminiscent of the Western’s wise old judge, arrives in town. With grudging respect for the cowboy who has diverted the law into his own capable hands, he efficiently censures his wayward officials and reprimands the media. It is a traditional, yet simplistic solution to a film that has depicted a decaying society, populated by misguided pro­ fessionals, whose decisions dominate the destinies of the public under the guise of performing essential social functions.

Even the reference to legal action suggested by the title is left redundant.

Despite the media’s irresponsible decisions, none of its victims has ammunition for legal recourse within the system. Only Gallagher triumphs, as a result of his ability to adopt the tactics of his accusers. He rides out of the film, and his relationship with Megan, alone and untarnished, carrying with him most of our sympathies, and deflecting our hostility

towards Megan and the organization that she has naively discredited. Her belated humility and awareness cannot indemnify the rash, reckless actions that have blemished a presumably intel­ ligent, capable woman. Finally, Wells’ ability to admonish the press and censure the negligent, manipulative members of the Justice Department provide an orthodox, yet inadequate, solution. We are encouraged to believe that a deadlocked society, victim of its own institutions, devoid of effective legal and moral guidance, finds its savior in the anachronistic, retributive symbol of past glories.

Absence of Malice: Directed by: Sydney Pollack.

Producer: Sydney Pollack. Executive producer: Ronald L. Schwary. Screenplay: Kurt Luedtke.

Director of photography: Owen Roizman. Editor: Sheldon Kahn. Production designer: Terence Marsh. Music: Dave Grusin. Sound: Bert Hall­ berg. Cast: Paul Newman (Gallagher), Sally Field (Megan), Bob Balaban (Rosen), Melinda Dillon (Teresa), Luther Adler (Malderone), Barry Primus (Waddell), Josef Sommer (McAdam), John Harkins (Davidek), Don Hood (Quinn), Wilford Brimley (Wells). Production company: Columbia. Distributor: Fox-Columbia. 35mm. 116 mins. U.S. 1981.

Angels of War Curtis Levy “The people of Papua New Guinea don’t make things for fighting war with other countries. We just grow our own food and have sing-sings and beat our drums, that’s all. We don’t know how to make warships or sub­ marines, bombs or bullets. We just live our own lives, that’s all.”

These words are spoken by Sergeant­ Major Yauwiga in Angels of War, a documentary film about the people of Papua New Guinea in World War 2.

Yauwiga’s life was tragically changed by his participation in the war, when, like many young warriors, he joined up with the Aussie diggers. After many heroic actions in which he killed several Japanese soldiers, he ended the war with one arm blown away and blinded in both eyes. The doctors who cared for him in a Brisbane hospital replaced one of his eyes with the eye of a young man who had just died in a motor-bike accident, but the European eye failed him. The doctors made a hand for him, a hook, and when he went to meet the Queen they gave him a new hand, one with two hooks. Now he tells us, “I’ve lost the key and the hooks don’t work properly.”

Young Papua New Guinea men from the age of 14 or 15 were forced into the war effort by one side or the other.

They had no choice but to obey who­ ever held the gun. Angels of War is a film which documents the contribution made by these men as soldiers and carriers.

The sacrifice of A ustralian, American and Japanese soldiers in Papua New Guinea is recorded in our history, but little recognition has ever been given to the enormous sacrifices made by local people. To this day, the Australian government refuses to give just compensation to the men who carried ammunition to the front lines and wounded diggers back along the jungle trails to safety. These “angels of war” were paid a princely 10 shillings a month during the war, and since then some small token payments have been made. For the men who joined in the field without formally signing up, there is no bureaucratic means of compensaCINEMA PAPERS June - 267

Angels o f War

Union City

New Guinea “angels of war” and pay those men who are still alive a proper form of compensation.

Angels of War: Directed by: Andrew Pike, Hank Nelson. Gavan Daws. Producers: Andrew Pike, Hank Nelson. Gavan Daws. Screenplay: Andrew Pike. Hank Nelson, Gavan Daws. Director of photography: Dennis O'Rourke. Editor: Stewart Young. Sound recordist: Gary Kildea. Narrator: John Waiko. Produc tion company: Robin Films. Distributor: Ronin Films. 16mm. 54 mins.

Australia. 1982.

Union City Susan Tate

A Papua New Guinea “angel” escorts a wounded Australian soldier during World War 2.

Andrew Pike, H ank Nelson and Gavan Daws’Angels o f War.

tion. As one old Sepik man, Wamanari, told the filmmakers: “The Australian government said, you work and later you’ll be like us.

But it hasn’t happened. They said, you work for us and then we’ll sit down at the same table and eat the same food with the same spoon. But it hasn’t happened . . . Old men like me are dying without getting any­ thing.”

Although Angels of War documents the exploitation of innocent people who happened to be in the wrong place when war broke out, the story is not without its humorous side. Somehow in telling their stories, these “angels” are able to entertain the audience with real theatre.

As storytellers they have an incredible ability to act out in a humorous way the most tragic events. So, although the film adds up to a strong indictment of the abuse of the local people by the Australian and Japanese forces, one cannot fail to be impressed by the vitality and spirit of the people. Poss­ ibly the filmmakers, Andrew Pike, Hank Nelson and Gavan Daws, have encouraged this vitality to come through in the film by deliberately using a relaxed and informal interview­ ing technique. Instead of the usual straight current-affairs approach, they have enlisted the services of a Papua New Guinea historian, John Waiko, who chats with the interviewees in their language. As a result, one feels one is sitting in on personal conversations.

268 - June CINEMA PAPERS

Waiko is able to dissipate all aware­ ness of the camera, and the casual out­ bursts of laughter and the often poignant personal stories are a testi­ mony to this technique.

The filmmakers sifted through thou­ sands of feet of film stored in the archives of the Australian War Memorial in Canberra and came across some unique and sometimes bizarre sequences. There is propaganda footage made by the Japanese to justify their attempt to widen their “sphere of co­ prosperity”, and a bizarre American offering to the war effort, in which Gary Cooper and two swim-suited starlets are seen entertaining the troops in the steamy jungles. The archival sequences are skilfully entwined with the contemporary footage to create an effect of immediacy, and an involve­ ment in events long past. The editor, Stewart Young, has created a strong unity of old and new footage, juxta­ posing the material in such a way that the film never bogs down in over­ indulgent reminiscences.

Perhaps the reason why Angels of War is such an effective film is that it is not just a story of war experiences; Angels makes a strong statement about the phenomenon of colonialism and, in particular, provides a telling portrayal of Australia’s relationship with Papua New Guinea. Obviously this relation­ ship will be far more healthy in the future, if Australia is to recognize the contribution made by the Papua

After an earnest introduction that places the film firmly in the 1950s, by the use of shots that act as cultural references of ladies’ beauty products and period furniture, and sets the film noir-\s,Y\ tone with its cloying low-key interior and subjective photography, worked in the crimsons and purples of passion, the action crawls to a start.

Like the overworked indicators of period and tone in the introductory shots, the opening action makes all-tooblatant attempts to create notes of suspense. The paper-boy stops Harlan (Dennis Liscomb) on his world-weary way home; he has forgotten to deliver his paper. He suggests it must be inter­ esting for Harlan “working with blades”. It is a solitary reference, not part of a body of imagery as such a device should be.

The boy also remarks to Harlan, “Say hello to your wife”. Other refer­ ences to Harlan’s wife Lillian (Deborah Harry) are built up throughout the film.

All the main male characters ask after or make reference to her: the bartender at Taty’s reminds Harlan, “You should be nice to her (a comment which is later reflected in Lillian’s own expression of wishes for herself: “I want a man who will be nice to me”).

Their references create an under­ current of the potential for Lillian’s imminent affaire by building up a profile of her desirability and an index of male recognition, which is matched throughout the'flm by her own direct and indirect expressions of need for sexual recognition and attention.

More successful than the attempts to create a dramatic tone for the film, the opening scene also introduces the motif of Union City. A hobo slouches on a street corner. He sees one of the tenants from Lillian and Harlan’s apartment block coming home drunk. The drunk gives his cab driver a $25 tip. The hobo approaches the driver for a share in the tip, but is given the drunk’s hat instead.

He tries it on with a grand gesture, paralleling the action of the character portrayed on the billboard above him advertising the development site of Union City — Mr Middle America stretches his arms wide suggesting the prospects of such a site. He sports a hat similar to the one the hobo tries on, the symbolic dress of respectability and linked with the values of Middle America — the aspiration to and respect of private property and privacy that the advertisement suggests and which will eventually bring about Harlan’s downfall through his indigna­ tion at the violation of these ideals he feels he has suffered.

The combined shot of the hobo and the billboard suggests the disparity which exists between the American dream and the American reality. In reality the hobo can never aspire to be a property owner like the Union City advertisement suggests.

The billboard also functions in the final scene after Harlan jumps to his death, believing his ‘secret’ to have been found out. He falls to his death under the sign. An objective long-shot of the crowd which gathers around the corpse suggests the irony of the fate of one who has made inroads into achievement of property ownership and surface res­ pectability being driven to suicide in his paranoic attempts to preserve both.

The entrance of the hobo onto the scene, t-he man Harlan believed himself to have killed in defending his milk supply, happily free of property and position, compounds the irony.

The elements of private property and respectability suggested by the Union City development site billboards are developed through the film in the nature of Lillian and Harlan’s sterile marriage and in Lillian’s boredom, with its at-once attendant and causative sexual and emotional frustration. But most important, it is crucial to the central drama of the film, in Harlan’s hysteria at the invasion of privacy and violation of personal sanctity that the stealing of his milk each morning rep­ resents, leading to his determination to catch the thief and his belief that he has killed him in the accident that follows.

The sociological interest of the themes represented by the Union City billboard and developed via the plot add a substance to the film which it fails to achieve in its dramatic elements. The film fails to live up to the film noir pre­ tensions suggested in the introduction, leaning more towards the American television sitcom style of drama, with its slapstick circumstances and the domestic trappings of married life which surround the “murder”.

Despite attempts to add suspense and build tension before the murder, through such devices as the blade reference and the introduction of several suspects for the milk theft and potential lovers for Lillian’s inevitable affaire (a further violation of Harlan’s property), the action is flat and lack­ lustre. More suspense is created after the murder in the psychological sense through the anxiety that besets Harlan in his fear of being found out and which manifests itself in his nervous behaviour at work, particularly when his secretary spills some milk, and his insistence that he and Lillian move house.

Further tension lies in the more existential anxiety Harlan suffers as a result of having committed a thoroughly anti-social act that will alienate him from his known world. To assuage this fear he begs for expres­ sions of love from Lillian and con­ siders her with a tenderness that springs from the divorce from her his crime will bring about. He watches enviously and longs to join her in her nightmare-free sleep.

While Harlan anguishes at his attempts to step back into the safe con­ fines of the world from which he has alienated himself by his act, Lillian sets out on a path of fantasy to escape from the reality of the same world. It is ironic that the role of Lillian is played

by Deborah Harry, lead singer of the rock group Blondie, herself a symbol of sexual and glamor fantasy.

The possibility for a subtle dialectic between the Harry/Lillian character is set up by the audience’s and director’s awareness of the fact that the famous rock star is being used in the leading female role. In the film, Lillian bleaches her hair platinum “to look like Marilyn”. She also transforms herself into her own familiar image as Debbie Harry by ttfe color change. Larry asks

Union City

Lillian to sing a popular tune about young American couple of the 1950s coffee but she begs incapable, another with their shy-cute sexuality. amused nod at the dual role of the Dennis Liscomb’s excellent por­ performer as star playing ordinary trayal of the twitchy neurotic Harlan housewife. highlights Deborah Harry’s acting For Lillian, at the beginning of the inability and it would seem the two film, her fantasy world extends to have wandered in from entirely buying exotic shoes and going to the different films to come together in an Friday matinee with Larry, with whom uneasy duo. The disparity in acting she will eventually have an affaire and talent is not helped by an inadequate plan a movie-style life. Her fantasy life script with too many empty moments develops into the donning of the trap­ which result in Harry appearing to have pings of sexual and glamor fantasies forgotten her lines at times. The music which remain of an indeterminate by Chris Stein is undistinguished. nature, and which are partially and Despite these shortcomings, it is an tentatively directed towards Harlan and interesting film for its sociological specifically and directly towards Larry. content and some of the cinematic While Lillian develops a workable devices it uses, such as the billboard and eventually realistic outlet for her (similar to a device used in Badlands) fantasy world outside Union City, and the star/housewife dialectic which characters like the Contessa have gone adds an interesting twist to the fantasy quietly crazy, with her spouting elements. theories of reincarnation and draping herself in oriental silks. Harlan’s escape from his pre-crime frustrations and Union City: Directed by: Mark Reichert. post-crime anxieties is found at the Producer: Graham Belin. Executive producer: Monty Montgomery. Screenplay: Mark Reichert. bottom of a bottle.

Based on the story “The Corpse Next Door” by While the theme of Middle American Cornell Woolrich. Director of photography: respectability and the role of fantasy in Edward Lachman. Editor: LanaTokel. Production it is an interesting one, it is not fully designer: George Stavrinos. Music: Chris Stein. recordists: Jack Cooley, Bob Prewitt. Cast: developed in the film or very complex. Sound Dennis Liscomb (H arlan), Deborah Harry The drama which surrounds it lacks (Lillian), Irina Maleeva (Contessa), Everett suspense. Characters like the Contessa McGill (Larry), Sam McMurray (Hobo), Terina Lewis (Evelyn), Paul Andor (Ludendorff), Taylor (Irina Maleeva) don’t work well in their Mead Cynthia Crisp (Wanda), Pat dramatic function (it is the Contessa Benatar(Waiter), (Jeann ette). Production company: who first makes Harlan believe his Kinesis. Distributor: Frank Cox. 35mm. 87 mins secret has been discovered through her U.S. 1979. garbled messages of understanding his suffering), although they are quite effective in providing a glimpse of the Freedom other side of the American dream and the underbelly of Union City. The large Jim Schembri Negro family who come to look at the spare room in the apartment block parody the American ideal of one room It is perhaps thankful that, in spite of per person as Harlan tries to point out its symptomatic fast vehicles, high­ the apartment would be far too small speed chases, beautiful women and for them. On the other hand, the couple excellent stuntwork, S co tt H ic k s’ who eventually do use the room, ironically-titled Freedom does not precipitating Harlan’s leap to his death, subscribe to the car-film syndrome. epitomize in a two-dimensional way the Regrettably, however, the energy,

Harlan (Dennis Liscomb) and wife Lillian (Deborah Harry). Mark Reichert’s Union City.

Freedom

The lovers: Larry (Everett McGill) and Lillian. Union City.

interest and promise initially associated with its central concern are subse­ quently betrayed.

Ron Matheson (Jon Blake) is an unemployed youth w hose dom estic tension and dismal prospects on thejob market nourish an increasingly-bewil­ dering and engrossing fantasy, which he later realizes. The section of the film before this realization is not only a welldrawn, involving (though flawed) character study, but also serves as a commentary on what is probably the s e n t i m e n t o f m a n y o f t o d a y ’s unemployed.

Although occasionally ostentatious, some well-directed scenes in the early part of Freedom align viewer empathy with Ron as they depict the gnawing frustrations, the inability to fulfil modest am bitions and the stunted

opportunities that combine to nurture his corresponding desire to escape these pressures.

The film’s opening credit sequence clearly conveys this juxtaposition of R o n ’s d esire for e sc a p e and his thwarting reality. Throttling through an electronic racetrack in an amuse­ ment parlor, Ron is absorbed at the wheel as he weaves through the field of other cars. A semi-circular shot around the racing booth effectively encloses Ron in his concentration, accentuating close shots of his taut face and eyes as they guide him precariously through the video racecourse. His friend Phil (Chris Haywood), having lost at Space Invaders, throws Ron’s gears, causing him to ‘crash’ and land a narrow second placing on the m a ch in e’s top five scores. Ron looks up at Phil, his face registering anger — and helplessness.

A slow pan across a stretch of working-class suburbia, which stops on Ron’s home, asserts his plight of frus­ trated opportunity as being fairly typical in today’s economic climate. It is in this portrait of his daily ordeals that viewer sympathies and concern for Ron polarize — temporarily.

Ron expounds to his employment officer (John Clayton) that he is a faceless, powerless victim of a ruthless money-saving attitude by employers who see fresh apprentices as mere commodities to be hired, fired and manipulated at their convenience. His recent sacking from the engine plant exem plifies this, and is sharpened further by his employment officer’s subsequent advice that, “ You must tailor your aspirations to job oppor­ tu nities” because “ em ployers can afford to be choosey these days.”

Indeed, the degradation Ron suffers at this is apparent as he first rejects, then reluctantly accepts, a manual labor job at a cement works.

Arriving there early next morning, a brief incident deftly suggests R on’s modest ambitions and his inadequacy to fulfil them as he accidentally bumps into another early arrival. A quick exchange of glances links the tattoo on the man’s arm with a printed facsimile o f a tattoo on the sleeve of R on’s T ­ s h ir t. T h is c o n t r a s t s th e m a n ’s significant level of personal achieve­ ment and R on’s deficiency of any such attainment as he subsequently dwells on the man’s thankful wife and child while closing their car door.

This sensibility is pained with frus­ tration when, due to his act of polite­ ness, Ron is the 21st applicant for the 20-man vacancy. Upon insistence that he is desperate for work, the employer

CINEMA PAPERS June - 269

Freedom

(Max Cullen) cordially takes down Ron’s name in the deceptive air that he will try and help him out, only to inform him never to turn up again, that “We don’t employ your type here.”

Ron’s frustrations and inadequacies are well encapsulated by his disparity with the over-contrived, under­ developed, yet functional character of his friend Phil. Owning a shocking-red panel van (complete with fur-lined interior, Star Warsian mural and “Machismo” proclaimed gaudily on the side) that symbolizes his material wealth through conformity, Phil explains to Ron the virtues of “shit eating” and how “this great country of ours was built on the smiling little shit eaters.”

During this advisory deluge, Ron envisions Phil’s van being progres­ sively crushed into a cube. Despite a surface impression of rejection, these images most probably represent Ron’s inability to succeed, and the according envy he feels toward Phil’s accomplish­ ments in the system.

The anger infused by these relentless batterings of rejection and frustration is highlighted by Ron’s stagey, yet powerful outburst at the CES office, and forces him to erect a metaphorical fortress against these pressures. His softly-lit bedroom, embellished with pop art images and centred on the sentinel of his sound system, provides him with a psychologically plausible niche into which he withdraws from his depressing reality. displaces the ego-crushing frustrations Donning headphones and crouching of his reality with a corresponding egoembryonically against a wall, Ron enforcing fantasy. Dressed in the height

Ron (Jon Blake) “wrenches Sally (Jad Capelja) from her baby to flee the police”. Scott Hicks’ Freedom.

270 - June CINEMA PAPERS

of fashion at the wheel of a Porsche, he glides effortlessly along a country road, Ron and Sally uncover the Porsche hidden in a beautiful woman (Candy Raymond) the hay shed. Freedom. by his side. These symbols of success, companionship, power and control counterpoise the absence of these the slightest tension or concern. elements in his life (though, carelessly, Some obscure, nihilistic statement Ron’s interaction with girls is never relating to how our society alienates the established). inadequate, rendering them powerless, As the fantasy develops, Ron’s grati­ and then hounds after them when they fication is marred by an obtrusive black are compelled to escape their useless vehicle that weaves portentously in existence in the system is vaguely front of him, before careering off the apparent. But viewer interest in Ron is road and down a hill. As he stops to destroyed. He becomes an unthinking, examine the wreckage, his companion aimless fool who, after picking up Sally drives off, leaving him stranded. in a roadhouse cafe, forces a car off the Though the Porsche in Ron’s fantasy road and has the long arm of the law — has its basis in reality (he fixates on it complete with five thumbs — after him. early in the film), the woman presents a Persuading Sally that he is a million­ jarring note. At first she seems to be aire secret agent, Ron’s unconvincing, imaginary, but later she is revealed to uninteresting persona is supplemented be both the owner of the Porsche and by many incidents where he displays a Annie Martin, an old friend of Ron’s. remarkable lack of intention or destina­ This implies that Ron deliberately tion. Indeed, he seems to agree to help placed her in his fantasy, and results in Sally in the search for her baby in want an inexplicable lack of recognition of any other purpose. when he meets her while caressing her Yet even this potentially involving car. concern is stultified by the lack of depth Arriving at Annie’s apartment for a in Sally’s character. Having located her date, Ron overhears her phone baby’s foster home, Sally leaves Ron conversation with her lover, Cassidy (a sleeping to retrieve her child. When minuscule, meaningless role for Bud Ron wakes to see an approaching police Tingwell), and is angered to learn that car, he races down and, in a clumsy she plans to use him to tease her lover. scene of screaming emotion, wrenches In response to yet another scheme to Sally from her baby to flee the police. exploit him, Ron steals her keys and Having just been separated from the speeds off with her car to no place in one meaningful thing in her life, Sally particular. expresses no remorse whatsoever about It is from here that a combination of the incident for the rest of the film. elements effectively inhibits taking the Soon after, in fact, when the pair seek film seriously and, indeed, provides assistance from a helpful, elderly farm some unintentionally laughable couple, Sally is cheerfully critical of moments as Ron hits the round- Ron’s rude manners and positively Australia highway. joyful at the way the farmer’s wife Ron’s unsavory character reversal prepares a thermos of tea and a bag of into his fantasy image, his association sandwiches for them in about ten with Sally, a thinly-drawn, thick-set seconds flat.' runaway mother in search of her child This dismal lack of emotional reflec(played by a promising, better­ deserving Jad Capelja), a squad of incapable, moronic policemen and the 1. This is only one o f the film ’s many lapses in continuity, which include another ultimate pointlessness of Ron’s trek sam ple o f geriatric alacrity — an old lady through the countryside sap the walking a half kilom etre in as little tim e subsequent developments in Freedom of as it takes Ron in the Porsche.

Freedom

tion is promptly displayed again when, having hidden the Porsche in a shed, Sally and Ron embrace for a giggling roll in the hay. ....

Constant reminders of Ron’s aim­ lessness echo his capsized character, from being one of color, substance and purpose to one of vacuous disorienta­ tion, and leads to an astonishingly meaningless anti-climax.

When Ron and Sally go ‘shopping’ after visiting her sister, Ron demands that they “get some things straight”, referring to the threat of her obsession to get her child imposing on what Ron wants. Yet he quickly agrees to ‘steal’ some baby items for Sally, because he clearly doesn’t know what it is he wants to straighten out.

In a well-evoked shot of aimlessness (with the Porsche parked roadside at the bottom of the frame, Sally looking at a map on its hood, while open sky and country fill the rest of the frame), Sally defends, with some fairly abysmal dialogue, the search for her baby. Ron calms her, insisting that he’s on her side and that he’ll help her get the child, but that as soon as that’s done, “It’s my trip” — whatever that is. As they prepare to continue, Sally asks “Do you know of somewhere to go?” to which Ron aptly replies, “We’ll find somewhere . . .”

The futility of Ron’s escapade is painfully stated toward the end of Freedom. Having left Sally sleeping on a hill, Ron tries to outrun the police through countryside which he soon recognizes as the locale of his fantasy.

Predictably, he comes across a snapped railing, stops the Porsche and stares down at the wreckage of the ominous black car. Realizing nothing, he heaves the empty shell of his dream car over the edge and down the crevasse.2 Finally, in an incredibly uncon­ vincing denouement, a little van, proclaiming that “ Jesus Saves” , conveniently chugs up to Ron’s rescue.

“Where are you headed?”-the driver asks. Ron’s reply is a precise: “I don’t know.” Nor does the viewer know — or indeed care.

The film’s insufferable concept of the police as the ‘henchmen’ of society is reflected in many unsubtle representa­ tions, including a lack of common sense and basic driving skills, arguments with sheep and even a symbolic truckload of real pigs. One scene in particular summarizes the police image in Freedom. Waking after a rest in a hay shed, Ron and Sally see a motorcycle patrolman searching the area. They frantically run to the concealed Porsche and drive off. Giving chase, the brave patrolman runs to his bike, deliberates for a moment, then oddly decides to continue on foot. Hoping to cut them off, he pounces off a small rise, lands in front of the speeding Porsche, and winds up on the critical list.

