Cinema Paper No.79 1990 by UOW Library

H A L A N D Jlw l M n H O Y

T a lk in g tou gh

The p o litic T lo f cJnm<ยง P I E R R E R lS S I E N t f J E R Z Y D O M A R A lIZ IC i

d ^ ^ t s ยฃS tru ck by L ig h tn in g

A d a z z lin g n e w ^ ^ m R E G I S T E R E D B Y A U S T R A L I A P O S T P U B L I C A T I O N NO. V P B 2121

AGFAXT125 & X T320 COLOUR NEGATIVE FILMS

AGFA ^ AGFA-GEVAERT LTD. AUSTRALIA, 2 BYFIELD STREET, NORTH RYDE NSW 2113, TEL. (02) 888 1444-F A X (02) 887 1981.

INCORPORATING MAY

1990

FILMVIEWS

NUMBER

BRIEFLY Berlin Film Festival; New s and Views

TILL THERE W A S YOU Location report by A nd rew L. Urban

HAL A N D JIM McELROY Interview by Scott M urray

NIGHT CRIES and TRACEY MOFFATT Scott M urray

STRUCK BY LIGHTNING Location report by Hunter C ord a iy

e d it o r

Scott Murray

JERZY DOMARADZKI Interviewed by Hunter C o rd a iy

Gina Goldsmith

pubusher

t e c h n ic a l e d it o r

Fred Harden

FILMS OF THE 80s Production Listing for the decade

M T V B O A R D O F DIRECTORS

John Jost

[CHAIRMAN],

CANNES SECTION

AUSTRALIAN FILMS AT CANNES

Natalie Miller, Gil Appleton, Ross Dimsey, Patricia Amad,

Night Out, Golden Braid, Mark Clark Van Ark, Sweethearts, A Kink in the Picasso, In Too Deep.

Chris Stewart l e g a l a d v is e r

d e s ig n

Nicholas Pullen

Com piled by Pat Gillespie

Ian Robertson Gina Goldsmith

a d v e r t is in g

f o u n d in g p u b u sh er s

Peter Beilby,

Scott Murray, Philippe Mora t y p e s e t t in g

ADDITIONAL CANNES LISTINGS Including Australia's record at Cannes

Paula Amad

s u b s c r ip t io n s

PIERRE RISSIENT Interviewed by Scott M urray

Ian Robertson

d is k p r o c e s s in g

O n The Ball

TECHNICALITIES Fred Harden

P R IN T IN G

Photo Offset Productions

d is t r ib u t io n

Network Distribution

DIRTY DOZEN

FILM REVIEWS Henry V Brian McFarlane Driving Miss Daisy John Conomos Raw Nerve Adrian Martin Beyond El Rocco Raffaele Caputo and Peter Lawrance Bloodmoon Jim Schembri

PRODUCTION SURVEY

CINEMA PAPERS IS PUBLISHED WITH FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE FR OM THE AUSTRALIAN FILM COMM ISSION A N D FILM VICTORIA

COPYRIGHT 1990 MTV PUBLISHING LIMITED. Signed articles represent the views of the authors and not necessarily that of the editor and publisher. W h ile every care is taken with manuscripts and materials supplied to the m agazine, neither the editor nor the publisher can accept

J O H N C O N O M O S is a Sydney freelance writer on film; R A FFA E LE C A P U T O is a

freelance writer on film; H U N T E R C O R D A IY is a writer, and a lecturer in Mass M edia

liability for any loss or damage which may arise. This magazin e may not be reproduced in whole or part without the express permission of the copyright owners. Cinema Papers is published every two months by M TV Publishing Limited, 43 Charles Street, Abbotsford, Victoria, Australia 3 06 7 . Telephone {03} 4 2 9 5 51 1 . Fax (03) 4 2 7 925 5 . Telex A A 3 0 6 2 5 . Reference M E M E 230.

at N S W University; P A T GILLESPIE is a freelance writer and publicist; FRED H A R D E N is a Melbourne film and television producer specializing in special effects; P A U L K A L I N A is the video critic for. The Sunday Herald, M elbourne; PETER L A W R A N C E is a Melbourne freelance writer on film; B R IA N M c F A R L A N E is principal lecturer in Literature and Cinema Studies at Chisholm Institute of Technology, M elbourne; A D R IA N M A R T IN is a Melbourne freelance writer on film; J IM S C H E M B R I is a film journalist at The A g e , Melbourne; Sydney-based A N D R E W L. U R B A N writes for several journals on film, including Screen International.