It must be acknowledged that Free­ dom is a technically proficient film, with clear, sharp pictures and exposure, some acute editing, fluent, imaginative cinematography and an atmospheric soundtrack by Don Waiker. Impressive packaging, however, cannot compen­ sate for the manner in which Freedom disregards the promise and interest cul­ tivated in its early developments in the pursuit of ideas that are rendered sterile 2. One knows it is an em pty shell as it rolls down in slow m otion, because the differ­ ential, engine, and petrol have all been removed. This, perhaps, is meant to be sym bolic, but is more indicative o f a salvage operation necessitated by budget restrictions.

Quartet

by a lack of coherence and ultimate Rhys’ own voice. In Quartet one meets, strength lies in this: its deft, if not diffi­ purpose. for the first time, the stunningly dent, handling of the subtle contours of beautiful heroine whose life Rhys was personality and motivation. to follow, under different names, in her Quartet’s most enjoyable virtue is its first four semi-autobiographical novels. marvellous recreation of bohemian Freedom: Directed by: Scott Hicks. Producer: Paris. Ivory, his cinematographer Matt Carroll. Screenplay: John Emery. Director of Though Quartet is written in the third photography: Ron Johanson. Editor: Phillip Reid. person, this works to create a highly- Pierre Lhomme and art director JeanProduction designer: Herbert Pinter. Music: Don subjective drama by focusing largely on Jaques Caziot have evoked this milieu Walker. Sound recordist: Tim Lloyd. Cast: Jon Marya’s responses to Heidler’s with an aesthete’s passion for artefacts Blake (Ron), Candy Raymond (Annie), Jad duplicity — his desire to keep both and decor. At times, their enthusiasm Capelja (Sally), Charles “ Bud” Tingwell (Cassidy), Max Cullen (Factory clerk), Chris Hay­ women, and Lois’ complicity — due not almost crowds what there is of the wood (Phil), Reg Lye (Old farmer), John Claytoi drama. This is the case when three half­ (CES officer). Production companies: South Aus­ to her broadmindedness but to her naked, dance-hall girls, who Lois tralian Film Corporation, Endeavour Com­ shrewdness in identifying a way of munications Corporation. Distributor: Road­ holding on to her husband. mistakenly describes as under­ show. 35mm. 95 mins. Australia. 1982.

The film, however, moves the focus nourished, do their routine, and during away from Marya and follows the a nightclub party, where a jazz singer, a shifting relationship between the large Negress (Armelia McQueen), central quartet, but without involving wades through two scintillating Quartet one in the fate of the characters. Ivory, numbers. possibly out of fear of clouding the The most interesting scene into which Les Rabinowicz intricate machinations at play, has all the film’s carnal intricacies are avoided bringing one closer or adding woven and tragically resolved is a The heroines of Jean Rhys’ novels — to an understanding of them beyond dinner following Stephan’s release, whose first, Quartet, has now been their immediate motivations toward which brings the quartet together for the first time. Heidler attempts to brought to the screen by the accom­ each other.

Adjani’s Marya, who is over­ reclaim Marya, while Lois overplays plished team of James Ivory, Ruth Prawer Jhabvala and Ismail Mer­ whelmed by circumstances with which her hand by telling Stephan what has one bn in his absence, in the hope that chant — are often passive figures, she can’t cope, lacks a presence that e will take Marya away. Marya, inevitably hurt by the men with whom even this petite femme should possess. they are desperately in love. And James And if Ivory was concerned about however, clumsily invites Heidler to Ivory’s fascination with the story of one creating a sympathetic portrait of her, dance, to ask him for money so she can of these, Marya Zelli, whose aimless the opposite holds for Lois whose nasti­ leave Paris with Stephan, unaware that existence is shattered when she is taken ness extends further than using Marya he has misconstrued her leave-taking. up by a middle-aged couple following as a butt for her cruel jibes and taunts. Revulsed by the whole affair, Stephan her husband’s imprisonment, has much It is on reflection, prompted by praise leaves without her.

If Quartet ends ambiguously by to do with the objectivity of Rhys’ from one of Lois’ friends, inserted late in the film, that one is reminded that leaving one to guess about Marya’s prose.

Quartet also reflects another pre­ her hideous behaviour is an index of her future, it closes on a note of sombre occupation. Merchant-Ivory produc­ love of Heidler. It is here that the disquiet, poignantly captured in its last tions, despite their wide range in drama comes unstuck, as the film does lines of dialogue. And if this has been subjects, have often been explorations not intimate anything of this other­ foreshadowed from the start, Ivory and of the.tensions which spring when one wise temperamental and lecherous Jhabvala have also succeeded in culture encroaches on another. They dilettante that would inspire such capturing something of Marya’s (and, are meditations on decay set against a single-minded devotion. What, in the for that matter, Lois’) feverish instinct confrontation between a new, con­ novel, is a source of perplexing incom­ for self-preservation. ★ fident and youthful order and an prehension for Marya, becomes a insidious older one. To be sure, these glaring fault in the film.

Lois and Heidler are bound by their Quartet: Directed by: James Ivory. Producers: themes, prominent in their earlier films, Ismail Merchant, Jean Pierre Mahot de la Queranhave receded in their more recent ones, efforts in “keeping up appearances” in tonnais.

Executive producer: Hubert Niogret. though without diminishing in signifi­ the face of the sordid state of their Associate producers: Humbert Balsan, Connie cance. In Quartet they are echoed in the private lives, which is encapsulated in Kaiserman. Screenplay: Ruth Prawer jhabvala, based on the novel by Jean Rhys. Director of personal differences between Marya Lois’ “You aren’t going to tell anyone photography: Pierre Lhomme. Editor: Humphrey (Isabelle Adjani), a young Creole, her in Paris about this, are you?”, following Dixon. Production designer: Jean-Jacques Caziot.

Polish husband Stephan (Anthony Hig­ a stormy row, and Heidler’s protest Music: Richard Robbins; “Arabesque Valsant” byLuther Levitsky. Sound recordist: Bernard Bats. gins), and the middle-aged British that Marya “isn’t playing the game”. Cast: Isabelle Adjani (Marya). Anthony Higgins couple, H. J. Heidler (Alan Bates), an This is given an unexpected twist. (Stephan), Maggie Smith (Lois), Alan Bates arrogant art dealer of German Rather than dwelling on the hypocrisy (Heidler), Pierre Clementi (Theo), Daniel ancestry, and his artist wife Lois involved, Quartet almost becomes a Mesguich (Pierre), Virginie Thevenet (Chardin), Flon (Mrs Hautchamp), Sebastien Floche study of the Heidlers’ removal from Suzanne (Maggie Smith).

(Hautchamp), Sheila Gish (Anna). Production Set in the famous Montparnasse their own feelings, by juxtaposing their company: Merchant Ivory Productions, Lyric district of Paris in 1927, Quartet charts behaviour with Stephan and Marya’s International. Distributor: Roadshow. 35mm. 101 with uncanny precision the emotion­ more intuitive and emotionally-respon- mins. France. 1981. ally-numbing and bewildering c„Kw- sivc actions. And much of the film’s iences that Marya suffers through becoming involved in a menage a trois with the Heidlers.

At first, Marya finds Heidler repul­ sive but succumbs to his advances in the hope of finding comfort from the excruciating household tensions. Later, realizing the extent of the couple’s connivance, but still financially dependent on Heidler and clinging pre­ cariously to his affections, she allows herself to be kept in a hotel at his expense. Heidler, however, begins to lose interest which is only reawakened

by Stephan’s release from prison.

But in transposing this story to the screen, Ivory and scriptwriter Ruth Prawer Jhabvala have created a film that is lacking in feeling. Its tone is too subdued, its reverberations too muted.

Part of the problem is that they have superimposed their preoccupations on Rhys’ feminist ones, producing a vague admixture of oblique references and suggestions. It is as if their overlycareful balancing of the film’s com­ peting thematic and stylistic intentions Alan Bates as H. J. Heidler, an “arrogant art dealer o f German ancestry’’, and Isabelle Adjani has cancelled out its emotional texture. as Marya Zelli, who shelters with him. James Ivory’s Quartet.

Perhaps what is lacking is Jean CINEMA PAPERS June - 271

SPACEAGECO O K S PTY LTD

CINEMA BOOKS, MAGAZINES, POSTERS & RECORDS THE HISTORY OF MOVIE PHOTOGRAPHY

by Brian Coe $29.95 An Illustrated History of Equipment and Techniques.

Mention this advertisement for a 10% discount.

A FREE MOVIE POSTER WITH EVERY SALE. Write now for a free current list of titles available.

WE ARE OPEN 7 D A Y S A WEEK

305-307 SWANSTON ST, MELBOURNE 3000 Phone: (03) 663 1777; 662 3040

Soundtrack Albums New Sound Tracks and Cast Recordings BRIDESHEAD REVISITED (BURGON) $9.99; RAINTREE COUNTY (GREEN) $16.50; HALLOWEEN II (CARPENTER) $11.99; MAD MAX (MAY) $11.99; MAD MAX II (MAY) $13.99; BOY ON A DOLPHIN (FRIEDHOFER) $11.99; MAN OF A THOUSAND FACES (SKINNER) $11.99; THE DEVIL AT 4 O’CLOCK (DUNING) $11.99; BARABBAS (NASCIMBENE) $11.99; THE WAR OF THE WORLDS — ORIGINAL RADIO BROADCAST WITH ORSON WELLES — 2 DISCS $14.99.

Mail orders welcome; add $1.50 post/packing

--------- R EADING S RECORDS & B O O K S ---------132d Toorak Road, SOUTH YARRA. Telephone (03) 267 1885 We are open 7 days a week

cineaste

His Life and films Barbara Learning A revealing and authoritative biography of the, man behind G uide Sac, Repulsion, Rosemary's Baby, Chinatown, M acbeth and Tess.

No modern film director creates more instant reactions than Roman Polanski.

He attracts controversy and violence as if the events of real life have emerged from his films.

Barbara Learning is a professor in the Departm ent of Theatre and Cinema at Hunter College, N ew York City Paperback, -

-V - . ' -

: . ■•■■

,

■ ,

A Hamish Hamilton book from

NELSON

Here's $7 (S12 foreign) for 4 issues □ Here’s $12 ($20 foreign)for 8 issues □ NAME_________________________________ _ _ _ ADDRESS__________________________ __ CITY_______________ STATE_________ ZIP_________ Cineaste

16 pages of illustrations $15.95*

... - ^recommendedretaifprrce

Published continually since 1967, Cineaste is today in­ ternationally recognized as America’s leading magazine on the art and politics of the cinema. ‘‘A trenchant, eter­ nally zestful magazine,” says the International Film Guide, “ in the forefront of American film periodicals. Cineaste always has something worth reading, and it permits its writers more space to develop ideas than most maga­ zines.”

Published quarterly, Cineaste covers the entire world of cinema — including Hollywood, the independents, Europe, and the Third World— with exclusive interviews, lively articles, and in-depth reviews. Subscribe now, or send $2 for a sample copy, and see what you’ve been missing!

.

419 Park Avenue South New York, NY 10016

Those Fabulous TV Years Brian Davies, Cassell Australia, 1981, $14.95.

Australian TV: The First 25 Years Edited by Peter Beilby, Nelson in association with Cinema Papers, 1981, $14.95.

Turning On Turning Off: Australian Television In The Eighties Sandra Hall, Cassell Australia, 1981, $11.95.

Dave Sargent Last year marked the Silver Anni­ versary o f television in Australia. In many ways the occasion was pro­ moted, as well as constructed, as a major event by stations and other media.

In the area of book publishing, Cassell Australia and Thomas Nelson, in association with Cinema Papers, took the opportunity to produce three “ coffee-table” books of the 1980s — glossy cardboard-covered volumes with inexpensive price tags (in comparison with t o d a y ’s o u tr a g e o u s ly high, sta n d a rd p ap erb a ck rates). Y et, although they have been similarly pack­ aged with a wide range o f consumers in mind — “ eat a book with your daily cuppa” — they do vary in objective, scope and substance.

Those Fabulous T V Years by Brian Davies and A ustralian TV: The First 25 Years edited by Peter Beilby make claims to historiography. In the “ Intro­ duction” to Those Fabulous T V Y ears, Bruce Gyngell sweepingly describes the book as “ the history of an industry” , while Peter Beilby, in the “ Editor’s N o te ” to A ustralian TV, cautiously writes: “ A ustralian T V . . . is not a definitive history; a great deal more research remains to be done before that is a possibility.”

Both books are histories: Those Fabulous T V Years presents a subjec­ tive and descriptive text by someone who has first-hand knowledge from working for the A BC and commercial television, while the Beilby book brings “ together a group o f writers who have made different aspects of television their special interest” , records “ key developments within T V ” and high­ lights “ significant programme types, leading personalities and the most popular programmes of the last 25 years” . Both volumes also supplement their written history with pictorial representation.

However, there is little effort to make sense of these descriptive his­ tories in complex social and political contexts (although Beilby does acknow­ ledge that, “ N o understanding of the nature and effect o f TV is possible in the absence o f an adequate historical perspective” ). As a result, both books (especially Davies’) are little more than unabashedly nostalgic trips through a quarter of a century of television pro­ gramming.

S entim ental pleasure (rem inding people o f “ what life and past times were like, coinciding with a favourite pro­ gramme recollected” ) can be derived from flipping through pages of photo­ graphs o f cherished and long forgotten programs, performers and personali­ ties, and skimming through rapidlyflowing personal and detailed writing.

But in our society an emphasis on nostalgia usually works as a diver­

sionary device; it displaces our atten­ tio n a w a y from th e i m p o r t a n t economic, social and political events amidst which Australian television em erg ed and d e v e lo p e d . It also obscures the complex role that tele­ vision plays in the perpetuation of ideo­ logies and discourses.

It is not that the books don’t acknow­ ledge that television has a social func­ tion. For instance, Davies writes: “ Arguably, one of the biggest single factors underlying the social changes of the past twenty-seven years has been television . . . Like the un­ resolvable chicken-and-egg argu­ me n t a b o u t H o l l y w o o d and America’s lifestyle, as to whether life imitates art or vice versa, television led or reflected the way to the society, rightly or wrongly, we thought we wanted to be. And because in the Menzies years from 1949 onward we wanted to be a con­ sumer society without end, all that we aspired to was reflected on our television screens, or could it also in part have been dictated by them?”

But that is as far as Davies (or his publisher?) allows himself to go. His text shies away from getting involved in anything but the most perfunctory co m ­ mentary about television; after a while, this, the anecdotes, and a steady stream of mentions o f programs and people begins to bore.

S im ila r ly , Jim M u rp h y, Brian Courtis, Garrie Hutchinson, Andrew McKay, Christopher Day and Ivan Hutchinson in A ustralian T V duplicate these shortcomings, though their styles are less emotionally nostalgic in tone.

In a d d ition to p ieces by th ese authors, A ustralian T V presents an opening section entitled “ The Passing Parade” which, from 1956 onward, offers yearly National Top 10 pro­ grams, Logie Award winners and his­ torical tidbits about the industry and the world at large. This is straight­ forward “ facts and information” with no interpretation, but it does provide abstract indexes to the ever-changing relationship between television and society as it has developed over the years.

There is also a disappointing, un­ critical end section entitled “ Commer­ cial Break” that reproduces “ some memorable moments in the last 25 years o f Australian TV commercials, highlighting the changes TV advertising has undergone” . The major interest of this section is to suggest that “ co m ­ mercials are often more entertaining and more professionally made than the programmes they accompany” rather than assessing the impact of comm er­ cials in promoting a consumer-oriented society, or analysing the relationship between commercial interests and the development o f television.

Therefore, both books (especially A ustralian TV) are more attractive and impressive for their photographs than texts, and neither com es close to Sandra Hall’s Supertoy: 20 Years o f A ustralian Television (1976), which may have lacked visual pizzazz, but more than made up for it with a sub­ stantial text.

Hall has achieved the same standard in Turning On Turning Off: A ustralian Television In The E ighties, and this time the text is complemented by some nicely reproduced, if unmemorable, photos.

The intention behind this book is criticism rather than historiography (though in the future I am sure the book will greatly assist the latter). Her criticism transcends the usual “ gut response” variety which so many of this country’s film and television reviewers still pridefully acknowledge as the sort of critical writing they do.

Hall’s writing reflects an apprecia­ tion for theories of different media, and an understanding that television is far more than.a source of entertainment or recreation. She writes from a liberal perspective, but unlike most liberal writers she does not present society as being transparent, and makes a notice­ able effort to place her comments in firm contexts. Thus, her commentary is carefully created so as not to threaten readers who are put off by up-front “ serious criticism” , but this does not undermine the impact of what she has to write.

So, in Turning On Turning 0 / 7 Hal! sets out to do two things; “ by reviewing p rogram m es and analysing trends, I have discussed what television is providing already; and by putting into perspective the main broadcasting issues, I have talked about the service we could see , in the future.”

The strongest chapters are “ N e w s” , “ Public Affairs” , “ Documentaries” and “ Sport” , and in these she makes

CINEMA PAPERS June - 273

Book Reviews

some astute observations. For example, her brief analysis of different station approaches to news coverage, and public affairs programs such as 60 Minutes, helps to deconstruct pro­ gramming that is often accepted by television viewers as “the truth”: “Sixty Minutes [sic] is not interested in anything as abstract as an issue. It is interested in specifics, in per­ sonalities and in narrative. If a story doesn’t have a hero and a villain pre­ ferably, though not essentially, a beginning and an end, it’s not worth telling.”

Also in these chapters Hall slightly shifts general critical discourse that we are used to reading in dominant press publication, thus opening a space for discussion of some important issues.

For instance, in “Sport” she does more than lead the cheer squad for all that television has done in upgrading the auality of sport presentation. She also dons a football boot and gets stuck into the television stations for their trans­ formation from transmitters of sporting events to “expansive entre­ preneurs”. However, she never fully tackles the implications of this in a culture such as ours where sport has distinct ideological functions.

The weakest chapters of the book are “ The Future” , in which she deals with satellites, cable, teletext, video disc and the video-cassette recorder, and “ The Implications” . But then maybe this is to be expected because as Hall writes: “ It will probably be some time before Australians come to terms with all that their television sets can do for them. Undoubtedly, many people will find it more comfortable to ignore the whole issue, rather than plunge into the mess of complicated questions that has characterised the debate so far — and they may be right, because the only certainty about the next ten years of broad­ casting is that Australians are going to be offered a lot of technology they may well be better off without.”

Nevertheless, Hall doesn’t “ ignore the issue” . In Turning On Turning O ff she plunges into a “ mess of co m ­

pages) devoted to the subject. But the absence of a color supplement means that this section lacks some of its usual visual splendor.

Included in the animation section is a five page summary of animation in Australia and New Zealand. Written

by Bruno Edera, it covers everything from Dot and the Kangaroo to the work of the Cantrills.

There are also short informative chapters on festivals, 16mm, film archives, film schools (an everexpanding chapter), film bookshops and reviews of books and magazines.

In 1983 there will be the book’s 20th anniversary. I just , hope they don’t change format or content to celebrate.

plicated questions” dealing with the most important medium of our era, and in the long run Hall demonstrates how she has remained one of this country’s most consistently readable film and television reviewers in the dominant press.

International Film Guide 1982 Edited by Peter Cowie Tantivy Press/Space Age Books $17.95 James Manning This annual reference work is now in its 19th year of publication. A valuable work, it summarizes film production in all film producing countries and gives a good general view of cinema through­ out the world. It does not focus just on English language output, as do other available yearbooks.

An important feature every year is the five directors of the year. The most astonishing thing about this section is how it reflects the strong grip that men have on film direction. So far there have been 95 people nominated as directors of the year, and only two of t h e s e h a v e b een w o me n : Ma r t a Meszaros and Lina Wertmuller.

This year the five men are France’s Maurice Pialat, Britain’s Karel Reisz, West Germany’s Volker Schlondorff, India’s Mrinal Sen and Hungary’s Istvan Szabo. Each winner of the award gets a short essay detailing his career, which is followed by a comprehensive filmography. And the IFG is often the only place a complete filmography can be found on a particular director.

Roy Armes writes a fine essay on Reisz calling him “ very much the main­ stream director, picking his own project (though with what seems at times an almost perverse logic) and uncom­ plainingly filling the gaps between feature films with television produc­ tions and work on co m m e r c ia ls” .

M organ, A Suitable Case for Treat­ ment is called “ a disparate work: part analysis o f the ways in which society

tamesjts rebels, part chic mid-sixties Recent Releases comic caricature”. Although a bad Mervyn Binns film, D og Soldiers is given only five This column lists books released in Australia, as lines and dismissed with “it did little to resolve the contradictions of Reisz’s career.”

The next (and largest) part of the book is the world cinema survey taking up 279 pages and covering every country between Afghanistan (with the cryptic sentence, “ Afghan Films is now in a position to make a film together with the U .S .S .R .” ) and Yugoslavia (with a report on the most spectacular festival I have ever attended at the amphitheatre in Pula).

The Australian chapter is, as usual, written by David Stratton. He says that the Australian industry is “ for the time being” experiencing a boom. He says Harlequin got what it deserved (poor box-office) but “ it seems to have done better in more credulous overseas markets.” He comments on the fact that a number of films have not yet achieved commercial release. What ever did happen to David Hem mings’ The Survivor? Surveying the year’s output, Stratton says, “ After Gallipoli, there’s not much to write about.”

A chapter on animation follows the world round-up. This is a much over­ looked field (viz the non-release locally, at the time of writing, of Heavy M etal) and it is good to see so much space (33

Vic Gordon, Princess Panda and Happy Hammond in H SV-7’s Happy Show (from Australian TV: The First 25 Years).

274 - June CINEMA PAPERS

at April 1982, which deal with the cinema or related topics. All titles are on sale in bookshops.

The publishers and the local distributors are listed below the author in each entry. If no distri­ butor is indicated, the book is imported (Imp.).

The recommended prices listed are for paper­ backs, unless otherwise indicated, and are subject to variations between bookshops and states.

The list was compiled by Mervyn R. Binns of the Space Age Bookstore, Melbourne.

Popular and General Interest The Big Book o f B Movies: How Low Was M y Budget Robin Cross Frederick M uller/ANZ Book Co., $14.95 A survey of cheapie films including thrillers. Westerns, science fiction, war films and historical epics, and the people who made them.

Bring On the Stuntman Ian B. Jamieson Rigby/Rigby. S I2.95 (HC) An illustrated book about stunts, how they are done and the people who do them. By a practising stuntman.

Confessions o f an Ex-Fan Magazine Writer Jane Wilke Doubleday/Doubleday Aust.. $19.50 (HC) The author of this book tells how she got her inside stories about such leading stars as Elizabeth Taylor, John Wayne and Marilyn Monroe.

Cult Movies Danny Peary Delta/Im p.. SI6.75 ‘ One hundred films from the silent era to present day that have remained ever popular with filmgoers. Gives plot out­ lines and other details.

Dream Palaces Charles Lockwood Viking/Penguin Books Aust.. $19.95 (HC) The homes of the 1920s and 1930s film stars. 150 photo­ graphs of their mansions from the glamorous, lost era of Hollywood.

The Golden Age o f 'B' Movies Doug McLelland. new edition Bonanza/lmp., $7.50 (HC) Fifty low-budget films are covered, giving credits, stills and story outlines.

"Grandma's Scrapbook" o f Silent Movie Stars Produced by John M. Kaduck Wallace Homestead Book Co./Dymocks, $3.95 A collection of old photographs of American silent film stars.

Great Film Epics: Stories Behind the Scenes o f Mike Munn A rgus/AN Z Book Co.. $19.95 An illustrated book of behind-the-scenes events during the making of dozens of epic films, from Ben Hur to The Great Race.

The History o f the World Part One Mel Brooks Virgin Books/Thomas Nelson Aust., $6.95 A fully-illustrated book of Mel Brooks’ crazy comedy film.

The Illustrated Movie Quiz Book Rob Burt Severn House/Dent Aust., $3.95 An illustrated collection of quiz questions about films and film stars.

James Bond in the Cinema Steven Jay Rubin Talism an/LSP/Im p.. $14.95 An account of the making of the James Bond films, in­ cluding the behind-the-scenes problems, the personalities and the drama.

The Movie A d Book Malcolm Vance Control D ata/lm p., $ I 1.95 An illustrated history of the Hollywood film advertise­ ment, from science fiction and horror through drama.

Westerns, musicals, comedy and more.

Movie Memories John Brooker Patrick Stevens Ltd/lm p., $17.50 (HC) A book of film facts and memorabilia published in con­ junction with a British television series.

The Movie Star Elizabeth Weis Viking/Penguin Aust.. $25 (HC) A collection of essays, reviews and personal interviews that give an insight into the role of the film star, on and off the screen.