CINEMA

PAPERS

â&#x20AC;¢

EQUINE FILM SERVICES SPECIALIZING IN SUPPLYING QUALITY TRAINED HORSES FOR FILM AND TELEVISION. STUNTS • LIBERTY • REARING • FALLING • SADDLE HORSES • HARNESS • WRANGLERS • 15 YEARS EXPERIENCE CREDITS INCLUDE: QUIGLEY DOWN UNDER • MAN FROM SNOWY RIVER I & II • FIVE MILE CREEK • ROBBERY UNDER ARMS « THE LIGHTHORSEMEN • HEAVEN & EARTH • GUNSMOKE • DAVEY CROCKETT • SOUTH PACIFIC ADVENTURES ... AND MORE !!! CONTACT TONY JABLONSKI TELEPHONE 02 913 1942 FACSIMILE 02 997 6933

5933

Marketing and Distribution written by Jennifer Stott edited by John Cruthers The third in the series Taking Care of Business', published by the AFC and AFTRS, Marketing and Distribution provides a comprehensive look at all aspects of domestic and international marketing for producers of low-budget features, documentaries and shorts. The book explains how films find their way into the marketplace, outlines how films are promoted and provides clear information about the materials and services required. Over a dozen case studies are featured, including Cane Toads, The Pursuit of Happiness, Nice Coloured Girls, For Love or Money and Young Einstein. (146 pages) Available from: Distribution Unit Australian Film, Television & Radio School, PO Box 126, North Ryde 2113 Phone (02) 805 6454 $15 (plus $2 postage & handing)

SMOKEY DAWSON’S RANCH MONA VALE ROAD INGLESIDE SYDNEY AUSTRALIA 2101 CONTACT RIC ANDERSON TELEPHONE 02 913 1080

Also available are Vol 1, Production Budgeting and Accounting, and Vol 2, Case Studies in Independent Production.

ART&TECHNOLOQY IMKE-VJP COURSES FOR 1990

One or two year fulltime courses in Theatrical Arts

YEAR ONE: All aspects of make-up Art class / design layout presentation Sculpture class / special effects Theatrical hair stayling

YEAR TWO: Prosthesis work / special effects Theatrical hair styling (advanced) Basic wig knotting Special courses also available

incorporating THREE ARTS MAKE-UP CENTRE PTY LTD FILM TELEVISION THEATRE ESTABLISHED 1966 We are registered with the Department of Employment, Education and Training, to offer full fee educational services to overseas students in the following course: Two Year Theatrical Arts Certificate (Stages I and II, 12 months each)

Theatrical Arts Shop: • Make-up • Body washes • Masks • Material for Mask Making and Sculpture • Professional make-up brushes • New Dawn Range of Cosmetics For further information write or telephone DAWN SWANE

Congratulations to all our past and present students who are continuing with excellence the high standard in Make-up and Special Effects for our Film, Television, Theatre, High Fashion and Arts / Sculpture, plus other related areas of employment for make-up artists.

•THEATRICAL ARTS Full Time Course Stage I and II Film / TV / Theatre / Opera / Ballet / Special Effects Make-up 10.00 am - 4.00 pm •THEATRICAL ARTS Part Time Course One evening per week Stage I part one, first year Stage II part two, second year • SCULPTURE / SPECIAL EFFECTS one night per week, designed for professional / creative / revision / expanding existing knowledge • HOLIDAY HOBBY COURSE For schools, amateur theatre or people thinking of a career in make-up • LECTURE DEMONSTRATION All aspects of make-up, for schools, amateur theatre and interested groups

RADA, ASMA, Principal and Founder

Three Arts Make-Up Centre Pty Ltd Cnr. Shepherd & Myrtle Streets, Chippendale NSW Australia 2008 Telephone: (02) 698 1070

• CINEMA

PAPERS

•PRIVATE APPOINTMENT ONLY: Facial prosthethic and skin camouflage. Remedial Techniques. • DIRECT LIKENESS: Head sculptures created in bronze, resin and plaster.