Rock on Film David Ehrenstein and Bill Reed Delilah/Imp.. $14.95 A comprehensive survey of films featuring rock V roll music, with photographs and posters.

Book Reviews

Screen Slars o f the '70s David Castell LSP/Im p., S9.95 An illustrated, popular survey or the film stars of the 1970s, by the editor of Films Illustrated.

Walt Disney's Treasury o f Silly Symphonies Walt Disney Studios Abrahams/Macmillan Aust., $35 (HC) A beautiful collection of stories and illustrations, in full color, from some of Disney’s best work.

Wings on the Screen Bertil Skogsberg Barnes/Tantivy/Oaktree Press, $33.95 (HC) A pictorial history of air films from 1928 to 1978. The actors, the directors and the films from the silents to the 1,970s.

The Wit and Wisdom o f Mae West Edited by Joseph Weintraub Perigree/lm p., $3.95 Numerous photographs of Miss West along with quotes from her films and other sources.

Biographies and Filmographies Ann Margret Neel Peters and David Smith LSP/Im p., $19.95 A photo extravaganza and memoir. Illustrated- with numerous personal photographs, publicity stills and magazine covers.

Bette: A Biography o f Bette Davis Charles Higham New English Library/Hodder and Stoughton Aust., $19.95 (HC) The biography of one of Hollywood’s greatest stars. The story of her rise from mediocre roles to some of the screen’s most memorable performances.

Bogart: A Definitive Study o f His Career Terence Pettigrew Proteus/Doubleday Aust., $12.50 An illustrated, critical survey of all of Bogart’s films. An excellent study of his film career.

Cary Grant “ In the Spotlight" series Gallery Press/Imp., $9.95 (HC) An excellent collection of photographs along with a brief text on G rant’s illustrious career.

A Dreadful Man Brian Aherne Berkley/Imp., $3.75 A personal and intimate biography of George Sanders by a friend and fellow actor.

Elizabeth Taylor: The Last Star Kitty Kelly Michael Joseph/Thom as Nelson Aust., $19.95 (HC) The tumultuous personal history and career of the screen’s most publicised actress. A most detailed and unabashed biography.

The Films o f Burl Reynolds Ian Streebeck Citadel/Davis Publications, $28.95 (HC) A complete, illustrated survey of the career of Reynolds, with full details of all his films.

The Films o f d in t Eastwood Boris Zmijewsky and Lee Pfeiffer Citadel/Davis Publications, $28.95 (HC) A complete survey of Eastwood’s career, with full details of all his films.

The Films o f Charlton Heston Jeff Rovin, new edition Citadel/Davis Publications, $11.95 A complete, illustrated filmography. New in paperback.

The Films o f Paul Newman Kenneth Thompson, new revised edition Citadel/Davis Publications, $25.50 (HC) An updated, new bound edition of the complete filmo­ graphy of Paul Newman.

The Films o f Susan Hayward Eduardo Moreno, new edition Citadel/Davis Publications, $11.95 The complete filmography of Susan Hayward. New in paperback.

The Films o f Tyrone Power Dennis Belafonte with Alvin H. Maril, new edition $11.95 The complete filmography of Tyrone Power. New in paper­ back.

Finch, Bloody Finch Elaine Dundy, new edition Magnum/Methuen Aust., $4.95 The life and career of actor Peter Finch. New in paper­ back.

Flora Kenneth Barrow Heinemann/William Heinemann Aust., $29.95 (HC) An appreciation of the life and work of Dame Flora Robson.

Fonda: M y Life Henry Fonda as told to Howard Teichman W. H. Allen/Hutchinson Group Aust., $17.95 (HC) Two hundred hours of taped reminiscence by Fonda, plus interviews with his family and friends, make this a personal outpouring of feelings about his life and career.

From a Life o f Adventure: The Writings o f Errol Flynn Edited by Tony Thomas Citadel/Davis Publications, $14.95 (HC) A collection of articles and fiction written by Flynn, who claimed he always wanted to write a bestseller, an ambition that was not realized until after his death and the publica­ tion of his autobiography.

Gone But N ot Forgotten Patricia Fox-Sheinwold Bell/Imp.. $9.95 (HC) Illustrated biographies of Bing Crosby, Joan Crawford, Walt Disney, Betty Grable, Alfred Hitchcock, Rosalind Russell, John Wayne and Mae West.

Hollywood in a Suitcase Sammy Davis jun., new edition Star W yndham/Gordon and Gotch, $4.95 Personal anecdotes of time spent in Hollywood — the stars and the films.

I A in ’t Down Yet Gale Storm Bobbs-Merrill/Imp., $14.35 (HC) The autobiography of the film and television star of the 1940s and ’50s.

Jack Oakie’s Double Takes Strawberry Hill Press/Imp., $13.^4 One of Hollywood’s most likeable supporting actors.

reminisces about his 60 years in the film business, with anecdotes about many other famous stars from Chaplin to Temple.

James Cagney “ In the Spotlight” series Gallery Press/Imp., $9.95 (HC) A great collection of photographs with brief text, covering the career of one of Hollywood’s greatest stars.

Katharine Hepburn “ In the Spotlight” series Gallery Press/Imp., $9.95 (HC) An excellent collection of photographs covering the career of one of America’s best-loved actresses, with a brief but . enlightening text.

Lou's on First Chris Costello with Raymond Strait St Martins Press/Imp., $19.95 (HC) The tragic life of funny man Lou Costello, warmly recounted by his youngest child.

The Man With No Name Iain Johnstone Plexus/Doubleday Aust., $11.50 The career and personal life of Clint Eastwood. Illustrated.

Method in Madness Maurice Yacowar St Martins Press/Imp., $15.55 (HC) The comic art of Mel Brooks, from his television work to The Producers and Blazing Saddles. Although hated by the critics, his films have outgrossed those of the much-praised Woody Allen.

Olivier: The Life o f Sir Laurence Olivier Thomas Kiernan Sidgwick and Jackson, $18.95 (HC) The biography of one of Britain’s greatest actors.

Peter Seilers: The Authorized Biography Alexander Walker, new edition Coronet/Hodder and Stoughton, $4.95 Richard Burton Paul Ferris Wiedenfeld and Nicolson/Hodder and Stoughton Aust , $24.95 (HC) A new biography which attempts to generate more respect for Burton’s acting career.

Shelley: A lfo Known as Shirley Shelley Winters, new edition Granada/Gordon and Gotch, $6.95 The outspoken memoirs of Hollywood star Shelley Winters.

Solid Goldie Connie Berman Fyreside/Simon and Schuster/Ruth Walls, $13.50 An illustrated biography of the popular film and television actress, Goldie Hawn.

Susan's Story Susan Hampshire Sidgwick and Jackson/Hutchinson Group Aust., $19.95 (HC) English actress Susan Hampshire narrates her personal story including a battle with dyslexia, which she overcame to make a successful career in film and television.

Swanson on Swanson Gloria Swanson, new edition Hamlyn/Thomas Nelson Aust., $5.95 The inside story of Hollywood, from the silents to the 1970s, through the career of one of Hollywood’s brightest stars.

The Third Time Around George Burns Star/W yndham /G ordon and Gotch, $4.95 Intimate memories, zany anecdotes, private moments and public triumphs of the man they say is older than Holly­ wood itself. Told as only he can tell it.

Up in the Clouds, Gentlemen Please John Mills, new edition Penguin/Penguin Aust., $5.50 The autobiography of British actor John Mills. New in paperback.

The Walt Disney Biography Bob Thomas, new edition New English Library/Hodder and Stoughton, $6.95 A critical biography of the phenomenon of Walt Disney, the greatest animated filmmaker.

Directors and Producers Abel Gance James M. Welsh and Steven P. Kramer Twayne/Remal, $21.50 (HC) A title in the Twayne Theatrical Arts series. An apprecia­ tion of the work of the French director, whose epic film Napoleon is currently in revival.

Anthony Mann Jeanine Basinger Twayne/Remal, $21.50 (HC) The life and career of the director of such films as Winchester '73 and The Glenn Miller Story.

A nthropology-Reality-Cinema Mick Eaton British Film Institute/Gaumont, $5.95 A study of the films of Jean Rouch.

Artificially Arranged Scenes: George Melies John Frazer Twayne/Remal, $55.95 (HC) A comprehensive survey of the work of the French film pioneer and master of special effects, George Melies, with a synopsis of each of his films.

Billy Wilder Bernard F. Dick Twayne/Remal, $17.95 (H C )^» A complete survey of the life and work of the successful Hollywood director.

Blake Edwards Peter Lehman and William Luhr Ohio University Press/Harper and Row, $11.20, $22.97 (HC) A critical survey of the films of Blake Edwards, including “ 10” , The Great Race, the Clouseau films with Peter Sellers, Days of Wine and Roses and others.

Close-Up: The Contemporary Director Jon Tuska Scarecrow/James Bennett, $31.70 (HC) A survey of the work of Sydney Pollack, Samuel Fuller, Sam Peckinpah, George Roy Hill and others.

Douglas Sirk Michael Stern Twayne/Remal, $19.95 (HC) The life and work of the German-born director of such films as Written on the Wind. « Films and Dreams: A n Approach to Bergman Edited by Vlada Petrie

Redgrave/Hippocrene/lmp., $ 14.20 A collection of essays on the work of Ingmar Bergman.

The Films o f Robert Altman Alan Karp Scarecrow/James Bennett, $13.50 (HC) A critical assessment of the films of Altman including M*A*S*H, Nashville and Quintet.

Francois Truffaut Annette Insdorf Twayne/Remal, $17.95 (HC) The life and career of the film critic turned director.

Frank Capra Charles J. Maland Twayne/Remal, $19.95 (HC) The life and career of one of America’s most respected film directors, whose filmmaking began in the 1920s.

Frederick Wiseman Liz Ellsworth G. K. Hall/Remal, $49.95 (HC) A reference and resources guide, with biographical details, lists of films with synopses and other details, critical writings, research details and indexes.

Grigori Kozintsen Barbara Leming Twayne/Remal, $25.95 (HC) The life and work of the Soviet film director, whose most notable effort, based on Shakespeare, is King Lear.

Ingmar Bergman: The Cinema as Mistress Philip Mosley Marion Boyers/T. C. Lothian, $20.95 (HC) A critical history of Bergman’s films.

Jean Luc Godard John Francis Kreidl Twayne/Remal, $22.50 (HC) A comprehensible survey of this director’s life and work in the Theatrical Arts series.

Jean Luc Godard Julia Lesage G. K. Hall/Remal, $84.95 (HC) A reference and resources guide with biography, full film list, critical writings, screenplays and related activities.

Jean Renoir Christopher Faulkner G. K. Hall/Remal, $79.95 (HC) A complete reference guide to the work and films of Jean Renoir, with interviews, reviews and other details.

Joris Ivens: 50 Years in Filmmaking Rosalind Delmar British Film Institute/Gaumont Books, $8.95 A study of the work of one of the most important contri­ butors of political films including Song of the Rivers.

Joseph Losey Foster Hirsch Twayne/Remal, $22.50 (HC) A comprehensive survey of this director’s work.

Karel Reisz Georg Gaston Twayne/Remal, $24.95 (HC) A survey of the work of the director of Saturday Night and Sunday Morning. Isadora and other films.

Ken Russell Gene D. Phillips Twayne/Remal, $19.95 (HC) The life and work of the director of such films as The Devils and The Boyfriend Laurence Olivier Foster Hirsch Twayne/Remal, $21.50 (HC) The life and career of Britain’s most celebrated actor and director.

Leni Reifenstah!

Renata Berg Pan Twayne/Remal. $24.95 (HC) The life and work of the German filmmaker, the director of the famous Nazi propaganda film. The Triumph of the Will, and the film of the Berlin Olympic Games.

Luis Buñuel Virginia Higginbotham Twayne/Remal, $21.50 (HC) A survey of the work of the Spanish director of such films as Belle de jour and The Discreet Charm of the Bourgeoisie.

Martin Scorsese: The First Decade Mary Pat Kelly Redgrave/Imp., $14.95 A critical survey of the work of one of the most successful of the new directors of the 1970s.

M ike Nichols H. Wayne Scath Twayne/Remal. $21.50 (HC) A critical assessment of the work of Mike Nichols, in­ cluding Catch 22 and Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf?.

O f Walking In Ice Werner Herzog Tanam Press/Gaumont Books, $6.20 A personal memoir by the German film director.

Peter Watkins Joseph A. Gomez ■ Twayne/Remal, 519.95 (HC) A critical survey of the work of the director of The War Game.

Pier Paolo Pasolini Stephen Snyder Twayne/Remal, $24.95 (HC) A survey of the work of the director of such films as Oedipus Rex and The Decameron.

Rene Clair Celia McGerr Twayne/Remal, $22.50 (HC) A comprehensive survey of the work of this famous French director.

Robert Aldrich Alain Silver and Elizabeth Ward G. K. Hall/Remal, $29.95 (HC) A reference and resources guide including a complete films list, critical writings, reviews, related activities and interviews.

Roman Polanski Gretchen Bisplinghoff and Virginia Wright Wexman Twayne/Remal. $29.95 (HC) Sam Peckinpah Doug McKinney Twayne/Remal, SI9.95 (HC) A survey of the work of the controversial American director of The Wild Bunch and other films.

Shock Value John Waters Delta/imp., 51 1.95 The memoirs of filmmaker John Waters, whose notorious bad taste films included Pink Flamingos and Polyester.

Sidney Lumet Stephen E. Bowles G. J. Hall/Rem al. $29.95 (HC) A reference and resources guide with a complete guide to this director’s films, plus critical writings, reviews and other details.

Stanley Kubrick Wallace Coyle Twayne/Remal, 547.95 (HC) .

A reference and resources guide with biography, critical survey of films, critical writings, books adapted for films and much more.

William Wyler Michael Anderegg Twayne/Remal. 519.95 (HC) A reference and resources guide with biography, critical survey of films and critical writings.

Criticism Anatomy o f the Movies David Pirie Windward/lmp.. $19.95 (HC) A look at the inner-workings of filmmaking: the financing, the directors, their craft, and the finished film. Illustrated throughout.

The Cinematic Apparatus Edited by Teresa De Lauretis and Stephen Heath St Martins Press/Imp., $23.95 (HC) An exploration of the relationship between the technical and social aspects of film.

Crime Movies: An Illustrated History Carlos Clarens Seeker and Warburg, $19.95 (HC) The story of the gangster genre in film, from D. W. Griffith to The Godfather and beyond.

Cultures on Celluloid Keith Reader Quartet Books/Australasian Publishing Co., $28.25 (HC) A discussion of the films of four countries — the U.S., France, Britain and Japan — and the effect of their films on their cultures.

The Dark Side o f the Screen: Film Noir Foster Hirsch Barnes/Tantivy/Oaktree Press, $19.95 (HC) An exploration of the film genre that captured America’s dark mood in the 1940s and ’50s.

Film Noir Edited by Alain Silver and Elizabeth Ward Seeker and Warburg/William Heinemann Aust.. 537.50 (HC) A discussion of the film genre that many film critics consider the symbolic touchstone of American films.

From Scarface to Scarlet Roger Dooley Harcourt Brace and Janovich/LSP/Im p.. 529.95 (HC) A critical history of the Hollywood films made in the 1930s.

An outstanding volume that is sure to become a classic in cinema literature.

Genre: The Musical Edited by Rick Altman Routledge and Kegan Paul/Cambridge University Press Aust., $24.95 (HC) First in a new series sponsored by the British Film Institute.

This volume contains 14 articles on the film musical, from relatively inaccessible sources.

Hemingway and Film Gene D. Philips Frederick U ngar/Ruth Walls. 58.95 A discussion of the difficulties encountered in translating Hemingway’s novels into screenplays, with detailed criticism of the attempts that have been made.

The Hollywood Social Problems Films Peter Roffman and Jim Purdy Indiana University Press/Imp., $24.95 How Hollywood interpreted the Depression, war and post­ war periods.

The Imaginary Signifier Christian Metz Indiana University Press/Imp., $39.95 (HC) Psychoanalysis and the cinema — an exploration of various psychological and sociological aspects of the cinema.

The Movie Star Edited by Elizabeth Weis Viking/Penguin, $25 (HC) A collection of essays, reviews and personal interviews on the role of the film star, on and off the screen.

The Movies Grow Up Charles Champlin Swallow/Harper and Row, 515.55, $31.15 (HC) A new edition of Whatever Happened to A ndy Hardy, first published in 1977, to which a new chapter has been added.

Now available in paperback also. A critical history of over four decades of filmmaking in the U.S. On Movies Dwight MacDonald DaCapo/Plenum/Holt Saunders, $15.95 A collection of critical articles on the cinema, by a leading American critic.

Questions o f Cinema Stephen Heath Indiana University Press/Imp., $18.50 A collection of essays on film from the magazine Screen, by a leading critic and film lecturer.

Realism and the Cinema Christopher Williams Routledge and Kegan Paul/Cambridge University Press Aust., $24.95 (HC) A BFI Reader in Film Studies. A collection of articles on the long-standing debate on realism in the cinema.

Reverse Angle: A Decade o f American Films Christopher Williams Clarkson Potter/Im p.. 521.55 (HC) Film reviews from such diverse sources as Esquire and The New Yorker, by a critic who clearly states his reasons for loving or hating a film.

Spring Time in Italy: A Reader in Neo-Realism David Overbey Archon/Imp.. 529.95 (HC) A collection of articles by directors, producers and critics on the Italian neo-realism films.

Theories o f Authorship Edited by John Caughie Routledge and Kegan Paul/Cambridge University Press $14.95 (HC) ' A BFI Reader in Film Studies. The articles collected in this volume are arranged in three sections: auteurism. fiction of the author/author of the fiction and auteur-structuralism, including articles on John Ford.

Concluded on p. 283

CINEMA PAPERS June — 275

WHAT HAS '200TSUPERMAIM'AND FOCAL PRESS IN COMMON?

. . . Zoran Perisic, inventor of the Zoptic System, which gave the special effects for “2001” and “Superman” !

Perisic details in his book Special Optical Effects, an exhaustive treatment of Special Effects which he has discovered during his career (over 500 film credits) and reveals those he perfected himself.

Other media manuals in the Focal Press Series are written by experts in the state of the art like Zoran Perisic. These books, above all, are easy to use and learn from as they are made up of double page spreads and inter-related text and illustration.

The

Ammatíon Stand RssirotoCstBersOpáesátais.

Motion Picture Cam era &

Camera Data

lighting Equipm ent

Uniti VY

Üsvfci W.&saaæisaa ¡

The Media Manual Series 16mm Film Cutting - Burder 166 pages $14.50, The Animation Stand - Perisic 168 pages $15.00, Basic Film Technique - Daley 160 pages $17.95, Basic TV Staging - Millerson 176 pages $14,95, Creating Special Effects for TV & Films -Wilkie 160 pages $15.00, Effective TV Production - Millerson 192 pages $19.00, The Lens in Action - Ray 202 pages $17.95, The Lens and All its Jobs - Ray 160 pages $14,50, Local Radio - Redfern 164 pages $14.00, Motion Picture Camera Data - Samuelson 172 pages $19.50, Motion Picture Camera Techniques - Samuelson 200 pages $19.50, Motion Picture Camera & Lighting Equipment - Samuelson 220

b

Studio 75' x 46' with 14' to lighting grid.

b

Large three sided paintable fixed eye.

b

pages $19.50, Script Continuity and The Production Secretary Rowlands 160 pages $15.00, Scriptwriting for Animation Hayward 160 pages $19.00, The Small Television Studio - Equipment and Facilities - Bermingham et.al.

164 pages $14.50, TV Camera Operation - Millerson 160 pages $14.50, TV Sound Operations - Alkin 176 pages $14,50, The Use of Microphones - Nisbeft 168 pages $19.00, Using Videotape 2nd Ed. -

FocalP ress

eric fullilove producer-director

Good access to studio for cars and trucks.

■ Design and set construction service available.

■ Dressing rooms, wardrobe, and make-up facilities.

FOR STUDIO BOOKINGS, PHONE: Alex Simpson,

Robinson/Beards 172 pages $19.00, Your Film & The Lab - Happe 208 pages $19.00.

Order from your local bookseller, or in case of difficulty from: FOCAL PRESS: A Division of BUTTERWORTHS PTY LIMITED, 271-273 Lane Cove Road, North Ryde, NSW 2113 Telephone (02) 887 3444

. -: . ,

A

television productions pty ltd 6th floor, 56-62 berry street, north Sydney, n.s.w. 2060 (02) 922 4066 t

(03)568 0058, (03) 568 2948

producers of fine tv programs and films

Production Survey

Production Survey Continuedfrom p. 259 Camera assistant .............. Gary Clements Electrician .......................... Rod Therkelsen ¡-en9,h ..............................................20 mins Gauge ..................................................16mm Progress ........................................In release Cast: Allen Harvey, Noreen LeMottee, David Pidd, Jerry Burns, Don Butler.

Synopsis: Jack Austin is a conscientious storeman for a building company. He fixes electrical equipment, although he is not licensed. Because of his lack of know­ ledge, a workman is killed. Produced for the Hydro Electric Commission and the Department of Labour and Industry.

The Quarter

FLY/DRIVE HOLIDAY Prod, company .......................................TFC Dist. company .........................................TFC Producer ..................................Barry Pierce Director ...................................... Anne Dunn Photography ...........................Chris Morgan Sound recordist .....................Jeff Jackson Editor ..............................Mike Woolveridge Prod, assistant ..................Adam Kropinskl Camera assistant ........... David Hudspeth Mixer ....................................Peter McKinley Narrator .......................................Anne Dunn Length ................................................15 mins Gauge ................................................... 16mm Progress ........................................ In release Synopsis: Anne and her family take a fly/drive holidayaround Tasmania and suggest to potential tourists places to stay and things to do, and gives a close-up glimpse of thebeautiful Holiday Isle.

Produced for the Tasmanian Department of Tourism.

CHILD DEVELOPMENT Prod, company ....................................... TFC Dist. company ......................................... TFC Producer ................................. Jack Zalkalns Director ................................... Jack Zalkalns Scriptwriters .........................Rob McKenzie, Jack Zalkalns Length .............................................. 15 mins Gauge ................................1-inch videotape Progress ...............................Pre-production Synopsis: A discussion documentary for children and parents to look at the inter­ relationship between home and school environments on the development of the 8­ 12-year-old child. Produced for the Tasmanian Education Department.

DANGEROUS FUMES AND DUST Prod, company .......................................TFC Dist. company .........................................TFC Producer ................................Don Anderson Director ............................. Phillip Mark Law Scriptwriter .......... C. Douglas Colquhoun Photography ..................... Russell Galloway Sound recordist ......................... Ian Sherry Prod, secretary ........................Pat Caspers Prod, assistant ........................... Peter Cass Continuity .......................................Liz Arnott Camera assistant ..............Joel Peterson Key grip ...............................Gary Clements Electrician ........................... Rod Therkelsen Length ..............................................15 mins Gauge ................................................... 16mrh Progress ............................. Post-production Caat: Phillip Sabine, Claire Williams.

Synopsis: The story of Peter who works in a furniture factory and, because of poor safety precautions, develops industrial asthma. Produced for the Department of Labour and Industry. ,

Photography ..................... Russell Galloway Editor .............................. Mike Woolveridge Prod, manager ..................Damian Brown Prod, secretary ................Pat Caspers Prod, assistant .......................... Peter Cass Continuity ......................................Di Heddle Carrera assistant ........John Jasiukowicz Key grip .................................Gary Clements Electrician ..........................Rod Therkelsen Make-up ........................... Margaret Pierce Wardrobe ......................................Di Heddle Mixer .................................... Peter McKinley Narrator ........................................ Bert Wicks Length ..............................................23 mins Gauge ................................................. 35mm Progress ........................................ In release Cast: Berrie Cameron-Alien (Madge), John Smythe (Archie).

Synopsis: An unsubtle tilt at the verbosity and stylistic blunders of many travel docu­ mentaries. Produced for the Tasmanian Department of Tourism.

OUTDOOR RECREATION

GULLIBLE’S TRAVELS Prod, company .......................................TFC Dist. company .........................................TFC Producer ................................... Barry Pierce Director ................................. Damian Brown Scriptwriter .......................... Lindsay Arnold Photography ..................... Russell Galloway Sound recordist ......................... Ian Sherry Editor ......................................... Kerry Regan Continuity ......................................Lin Arnott Camera assistant ........John Jasiukowicz Key grip .................................Gary Clements Electrician .........................Rod Therkelsen Make-up ..........................Felicity Newman Set decorator ..........................Jon Bowling Mixer .................................... Peter McKinley Length ..............................................10 mins Gauge ................................................... 16mm Progress .............................Post-production Cast: Phillip Priest, Susan Weldrick, Guy Dow Sainter, Richard Lawrence.