[Ü 3 Lrti D I ^

BERLIN

FILM PAUL

to look at the ‘Trabies’ filling the streets of West Berlin, the hordes of East Ger mans lugging their newly-ac quired VCRs or the East German border guards bemusedly peer ing through the man-size gaps in the Berlin Wall to get an inkling of the momentous events that had taken place exacdy three months to the day before the opening of this year’s Berlin Film Festival. For the first time in the Festi val’s forty-year history, itwas staged in both parts of the once-divided city. If this was not the correct time to ironically contemplate how the Festival’s birthright had been suddenly supplanted - this along with several other interna tional arts and music festivals were created in West Berlin at the height of the Cold War to help build the stature of the Federal German Republic’s isolated out post - it was indeed the occasion to cast one’s eyes back through the tumultuous events of postWorld War II history. Whether as a result of extraor dinary prescience, fortuitous co incidence or astute programming, the Berlinale managed to reflect the broader social and political circumstances of Europe past and present - right down to the two Retrospectives. “The Year 1945” was designed as a follow-up to last year’s programme of films on Europe in 1939, but with its emphasis on the consequences of the post-War divisions of Europe the timely programme took on an extra dimension as a history lesson. The other retrospective provided a survey of forty years of the Berlinale. Six films from Eastern Europe took part in the Competition, includingjiri Menzel’s Skrivdnd Na Nitich (Larks On A String) and Frank Beyer’s Spur Der Steine (Traces Of The Stones). Both films arrived at the Festival with the notable distinc tion of having been banned by their respective regimes. Beyer’s film was unseen (and miracu lously preserved intact) since 1966, after a monu mental crackdown by the East German Commu nist Party which led to a nine-year hiatus in the director’s career. Menzel’s film, which shared the coveted Golden Bear with Constantin CostaGavras’ Music Box, is a sly comedy set in a scrap yard where former ‘bourgeois elements’ are re educated, and scores points for its portrayal of authorities who are neither particularly smart nor capable. The film, which Menzel states was made as a peace offering to the Czechoslovakian Communist Party in 1969, sadly shows its age in its coy depiction of the romance between a young worker and a gypsy. If both films were more of interest to histori ans than cinephiles, due compensation was pro

FESTIVAL

KALI NA

O ne needed o n ly

vided by the Russian Competition entry, Karaul ( The Guard), directed by Aleksandr Rogoschkin. This is Rogoschkin’s third film, having previously studied art and history before working as a pro duction designer. Shot in black and white, bar a brief, surrealistic dream sequence in muted col our, the film is set in the overbearingly claustro phobic confines of a train that is taking prisoners to an unknown destination. Rogoschkin’s par able of totalitarianism, of a system based solely on the institutionalization of violence and intimida tion, is brutal and frank, yet a masterful display of cinematography and design. West German director Michael Verhoeven is well known for causing rifts at Berlin. When his 1970 Competition entry O.K. was deemed antiAmerican by Jury president George Stevens, the Jury was dismissed and the Competition for that year was abandoned. The nasty girl of the title of this year’s Competition entry, Das Schreckliche Mädchen, turns out to be none other than a highly respected schoolgirl, daughter of the school head master and teacher and niece of the local vicar, who wants to follow up her prize-winning essay with another on the subject of “My town during the Third Reich”. Many at this year’s Berlinale were disappointed (surprised would not be quite correct) that the film did not win a major prize.

But it was not Verhoeven who caused the major contro versy of this year’s Festival. Be fore the Festival opened, Ger man director Helma SandersBrahms quit the selection com mittee in protest over what she saw as a domination of Ameri can films in the Competition. Seven American films (Bom on the Fourth ofJuly, Music Box, The War of The Roses, Shadow Makers, Driving Miss Daisy, along with Steel Magnolias and Crimes and Misdemeanors screening out of Competition) and the US-West German co-production of The Handmaid’s Tale (which proved to be one of the greatest disap pointments of the Festival) were shown in the Competition sec tion. The real bone of conten tion was the choice of Steel Magnolias for the opening night extravaganza (on hand were stars Daryl H annah, Julia Roberts, Olympia Dukakis, Sally Field and Dolly Parton, producer Ray Stark and director Herbert Ross). Audiences were unim pressed when the curtain raised on the American soapie, with even the popular press dubbing this historic East-West Festival opener an embarrassment and a sell-out to the interests of major U.S. distribution companies. The wider issue at stake here was well explained by Derek Malcolm when he wrote in The Guardian, “What better showcase could the American cinema have for the attempt to extend its hegemony into East ern Europe?” But not far away from the Competition, at the Panorama and Forum screenings, was where one could get down to watching the films that truly belong to such a Festival, films that, in any event, were unlikely to open in scores of theatres within days of the Festival’s closing. Forum screened six forbidden films from East Germany from the years 1965-66, while Frederick Wiseman’s Near Death, a six-hour documentary set in the intensive-care unit of a Boston hospital, provided demanding though rewarding viewing, j. If there was a discovery to be made at this year’s Festival itwas in the two films by the prolific Finnish director Aki Kaurismaki. In Tulitkkutehtaan tytto (The Girlfrom the Match Factory), Kaurismaki tells a wickedly comic story about the exploitation of a factory worker in a tone that is as dry as it is sardonic, while in I^eningrad Cowboys Go America he charts a raucous fish-out-of-water comedy about a Finnish band that travels to America, only to discover that the yanks want nothing other than rock ’n’ roll, but that success is forthcoming farther south in Mexico.

CINEMA

PAPERS

• 3

□

T HI S

I SSUE

• Due to writer Paul Kalina’s presence at this year’s Berlin Film Festival, there is no “Video Releases” in this issue. Kalina will cover all

ACADEMY AWARDS BERESFORD The major Australian news of this year’s Academy Awards was the success of Bruce Beresford’s American film, Driving Miss Daisy. It won Best Film, Best Actress (Jessica Tandy), Best Screen play Adaptation (Alfred Uhry) and Best Make-up (Manilo Rocchetti). It is the first time a film

O S C A R - W I N N I N G JE S S IC A T A N D Y A S D A IS Y W E R T H A N IN B R U C E B E R E S F O R D 'S D R IVIN G MISS DAISY.

directed by an Australian has won Best Film. The major disappointment, as Billy Crystal and other presenters and acceptants remarked, was the non-inclusion of Beresford in the Best Di rector category. How can a film which isjudged to be the best not also be the best directed? so many queried. But the Oscars are not about logic, and every year they have inconsistencies. However, it is fair to assume that, had Beresford been nomi nated, he would have won. How else can one explain Oliver Stone’s winning if his Bom on the Fourth ofJuly wasn’t thought good enough to win Best Film. Sc while Beresford must be happy his film did that well, there must be a sense of a personal chance so narrowly, and perhaps un fairly, missed. What has been litde remarked in the summa tions is that the Best Director nominations are submitted by the Screen Directors’ Guild of America; Academy members can vote only on those on the Guild’s list. This patendy unfair system, where internal politics have too great a chance of influencing things, is something that should be changed. Strangely, it is similar to the pre-selection model adopted by the Australian Film Institute in its annual awards. So, with Beresford (and Peter Weir) missing out, John Farrow remains the only Australian to have won an Academy in a ‘major’ category. One suspects, however, that it won’t be long before another Australian name joins his on the Oscar lists.

the interim releases in the next issue. As well, owing to space constraints occa sioned by the special Cannes Festival mate rial, there are no “Censorship listin g s” or “Books”. There will be enlarged sections in the next issue, including reviews o f Scorsese on Scorsese and The Truffaut Letters. One recent Australian book worth men tioning in the meantime, however, is Market ing and D istribution, Jennifer Stott, John Cruthers (Ed.). Jointly published by the Australian Film Television & Radio School and the Australian Film Commission, it is the third in the Taking Care of Business: A practical guide to independentfilm and video production series. The book makes a useful companion to several producer guides already published by the Marketing Branch o f the AFC, such as the invaluable Delivery Items: A Guidefo r Film and Video Producers.