Synopsis: Actors describe incidents involving drugs and young Australians travelling overseas. Produced for the Department of Health Services in associa­ tion with the National Drug Education Program.

NORTHERN TASMANIA — PHOTOGRAPHIC WONDERLAND Prod, company ..................................... TFC Dist. company .......................................TFC Producer ..................................Barry Pierce Director ..................................Jack Zalkalns Scriptwriters ......................Lindsay Arnold, Jack Zalkalns, Barry Pierce, John Honey

The Quarter Continuedfrom p. 205 conceived his children’s classic, The Magic Pudding, written in 1917.

The emphasis of the film is on the adaptation of this classic as a puppet play by the Marionette Theatre of Australia. One sees how the play is scripted, how the puppets are made, and the behind-the-scenes work of the theatre company in rehearsing the play, culminating in its live perform­ ance at the Sydney Opera House. The camera moves from the stage to the audience reactions, and behind the scenes, to create a montage of insights into the creative process at work.

Angels of War, a docum entary produced and directed by Andrew Pike, Hank Nelson and Gavan Daws, received the award for Best Educa­ tional Short Film in the Social Sciences.

This film provides a model for ways in which a wealth of historical material can be brought to life on the screen.

Between 1942 and 1945, the Papua New Guinea campaign raged through­ out the islands that make up that country. An estimated two million American, Australian and Japanese forces invaded, bombed and fought their war through dense tropical rain­ forests, humid mangrove swamps, up steep mountain slopes and across remote tropical atolls.

C a u g ht in the m id d le of th is advanced form of civilized madness was the Papua New Guinea villager.

The men were forced to work for what­ ever army happened to get to them firs t. They carried the dead and wounded, bore heavy loads of ammuni­ tion to the front line, and were trained as infantrymen and guerrilla fighters.

Angels of War is based on detailed historical research (the directors are primarily historians), and combines dramatic footage shot by American, Australian and Japanese cameramen, with interviews of present-day survivors who vividly recall some of the episodes

Prod, company .......................................TFC Dist. company .........................................TFC Producer .................................Jack Zalkalns Director ...................................Jack Zalkalns Photography ..................... Russell Galloway Sound recordist .........................Ian Sherry Editor ..............................Mike Woolveridge Prod, secretary ....................Peter Caspers Prod, assistant ..........................Peter Cass Camera assistant ...............Gary Clements Electrician .......................... Rod Therkelsen Make-up ............................ Margaret Pierce Wardrobe ......................................Di Heddle Props ..............................................Di Heddle Still photography ............Jacquie Gardner Length ............................................. 20 mins Gauge ...................................................16mm Progress .............................Post-production Cast: lain Lang, Noreen Le Mottee, Joan Green, John Lavery, Brian Ervin, Don Gray.

Synopsis: A cartoon-style comedy which looks at facets of leadership in bush walking and other group outdoor recreations.

Produced for the Tasmanian Education Department.

PALS Prod, company .......................................TFC Producer ............................. Don Anderson Scriptwriters ........................Ron Saunders, Bob George, John Patterson Exec, producer .......................John Honey Length ...................................... 5 x 25 mins Progress .............................. Pre-production Synopsis: Sammy lives with his grand­ parents. His father, Oscar, is a stuntman and Sammy runs away from home to be with him. The series is about two friends

of the campaign. The film focuses on the viewpoint of the villager — the emphasis is on oral history, recounted by a people that still have a close tie with th e ir oral tra d itio n s . These villagers also speak angrily of the many promises made by the occupying armies of compensation and reward after the war. They are still waiting for the fulfilment of these promises.

A special award was given to Sally Heckel’s A Jury of Her Peers. Accord­ ing to the citation, this film received the award because of its unique approach to a number of social issues, as well as its translation of the short story form into film.

Set in 1905 rural America, A Jury of Her Peers stresses the vast difference between the world of the male farmer and the sensibilities of the farmer’s wife. She lives in lonely isolation, con­ demned to a strict division of labor which has her confined to the house­ hold.

This is a subtle film, emphasizing the private hell of one woman’s world through images depicting her lonely domestication, and her efforts at creating some color and sensitivity in the spartan environment of the turn-ofthe-century rural household.

Gillian Armstrong’s 14’s Good, 18’s Better gained the award for the Best Australian Educational Short Film. The focus is on three Adelaide women, filmed at 14, and, four years later, at 18.

This longitudinal view provides unique insights into the lifestyles, expecta­ tions and living environment of three contemporary working-class women, and their growth over the crucial late adolescent period.

At 18, their lives had changed con­ siderably. Diana, for one, is already married, pregnant and living with shift worker Keith, who faces a potential jail sentence for assault. There is a moving quality in the attempts of this couple to cre a te a life to g e th e r, as they unconsciously move into a replica of th e ir p a re n ts’ lifestyle, seem ingly prisoners of their environment.

who are on the run but out to enjoy themselves.

PERILOUS JOURNEY Prod, company .......................................TFC Dist. company .........................................TFC Producer ..............................Don Anderson Director ............................Phillip Mark Law Scriptwriter ............................... Phillip Blake Photography ..................... Russell Galloway Sound recordist ........................Ian Sherry Editor ..............................Mike Woolveridge Prod, assistant ............................ Peter Cass Camera operator ..............Gary Clements Electrician ........................... Rod Therkelsen Mixer ....................................Peter McKinley Length ................................................15 mins Gauge ................................................... 16mm Progress .............................Post-production Synopsis: A film for parents, teachers and children to show the “perilous journey" a child faces while travelling to and from school. Produced for the Tasmania Police, Division of Road Safety.

PLANET EARTH — A QUESTION OF EXPANSION? Prod, company .......................................TFC Dist. company .........................................TFC Producer ................................... Barry Pierce Director .................................Damian Brown Photography ..................... Russell Galloway Sound recordist ......................... Ian Sherry Camera assistant .................Joel Peterson Key grip .................................Gary Clements Tech, producer video . Peter Richardson Length ............................................... 20 mins Gauge ............................... 1-inch videotape Progress .............................Post-production Synopsis: Professor Carey of the University of Tasmania talks about his theory of an expanding earth.

SEXUALLY TRANSMITTED DISEASES Prod, company .......................................TFC Dist. company .........................................TFC Producer ................................... Barry Pierce Director ..................................... Barry Pierce Scriptwriters ..................... John Patterson, Barry Pierce Photography .....................Russell Galloway Sound recordist ................ Peter McKinley Continuity ..................................... Liz Arnott Camera assistant .................Joel Peterson Key grip .............................Gary Clements Make-up ..........................Felicity Newman Tech, producer video . Peter Richardson Length ............................................. 20 mins Gauge ............................. 1 -inch videotape Progress .............................Post-production

Josie’s 14-year-old optimism and energy has been severely undermined by her life as a single mother. At 18, she has two ch ildren, and a broken marriage behind her. She has attained an impressive maturity at a very high price.

Kerry, at 18, has broken off an engagement and looks forward to a period of greater freedom. She works in an office, lives at home and is saving up for a trip around Australia.

Armstrong continues to impress with her ability to look at the world of teenage women, as well as her ability to create a documentary that is sharply edited, with an energy that reflects the energy of her subjects. 14’s Good, 18’s Better highlights the immense value of film as an educational device, and s h o u ld p ro v o k e a lo t of s e lf­ understanding and examination when shown to teenage school audiences as well as adults.

The ATOM Awards for Educational Short Films is a valuable addition to the Australian film culture, providing much needed encouragement for this often neglected area of Australian film ­ making. Valuable assistance was p ro v id e d by the sp o n so rs: The Children’s Television Advisory Board (TCN-9 Sydney), the Australia Council, Hoyts Theatres Pty Ltd and the Australian Film Commission.

Films Highly Commended: Captives of Care, Australia, 1981, produced

by Don Catchlove, directed by Stephen Wallace.

Public Enemy Number One, Australia, 1980, produced and directed by David Bradbury. . . . No Such a Place, Australia, 1980, produced by Peter Butt.

Stepping Out, Australia, 1980, produced and directed by Chris Noonan.

Film Work, Australia, 1981, produced and directed by John Hughes.

Mid-Pacific Ross Lansell reports: Various taxation incentive measures

Synopsis: A documentary on sexuallytransmitted diseases for the 15- to 25-yearoid age range. Produced for the Tas­ manian Department of Health Services.

TOXIC CHEMICALS Prod, company ....................................... TFC Dist. company .........................................TFC Producer ..............................Don Anderson Director ................................Don Anderson Scriptwriter ............................... Phillip Blake Length ................................................15 mins Gauge ................................................... 16mm Progress ...............................Pre-production Synopsis: A specialized documentary on the correct use of pesticides. Produced for the Tasmanian Department of Health.

THE UNSEEN ENEMY Prod, company .......................................TFC Dist. company .........................................TFC Producer ............................... Don Anderson Director . . . -.........................Damian Brown Scriptwriter ................... Christine Schofield Photography ..................... Russell Galloway Sound recordist ................ Peter McKinley Editor ..............................Mike Woolveridge Prod, assistant ............................Di Heddle Lighting ..............................Rod Therkelsen Camera assistant ...............Gary Clements Asst editor ..........................Debbie Regan Length ................................................15 mins Gauge ................................................... 16mm Progress ........................... Post-production Synopsis: A look at safe food handling in industry, and the common mistakes people make handling food. Produced for the Tas­ manian Division of Public Health.

“WHAT’S COOKING?” Prod, company .......................................TFC Dist. company .........................................TFC Scriptwriter ................... Christine Schofield Photography .........................Chris Morgan Sound recordist .........................Ian Sherry Editor .........................................Kerry Regan Prod, assistant ..................Paul Champion Continuity ........................ Felicity Newman Camera assistant .................... Peter Cass Key grip ................................ Gary Clements Electrician ..........................Rod Therkelsen Asst editor ............................Debbie Regan Length ............................................. 15 mins Gauge ................................................... 16mm Progress .............................Post-production Cast: Robin Moase.

Synopsis: A young mother thinks she is efficient in her home but discovers her kitchen can harbor germs due to ignorance of safe food handling. Produced for the Tasmanian Division of Public Health. ★

have been devised in recent years to support the Australian feature film industry. There was, for instance, the Income Tax Assessment Amendment Act 1978 (No. 4), with its 100 per cent write-off over the first two years’ copy­ right. This is generally considered not to have been a roaring success: a “fizzer” , says Joseph Skrzynski, the Australian Film Commission’s general manager.

The legislative turning point was the Income Tax Assessment Amendment Act 1981 (No. 111), with, in particular, its new Division 10BA, quite specific­ ally entitled “Australian Films” , and Section 23H, “ Exemption of Certain Film Income” , with namely 150 per cent write-off in the year of expenditure as well as another 50 per cent off returns, if any. This new measure has had more than its fair share of attendant contro­ versies, before and after its enact­ ment, and has not been generally considered to be a complete success, either.1 Some large-scale film investment com panies, such as P erth-based United American and Australasian Film Productions — created in late 1979 by E. John Picton-Warlow, a solicitor with some i n t e r n a t i o n a l e xp e r i e n c e , together with his business associates — have reverted to the old Section 51 of the Income Tax Assessment Act 1936, with its more general principles of “ ordinary business dealings” and concomitant legitimate taxation deduc­ tions, in conjunction with the old West Australian Limited Partnerships Act 1909 (No. 17).

Despite the fact that UAA has such industry heavyweights as Jim McElroy and Peter Weir doing Christopher Koch’s The Year of Living Danger­ ously and Patricia Lovell doing Shirley

Concluded on p. 295 1. [Danny Collins and Pom Oliver], Interim Report on the Australian Film Industry, AFC and FTVPAA, Sydney, [January 1982], pp. 6-10 for a summary of criticisms.

CINEMA PAPERS June - 277

Why are most Hollywood films shot using Rosco filters and gels?

For further information on the largest range of lighting filters in the world,

contact the sole Australian agents for Rosco.

PIC S Australasia P ty L td r W f l l

- r n 1 ' ™

NSW: 8 Dungate Lana. Sydney 2000 Tel: 264 1981 Telex:AA26664.

VIC: 77 Cit* Rd> $ ,h Melbourne 3205 Tel: 62 1133 Telex:AA30912 OLD: 28 Baxter St., Fortitude Valley 4006 Tel: 52 8816 Telex:AA42054 WA: 172 Rai,waV Pd> - Leederville 6007 Tel: 381 7707 Telex:AA93625 SA: 239 Anzac Highway,, nym pten 5038 Tel: 293 2692 Telex:AA89857

In Singapore, M alaysia, the Far East, Indonesia a n d Australia . . . y o u ’re in

FILMWEST COUNTRY Since 1967 we've been making films that promote and entertain. Cinema and television commercials that sell. Also, we make films and documentaries for sale, We are fully equipped, fully staffed with the best equipment and some of the most creative people in the business, capable of handling everything from scripts to music, shooting to screening.

Along the way we've won many awards. So if you'd like to win an award for your next film or commercial, call us, in Perth or Singapore.

We'd like to show you what we can do.

,.

A u s tra lia n F ilm an d T e le v isio n S c h o o l

FREE! *

In fo r m a tio n on our short-term, specialized c o u rses con d u cted th r o u g h o u t A u str a lia for film, television and radio professionals

*

C a t a lo g u e s for our tr a in in g m a te r ia ls available in print and on film and video tape

Get iri for your ch o p n o w . Drop us a line or call us at:

T h e O p e n P ro g ra m , Australian Film and Television S ch ool PO B o x 126, N O R T H R Y D E N SW 2 1 1 3 Telephone: (02) 887 1666

FILMWESTB FILMWEST Pty Ltd 75 Bennett Street, East Perth 6000, Western Australia. Phone 3251177, 3251423.

Cables “Filmwest” Perth Telex AA 94150 FILMWA FILMWEST Pte Ltd Suite 185, Raffles Hotel, 1-3 Beach Road, Singapore 0718. Tel: 3361509, 337 8041.

Telex RS 36389 FLMWST. Cable Raflotel

Importers & distributors of AATON cam eras, Sachtler Tripods, KEM Editing Machines and other famous nam e equipment.

Why re the world’s hniciatis using micron radio microphones?

THE OPEN PR O G R A M o f the

Here's where you'll find us:

“TEST DRIVE” one and find out!

For further information contact the sole Australian distributor PICS Australasia P ty L td r 4 b » ■ B

1 • iM

RunB*t® Lane. Sydney 2000 Tel: 264 1981 Telex:AA26664.

VIC: 77 City Rd. Sth Melbourne 3205 Tel: 62 1133 Telex:A A 309l2 OLD: 2 8 B « »« r St Fortitude Valley 4006 Tel: 52 8816 Telex:AA42054 WA: 172 Railway Pde.. Leederville 6007 Tel: 381 7707 Telex:AA93625 SA: 239 Anzac Highway, Plympton 5038 Tel: 293 2692 Telex:AA89857

B O X - O F F I C E C R O S S ES 0(1) 55’

T IT L E

P E R IO D 4.1 3.81 to 2 0 .3 .8 2

«■* ■1

P E R IO D 14.6.81 to 3.10.81

iT

S

S

SYD.2

M LB .

PTH

ADL

BRI.

T o ta l $

R ank

SY D .

M LB .

(20V3) 4 5 9 ,6 8 0

(20V12) 428 ,29 5

2 ,7 2 2 ,6 9 4

1

(7V2V2*) 615 ,61 3

(7*/2*) 322 ,90 9

G a llip o li

RS

(20V6/6) 7 23 ,54 3

RS

(8 *)

(8 *)

M ad M ax 2

(8 *)

(8 *)

N /A

N /A

N /A

N /A

(8*/3) N /A

N /A

2

P u b e rty B lu e s

RS

(10V6/6) 4 6 4 ,0 3 0

(10V2/1) 2 6 4 ,9 5 5

(8 *)

141 ,69 7

(7*) 121 ,78 3

(6/1*) 149 ,58 2

1 ,14 2,04 7

3

W in te r o f o u r D re a m s

GUO

(10/10) 2 66 ,79 9

(19) 1 34,382

4 4,2 34

508,761

4

T h e K illin g o f A n g e l S tre e t

GUO

(2 )

16,095

(4) 21,5 28

(1/1) 2813

40,436

5

H o o d w in k

Hoyts

(3) 3 0,6 68

(1) 3031

(1) 1578

3 5,277

6

R a ce to th e Yankee Z ephyr

GUO

(3) 11,644

31,103

7

B re a k e r M o ra n t

RS

M y B r illia n t C a r e e r / P ic n ic a t H a n g in g R o c k

GUO

G re n d e l, G re n d e l, G re n d e l

Hoyts

(20V11/2) (19V8/10) 5 53 ,45 3 6 07 ,72 3

(8 )

(12) 6 3,3 46

(D

2308

(D

3268

5576

8

4964

9

BRI.

T o ta l $

R ank

(2*) 7 2,0 95

(2*/2*) 110 ,56 4

1,121,181

1

716

10

(4) 12,404

(9 *)

(2 *)

111,901

2 4,704

1 36 ,60 5

2

4 8 ,2 2 0

4

7482

7

34,8 27

5

(1/3/4/1) 3 5,816

(2 *)

(D

4 96 4

7482

(1 )

(7 )

716

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

Foreign Total0

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

9.720.615 6,912.835 4,300,682 3,927,965 2,435,059

t Not for publication, but ranking correct. w Figures exclude N /A figures. _ • B ox-office grosses of individual film s have been supplied to C inem a Papers by the Australian Film Comm ission. o This figure represents the total box-office gross of all foreign film s show n during the period in the area specified. * Continuing Into next period NB; Figures In parenthesis above the grosses represent weeks in release. If more than one figure appears, the film has been released In more than one cinem a during the period.

34,8 27

660,161

N/A

51,924

83,670

117,002

N/A

5,470,095 3,703,749 2,938,854 1,633,380 1,600,048 15,346,126 6,130,251

N/A

2,990 778 1,717,050 1,717,050

N/A

.

(1) Australian theatrical distribu tor only. RS - Roadshow; GUO — Greater Union O rganization Film D istributors HTS — Hovts Theatres FOX _ 20th Century Fox; UA - United Artists; CIC - Cinema International Corporation- FW - Film ways Australasian Distributors; 7K - 7 Keys Film D istributors; COL - C olum bia Pictures; REG — Regent Film Distributors; CCG — Cinem a Centre Group; AFC — Australian Film Com m ission; SAFC — South Australian Film C orporation; MCA — M usic C o rpo ratio n of Am erica; S — S h a rm illF ilm s ; OTH — Other. (21 Figures are drawn from capital city and Inner suburban first release hardtops only. (3) Split figures Indicate a m ultipie cin em a release, •

B ox-O ffice

CINEMA PAPERS June - 279

Australian Total

Grand Total

ADL.

t

(2 )

19,459

PTH

IT’S FRUSTRATING To have a g o o d Doco idea but no resources to finance and produce it.

We are presently finalising our 1982-83 Production Schedule.

Your subject may fit our Australian TV Documentary Package.

Call or write to Brian Morris for a confidential interview.

SOUNDSENSE Film Productions Pty. Ltd.

343 Sailors Bay Road North bridge NSW 2063 PO Box 97 North bridge NSW 2063 Telephone (02) 958 1088 (3 lines)

PRO D U C T IO N OFFICE ____________________________ ____________________ /

>

S p a c e Available!

ALBERT PARK Vic 3206

Equipment and Operator Ex Gary W ilkins Sound Services with recent feature credits of: LONELY HEARTS NEXT OF KIN THE PIRATE MOVIE

Specialising in Feature Film & Documentary Sound Transfers at Special Rates, 16m m , 17.5m m or 35m m . After Hours Service Available Discount Rates for Student Films.

THE CLINIC

Phones, parking, adjacent to Preview Theatre.

Contact Tim Lewis, T h e Jo in ery Pty Ltd, (03) 699 6666

N e iL S O N -

518963

A member of the United Film Services (Australia) Group 75 High St. Prahran 3181 Telex AA37472

Anim ation Camera for sale

H O R D C LL

Neilson Hordell animation stand JS 25-02 with animation camera 16mm 86-04; fixed pin registration, manual fade and dissolve, reflex viewfinder, and many other features. This quality equipment is in excellent order.

For complete details, write or phone

Pinnis Freeman Films P.O. Box 249 G.P.O. Ballarat 3350 (053) 31 6768

ACTORS

and E

XTRAS

AR E YOU DISSATISFIED W IT H YOUR A G EN T ???

As a new., enthusiastic Agency — we can offer you an efficient and confidential service.

PH O N E N O W for a personal discussion.

COGHLAN

an d

H A RV EY AGENCY

(0 3 )

6 9 9 1 3 2 5

“Runnin’ On “Now and F “On the 1 “Year of Living Dangerously”

Call Stuart Armstrong on (02)949-6882 or through Top Technicians to ask about hiring rates of the new Acmade 35 mm Edge Numbering Machine.

'■ / .

The Law o f Making Movies/Censorship

Joan Fontaine

The Law o f Making Movies Continuedfrom p. 213 After lunch, the session on industrial issues and policies was marked by a solid statement of opposition to foreign writers, actors and film technicians from the unions, and a tense inter­ change between producer-director Mike Thorn­ hill and Actors and Announcers Equity Associa­ tion of Australia organizer Janette Paramore.

David Williamson, president of the Austra­ lian Writers Guild, told the seminar that negotiations with the Film and Television Pro­ duction Association of Australia over a standard writers agreement had broken down over the issue of assignment versus licensing. The producers want an assignment of all rights, the writers want to license specific rights only.

Williamson predicted that the breakdown meant that producers will end up paying more for scripts and that there will be less good product around in future.

On foreign writers, Williamson said that the AWG’s opposition was unashamedly a defenceof-employment policy. “ Many of us in the Guild will go beyond a defence-of-employment policy.

I believe that films which have a high percentage of Australian creative talent are the ones most likely in the long run to succeed, here and abroad. The Americans make much better American genre films than we ever will” , he said. He then cited the British Industry’s recent Oscar success with Chariots of Fire to back him up.

Paramore explained Equity’s policy on foreign artists and how it was arrived at as a result of members’ pressure. A review is currently underway to tighten the policy. “ Historically, actors have always had to fight for employment. I wonder how many other pro­

Film Censorship Listings Continuedfrom p. 241 Exoristos stin kentriki leoforo (videotape): Not shown, Greece, 81 mins, Sinbad Overseas Trading Co., S(i-m g). 0 (d ru g s) Ghost Story: B. W eissbourd, U.S., 2940.85 m, Cinema Int’l Corp., S (i-m -j) The Godfather Squad (16m m): P. M ing, Hong Kong, 921 48 m, Video Classics, V(f-m -g) I, the Jury: R. Solo, U.S., 2940.85 m, W arner Bros (Aust.), S(i-m -g), V(t-m -g) Je tu il elle (16m m): Paradise Films, France, 910.51 m, Australian Film Institute, S(f-m -g) Monkey Grip: P. Lovell, Australia, 2788.8 m, Pavilion Films, S(i-m -g), L(f-m -g) Murderer Pursues: Shaw Bros, Hong Kong, 2626.52 m, Joe Siu Int’l Film Co., V(f-m -g) Oriental Blue (m od ified version) (videotape) (b): Lolas Film s, U.S.. 59 mins, Anjohn Int’l, S (f-m -g), L(f-m -g) P o rk y’s: D. C a rm o n d y /B . C la rk , U .S ./C a n a d a , 2620.03 m. Roadshow Dist., S(i-m -g), L(f-m -g) Prodlissy (v id e o ta p e ): A. F on so n /E . A n oussaki, Greece, 100 m ins, Sinbad Overseas Trading Co., S (i-m -g)

Joan Fontaine Continuedfrom p. 299

fessions have had to fight so hard for the right to employment in their own country?” she queried.

Lyn Gailey, recently-elected NSW vice­ president of the Australian Theatrical and Amusement Employees Association, spoke of the need for a standard crew agreement which would supersede the verbal agreem ent commonly used to engage crews.

Thornhill then attacked Equity over a mis­ representation of the process of obtaining work permits for foreign artists, arguing that Equity members were able to work overseas so should permit a reciprocal flow of artists here. The dispute appeared to be about whether Equity had the right to bar foreign actors or only the right to consultation with the Department for Employment and Youth Affairs. Paramore insisted that not one film which had been built around overseas actors had done well or won critical acclaim, and anyway seven Australians working overseas was not a significant number.

At this point, the apparently trouble-free nature of the film industry evaporated for the legal audience and the complexities of the producer’s job of “walking on water”, in the words of one participant, became clear.

Producer Tony Buckley had spent the first session outlining the 17 steps to producing a feature and the necessary contracts to be drawn up at each stage (see box). With his calm manner and heavy, black-rimmed spectacles, Buckley could have passed for a lawyer himself and did an excellent job of explaining the process of going from an option agreement to the last contract of his 17 steps, the errors and omissions policy.

Buckley described the difficulties experienced in obtaining the latter for his last released film, Killing of Angel Street, because of last minute doubts about the fictional names used. The film began in 1976 with a first draft screenplay and in

Quest for Fire: Belstar-Stephan, Canada, 2646.76 m, Hoyts Dist., S(i-m -j), Vfi-m -j) Schizoid: Cannon,. U.S., 2352.68 m, Video Classics, V(f-m -g) Sexomania (videotape): M. lo unid ou/S . Farmakis, Greece, 81 mins, Sinbad Overseas Trading Co., S(f-m -g) The Sexpert (m odified version) (videotape): Poseidon Films, U.S., 90 mins, Anjohn Int’l, S (l-m -g) Shades of Blue 001 (videotape): Astra Video Ltd, U.S., 59 mins, G.L. Film Enterprises, S (i-m -g), O(nudity) Shogun Assassin (videotape): New W orld Pictures Inc., Japan, 86 mins, TCN, V(f-m-g) Shogun Assassin: New W orld Pictures Inc., Japan, 86 mins. Star Video, V(l-m -g) Sometime Sweet Susan (soft version) (videotape): TCX Prod., U.S., 72 mins. Star Video, S(f-m -g) Tango of Perversion (m odified version) (videotape): Carar Films, Greece, 84 mins, Anjohn Int'l, S(f-l-g), O fsexual allusions) VIP — The International Men’s Video Magazine Vol. 1 (videotape): Not shown, U.S., 50 mins, Electric Blue (A'sia), S (i-m -g), O (nudity) (a) Previously shown on January 1971 list as Scratch Harry (b) Previously shown on O ctober 1981 list.

Special condition: That the film be shown only to its m em bers by the National Film Theatre of Australia in

It was a good part — one that I understood. It was Hedda Hopper, and all those journalists I really knew. I knew how they behaved, so it was not difficult for me to do it.

And, again, it was a political thing.

I certainly understand the politics of the press in -relation to films and film people, and what it’s like — society as well.

degenerate grandmothers. I would rather not work in films and do stage work than do that kind of thing. And they have a terrible habit of putting a sharp lens on you and making you look like Bette Davis turned inside out. I don’t Do you regret not having worked want that. I don’t want to play with any particular directors? those parts.

I don’t think so.

The last thing I saw you in was a television film, “The Users”, with Tony Curtis and Darren McGavin, but I didn’t greatly enjoy it. Were you attracted to the part there or did you just feel like working?

How about Billy Wilder and Nicholas Ray, with whom you made one film each?

They were so foreign to me in their natures. Nick Ray was just a

the next year became “The Juanita Factor” . It was their intention to base the film on facts but make a fictional film. In 1978, the script was called “Not in the Public Interest” and, in its next version, which was completely fictional, it became “ Hot Property” . Buckley said, “ We had been making period films and we wanted to get into contemporary Australian cinema, not to make a bland film but a look at social issues.”

On advice from one lawyer, a Queen’s Counsel engaged all the way through the film, this was exactly what they had done. They even had one scene which was a disclaimer that the film was about Juanita Nielsen. Buckley told the seminar that certain property developers in the Kings Cross area had made heavy demands on their lawyers to check the script, but these demands were always refused.

The seminar, which had been planned for 40 lawyers, was initiated by the AFC as part of its industry training scheme. To quote the foreword to the reference materials, “The continuing.education of lawyers in film law was considered an important part of film production, so an approach was made to the College of Law, an arm of the New South Wales Law Society, which specializes in continuing education. The AFC and the College felt that the seminar should increase the number of legal practitioners having some knowledge and experience of the legal problems and some of their solutions in the creative business of film production.”

Future seminars for Melbourne and perhaps Perth are under consideration by the AFC, as is the creation of a film law society. The reference papers, which include a valuable glossary of terms, a bibliography and index to cases, as well as examples of key contracts, will be available from June at the AFC and the College of Law.

its 1982 "The C elluloid Closet” season.

I Led Two Lives (16m m): Edward D. W ood jun., U.S., 812 m, National Film Theatre of Australia Olivia (16mm): J. Audry, France, 987.3 m, National Film Theatre of Australia

Films Registered With Eliminations For Restricted Exhibition (R) The Godson (vldeotape) (a): Global, U.S., 89 mins, K & C Video, Sff-m -g) Reason for deletions: O fsexual violence) Night of the Vibrator (16mm): Not shown, U.S., 548.5 m, 14th M andolin, S(f-m -g) Deletions: 24.5 m (2 m ins 14 secs) Reason for deletions: S(i-h-g) (a) Not identical with The Godson shown on March 1973 list.

Look No Staples Vol. 1 (videotape): Club Video, Britain, 60 mins, Videocraft, S(i-h-g) Look No Staples Vol. 2 (videotape): Club Video, Britain, 60 mins. Videocraft, S(f-h-g) The Lusty Ladies of Capitol Hill: J. Skintges, U.S., 2684 m, Greg Lynch Film Dist., S ff-h-g) The Stimulant (16mm): Not shown. U.S., 656 m, 14th M andolin, Sff-h-g) Teenage Swingers (soft version) (16mm) (b): T. Taylor, U.S.. 657.5 m. Landm ark Films. Sff-h-g) Temptations (reconstructed pre-censor cut version) (c): D. Eagle. U.S., 2063 m, A.Z. Associated Theatres.

Sff-h-g) (a) Previously shown on August 1981 list. (b) Previously shown on January 1982 list. (c) Previously shown on O ctober 1981 list, and on January 1982 list as I Feel It Rising.

Films Refused Registration

Films Board of Review

Bound to Please (16mm): Not shown, U.S., 628 m, 14th M andolin, S(f-h-g) Emanuelle Queen of Sardos (reconstructed version) (a): A ndrom eda & O thello Prods, Greece, 2291 m, Apollon Films, O fsexual exploitation of a m inor) Horny Vampire (16mm): Not shown, U.S., 578 m, 14th M andolin, Sff-h-g)

Sharky’s Machine (a): O rion Pictures, U.S., 3319.03 m, W arner Bros (Aust.)

Decision reviewed: Classify “ R” by the Film Censor­ ship Board.

Decision of the Board: Uphold the decision of the Film C ensorship Boardfa) Previously shown on January 1982 list. if

nice stuttering guy from Brooklyn and Billy Wilder had been a piano player in a whorehouse in Vienna.

So, I really did not have a lot in common with them.

I think I am remembered for Rebecca, The Constant Nymph, Jane Eyre and Letter From an Unknown Woman.

Are you happy with that?

Was there any role you didn’t play that you would love to have done?

Oh, lots. I never saw From Here to Eternity, but I was offered a role.

I had family problems at the time and custodial problems with my daughter, so I had to turn it down.

Several I had to turn down because of trying to be a mother, wife and money-earner, as well as actress. It is a very difficult road to follow.

Looking back on your career, for which roles would you most like to be remembered?

Pretty good. Take a writer: how many books can you remember of Ernest Hemingway’s? If you have four you are remembered for, that’s pretty good.

I would like you to add “Ivy” to the list actually, but those four you men­ tioned are enough to establish you as a major actress . . . * Yes, they are all distinguished roles. That’s why I don’t really want to do anything tacky. I really don’t. ★ CINEMA PAPERS June - 281

K E M 8 0 0 S E R IE S : E V E R Y T H IN G IS P O S S I B L E

When you edit with KEM, you're editing with the best of them! From 16mm to Super-lóto 35mm—even videotape! Full picture and sound editing, transfer to video with SMPTE and EBUCode processing. With KEM as part of your editing team, sophisticated German engineering and totally versatile, totally flexible, totally variable editing makes every editing job possible. From a low budget commercial to a winner at Cannes. For further details, call us.

FILMWEST B PERTH

Filmwest Pty. Ltd. 75 Bennett Street, Western Australia 6000.

Phone: 3 25 1177, 3251423.

Telex: AA94150 FILMWA Cables "Filmwest" Perth.

MELBOURNE

Doug Stanley Nomad Films International Pty. Ltd. 71 Palmerston Cres., South Melbourne, Victoria 3205.

Phone: 699 7244 Telex: AA31290 NOMFIL.

You may be looking for script development money, selling a script, enticing investors or wooing the general public.

In each case you are selling a product, and like any product it must be packaged properly if it’s to be a success.

THE INVESTMENT DOCUMENT In the constant struggle to get finance for your project you must outshine the others. Ifyour image is unprofessional, you’ll miss out.

We will help you get above the rest with an effective, well designed and well written investment document.

THE SCRIPT You’v e written a great script and have mailed it off to producers and investors. It sits on their desks in its manilla cover, indistinguishable from the other ten that arrived in the mail that morning. Something as simple as a special cover or folder will make your script noticed and read.

THE LOGO Whether it’s for a script or for the title of a film, w e’ll design a logo that will enhance your product and dem and attention.

SYDNEY

Alan Lake Film Production 102 Chandos Street, St. Leonards, New South Wales 2065.

Phone: 439 7102.

SINGAPORE

Filmwest Fte. Ltd. Suite 185, Raffles Hotel, 1-3 Beach Road, Singapore 0718.

Phone: 3386044, 3361509.

Telex: RS36389 FLMWST Cables: "Raflotel".

GET YOUR ACT TOGETHER

THE ADVERTISING CAMPAIGN You’v e made your film and now you want to tell the theatre-going public about it. The idea of a large impersonal advertising agency is daunting. We are small but have five years’ experience in the promotion of new Australian films. We handle everything from press ads through to cinema trailers.

THE PRESS KTT The media is swamped with stapled, typed scraps of paper.

An interesting informative press kit will be noticed and will make the media’s job of promoting your film so much easier.

D. Worland & Co. is not a public relations firm. We specialise in designing, writing and marketing.

So if you want your script or movie to be shown in the best light, call Diane Worland or Omar Sehic at D. Worland & Co. They’ll give you an audience.

D. W ORLAND & COM PANY PTY. LTD. The Basement, 418 S i Hilda R d , Melbourne 3004. Tel: (03)26 6124 WAC 174

Book Reviews

Geoff Burrowes and George Miller Continuedfrom p. 212 Burrowes: The two are intrinsi­ cally interwoven. I don’t believe it’s possible in this business, unless you are absolutely cynical, and we wouldn’t be in this position if we were, to separate the pursuit of excellence from one’s objective appreciation of the situation. The pursuit of excellence is as intrinsic to you as putting on your under­ pants in the morning.

We’re not talking about enter­ tainment in lieu of art, we’re not talking about entertainment in lieu of craft. It is art and craft disci­ plined, orientated, targeted and controlled.

It is not because we are dopey that we make something simple. To

Book Reviews Continuedfrom p. 2 75 Filmmaking

The Photographs o f Chachaji — The Making o f a Documentary Film Vad Mehta Oxford University Press, $24 (HC) The story of the making of an Indian documentary film entitled Chachaji, My Poor Relation, a memoir by Vad Mehta which was awarded the Du Pont Columbia Award for Excellence in Broadcast Journalism.

History of the Cinema

The American Newsreel 1911-1967 Raymond Fielding, new edition University of Oklahom a/Im p., $9.95, $21.55 (HC) The history of the newsreel. First published in 1972.

Australian Cinema: Industry, Narrative and Meaning John Tulloch Allen and Unwin/Allen and Unwin, $9.95 A historical study of film in Australia in the silent and early sound period. A detailed documentation of the struggles of the Australian industry to establish itself from within the Hollywood empire, and numerous problems the industry faced.

Forever Ealing George Perry Pavill ion/Michael Joseph/Thomas Nelson Aust.. $25 (HC) The illustrated history of the great British film studio, which produced some of the best thrillers, comedies, adven­ tures and dramatic films seen on the screen.

Government and Film in Australia Ina Bcrtrand/Diane Collins Currency Press/Cambridge University Press, $14.95 The second book in this series of critical studies in the history of Australian film and television. This volume covers tfie story of the early struggle of the industry to survive against continuing government restrictions and the Hollywood Goliath, up to the gaining of the government assistance that has now set the Australian film industry on its feet.

The History o f Movie Photography Brian Coe Ash and G rant/H odder and Stoughton Aust., $29.95 (HC) The illustrated history of film cameras and projectors, from the earliest crude machines to the sophisticated equipment of today.

Hollywood Genres Thomas Schatz Temple University Press/Imp., $29.95 (HC) .

The development of the genre film as the mainstay of Hollywood filmmaking in the heyday of MGM. Para­ mount, Warner Brothers and others studios.

The Japanese Movie Donald Richie, new revised edition Kodansha/Bookwise, $36.50 (HC) An expanded and updated edition of this book covering the colorful history of Japanese filmmaking in all its aspects.

Well illustrated.

Kindergarten o f the Movies Anthony Slides ...................

Scarecrow Press/Jam es Bennett, $18.30 (HC) The history of the early American film studio. The Fine Arts Company, where films were made by D. W. Griffith, Douglas Fairbanks and others.

The Loving Darkness: The Cinema and Spanish Writers 1920 to 1936 C. B. Morris Oxford University Press/Oxford University Press, $40.95 (HC) A period of controversy, when writers in favor of the cinema were against those who saw it as a threat to the theatre, good writing and moral standards.

M otion Picture: The Development o f an A rt A. R. Fulton Oklahoma University Press/Imp., $17.95 (HC) A history of filmmaking showing how the makers learned and interpreted their ideas and developed the art.

Illustrated.

The Movies Richard Griffith, Arthur Mayer and Eileen Bowser, new revised edition Simon and Schuster/Ruth Walls, $34.95 (HC) A comprehensive history of American motion pictures, the filmmakers and the stars from the silents to the 1970s.

George Miller and Geoff Burrowes

arrive at the result, we had to have a greater comprehension of art and craft, -and • to have more assidu­ ously pursued excellence than the auteurs who eschew the implicit disciplines, who don’t recognize the heights to which one can take one’s craft. Simplicity and clarity of statement can only be arrived at after complex consideration — ask Albert Einstein or George Bernard Shaw!

What do you mean by “auteur”?

Burrowes: Well, its meaning is apparent, isn’t it?

Miller: “A film by . . . ” is almost a guarantee. There is only one person that ever did that well, and that was Alfred Hitchcock.

Burrowes: He was, not coin­ cidentally, a consummate crafts­ The Phenomenon o f the Soviet Cinema Yuri Voronstov and Igor Rachuk Central Books/Imp., $19.95 (HC) A comprehensive history of the cinema in the Soviet Union.

A Pictorial History o f Indian Cinema Firoze Rangoonwalla, remainder Hamlyn/Dymocks, $6.95 (HC) This book was not imported into the country by the pub­ lisher when first published in 1979. It is now on sale as a remainder and is a fascinating insight into the most prolific film industry in the world.

Sound and Cinema Evan William Cameron Redgrave/Imp., $10.95 The technological developments leading up to the birth of sound in the cinema and later events in the cinematic art.

Surrealism and American Feature Films J. H. Mathews Twayne/Remal, $19.95 (HC) A history of surrealism in films from the Marx Brothers to the Last Remake of Beau Geste.

Reference

Australian Film ¡900-1977 Andrew Pike and Ross Cooper Oxford University Press/Oxford University Press, $37.50 (HC) This very comprehensive reference to all (?) films made in Australia up to 1977 was published in 1980 at $75. It has now been re-issued in the original edition at half the price, which is more realistic.

Cinema: A Critical Dictionary Richard Roud, two volumes Seeker and Warberg/William Heineman, $6.95 (HC) An encyclopedia reference to all the world’s major film­ makers and their films, which are discussed in detail. More than 200 articles by leading film critics. One of the most important reference works on the cinema published to date.

Film Review 1981-82 Edited by F. Maurice Speed W. H. Allen/Hutchinson, $27.95 (HC) The 38th volume in this long-running series which surveys the British film scene, covering all films released in Britain plus articles and reviews.

HalliweH’s Film Guide Leslie Hailiwell, third edition Granada/M ethuen, $44.95 (HC) An updated edition — 2000 complete new entries, plus additional information on B films of the 1930s and ’40s and the film awards.

The Illustrated Directory o f Film Stars David Quinlan Batsford/Oxford University Press, $37.50 (HC) Concise career details and complete film appearances of more than 1600 film stars. Illustrated.

International Film Guide 1982 Edited by Peter Cowie Space Age Books, $17.95 The annual guide to the cinema industry throughout the world. Reports from each film producing country, awards, film schools, services, books, magazines, reviews and other information.

Movies Made fo r Television 1964-1979 Alvin H. Manill, new edition Da C apo/H olt Saunders, $23.95 A comprehensive coverage of telefeatures and mini-series, with casts and credits. An excellent reference volume.

The New Musical Express Guide to Rock Cinema Fred Dellos Hamlyn Paperbacks/Thomas Nelson Aust., $5.50 An alphabetical listing of film titles with performers and their music tracks.

Screen World 1981 Volume 32 Edited by John Willis Crown/Imp., $23.95 (HC) .

The annual listing of every film released in the U.S. during the year, with casts and stills from each film, plus details on new faces and an “ in memoriam” section of film personali­ ties who have left us.

Scripts

The Asphalt Jungle Ben Maddow and John Huston Southern Illinois University Press/Imp., $8.70, $18 (HC) A film directed by John Huston, starring Sterling Hayden and Louis Calhern.

Best Film Plays 1945 Edited by John Gassner and Dudley Nichols G arland/Im p., $52.80 (HC) Includes Lost Weekend, Spellbound, Double Indemnity, A Tree Grows in Brooklyn and seven other screenplays.

man. That’s why his reputation is as it is, not because he made artistic films or great statements.

But don’t you agree that a film or book can have meaning that even the director or author doesn’t see?

Burrowes: If something happens in a film that you don’t intend, then fuck, what were you doing? Where was your mind? That’s facile.

That’s not to dismiss moments of magic, when something happens that just lifts a performance or changes slightly the way in which you see the scene.

How will people in 50 years view “Snowy River”?

Miller: People will be able to say, “That is what Australia looked like Four Star Scripts Edited by Lorraine Noble G arland/Im p.. $33 (HC) Actual shooting scripts and how they are written, including It Happened One Night and The Story of Louis Pasteur.

Gone With the Wind The Illustrated Screenplay Lorrim er/LSP/Im p., $12.50 The complete screenplay and detailed history of the making of the film, with illustrations.

I Am a Fugitive From a Chain Gang Edited by John E. O’Connor University of Wisconsin/Imp., $7.45 The complete script of the Paul Muni films.

Little Caesar Edited by Gerald Peary University of Wisconsin/Imp.. $7.45 The full script of the Edward G. Robinson film.

The Naked City Albert Malz and Malvin Wald Southern Illinois University Press/Imp., $6.20 A Mark Hellinger film starring Barry Fitzgerald and Howard Duff, directed by Jules Dassin.

On the Waterfront Budd Schulberg Southern Illinois University Press/Imp., $7.45 A film directed by Elia Kazan, starring Marlon Brando and Karl Malden.

The Public Enemy Edited by Henry Cohen University of Wisconsin/Imp., $7.45 The script of the film starring James Cagney.

The Road to Glory Joel Sayre and William Saroyan Southern Illinois University Press/Imp., $9.95 A Daryl F. Zanuck film directed by Howard Hawks, star­ ring Frederic March.

Screenplays Werner Herzog Tanam Press/Imp., $7.45 Includes Acquire, the Wrath of God, Everyman for Himself and God Against All and Land of Silence and Darkness.

The Screenplay o f the French Lieutenant's Woman Harold Pinter Jonathan Cape/Australasian Publishing Co., $13.95 (HC) The complete screenplay adapted from the book by John Fowles.

Yankee Doodle Dandy Edited by Patrick McGilligan Wisconsin University Press/Imp., $7.45 The script of the classic musical starring James Cagney.

Television

Slay Tuned Richard Levinson St M artins/Imp., $14.35 (HC) An inside look at the making of prime time television by two television producers and filmmakers.

Television's Transformation: The Next 25 Years Stuart M. Deluca Barnes/Tantivy/Oaktree Press, $13.95 (HC) An illumination of American television today and a view of the future by a relevant examination of the past.

Watching TV: Four Decades o f American Television Harvey Castleman and Walter J. Podrazik, $22.75 A year-by-year history of television in the U.S. with facts and figures, plus behind-the-scenes details.

Cinema Techniques

Adventurous Filmmaking J. David Beal Focal Press/Butterworth, $27.95 (HC) A description of more ambitious and interesting tech­ niques for amateur filmmakers.

Basic Filmmaking Dana H. Hodgson and Stuart M. Kaminsky Arco/Prentice Hall, $10.75 A Guide to fundamental filmmaking techniques and technology.

The Film Script Roland Giustini Spectrum/Prentice Hall, $8.95 A step-by-step approach to writing professional film scripts from concept to shooting.

Knowing the Score: Notes on Film Music Irwin Bazelon Arco/Prentice Hall, $13.50 Views and anecdotes about producers, directors and other occupational hazards facing those who make music for films.

in the 1880s.” If the film contri­ butes anything to A ustralian history, it is a freezing of what the 1880s and 1890s looked like.

It is also the culmination of 20 years’ research on the part of the art director, Les Binns. People don’t realize that now, but they may in 50 years’ time.

Burrowes: I think people will look back on Snowy as a rather quaint and amusing little film made by a bunch of funny people in the same way as one looks back on films that Ken Hall made, which were brilliant successes in their day and have stood the test of time.

Miller: If the Australian public looks upon our film as fondly as they looked upon Ken Hall’s, then I’ll be a happy person. He really knew his craft. ★

Scripting fo r Video and Audiovisual Media Dwight V. Swain Focal Press/Butterworth, $49 (HC) A realistic approach to the art of film scripting.

The Thames and Hudson Manual o f Film Editing Roger Crittenden Thames and Hudson/T and H, $13.50 A comprehensive introduction to the techniques and skills of film editing.

The Movie Business David Lees and Stan Berkowitz Vintage/Doubleday Aust,, 56.20 How film deals are made, the studio system, budgeting dis­ tribution and much more.

Writing fo r Film and Television Stewart Bronfield Spectrum/Prentice Hall, $6.75 An introductory text.

Writing the Script Wells Root Holt R inehart/Holt Saunders, S8.95 A practical guide to scriptwriting for films and television.

In Front o f the Camera Bernard Sandler and Steve Posner Dutton/Bookwise, 59.95 How to make it and survive in films and television.

Non-Cinema Associated Titles

A Better Class o f Person: A n Autobiography 1929-1956 John Osborne Faber/Penguin Books, $22.95 (HC) The autobiography of playwright John Osborne, who writes about his early life and early success in the drama scene.

Diana Ross Geoff Brown Sidgwick and Jackson/Hutchinson Group. SI5.95 (HC) A biography of singer-actress Diana Ross. Illustrated.

Image-Music-Text Roland Barthes Fontana/William Collins, $6.95 Essays on the structural analysis of narrative and issues on literacy theory relating to literature, image, film, song and theatre.

Parkinson's Lore Michael Parkinson Pavillion/Michael Joseph/Thomas Nelson Aust., $13.95 (HC) ' Autobiographical reminiscences and anecdotes by the popular television interview show compere.

Piaf Monique Lance Sidgwick and Jackson/Hutchinson, 517.95 (HC) An illustrated biography of the French singer.

Side Effects Woody Allen New English Library/Australasian Publishing Co., 516.60 (HC) Woody Allen’s third collection of comic writing on a range of topical subjects.

Ten Days That Shook the World John Reed Penguin/Penguin Books, 54.95 The book by the writer whose life and experience is the basis for the film Reds.

Film Fiction

Hump Your Bluey to Hollywood Alan Veitch QB Books/Gordon and Gotch, $3.95 A humorous novel about an Australian actor trying his luck in Hollywood, by Graham Kennedy’s ex-scriptwriter.

Night Crossing Jurgen Petschull Coronet/Hodder and Stoughton, $3.95 Secret A rm y John Brason BBC/Hodder and Stoughton, S2.95 Tenko Anthony Masters BBC/Hodder and Stoughton, 54.95 True Confessions John Gregory Dunne Futura/Doubleday. 54.95 Whose Life is it Anyway?