NINE NETWORK The major disappointment of this year’s Awards telecast was the decision by the Nine Network to shorten the programme. This had a disastrous effect on both the ceremony’s appeal to world peace and the recognition of one of the cinema’s finest filmmakers. In the spirit of world brotherhood, the origi nal presentation crossed to various world cities: London, Moscow, Tokyo, Buenos Aires and Syd-

South Australian Film Corporation’s

HENDON STUDIOS A major facility for feature film and mini-series production Enquiries about production space, sound stages and post-production facilities welcomed. For details and brochure please contact : M ichael Rowan, Studio Manager HENDON STUDIOS Butler Drive WESTSIDE COMMERCE CENTRE HENDON South A ustralia 5014 telephone (08) 348 9300 fax. (08) 347 1525 4

• CINEMA

PAPERS

ney. However, Nine decided in its wisdom to delete the Tokyo cross: so much for a spirit of brotherhood with the Japanese. Worse, Nine deleted in its entirety the pres entation of Akira Kurosawa with the Life-time Achievement Award and the accompanying film tribute by American critic Richard Schickel. The 80 year-old filmmaker has had a remarkable 38year career; few would argue he is not one of the major filmmakers of the cinema. He is also one whose work has been championed in the U.S. by Francis Ford Coppola, George Lucas and Martin Scorsese, among others. (In fact, Lucas and Ste ven Spielberg presented the Award.) But, no, Nine decided he was not important enough to warrant Australian air time: the acceptance speeches of American sound technicians and effects editors were judged to be more rivetting and important. The morning of the Awards, NBC’s Today dealt with Kurosawa’s Award as the coming high light of the ceremony. So what an American network station considered the most important, an Australian network considered the least. Given the anti-Japanese feeling generated by some of Andrew Peacock’s comments immedi ately prior to the election, it is difficult to under stand why Nine chose a course of action that would inevitably be queried. Not only was its actions indicative of network television’s dis-interest in real cinema, but of a lack of concern for the spirit of the Awards programme. It is some thing the Broadcasting Tribunal should investi gate. Cultural selectivity of this kind is totally un acceptable. It is also regrettable that the newspapers saw not to comment on this. The Age s film critic made no mention and didn’teven list Kurosawa’s Award with the others; neither did TheAustralian's. While some critics may have seen the ceremony direct and not known of Nine’s later deletions, surely a newspaper has an obligation to be aware of what went to air, notjust of what the privileged few saw. AUSTRALIAN FILM FINANCE CORPORATION FUNDING DECISIONS: FEBRUARY 1990 •

DOCUMENTARIES ENCOUNTERS OF THE SILKEN KIND (50 mins) Roger Whittaker Films. Producer: Roger Whit taker. The economy of spiders is based on silk - as a tool, an appliance, a weapon, a lifeline. Written by Densey Clyne, this film will be a close and stunning look at the lives and loves of spiders. PEGGY GLANVILLE-HICKS (60 mins) Juniper Films. Producer: John Tristram. The uncon ventional and adventurous life of Peggy Glanville-Hicks, one of the first, successful women composers. Working with librettists such as Thomas Mann, Robert Graves and Lawrence Durrell, her career included work for opera, symphony orchestra, ballet and film. CROCODILE M A N (75 m ins). David Ireland. Producer: David Ireland. David Ireland travels to the Kimberleys to come face to face with the biggest crocodiles in the country, and to study their ferocity and cunning, and their signifi cance as a totem in Aboriginal dreamtime sto ries. Filmed largely from a cage, the result is some of the most exciting underwater footage ever captured. TO T AL V A L U E O F FFC IN V ESTM EN TS IN THE CU R R EN T FI

Dear Mr Murray, What a magnificent article on my late husband John Farrow! I just sent a copy to my daughter Mia with a note saying how happy he would have been. More especially, since it came from his own country. It was his dream in his last years to return to Australia. I congratulate you on the tremendous research you have done ... I don’t know why really that he has not been given more recognition. I think the economics of a large family forced him to do lesser films. Somehow too, a not-too-good script became a challenge to turn it into something good with re-writing and so on. And that worked often. The other night we ran Where Danger Lives: it is absorbing and timeless ... Many good wishes and gratitude MAUREEN O'SULLIVAN FARROW CUSHING

PS: The original title of above film was “A White Rose for Julie”, which was why I wanted to do it