David Benedictus Sphere/Thomas Nelson Aust., $3.95 Wings Over Enemy Lines Barry Thomas BBC/Hodder and Stoughton. S2.95 w

CINEMA PAPERS June - 283

Film Insurance

Film Insurance!Adair Continuedfrom p. 237 requirements for an upcoming production?

Hopefully, one would like to be called in quite early, when the budgets are being put together, and even before the final decisions about casting. Often, before fin­ ance has been arranged — by providing detail for the provisional budget — one can assist by indica­ ting a rating structure according to the script. Obviously, a film bearing a degree of hazard — with a number of stunt operations and exploding props — will carry a different rating structure to a film being principally shot in a studio.

Use of helicopters and locations for filming, for example, also affects this.

So, the earlier we are called into the project, the better. Unfortun­ ately, until recently, insurance was often the last thing considered by some film producers. Quotes were sometimes required in two days, with shooting scheduled to begin in three. The days of such produc­ tions have certainly gone by the board. Thankfully, solicitors, accountants, investors and especi­ ally producers now realize that the earlier a broker becomes involved, the better.

It doesn’t matter whether you are dealing with a film insurer in Aus­ tralia or overseas, the important thing is that the more information

Film Insurance/Cinesure Continued from p. 239 buying cheap, nasty insurance, there is very little benefit when a claim comes along.

McEwin: I would mention that we do have one financial advantage over foreign insurers: we don’t have to pay any withholding taxes and, as a result, we don’t have extra costs of this kind to pass on to clients.

How will your idea of rewarding producers with good track records work?

McEwin: On an individual basis for individual producers. It may mean rewarding them with keener rates because of their previous track record, or it may mean rewarding them at the end of a pro­ duction with some sort of no-claim rebate.

Does Cinesure offer any services or advantages that aren’t already avail­ able for film and television pro­ ducers?

McEwin: As a starting point, we can offer coverage as wide as that offered by any insurer in the world and that includes Errors and Omissions, Producers’ Indemnity 284 - June CINEMA PAPERS

the domestic types which apply to any co m m ercial o p e ra tio n : Worker’s Compensation, Public Liability, Motor Vehicle, Compre­ hensive, Payroll and so forth.

In the category regarding film production insurances, we initially cover certain key people, such as the director, perhaps the director of photography, and all important artists involved during the pre-pro­ duction period. If any mishap befalls those key people, it may affect the outcome of the project.

Next comes Film Producer’s Indemnity (FPI), or Cast Insur­ ance, which insures various actors, director of photography, the dir­ ector, sometimes even the pro­ ducer; those people who, if they become ill or were injured during production, could affect the con­ tinuity of the shooting schedule.

Remember, the daily cost of pro­ duction in Australia could be from $15,000 to $100,000.

Let’s say it is $30,000, and our example production works a 10hour day, six-day week. If some­ thing happens to a nominated person and production around a certain situation cannot continue for several days, all wages, hiring costs, rentals and so forth must continue to be paid. That $30,000 a day is still outgoing — and that is the basis of Film Producer’s Indemnity. Six days’ delay at $30,000 a day is a helluva lot of money. Think about a budget of around $100,000 a day . . .

Then we have Negative All Risk, or Negative Film Risk (NFR). This

protects the film until answer print stage, during the period from raw stock through to the editing, mixing and marriage of music tracks. If anything happens to that material during this stage of production, the film may have to be reshot. Or, if sufficient of it is damaged or destroyed, abandonment may have to be considered.

This insurance is particularly vital. The FPI lasts only the period of the actual shoot, after which the artists go their various ways. The Negative All Risk could go on for six months or longer after comple­ tion of the' shoot. This is why the budget Figure for NFR is often the greater, because it is covering a greater piece of the overall pro­ duction budget.

The next type of risk is called Props, Sets and Wardrobe, and covers .the replacement of these items, which may run into several hundred thousands of dollars. Also insured is the hiring of miscellan­ eous items of equipm ent — cameras, booms, lighting gear and so on — which are equally expen­ sive to replace or rehire.

Next, there is Extra Expense insurance. This covers the daily cost of the production company against something happening to the sets, causing the halting of the schedule. If a particularly import­ ant set is destroyed and must be rebuilt, everyone must continue to be paid during that reconstruction.

The set is covered, and so too is the extra expense incurred through its destruction or damage. With large

and Negative Film Insurance, for ment for the further protection of example. The fact that we are in the Australian public.

An interesting thing about the Australia means that we are able to discuss fully with any producer his Act, by the way, is that it demands or her policy needs, which can’t be a solvency margin with Australian done with overseas insurers many insurance companies — that is, a thousands of miles away. We are substantial differential between therefore better able to devise assets and liabilities — whereas tailor-made policies to suit every overseas companies don’t have to producer. We think our service will meet this criterion because the prove to be more personal, as well Insurance Commissioner has no as being speedier and more flex­ authority over them. ible.

But the ‘Act’ does not offer protec­ Lipman: That’s right. We are tion in the event of a dispute over a here in Australia. We can discuss claim, does it? their insurance needs and prob­ lems directly with our clients and Lipman: No it doesn’t involve give them immediate decisions, procedures for the settlement of which can’t be done when you are disputes but it aims to make sure dealing with overseas insurers. that the insurance company writing More important, if there is a loss, the business is financially sound. we are here on the spot to pay it. Another important point here is We are authorized to pay losses up that, if anyone has a legal dispute to $10,000 immediately to any film with an A ustralian insurance producer who has a justified claim. company, it can be settled in Aus­ And larger claims will be pro­ tralian courts. The policy holder cessed quickly „here in Australia. would not have to take his case to a Finally, there is the advantage of court in, say, Los Angeles, which the protection of the Common­ could happen with an overseas wealth Insurance Act. insurer. And it’s obvious what an expensive proposition that would Does the ‘Insurance Act’ make that be. much difference?

You are aiming to service the film Lipman: I believe it does. It is and television industry throughout always being updated to meet Aus­ Australia. Yet Cinesure’s only office tralian needs. Only this week, the is in Sydney, while a few of the Parliament has before it an amend­ brokers have offices in all the major

State capitals. So how will you service clients outside Sydney?

you can provide the underwriter, the more detail you collect, the more you can display an intimate knowledge of the script, the greater the chances of obtaining a better rate. If you can’t provide the under­ writers with such complete details, they will quote a rate which builds in the possibility of risk. The more you tell them, the more accurate the rate will be and the better it will look on the overall budget figures being prepared for investors and producers.

Provided we, as brokers, have all the information at hand, we can successfully advise our under­ writers of the suggested rate. And it is very rare that we have that rate queried by them. In the event that there is any alte ra tio n , the producers will know about it within 24 hours. Distance between broker and underwriter is of no commer­ cial consequence with this style of relationship.

How many types of insurances are there with which the film producer — and his investors — must be concerned?

There are two basic types of insurance, covering a wide range of implications. There are the Special Film Insurances, appertaining to the filming of the production, pro­ tection of the artists, of the nega­ tive, props, sets, wardrobe, equip­ ment. etc. Then there are the Com pany Insurances, which comply with various requirements of state law. These insurances are

Lipman: At present, Cinesure itself has only an office in Sydney, although its parent company (Terence Lipman Pty Ltd) is repre­ sented in all parts of Australia and throughout the world. The four companies for which we act have offices in every city and major town in the country. Nevertheless, we believe it is best that Cinesure itself operates from a single, centralized office. This is because we know from previous experience that specialist insurance is most efficiently handled by senior experts at a single point.

So, the existence of extra offices would only cause delays as any business would have to be referred to the central office anyway. After all, if you go to a broker’s office in, say, Perth, that office is going to have to refer your enquiry to its head office in Sydney and, until now, of course, it would then have to be referred to an insurer overseas. At Cinesure, we are ready to hop on a plane at any time to do business with a client in any part of Australia. And, frankly, that’s also cheaper than maintaining offices throughout the land. Those offices would only mean extra costs which ultimately would have to be passed on to the clients. ★

Film Insurance

productions, Extra Expense may cover up to $1 million worth of additional expenditure.

Then, there is Third Party Property Damage and Loss of Use. Hiring of cameras and equipment is often a significant slice of the pro­ duction budget. If something happens to that equipment and it must be repaired, the hiring costs must continue to be paid until that equipment is back in operation.

The hiring company will, of course, supply another camera, but will insist that hiring charges be paid on both cameras until the first is fixed, and is therefore hireable again. This covers loss of revenue from loss of use to the hiring company, and is a typical example of this type of insurance cover.

There are two other areas of cover which were not always con­ sidered essential, but appear to have become so recently. The first is Errors and Omissions, which pro­ tects the production company — and thus the investors — against lawsuits involving libel or defama­ tion, plagiarism and so forth. This insurance may be taken from one to three years from the date requested, and continuously renewed if required.

The other area is not an insur­ able risk, but a financial risk, and is now becoming a necessary part of the business. It is called Comple­ tion G uarantee. We are not involved in this area, but it basic­ ally guarantees that, if a project goes over budget, the film is completed and paid for by the completion guarantor. Investors are insisting more and more upon this type of agreement, often on their behalf by solicitors. If called upon, we will advise the names of companies that are in this busi­ ness.

How has the introduction of the Federal Government taxation con­ cessions in the film industry affec­ ted your brokerage?

The concessions have meant a great deal to the production companies of Australia, attracting bigger budgets and a greater volume of production generally. In that respect, it has enabled us to have greater involvement in the business. And as the budgets have become larger, the whole area of business has become much more sophisticated. In light of interna­ tional interest in our product today, that’s timely.

Apart from Adair’s insurance con­ nections with the industry, has the company ever been an investor in Australian film?

As Australian brokers for more than 20 years, we have always believed we should put our money where our mouth is; that whatever

investments we make with any pro­ fits should be in the areas of busi­ ness with which we are principally concerned.

We have invested in several Aus­ tralian theatrical and film produc­ tions over the years — in fact, in eight films to date. All our invest­ ments were made in the pre­ concession era; it was purely risk money. We will continue to invest in films on a selective basis.

experience on both sides. The better the quality of information provided and assessment given, the better the premium rate from the beginning.

And that is the key issue affecting the bottom line.

What actually happens in the event of a claim? How simple is the settle­ ment procedure?

There are claims all the time in the Australian film business. For­ As an Australian company with sub­ tunately, to date, there has been no stantial international connections dramatic claim of the Natalie and access to their facilities, what Wood variety, where the actress her death at a vital stage of a do you consider the overall benefits met project.

One of these days, how­ of such connections to your clients? ever, I believe it will happen.

In the event of a normal claim, We have a wide range of facili­ assessors familiar with the piece of ties available, from local, to business are available to investi­ Lloyd’s and other London markets, gate and assess the claim. With to Ruben and The Fireman’s Fund much of the small claim business, in the U.S. These cover the best list such as the breakdown of a piece of of contacts in the business, contacts equipment, the information is we utilize to our best abilities to the already at hand and it is often advantage of our Australian clients. unnecessary to send an assessor to Hence, good rates. the site. The information is simply It is significant that last year gathered and despatched to the Albert G. Ruben and Co. and The underwriter. Once we receive Fireman’s Fund made a conscious advice that the claim has been decision to enter the Australian accepted and that official con­ market. Ruben is the sole world­ firmation of payment is to be made, wide underwriter for The Fire­ we can settle the claim on behalf of man’s Fund Insurance Company, the underwriters.

A claim may arise, however, and in 1981 Scott Milne, Ruben president, came to Australia to which can be assessed but not final­ investigate the market. It is, natur­ ized in its value until the film is ally, a matter of great pride to our­ completed. There may be a great selves that Adair was appointed deal of detail to be sorted out with sole re p re s e n ta tiv e for the the production accountant and companies in Australia and New others involved, and final cost often Zealand. Such connections — con­ cannot be established until proces­ sidering The Fireman’s Fund is the sing is completed.

It is important to note that we biggest in the business — are not in­ consequential to our clients. Our have a network of experienced servicing base to the industry in executives able to advise on claim Australia and New Zealand has procedure on the spot. broadened considerably. We now have client production companies What business does Adair have at shooting as far afield as the South present?

Pacific, Greece, Yugoslavia and Over the past few months, we Germany, and using various over­ have handled something in excess seas laboratory facilities.

It is also important to underline of $35 million worth of insured that this recent liaison, in partic­ value of feature films, as well as a ular, has brought into Australia a continual run of documentaries, long and established list of industry commercials and small produc­ connections, and lines of often tions. Today, our client budgets personal contact with industry range from $20,000, for the filming marketers, distributors, financiers, of four two-minute commercials in lawyers and producers. These con­ Fiji, to a $7 million feature.

When feature films are tailing off nections are invaluable to any exporting industry, particularly in toward the end of the financial year, film production crews become Australia.

For example, let’s say a client of busy handling documentary and Ruben and The Fireman’s Fund other commercial business, which visits Australia on a project. The c a rrie s them th ro u g h u n til logical conseqence is that he will be July/August when film produc­ requested to contact Adair upon tions start again.

We are currently quoting on nine arrival. If he doesn’t already have the contacts, we will put him in Australian feature films as the touch with the right people in the industry gears for the new finan­ Australian market: solicitors who cial year, and four major produc­ may specialize in fund-raising, the tions in New Zealand. media, distributors, PR people, even other insurers. Conversely, From your standpoint, what changes these benefits and introductions are have you seen in production values available to our Australian clients over the past decade of close involve­ during visits to the U.S. or Europe. ment?

The greatest benefit of such a The budgets in the early 1970s liaison, however, is the strength of

went as low as $200,000 for a feature film, and now we are dealing with $7 m illion and upwards. Back then, $500,000 was considered large.

Over the past 18 months, in par­ tic u la r, local bu d g ets have increased dramatically in line with the increased number of films in production. Values have been rising steadily over the years as film crews become more experienced, and wages and inflation take their course. One of our clients, for whom we insured a film worth $293,000 in 1977, is now producing a film worth $3.5 million. That is indicative. It is difficult to produce a worthwhile feature film for less than $1 million today, considering the quality of sets, locations, crew, actors and equipment necessary to ensure a good chance at local and international commercial success.

Given your own and your company’s experience in Australian film, what is your opinion of the current state of the industry, and its likely future?

Perhaps only the Treasurer can prophesy the future of the industry; he is the only one who knows what is going to happen in regard to investment.

However, over the years I have seen the quality and expertise exhibited in A u stralian film improve out of sight. The inter­ change of experienced people — Australians going overseas and internationals coming here — has been of tremendous value to the development of our producers, writers, directors, crews and artists.

Our writers, I believe, could use a little more of that interchange to polish the edges.

The experience has made an incredible difference to our growth.

That is probably one of the reasons so much interest is now found in Australian film.

There must be a very good reason why Australians can secure good acting roles in foreign films, why Australian directors, camera­ men and other professionals are being sought internationally. It is because they are very good at their craft.

Generally, the Australian in­ dustry is becoming a very sophist­ icated operation. And this will continue, providing we don’t get into the area of, how shall we say, featherbedding, as we have seen occur in the U.S. and Europe, provided we don’t develop the type of temperamental artists who will walk off the set, thereby causing inflated costs through production holdups.

One of the most noteworthy aspects of our industry today is the level of dedication inherent in our artists and production profes­ sionals. If we can continue to work that way, with dedicated people working hard and being fairly remunerated, I can see nothing but a good and solid future for Austra­ lian product. ★ CINEMA PAPERS June - 2S5

m

m

í i í s g

s - ^

-

r'ïa^r:^^

»:

.,.

^¡S P

32g

Jam es Ivory

James Ivory Continuedfrom p. 219 than their predecessors in achieving a genuine richness of emotional texture and a satisfying sense of the reaction of one nature, and of culture, upon another.

That they render as much of James’ vision as they do is not due just to the dialogue’s fidelity to the original or to the intelligence with which it is spoken. It is essentially a matter of 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 (Lee Remick), the Baroness Munster, morganatic wife of a German princeling, and her brother Felix (Tim Woodward), an artist manque, approach their American cousins, the Wentworths, in different frames of mind. Each wants something from the visit: Eugenia wants a fortune (“That’s always interesting” , is her reply to learning that the Wentworths’ neighbor Robert Acton has one); Felix is determined to be entertained and, though he will be pleased if his cousins are rich, it is not a condition of his enter­ tainment. Eugenia, with her clearer sense of purpose, loses her chance with Acton (Robin Ellis) whose Yankee shrewdness is a match for her sophistication. Felix, ironically, Finds in his love for Gertrude Wentworth (Lisa Eichhorn) the seriousness that has been missing from his life.

By somewhat surprisingly omitting the novel’s opening chapter which so skilfully establishes the different approaches of brother and sister to America, Ivory and his collaborators have undervalued the importance James places on the cultural gap between them and their New England cousins. The novel is far from being a schematic treatment of Old World sophistica­ tion exploiting American innocence — or of the latter effecting moral regeneration in decadent Europeans — and the Film certainly avoids any such simplistic sense of representativeness.

However, it also loses a pressure that would make the finely-achieved individual relation­ ships mean more if set more Firmly in a context of cultural differences.

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, and in a series of lovely tracking shots along streets, across Fields, up staircases and over bridges. 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 to be felt in differences of dress (cf. Eugenia’s blue-black ballgown contrasts with the pastel sameness of the Boston ladies), in ways of standing and sitting, of looking and walking.

Nevertheless, our sense of these differences would have been strengthened by retaining James’ opening scene. To begin as Ivory does, with Gertrude Wentworth’s undefined dis­ content, certainly establishes her life 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.

This is all played with delicacy and exactness, and the girl’s restlessness is sharply and dramatically at odds with the Film’s visual and aural imagery — a serenely lovely setting and “Shall we gather at the river” on the sound­ track. Fine as this is, this scene works against the centrality the book gives to Eugenia — a centrality the Film also wants to insist on — and slightly undermines Lee Remick’s effectiveness

in the role. Without seeing her earlier, bitterly unhappy response to America, we are less moved than we might be by her sudden access of genuine emotion when she says to her uncle (Wesley Addy): “ I should like to stay here . . .

Pray take me in.”

This is my one serious complaint about the Jhabvala adaptation. The Film is not perfect James: there are some inevitable coarsenings, particularly in comic moments like that in which Felix asks Mr Wentworth if he may marry Gertrude; and Mr Brand (Norman Snow), Gertrude’s other suitor, a charcoal sketch among watercolors, belongs to a darker New England tradition. It is not perfect Ivory either: it does occasionally linger when it ought to move on as if it could hardly tear itself away from the beauty of New England in the fall. However, The Europeans is an immensely attractive Film, exhibiting Ivory’s preoccupations and strengths at their most distinctive and distinguished. The cross-cultural tensions previously examined in the context of East-West relations in modern India, or in the allegoric situation of forest­ dwelling savages in a deserted mansion in Savages (1972) (a Film I have not been able to see and one which sounds tantalizingly typical), are here explored in a lovingly-recreated corner of America a hundred years ago. Essentially, though, meticulous as Jeremiah Rusconi’s art direction is, it is Ivory’s characteristic trust in his actors, in their faces above all, that allows him to approach the subtle shifts of James’ prose.

The cast, especially Remick, Ellis, Eichhorn, Addy, and Helen Stenborg (as Mrs Acton), show a striking capacity to speak dialogue of a subtle resonance unusual 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 instruments of meaning, and to the way Ivory trusts them with so much of the Film’s meaning.

The Film’s grammatical staple is the centrescreen medium shot of one or other of these eloquent faces, and Ivory is right to trust them.

The tracking shots, the beautifully and naturally composed two-shots and groupings around tables, in doorways, or by hearths, all make their points with quiet 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 change; or the two kinds of goodness reflected respectively in the gentleness of Helen Stenborg’s Mrs Acton and the stern rectitudes of Wesley Addy’s Mr Went­ worth: these are discriminations achieved by a director and cameraman who know what a camera can make the right face reveal. he Europeans has been the most popular of Ivory’s films to ‘be shown here; short without being slight, it is also complex without being obscure.

Its emotional territory has points of contact with many of his other films but the approach to it has been accessible to larger audi­ ences. Certainly there was scarcely an audience at all for Hullabaloo over Geòrgie and Bonnie’s Pictures made the previous year (1978) for British television. Its story is seemingly slight: two western art-collectors, Lady G. (Peggy Ash­ croft), a buyer for a London museum, and Clark Haven (Larry Pire), an independent American collector, are bent on acquiring the priceless Tasveer m iniature paintings, held in a Maharajah’s palace. Western opportunism exploits what it erroneously takes to be Indian naivety, as Lady G. woos “Geòrgie” , the present Maharajah whose grandfather collected the miniatures, and Haven sets out to charm “ Bonnie” , the Maharani.

From this slender thread, Ivory and Jhabvala weave a texture of remarkable richness. The recurring preoccupations of one culture impinging on another, of people exploiting each other, are brilliantly served by Jhabvala’s screenplay. In this case, Jhabvala has gone further, concerning herself with other issues of large signiFicance, such as the purpose of art in life and the ways in which works of art mean and matter. These issues — and this is true of all the best of the team’s films — are not thrown up as matters for discussion or as captions to scenes; they arise organically from the particularity of scenes, from script and playing. John Pym, reviewing the Film for the Monthly Film Bulletin (May 1979), sums up and exempliFies the way “the cases are put for both art and life. When the collection is shown for the second time in silence (on the First occasion, the picture’s ‘meaning’ is glossed by Haven’s comments), the succession of tranquil images effortlessly reduces the

T

CINEMA PAPERS June - 287

THINKING OF FILMING IN CENTRAL OR NORTHERN AUSTRALIA? THEN CONTACT US FOR ADVICE O N LOCATIONS, EQUIPMENT, PERMITS, CREW, PRODUCTION SUPERVISION A N D A MILLION OTHER THINGS THAT CAN DRIVE YOU NUTS W HEN FILMING IN REMOTE AREAS. "CHECK W ITH THE LOCALS,” THEY SAY WE'RE LOCALS A N D USED TO FILMING UNDER

CONDITIONS.

PO BOX 3552, DARWIN, NORTHERN TERRITORY. TELEPHONE: (089) 851093

STUDIO FOR SALE Modern Sound Stage Studio and Offices.

354-356 Liverpool Rd., Ashfield N.S.W. LOCATION: 2,042 m2 SITE AREA: BUILDING AREA: (a) Main Building 2nd Studio Part Completed Office & Amenities 234 m2 Factory 468 m2 Total 702 m2 (b) New Section Sound Stage Studio Showroom, Office, Amenities 125 m2 Studio 245 mz Total 370 m2 Total Building Area 10272 m2 2(a) ZONING: CONSTRUCTION: Attractive Brick building Two dock loading plus three roller shutters ACCESS: 3.7m x 3.4m each WALL HEIGHTS: 3.8m to truss rising to 4.9m centre 5 W.C. with hand basins and shower AMENITIES: Ample power as presently being utilised for heavy POWER: electrical Hi-Fi equipm ent 10 off-street car spaces or more if required PARKING: Mezzannine plus ground floor fully carpeted with air OFFICES: conditioning Two 1000-gallon under ground fuel tanks plus one INCLUSIONS: 150-gallon above ground fuel tank

W A N TE D An essentially non-legal position within the film industry for a highly qualified young and am bitious law yer w ith experience in licensing, contract and copyright.

Contact Y.A.L. C /- 7 Belgrave Street, M AN LY N.S.W. 2095

W A R W IC K ’S B A C K !

FREEMAN: (Creative consultant) ... “Channel 0/28 has been a most rewarding and stimulating two years of my life. It’s not often that one gets an opportunity to help initiate a whole television netw ork!’’

W ARW ICK FREEM AN

“N o w

doing what he does best!”

PRODUCING and DIRECTING T e le v i s io n — F ilm — T h e a t r e SUITE 5, 1st FLOOR, 182-186 BLUES POINT RD., NORTH SYDNEY 2060

(02) 929 7589 (02) 921 896

James Ivory

characters’ squabbles and discontents to insignificance.”

Hullabaloo has been an unmitigated disaster in the cinema-, even more than most Ivory, it is an utterly uncommercial venture. And yet, I can’t help feeling that it is really best suited to television: it is essentially a small-screen subject, intimately and lovingly treated, even if one rejects Sight and Sound's fulsomeness in describing it as “ an exquisite little rondo” . (In spite of this praise and three stars in its Film Guide, Summer 1979, Sight and Sound did not bother to review it, though appearing to rate it as one of the most impressive films of the quarter.)

With its impeccable sense of place, discreetly evoked by Walter Lassally’s camerawork and acting beyond praise from Peggy Ashcroft, Aparna Sen (“ Bonnie”), Victor Bannerjee (“Geòrgie”) and Saeed Jaffrey (Shri Narain, in charge of the collection), it would surely have elicited the sort of audience and appreciation recently accorded Staying On, that other touch­ ing and funny tale of the end of the Raj. Jhabvala, interviewed in Sight and Sound, Winter 1978/79, has said, “ Essentially, I think a television play is people closed up in a room talking.” “ Essentially” , that may be the case; rarely, though, are they given such resonant and witty things to say as they are in Hullabaloo.

be a statue of Gandhi. Around the statue, a prosperous, complacent audience gathers for a sermon about “godly love” , followed by an alfresco meal during which the boy is pulled out from under the table and sent away hungry. So much for Gandhian principles, as the film ends with the boy walking solitarily on the beach that night and the camera moves in for a sad final close-up.

A summary makes it sound triter than it is, but there is no denying a certain sentimentality in the concept and some schematic touches in Tanveer Faruquei’s screenplay (a woman feeding a dalmatian refuses the boy food). It nevertheless offers some telling ironic observa­ tions on the way one cultural group can ignore another’s needs, not wishing to be discomposed by signs of real deprivation. Perhaps in counter­ point to its sad little story, it is always lovely to look at in Subrata Mitra’s gentle images.

Helen — Queen of the Nautch Girls, written

by Ivory, produced by Merchant and directed by Anthony Korner, had a brief “supporting” season at Melbourne’s Longford Cinema.

Though it is a documentary and not even directed by Ivory, it is a useful film to note in conclusion. The film’s commentary (spoken by Korner) records — laments? — the unpopu­ larity of traditional Indian dances, long since superseded in the public taste by inordinately long (3 to 4 hours) musical films whose success he two Ivory-Merchant short films I depends on the superstar Helen. The film offers have been able to see — Mahatma and highlights from Helen’s films, much influenced, the Mad Boy (1973) and Helen — if often bizarrely so, by Hollywood, and they Queen of the Nautch Girls (1973) — recall variously Ann Miller, Vera-Ellen, Jessie have their points of interest and Matthews and Cyd Charisse, though Helen herself touches of charm. Mahatma and the Mad Boy has real charm and character. These latter (produced and directed by Merchant) is are a seen as she sits at her make-up table, parable shot on Bombay’s Juhn beach, focusing talking about her difficult early years, her on a little beach boy (Sajid Khan) who scavenges English father and Burmese mother, and her for food and, perhaps improbably, has a monkey shrewd assessment of her future — “probably for company. He engages in conversation with character roles” , and perhaps “a boutique in the an at-first-unseen audience which proves to Sheraton Hotel — something groovy” .

T

The film’s irony is that, genuinely attractive and talented, and hugely popular, as Helen is, her films represent a western debasement of an art form with a long history. Against this view, and perhaps more insidious, the fact is that, “ Even intellectuals call these escapist fantasies a new folk art” , when they are clearly no more than camp. Helen’s films offer glimpses of luxury and exotica, and of an otherwise unview­ able eroticism. They are frequently set in cabarets which allow the producers scope for the fantastic and which bring a note of forbidden luxury, liquor and western decadence. The big dance number — and the documentary makes generous use of Helen’s films — is always the film’s top spectacular moment and, a further irony, in its mindless, pretty way, is also the pinnacle of professionalism in Indian film.

Helen — Queen of the Nautch Girls intercuts a scene from Ivory’s Bombay Talkie in which Helen and the film’s star, Shashi Kapoor, dance on the keys of a huge typewriter. A scene from a film about filmmaking and an absurd sub­ Hollywood production number is a good metaphor for the recurring preoccupations of human beings (no film could exist without this) and it is the result of one culture having collided with another.

Postscript: At the time of writing, I have just learnt that the next Merchant-Ivory production, begun in February 1982, is a film version of Ruth Prawer Jhabvala’s novel, the remarkable Heat and Dust, adapted by the author. The film stars Julie Christie, Christopher Cazenove and Shashi Kapoor who seem ideal casting for the central roles of Olivia Rivers, wayward wife of the District Officer, her husband Douglas, and the local Nawab with whom Olivia has an affaire which alters her life.

A ckno wledgments: 1 would like to acknowledge the assistance of Andrew Pike of Ronin Films, C an berra, in making several of the M erchant-Ivory films available to me, and for providing photographs and other information relating to them. In particular, since I wrote the above article, he has supplied the following com m ents on the release history of the M erchant-Ivory films dis­ tributed by Ronin.

Autobiography of a Princess was screened exten­ sively in M elbourne as a supporting feature in “ a r t ” and repertory cinemas and received excellent reviews.

It was never adequately released in Sydney but had great commercial success as a main feature in C anberra. It has been rejected repeatedly by ABC television, though it has been heavily used by film societies.

Bombay Talkie had universally hostile reviews in Australia, except in T h e C a n b e r r a T im e s . It had minor, comm ercialiy-disastrous first-release seasons at the Universal, Fitzroy, and the W alker Street C inem a, Sydney, and slightly better commercial results in C anberra. In general it has been “ seldom screened and widely detested” .

Hullabaloo over Georgie and Bonnie’s Pictures had minor theatrical releases in Sydney (at W alker Street) and Melbourne (at the Silver Screen), with excellent reviews and very poor results. Again, it had some commercial success in C a n b e rra and very heavy dem and from film societies.

Jan e Austen in M an h attan suffered a commercially very poor season at M elbourne’s Brighton Bay T w in ’, but had fair commercial results in C an berra. Its reviews ranged from respectful to positive, but it has so far attracted no interest from film societies or repertory cinemas.

Ronin Films is com fortably in profit with Auto­ biography and Hullabaloo but there seems little prospect of this happening with Bombay T alkie or Jan e Austen. ★

A dance performance at the M aharajah’s palace. James Ivory's Hullabaloo Over Geòrgie and Bonnie’s Pictures.

3. The cinem a’s co-manager, Michael W alsh, told me that the meagre audiences were not just indifferent but downright hostile to the film.

CINEMA PAPERS June - 289

A SPECIAL OFFER ON AATON FROM FILMWEST...

WeVe‘stopped-down’the asking price onx ¿current m odel AJHOH's!

You know about cameras. So you know AATON. Because it's the best, And you've heard too many who use one, say so. , So here's an offer you'll find hard to refuse. At Filmwest we've g o tV 2 current model AATON 16mm and Super-16 cameras that we're N prepared to talk turkey on, to clear our stocks. It's a great opportunity to get into the best and quietest Super-16 on the market today (23db±1db).

There are many reasons for choosing AATON. Our special deal is just one more! Call us today.

PERTH

Filmwest Pty. Ltd. 75 Bennett Street, Western Australia 6000.

Phone: 3251177, 3251423.

Telex: AAP4150 FILMWA Cables "Filmwest" Perth.

MELBOURNE

Alex McPhee Filmwest Pty. Ltd. C /- Media Specialists 71 Palmerston Cres.

South Melbourne 3205, Victoria.

Phone: 6999677.

SYDNEY

Percy Jones Motion Picture Services 17 Lochinvar Parade, Carllngford, New South Wales 2118.

Phone: 871 2253.

SINGAPORE

Filmwest F^e. Ltd. Suite 185, Raffles Hotel, 1-3 Beach Road, Singapore 0718.

Phone: 3386044, 3361509 Telex: RS36389 FLMWST. Cables: "Raflotel".

FILMWEST Gl

Importers and distributors of AATON cam eras throughout Australia, New Zealand, Singapore and Malaysia.

Film Script Com petition The Parkstone Trust is conducting a competition for film scripts.

Subject: A film treating homosexuality (male or female) in a positive way.

Type: Either fiction or documentary.

Length: 20 to 50 minutes.

Closing Date: For Stage 1 entries — August 31,1982.

P rize M oneY:

Stage 1: Treatment.

A prize of $100 each to the best 1C treatments. These prize-winners will then be eligible to submit entries for Stage 2.

Stage 2: Scripts.

1st Prize $ 2 ,0 0 0 2nd Prize $ 1 ,0 0 0 3rd Prize $ 5 0 0 Enquiries an d Entries:

The Parkstone Trust, P.O. Box 459, Nth. Adelaide, SA 5006.

SUPER-fl SERVICES PTY. LIMITED

A PROFESSIONAL SUPER-8mm LABORATORY Now offering high quality video duplicating as well as our regular services.

• Reduction Printing — 16mm to Super-8mm • Super-8mm to Super-8mm Duplication ® Blow-ups Super-8mm to 16mm • Super-8mm to Video Transfers • Magnetic Striping ® Pre-striped Prints ® Cartridge Loading • Sound Transfers For further details contact

SUPER-8 SERVICES PTY LIMITED Suite 4 870 Pacific Highway Gordon NSW 2072 Phone (02) 498 7668, (02) 498 7835

Tony Williams

Tony Williams

only way to use Steadicam.

Continuedfrom p. 245

What were some of the things Toby brought back from the one-week course?

extraordinary work within the time and budget available. I must admit I never believed we were going to pull off a lot of the shots that we did.

Gary Hansen is a true D.O.P. [director of photography] and is wonderful at pulling his team together and very supportive to the director. Having just seen Bad Blood, which he shot in New Zealand, I think Gary will soon be recognized as one of the finest lighting cameramen in Australia.

Next of Kin is a stylish film and, before we started shooting, I storyboarded every frame of film, with a floor plan of each scene. And I think it was the first time Steadicam had been used in Australia where it was totally part of the film equipment and not something called in for a special day. We used an Arri BL mounted onto the Steadicam, which Toby set up with the help of John Barry.

John and his assistants were fantastic and really got the whole system going.

Toby had just come back from a week’s course with Gareth Brown in Los Angeles, so he knew exactly how The Shining had been shot and what systems they had used. He felt it was not really worth doing Steadicam unless we did it totally. I wanted to use Steadicam all through the film, but not in such a way that people would know it was Steadicam. Also, I was worried it might take longer to set up than laying tracks and using a dolly.

A lot of Australian directors have found, including myself on commercials, that while it may look a simple machine to use, it can take so long to set up — particularly if you use an inexperienced operator — that you might as well use a dolly or a crane. So we decided that if we were going to use it, we would do so according to Toby’s condi­ tions and requirements.

It was fantastic because Gary and I were in a position to say, “ Right, here is the shot, as storyboarded. How best can we achieve it?” We would spend a couple of minutes on the decision, an d th e n s a y , “ L e t ’s go Steadicam.”

Toby then had five minutes to strap-up, wheel on the monitors and plug everything in. We found that he could move just as fast as it takes grips to lay tracks. In fact, a lot of scenes in the film you wouldn’t realize were Steadicam because they weren’t designed to be tricky Steadicam shots; it was easier than using a dolly. And in many scenes we used a combination of a crane, track in g shots, Steadicam and hand-held shots.

Even some static wide-shots were shot Steadicam because it was easier to shoot it that way than take the Steadicam off Toby.

I am totally convinced this is the

Mainly the experience of being an operator. You find a lot of Steadicam people who say that unless you are running through a forest, or moving it about, it is very hard to keep it rock steady. You can’t do the sort of things you could with a crane on a dolly. In some cases, that is still true. You wouldn’t try to shoot a 180-degree track on an 85mm lens around somebody on Steadicam; you would use curved tracks and a dolly.

Against that, what Toby had sweated over and practised hard was being able to operate the Steadicam rock steady as if the camera were on a tripod. So, you could start with a frame that was totally static and well framed, and, on a given signal, track in with someone as if the camera were on a dolly. At the end of the movement, you could stop rock steady, again with a pleasing composition. And then if the actors moved, you could tilt or pan again. So there was this feeling that the camera was on a dolly.

On the hardware side, Toby brought back a way of mounting the Steadicam so that the BL could be put on it and also a transmitter, rather than cables. We had a master control monitor set with a video recorder, so that we could videotape the takes. There were also hand-held, battery-operated receivers for the sound man, continuity girl and the director of photography to see what was being shot.

The system worked so well that we ended up using it even if we weren’t shooting on Steadicam. We would videotape scenes and then play them back. We found we were making decisions faster as to whether to go with a take or continue working for a better one.

Is there a limitation in the lens you can use on the Steadicam system?

Y es. Y ou w o u ld n ’t use Steadicam if you were trying to shoot a very exact long lens shot: for example, an 85mm tracking shot around somebody in the bed, as we had in our film. It would be easier for focus control to shoot on tracks. One of the problems is the focus puller has to see in 3 dimensions; he can’t make marks on the ground as you would with a dolly, because there is always variance with the Steadicam operator. The focus puller has to learn a whole new system.

are harder to operate. But we did onto the back of the truck. Linda shoot some scenes with an 85mm got into the truck and drove off lens, and quite a lot of scenes with a with the camera crew in the back.

50mm. G en erally sp eak in g , The camera crew then had to however, if you are going to do execute a 180-degree pan and, tracking shots across broken instead of seeing the lights, the ground, you would want to stay camera crew and the crane, they 35mm or wider. had had to see an entire building being blown up. It took the grip, The film has an unusual light Noel MacDonald, three months to quality, such as the slightly surreal build the equipment to make that silvery light when Linda and Barney possible, and it took us three days (John Jarratt) run across the just to rehearse that one shot. paddocks. . .

Probably the person who had had the hardest job on that day was Yes, it is typical Hansen lighting. Jackie Kerin, because there wasn’t I discussed light at some length tim e to w o rry a b o u t h e r with Garry, and we looked at a lot performance. If she had stalled the of tapes together. One was Last car it would have blown the day’s Tango in Paris, which is a film I shoot. There were 14 people at one enjoy very much technically. It is a stage rushing around behind the sumptuous film — particularly cameras screwing bolts, laying from the point of view of lighting. charges, pulling pins out, releasing There are a lot of scenes in our jacks and throwing sandbags on film where we had worked out the cranes, all while she was in front of lighting long before we had started camera. shooting. All the scenes with rain The shot had to be taken at reflected in the bedrooms and on exactly 8.30 p.m. when the sun was the girl’s face, for instance, were just dipping behind the hill. It took designed to be part of the lighting. six hours to line the crane up for the Beyond that, Garry used a lot of shot, so if we missed it, by the time quarter blue filters to give the film a we came back to reshoot it, it was bluish look, and prayed for overcast too dark. Also, Chris Murray had weather — very European. This to lay charges in the building so was carried right through the props that the moment the truck took off and the whole design of the film. and the crane drove out of shot, the 1 would have liked to have done set was made hot so it could then, more than we had the facilities to when the camera turned around, do. The film was late starting and start blowing up. He was pretty the art department just about had tense, too. pups. They couldn’t start until the Everyone was amazed that the finance came through, and, by the shot worked. No one really believed time they „were given the word to we were going to pull it off. In fact, go, their pre-production time had at 10 a.m. we were told we couldn’t been halved. But we had made shoot because there was a fire ban. use of the hiatus by having an The producers had to chase up the enormous number of discussions. CFA all day for permission. Finally Gary said it was the most prepared we did get permission, but only if film he had worked on, as did most we had eight fire appliances on of the crew, because of all that hand before we were allowed to discussion time. We locked down shoot. virtually every shot in the film.

I discussed with the art director the sets and what we could afford to What have you lined up at the build. Then I storyboarded and moment? shot-listed the film. We even rebuilt It is back to commercials and a set to accommodate certain shots. starting to look for another If we knew we were going to be shooting at 10 cm from the floor, or property. on an 18 mm prism lens, we altered the sets to accommodate. In that How do you rate the commercials as part of your filmmaking output? sense, it was very well planned.

Do you have a few prism shots? You seem to get pretty close to walls . . .

We used combinations. On some scenes we shot with Steadicam in the reversed modes. Some scenes we shot with prisms on elongated arms, and some dolly shots were actually rigged from the ceiling.

The camera was dropped onto the floor and operated remotely.

The last shot looks rather intricate.

I have heard, for example, that the How was it done?

Steadicam is best suited with a It involved starting on a crane 32mm lens, which is fairly wide angle. . . shot about eight metres in the air and dropping into a close-up of Longer lenses do create problems Linda. While that was happening, from a focus point of view and they the camera then had to be attached

I thoroughly enjoy them. They are well paid and I don’t decry them at all. People like to say commercials are stepping stones to features, but commercials are stepping stones to commercials.

There is a great shortage of good sc rip ts for co m m ercials in Australia and there are not that many people making the ones I like to make, which are dramatic, humorous and subtle, I hope.

Equally, features are stepping stones to features. Solo was a stepping stone to Next of Kin, and now I don’t want to cover that territory again. Next time I would like to have a stronger property, some name actors, a bigger budget and more time. ★ CINEMA PAPERS June - 291

Barron films chose GevacolorType 682 negative film to achieve outstanding results in the newTVseries‘Kicking Around!

W hen Paul Barron decided to produce a ten part mini-series called ‘K icking A rou n d ’ he had a number o f decisions to make about the production.

After choosing the cast and locations, the cameraman and the crew, the final decision was what sort o f negative stock he w ould use: he chose Gevacolor Type 682.

He used it, and the results have been outstanding.

B A R R O N FIL M S d » The production, 16 Thomas St., West Perth. about a bunch o f

young inner-city soccer enthusiasts in Western Australia, has turned out brilliantly.

It’s action m ixed w ith em otion, a dream m aking itself reality. A tribute to Australian production expertise.

Paul Barron was delighted w ith the results. H e’s sure you w ill be too w hen you see ‘K icking A rou n d ’ on the A B C in June.

Incidentally, the film s ‘T h e French Lieutenant’s W om an’ and ‘Chariots o f Fire’ were finished on G evacolor Type 982 positive film.

Here's why you should choose Gevacolorlype 682 negative film for on your next creative venture.

superbresults

Gevacolor Type 682 negative film will positively enhance the creation o f any masterpiece.

It’s a film that passes with flying colours as far as skin tones are concerned.

It also offers a wide exposure latitude that caters for even the most severe variations.

But, none-the-less, it gives a very

fine grain. And it’s compatible with the processing employed by all Australian laboratories.

So if you’ve got the creative know-how, and the will, we’ve got the way. Gevacolor Type 682.

AGFA-GEVAERT LIMITED M elbourne 878 8000, Sydney 8881444, Brisbane 3525522, Adelaide 425703, Perth 2779266.

E325

O P TIC A L

V ideo images fty. ltd. is seeking Australian films for overseas distribution. Entertaining features, shorts, documentaries and animation required.

Telephone (0 3 ) 3 4 7 0 0 7 4 or write to 51 Drummond St, Carlton 3 0 5 3

&

G R A P H IC

MOTION PICTURE

PTY. LTD.

and

AUDIO VISUAL Shooting in —

60 WHITING ST., ARTARMON, NSW, 2064

ANAMORPHIC WIDE SCREEN TELEVISION and all

A/V FORMATS

[0 2 )

439-5611

d V ■ U -------

M IXING POST-SYNC RECORDING

VOICE-OVERS We have a well equipped sound department with first rate staff and one of Australia’s most talented mixers. A t present we have some spare capacity and invite you to phone for details:STUDIO MANAGER STUDIO SECRETARY MICHAEL ROWAN GREER LEACH (0 8 )4 5 2 2 7 7

(0 8 )4 5 2 2 7 7

South Australian Film Corporation

The Quarter

Motion Picture Guarantors Inc We try harder . . . because . . .

We are not the largest, but we are proud to be one of the major international completion guarantors in the world. M otion Picture Guarantors Inc., together with its associated companies, has guaranteed completion of more than 200 films since 1970, including feature length movies with total budgets in excess of $40,000,000. .

Our policy is to assist the producer in every possible way with counsel and expertise. We conceive our job as helping the Production Team maintain its objectives: M O V I E F IN I S H E D — O N T IM E

-

O N BUDGET!

Frequently producers have told us that we were of material help in spotting difficulties early and assisting in their solution.

We are able to offer bonding for the largest-budget films as well as smaller, at strictly competitive rates. O u r n o - c la im b o n u s is t h e m o s t a t t r a c t iv e in t h e in d u s tr y .

We w ill be pleased to consider bonding your next movie and invite enquiries by telex or telephone (collect).

In Australia: In New Zealand: SYDNEY: Film Services (02) 2901588. Telex AA 24771 WELLINGTON: 859-049. Telex 31337 MELBOURNE: (03) 699 9077. Telex AA 30900

Motion Picture Guarantors Inc 43 Britain Street, Toronto, Ontario MSA 1R7 Telephone: (4 1 6 )3 6 1-1 664 The Quarter Continued from p. 277 Hazzard’s T ransit o f Venus for them, this legal resort has earned it a fair amount of flak — within the industry and more so, surprisingly, without — for UAA’s alleged un-Australian activities in favor of a filmic multi­ nationalism and for its aforementioned ordinary business dealings which some politicians and editorializers regard as extraordinary (as the spirit of McCabe and Lafranchi moves across the face of the land).

UAA’s first major venture in this respect was that Ill-starred (in several senses of the word) zoological fantasy, The Earthling, starring the late William Holden and directed by the late Peter Collinson. It will break even, according to UAA; it has had the longest aviation run in history (critics would suggest that this was because it put so many people to sleep); but, more import­ antly for UAA, it gained considerable access to the U.S., through Filmways, now part of Orion which in turn is under Warner Bros’ umbrella, and perhaps more “ market penetration” than any other “Australian” film to date.

Such arguably mid-Pacific films, up until then more the preserve of such operators as Antony I. Ginnane in Aus­ tralia (and also perhaps Lord Lew Grade of Raise the Titanic fame in Britain, not to forget Canadian vicissi­ tudes in this area), aroused more than a passing glance from Liberal Senator Chris Puplick — at the time of the passing of the Income Bill in the Senate — who claimed that UAA’s activities, in particular its quite consideradle borrowing facilities with U.S. majors such as MGM, now MGM-UA, and Warner Bros, were seriously detri­ mental to the Australian film industry.2 Australians should be making films about Australia for Australians and 2. Senate, Hansard, June 11, 1981, pp.

2889-3119.

nobody else, the argument goes. It is irrelevant whether they make money or not; they are performing a significant cultural service. Why should, critics of UAA ask, Australian money be pumped into the financing of smash-hits overseas, such as Arthur, starring those typical Aussies, Dudley Moore, Liza Minelli and Sir John Gielgud — under the auspices of Section 51 — when the money should rightly go to really dinki-di Aussie films — under Division 10BA? The fortnightly magazine A u stra lia n B u sine ss has already twice this year laid into UAA on these grounds3; the South Australian Opposition leader, John Bannon, has performed a similar service, presumably at the behest of the South Australian Film Corporation; The A g e summarized Bannon’s attack in a front-page story article, followed by an editorial the next day4; and more recently Labor Senator Susan Ryan has seemingly sided with the now ex­ Senator Puplick, claiming a loss to Australian taxation revenue of some­ thing in the order of $64 million5.

UAA, in response, says that it has not “ in any way inhibited the flow of money into the subsidized 10BA type of scheme” , and that it does not attract the Division 10B sort of investor: “we just don’t compete” ; they leave that to, say, Sydney solicitor Carnegie Fieldhouse, business adviser to Lang Hancock and Mad Max 2®, another very Australian effort._________________ 3. Maximilian Walsh, “ Film Scheme Yields Tax Bonanza” , Australian Business, Vol. 2, No. 8, February 4, 1982, pp. 12-14; and Alan Jury et al., “ New Rules in the Tax Game", ibid., Vol. 2, No. 16, May 27,1982, pp. 16-21.

4. David English, “ Investors in foreign films claim millions in tax relief” , The Age, May 12, 1982, pp. 1 and 4; and “ Tax lurks for film investors” , ibid., May 13, 1982, p. 13.

5. Senate, Hansard, May 26, 1982, pp. 2437­ 2439; reported in The Age, May 29, 1982, p. 5.

6. See Craig McCarthy, “The Money Men Behind the Film Boom ” , Australian

Telex: 0 6 5 -2 4 6 9 7

Picton-Warlow concedes that there is “sharp philosophical difference of opinion between ourselves and tha t sort of point of view” , as outlined above, between the “ backyard garage films” , the “ bad films for tax reasons” supposedly spawned by the Income Tax Assessment Amendment Act, and films resulting from several years’ plan­ ning, the short exploitation haul as opposed to the longe quality haul.

Picton-Warlow’s comeback in the face of this continuing flak has two prongs: theoretical and practical. Aus­ tralian films have to crack the U.S. marketplace in a head-on manner, not just flirt coyly on the perimeter on the off chance of having some peanuts thrown their way from time to time. This means mass release, preferably by a major U.S. distributor, which in turn means one of the major U.S. produc­ tion companies and their “quite sub­ stantial” pre-production input; this doesn't mean a fairly limited, quasi-art house-come-college circuit release on just the east and west coasts (far from the nitty-gritty boondocks) as with Breaker Morant or Gallipoli. The novelty value of Australian films is, arguably, wearing thin; Australians are in danger of believing their propa­ ganda and wishful thinking (and Time cover stories that never make it to the U.S. edition)7.

Critical acclaim notwithstanding, are the so-called generous tax provisions of Division 10BA — even though quite considerably hamstrung by the timing provisions — going to be there forever?

The industry itself suspects a limited life span. Besides, if Senator Ryan is any indication, Labor would be less sympathetic to the present imperfect scheme than the Liberals.

The choice is clear-cut, if equally Business, Voi. 2, No. 10, March 4, 1982, pp. 38-45.

7. Jay D. Palmer, “A Boom Down Under” , Time, Voi. 118, No. 13, September 28, 1981, pp. 36-44.

expensive. The first is continuing, fairly massive support via the taxation system for specifically, “uniquely Aus­ tralian” films that have only a remote chance of recovering their production costs, much less their release costs (the latter can quite often exceed the former in the U.S.); that is, in effect, for an artistic if money-losing and hence permanently state-subsidized industry, an “industry that hangs on to the government’s purse strings in order to exist at all” , in Picton-Warlow’s words.

The second is-a ‘pragmatic’, ‘realistic’ Australian-U.S.' partnership, the basis, Picton-Warlow believes, for a “viable, economic” , money-making, if not exactly highly artistic, industry.

The choice is either small, personal, lo w -b u d g e t film s of lim ite d or specialized appeal or big, even block­ buster, films made in ardent pursuit of the almighty dollar, that rock the marketplace. UAA says that it’s putting its money where its mouth is, with — as a result of its inability to find suitable back-to-back studio facilities in Aus­ tralia for its much-postponed tele­ vision mini-series, The Thorn Birds (in conjunction with Warner Bros) — its $35 million attempt to outdo Pinewood Studios (the home of James Bond, Star Wars, and Superman) with a mammoth state-of-the-art facility in Canberra, as well as its training scheme for Austra­ lian production personnel written into its U.S. distribution contracts. As Steven Spielberg said recently, “ Every­ body is aiming for the rightfield stand”8, for the great home run, for the megabuck smash-hit, including UAA. If, for argument’s sake, a couple of million Australian dollars was invested in Arthur, then that represents a con­ siderable loss to taxation revenue. But the real question is: how much more came back to Australia in overseas revenue?

8. Richard Corliss, “ Steve’s Sum m er Magic” , Time, Voi. 119, No. 22, May 31, 1982, pp. 48-54.

June CINEMA PAPERS -295

STAGES

HIKE

In a busy production schedule we still have some spare capacity in our production department,undoubtedly one of the finest in Australia.

We have two air conditioned sound stages (30.5 m x 16.2 m and 24.5m x 16.2 m) with full vehicle access, supplemented by production offices, make-up, wardrobe, laundry and green room. Our set construction department has a comprehensive collection of props and flats for hire.

The studios are close to downtown Adelaide and we can help with locations and all other services.

FOR DETAILS PHONE: MICHAEL ROWAN GREER LEACH (08)452277 (08)452277

'W

South Australian Film Corporation

The quiet revolution continues

cinematic services pty ltd

@

»

8 Clarendon Street, ARTARMON NSW 2064 w Phone: (02) 439 6144

35m m & 16mm N egative C utting

CHRIS ROWELLPRODUCTIONS 139 Penshurst Street, \W illoughby, MS.W 2068

Telephone (02) 411 2255^

Joan Fontaine

Joan Fontaine am. I want to work.” So they send you some scripts and you say, Continuedfrom p. 235 “That one, A not B, or C, give me seemed to be associated with one that.” That’s all it is. There isn’t particular studio . .. any lovely plot, you don’t have any­ one reading scripts for you or No, Selznick rented me out all coming to you and saying, “Now the time, and took the money. It that’s for you!” was brilliant of him: instead of You are thinking of what agents risking capital by putting me in a once did. Good agents once had film, and, after a lot of work, the four or five clients. They would buy film may or may not be good, he stage plays or scripts for their would just hire me out and keep 95 clients and see that these Films were per cent of the money. It was produced. That was the day of the brilliant tactics. great impresario, that kind of thing. It didn’t exist in my time.

Which of the studios did you enjoy It had just been before when working at best?

Jimmie Stewart, Hank Fonda, etc., had as their agent Leland Hay­ You don’t care about the studios; ward, a man of great skill and you care about the film. One studio charm. He was Maggie Sullavan’s looks like the other; it doesn’t husband, and he only handled matter. You don’t see anybody; you clients, and followed their careers. just go to the set and back to the He would see that they had stage dressing room or make-up depart­ plays, would be there during ment. rehearsal, would confer with the writers. That is what you have to But the films seem to emerge with a have in the theatre. particular kind of quality or sheen Let’s take Katharine Hepburn. that stamps them as MGM, Para­ She found Spencer Tracy and, mount or whatever . . . regardless of their personal life, they worked as a marvellous team.

Accidental.

That meant they conferred with the writers and the producers, and, if Well, were the roles of Lady St one studio wouldn’t have them, Columb in “Frenchman’s Creek”, they would see that they were which you obviously hated, or Susan backed and went to another studio. in “Affairs of Susan”, part of a You really need two people to make deliberate policy to play more a career, not one. It’s very hard to sophisticated roles, to get a more do it alone. Bing Crosby had his sophisticated image? entire family working for him; Everett Crosby was his business I wanted to do Affairs of Susan manager, etc. Bob Hope worked — it was fun playing four different the same way. Two have an on­ characters — but, as for French­ going, continuous career; you need man’s Creek, I was forced to do it. a team.

There was no plot, no plan, no design. I was a serf and my What do you remember about play­ producer, Mr Selznick, a czar. So ing Ivy? Did you enjoy being a what could I do? Just stand still and wicked woman for the first time in freeze, or go his way. your career?

I didn’t care. I was a little sick And you like to keep working. Actu­ ally, I enjoyed your four “roles” in of what I call “the girl on the piano “Affairs of Susan” very much. I bench” , sitting there making wondered why you didn’t play more moony eyes at the man who is very boring. So it was kind of nice to comedy . . . be aggressive to some extent. The They didn’t give it to me, dear, costumes were fabulous, I must that’s the whole point. You seem to admit, and the song by Hoagy Car­ think I had some ability to guide michael was nice. But I knew, by my own career. I had none — none this time, that it was a “ B” picture; whatsoever. They told you what you could smell that. you were going to do, they selected the property. How could I go up to A “B” picture directed by Sam the head of a studio and say I want Wood and produced by William to play comedy? I was just sold to Cameron Menzies?

RKO for the role.

Sam Wood was not a very good Coming to what I see as a director and William Cameron couple of high spots, when I saw Menzies was a set designer.

“Ivy” in 1947, at the age of about 12, I became your devoted follower. Which probably accounts for its That was the first film I saw you in, being one of the best-looking Holly­ and I thought you played the sort of wood films of the 1940s . . . woman who gives wickedness a good Yes, but it was not the Lincoln, it name. I’ve seen it several times since, and it’s a great decorative was the Ford. One was quite aware of that. melodrama. How do you see it?

I see the political background. I I am a great devotee of this film, so I was under contract with Universal, am fascinated to hear this because and it was very hard to say, “ Here I its credentials are extraordinary. It

had a marvellous cast all down the My clothes were worked out very line, including character actresses carefully, step by step, the blacks like Lucille Watson, Isobel Elsom and the whites, and all that was and Norma Varden, and all those one. He kept me in all this black other English actors . . . and white, which was a lovely thing to do. It was all very clever and it But they were all low-priced. was masterfully produced, master­ Patrie Knowles was not a star. So fully thought out, the kind of thing they used a star, which I presume I that Selznick had done on Rebecca was, and they mounted me with and Gone With the Wind but ceased inferior actors — not inferior in to do. He was then playing baccarat acting but in price — and a pro­ in the south of France. ducer who had not done a great deal (he was principally known for One of the marvellous things about Gone With the Wind and David was “ Letter From an Unknown the almighty one in that). I. Woman” is the way all the elements instinctively knew that this was one are integrated. For instance, you step backwards. can trace what is happening to Lisa through the changes in the costumes I wonder about the next film, which seems to me not merely the high­ spot of your career, but indeed one And more than that. Starting at of the high-spots of all Hollywood 14 and going through up to 40 all in filmmaking: “Letter From an Un­ one film had never been done known Woman”. In it, you give, before. When you think that the what seems to me, one of the two or film was not even up for an three best performances in an Academy Award! It is all political American film . . . and that’s why I am always im­ pressed when people think they are That was political, and was involved in great Film enterprises, shelved by the studio. There were but it is only (as Hollywood has intra-mural problems and it was now become) a political, Financial produced by my husband [William accident. It really is.

Dozier]1, who was one of the vice­ presidents at Universal. However, I am interested in what you said Selznick’s brother-in-law had about the studios not really seeming married Louis B. Mayer’s daugh­ to you to have any special personali­ ter, Edie Goetz, and he was striving ties at all. But did you think the to own the studio. He had a great studio system had anything going deal of power on his side; my for it? husband didn’t. Billy Goetz eventu­ ally took over that studio and other It had continuity for an actor — people’s work was shelved. They if you had a producer who believed weren’t given a publicity budget in you. Let's just take Hal Wallis. I behind them, or anything like that, was working for him in Affairs of and that lovely film got caught in a Susan when I saw [Dean] Martin political shuffle. and [Jerry] Lewis one night at a It seems to have had very limited nightclub. I went to Hal and said I had just seen two marvellous release . . . comedians, so he signed them and Exactly and that is why; they dedicated the next Five years to weren’t prepared to spend money doing their Films. So they had the on it. It wasn’t a William Goetz partner they needed. You have to do that, but it was the kind of thing film.

I was certainly not prepared to do.

You will be heartened to know that Being a woman, you don’t want to it is generally considered to be a find a producer like that, because it becomes an emotional, personal great classic of filmmaking . . . thing and I don’t believe in mixing Oh, I couldn’t agree with you those two together, if I can help it. more and it’s a tragic thing that As a matter of fact, my husband anything as lovely and as beautiful was involved in the production of . . . They just thought it was corny Letter From an Unknown Woman — and said so! and it probably was rocky for our marriage because you can’t go Were you aware that you were home and say, “ Look, I don’t like working on a masterpiece? the rushes.” He would say, “ Look, I am your husband, and you do Oh, absolutely. [Max] Ophuls what I tell you” , and the balance was brought over by us to make it; was gone. You are no longer a it was made with my company. We person able to talk about your had a marvellous man called John character and say, “ I don’t want to Hambleton2 who did the sets and do it this way or that way” to the oversaw the costumes. We were the man who is a husband at night and first to have an overall visual a producer by day. You are caught integrator who worked with the between those two and there is no cameraman on every single detail. way out.

1. Fontaine and Dozier had formed Ram ­ part Productions in 1947, with Universal to release their product. John Housem an is actually listed as producer.

2. Ham bleton is listed as co-ordinator of production.

At the beginning of the 1950s, you worked again for George Stevens in “Something to Live For”, which is a film I am very fond of but I gather it wasn’t big at the box-office . . .

CINEMA PAPERS June - 297

Without doubt the highest quality, lowest cost editing machine available today.

4 Plate from $6,500 Model M.D.1 6 Plate from $13,750 Model D.3

Already many in use in Australia

by TV Stations, Production Houses and Government Departments

There are many fíne Film Editing Machines available today BUT: Only SCHMID can offer the fo llo w in g fa cilitie s in w hat is the best value package available in A ustralia today. * • 4, 6, and 8 plate designs. » S u p e r 8, 16mm and 35mm capabilities, as well as dual fo rm a t com bin a tio n units readily available.

• S tudio Q uality, Sound Transfer, R e-recording and Mix fa cilitie s.

These features release you from the fru stra tio n s and delays you have experienced and enable you to have

tota l in-house co n tro l over yo u r Sound and Editing fu n c tio n s.

There is an extensive range of m odels and o p tio n s to su it every need.

Call us fo r fu rth e r info rm a tion .

FILMTRONICS AUSTRALIA PTY LTD 33 HIGGINBOTHAM ROAD, GLADESVILLE, N.S.W. PHONE: (02) 807 1444. TLX: AA25629

ACME A & J C a stin g A gency Incorporating

TITLES

T O P 10 M A N A G E M E N T

Casting and Modelling Consultants

OPTICALS

5 Axford Crescent, Oakleigh Sth. 3167

GRAPHICS

Telephone (03) 570 4407

E L E C T R O N IC F IL M S Y N C H R O ­ N I Z E R S 1 6 M M counts hours, mins, secs, fr a m e s an d feet. R D 80, bench type, $495.00; R D 360, for editing tables, cinetech, inspection and preview machines, $675.00.

E L E C T R O N I C C U E D E T E C T O R S 16 or 35mm film with counter, beeper, and light indicators, $275.00.

Tim e Calculators for adding up hours, mins and secs, $31.50.

ANIMATION QUALITY

SERVICE

Blooping tapes 16 and 35mm, for sound track or picture, 50 ft from $3.25.

FAST AND VERY ACCURATE FOR TV PROGRAMMING AND FILM EDITING.

OXFORD FILM SERVICES, SALES, SERVICE AND TRADE ENQUIRIES: ph (02) 331 5702 441 Oxford St., PADDINGTON NSW 2021

3 4 Punch Street, Artarm on, 2 0 6 4 438 2993

Joan Fontaine

He was having studio problems and he took a very long time; he was adamant. He later became pretty much his own producer without using a studio. His idea — and it worked for him; I can’t tell you how political this is — was to take as long as possible. I always used to accuse him of having a lot of Kodak film stock. He was punishing the studio and they would come on the set and say we would have to finish in two weeks. He would say nothing at all, drag on his pipe and he’d take a month. If they sent somebody back and said we would have to finish the day after tomorrow, he would take another month. By gosh, it worked for him. He became an all-powerful man by doing that.

He took six months to do I Remember Mama, in 1947. Deliber­ ately. Getting his way with the front office, teaching them a lesson. And those poor actors got made up every day and sat there and he would not shoot.

paid any attention to anybody but her. They did marry I believe.

As for Mario, he was always trying to commit suicide. Oh, it was too awful! If it had not been for Vincent Price and marvellous costumes done by Howard Shoup, it would have been awful. I knew it was not going to be a good film.

Again, this was a studio commit­ ment.

I have never seen it . . .

No? I haven’t seen half the ones you are talking about.

One I am particularly fond of and wanted to ask you about was Robert Wise’s “Until They Sail”. . .

In the 1950s, many of the big women stars of the 1930s and 1940s became considerably less active. For example, Bette Davis, Katharine Hepburn, Claudette Colbert and Merle Oberon made very few films in that decade, but you made as many in the 1950s as in the 1940s. . .

He tried to fire me because one day I realized in the poem that when somebody — Jean Simmons, I think — recites, “ How do I love thee” , they left out a whole quatrain. I told Bob Anderson [screenplay], but he said, “ No we haven’t.” I said, “ Yes you have” , and he found that I was right. I don’t think that endeared me to them exactly.

Also, they were all sitting around and drinking after the day’s work was over. I never drink and drive, and I had to get home to my family.

There was a little cliquey thing, too. No, I didn’t like it at all.

Oh, but I didn’t. In 1954, I went to New York to do a play. I wasn’t getting roles.

It comes over in a low-key intelli­ gent way; it is really quite mov­ ing . . .

But in terms of numbers of roles, Well, Robert Wise was a cutter, you played as many in the 1950s as and during rehearsal he literally in the 1940s — 14, in fact, though took a stopwatch and timed a many were bunched around the early scene. When I saw that, I knew he years of the decade. You continued really could not be a creator of any to work for some very interesting kind. He was a mechanical man. directors and one whom I would describe as great. What can you tell Of course, he had cut his teeth on me about working for Fritz Lang in Orson Welles’ and Val Lewton’s “Beyond a Reasonable Doubt”? films at RKO . ..

Not very much. He was pretty much a beaten man by that time.

He was told that he had to be on his best behaviour. He was a very Prussian man, as was Ophuls: “ You vill do vat I tell you.” Well, he was on his best behaviour and perhaps that didn’t help.

T he le a d in g m an [D an a Andrews] was getting over having drunk too much for years and he was on the wagon, so there was a lacklustre performance there. The eyes were blank; the film wasn’t anything at all. It was a step back­ wards for me.

What about working with Anthony Mann in “Serenade”, not to speak of Mario Lanza?

Oh, my God! Mr Mann had fallen in love with the Spanish girl [Sarita Montiel] and they were holding hands in the projection room when you went in the evening to see the rushes, which I don’t really think is cricket. He never

That’s right. Imagine somebody taking a stopwatch and timing a scene. You are not even playing it.

He was just timing, doing camera moves. Well, they can get stand-ins to do that, but it’s heartbreaking when that takes place. I had no respect for him after that.

What about Jean Negulesco, for whom you worked in “A Certain Smile”?

He was a dear man. He had been best man at my wedding years ago.

He had been in the Cads’ Club in Hollywood. Always a professional cad. By political manoeuvring, he got where he did and he also had a great deal of artistic talent. He was a very good painter, and was in­ telligent, but nobody, as you know, is trained to be a producer or really trained to be a director. It is all accidental, experimental. You make a couple of good films and you are a genius like Orson Welles; you make a couple of bad films and you are box-office poison. There is

no consistency here whatsoever.

There isn’t even the consistency in talent. It’s a nerve-racking profes­ sion; very chancy. You are lucky one day, unlucky the next.

Gwen ffrangcon-Davies, McCowan, Kay Walsh . . .

Alec

And Cyril Franklin directed.

Did you enjoy working in Britain You only played one character role again, for the first time since “Ivanon the screen, and it was so good I hoe”? wonder why you have never done any more. I mean Baby Warren in I had a lot of union problems. I “Tender is the Night”, where you just did not understand the unions. were the one who had obviously read Right in the middle of a scene at 11 the book . . . sharp, they would pull the light plugs on the set and say, “ It’s our It’s odd that you should say that, tea-break” . I found this very hard because I was reading an article on to accept. It seemed very difficult me by John Russell, the New York for the director and absolutely critic, and he described my career murderous for the actors and the as “ From Soft Girl to Tough Girl” , whole idea of acting. You cannot, and he said that, as a soft girl, I as Mr Wise did, use a stopwatch on related to the audience so it could it. understand me; as a tough girl, I was only run of the mill. Well, I Recently, as you said, you worked don’t think Baby Warren was run more on the stage in between golf­ of the mill. But that’s his opinion. ing, ballooning, flying, cooking and writing. What difference do you find Did you enjoy doing that film? A lot in preparing a role for the stage or in of the things don’t seem to me right relationship with the director on the about i t . . . stage? Do you find it a notably different experience from working I never saw it, but when we were on a film? on location in Switzerland, Jennifer Jones was calling David Selznick I love being able to have a con­ every day in Hollywood. He was secutive go at it. With acting for the not allowed to produce it, but was screen, as you know, it’s bits and actually the producer. Here again pieces, out of chronology, whereas you have the producer-married-to- in the theatre you have this lovely the-leading-lady thing. He had ability to rehearse a character, let it found this film for her and she was grow and then to do it. I really get too old for it. She was not right and rather bored with a character after neither was Jason Robards, but he about six weeks of playing it, had to cast somebody of her age. I because the audience has taught me am not saying anything against a great deal and then it becomes a Jennifer and I am very fond of her, matter of doing it really without but she was not quite right for it. any of your creative instincts. You She was 10 years too old at least. really can’t rebake the cake as it were, so it’s just rote; it becomes I think this is one of the very finest tedious. performances you ever gave — this at one end of the spectrum and Lisa I would have thought, for an actor, at the other . . . the stage, in a very major sense, is more an actor’s art, whereas the It’s a pity there aren’t many chic film is more a director’s art. Would tough roles. That’s a special thing you agree with that crude distinc­ in itself — well dressed and blasé tion? attitude and all that. Leopard skin and long cigarette holders.

The trouble with films is the director is right over the camera “Tender” was one of Henry King’s and he tells you when to lift your last films. Did you enjoy working eyebrow and that’s very difficult, with him? unless you have a director like Cukor. He is there milking your Henry King! Somebody brought performance, and you can see him out the fact that these two, before and you are pleased. You find you their marriage, were not going in are doing things you never thought and out of each others’ bedrooms you could do before. Eddie Gouldand they asked why not. I mean, it ing was the same, but it’s very was obviously so in the book. He seldom you find a director with said, “ It may be obvious in the whom you could feel his creativity. book, but in my film they don’t, What do you think of con­ until they are married!” Now, re­ temporary American cinema; would writing Scott Fitzgerald — and the you like to be part of it? essence of Scott Fitzgerald, more­ over. I mean, here we are.

Oh, yes, but to find a role is very Ridiculous. difficult — one that I could be proud of. It sounds vain, but I do I am fascinated to hear that. Your have a certain following, like you, last film, on big screen that is, “The God bless you, and I don’t want to Devil’s Own”, as far as I know, has disappoint these people. I really never been shown in Australia and I don’t want to play old hags and can’t imagine why. It got good reviews and has an excellent cast: Concluded on p. 281 CINEMA PAPERS June - 299

I

M ad M ax Z wasn’t so

Mad.

FILM (& AUSTRALIA ^ in the world’s top 3 DOLBY STEREO mixing studios

The producers were at the head of the queue to use FILM AUSTRALIA for their mix.

‘Mad Max 2’ w as first to use our Dolby Stereo facilities — first in Australia.

Delighted w ith the results and our service, other producers have been quick to make bookings at FILM AUSTRALIA. Now w e’ve mixed FREEDOM, STARSTRUCK, GOODBYE PARADISE, DEAD EASY, THE PIRATE MOVIE, THE RETURN OF CAPTAIN INVINCIBLE. Your feature should be next!

Contact Barry Bowden or Gordon Wraxall at Film Australia, Eton Road, Lindfield, 2070. or phone (02) 467-0111, Telex 22734.

EVERYTHING THAT W E C A N . .. . IS O U R BEST ...... ~ni-iiritmiiomifin^

IS S S I» ^ - x' '

;

...........

■p s s a t ia s r

p f p li

C IN E V E X FILM LABORATORIES Telephone: 5286188. Telex: 38366

^

’

Vic3185'

Nothing dampens your creative energy more than tilm that can’t capture the scene you want. But now there’s a film that’s as sensitive as you are. it’s Fujicolor A250 ... the world’s first high-speed tungsten type color negative movie film with an exposure index of 250.

Imagine the possibilities. Now you can capture the soft facial features of a woman in a dim room. Or the misting greys of a gentle rain at dawn. Or even the kaleidescope of colors at a night-time festival. All in natural light. All without coarse grain. All on Fujicolor A250.

So the next time your film is too slow, try Fujicolor A250.

It’s just your speed.

35m m TYPE8518*16m m TYPE8528

H jP | FUJICOLOR NEGATIVE FILM Distributed in Australia by

m HANIMEX O ld P ittw a te r R d ., B ro o k v a le , N .S .W . 2 1 0 0 . Ph: 9 3 8 - 0 2 4 0 .

2 8 2 N o rm a n b y R d ., P o rt M e lb o u r n e , V IC ., 3 2 0 7 . Ph: 6 4 - 1 1 1 1 .

17 D o v e r S tre e t, A lb io n , O L D ., 4 0 1 6 . Ph: 2 6 2 -7 5 5 5 .

H in d m a rs h A v e n u e , W e lla n d , S .A ., 5 0 0 7 . Ph: 4 6 - 9 0 3 1 .

2 2 N o rth w o o d S t., L e e d e rv ille , W .A ., 6 0 0 7 . Ph: 3 8 1 -4 6 2 2 .

1 6 9 C a m p b e ll S tre e t, H o b a rt, T A S ., 7 0 0 0 . 3 4 - 4 2 9 6 .

Industrial Division N A M E : ............................................................................................................................................................

A D DR ESS"

...................................................................................... Postcode: ..........................................Telephone:

In an ideal world a com plete film would be printed and processed in one pass.

So w e do it that way

Rank Film Laboratories North Orbital Road, Denham, Uxbridge, M iddlesex UB9 5HQ Telephone 0895 832323 Telex 934704