T U A R I E S JO Y

CAVILL

In 1953, Dan Casey, the Managing Director o f Uni versal Pictures, contacted Chips Rafferty and told him o f a feisty young secretary with lightning skills who desired to break into motion-picture produc tion. Soon after, Joy Cavill joined the Southern International Company, working as secretary to Rafferty. Zealous, determined and good humoured, Cavill quickly won her way into many hearts. Chips Rafferty, for one, fondly nicknamed her “Mother”. But not content to remain a continuity girl, Cavill pushed on, becoming involved in script dis cussions, and learning budget and cost control. She accomplished many feats: from designing dailyproduction, first-assistant-director and cameradepartment reports to inventing the stripboard system which is still used throughout the world today. Cavill would become respected throughout the film industry for revolutionising methods of production co-ordination and cost control. Later she would add producing and writing to her skills, and win an Awgie from the Australian Writers Guild for her first and last feature film, Dawn!. At Southern International, Cavill became asso ciate producer on many features shot at the Cinesound film studios, including Dust in the Sun and the Franco-Australian production, The Stowaway. Legendary writer, filmmaker and broadcaster, Lowell Thomas, and the CBS Television Network teamed with Cavill and Southern International to produce a $13 million series o f one-hour specials, giving Cavill an opportunity to become heavily in volved in the p l a n n i n g , continuity, pre-production and script development o f what was to be the most expensive television series made in its time. Stalwart, enthusiastic and never bowing to pres sure, Cavill maintained morale, ironed out prob lems, and had a knack of making things rim better and smoother. She never faltered in her loyalty to the Australian film industry. But hard hit by the impact o f television, Southern International eventu ally folded. With Southern’s demise and the sale o f the Bondi studio, Cavill teamed with Lee Robinson in the new company, Waratah Films. They produced a 13-part television series, Adventure Unlimited. Cavill wrote a number o f episodes and co-produced the series. The company later switched to documentary production, travelling to Tokyo for the 1964 Olym pics to film a special on Dawn Fraser. It was there that Cavill suffered her first heart attack.

After several months of convalescence Cavill returned to work, basing herself in Toronto, Can ada, working on a number o f Canadian and Ameri can feature films and a Canadian television series. During the late 1960s, Cavill returned to Aus tralia to team once again with Lee Robinson. She started with Fauna as associate producer, concen trating on her writing, and guiding a team o f young writers in the world o f weekly series production. Cavill trained dozens o f newcomers who in later years would make their mark in the industry, includ ing Lyn McEncroe, Adrian Read, Sue Milliken and close friend Jill Robb, who went on to produce Careful He Might Hear You, which scooped twelve AFI awards. Cavill later became producer on the Skippy series, as well as co-producer on the feature, Nickel Queen, and two television series, Barrier Reef and Shannon’s Mob. Eventually Cavill achieved her life’s ambition: to write and produce her own feature film, Dawn!. Although it did not achieve great boxoffice success, it did earn her a much-coveted Awgie Award for best original screenplay. Secretary, continuity girl, associate producer, writer, producer, filmmaker and “Mother”: Joy Cavill was many things to many people. Her out standing contribution to the Australian film indust ry and her fine leadership qualities will be missed. PAT GILLESPIE

ARCH

NICHOLSON

Director Arch Nicholson died peacefully on 24 February 1990, the result o f a motor neuron disease, ALS. Nicholson had established an excellent reputa tion in the television industry, with documentaries such as The Russians and series including The Flying Doctors and Special Squad. H e was well known for his speed on location and his ability to get material under trying conditions. Nicholson branched into the cinema with four features, Fortress, Buddies, Dark Age and the recently completed Weekend With Kate (formerly “Depth o f Feeling” ). The latter has quickly gathered a reputa tion at film markets as a skilfully made and delight ful romantic comedy. Nicholson’s early features, made during the worst years of the lOBAexplosion, were felt by many to not be a true indication o f what he could ulti mately bring to the cinema. Unfortunately, he was robbed o f that chance by his death at only 48.

N A N C IA L Y E A R IS N O W A P P R O X . $ 1 1 4 M IL U O N .

CINEMA

PAPERS

• 5

John Seale is one of the worldâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s mdst sought-after directors of photography, his work having ranged from the Oscar-nominated R ainman to G orillas in piling up and Hector Babenco [Kiss

the

of the

M ist , from Witness to D ead P oets Society. Many new offers are

Spider Woman] wants him to shoot a rather expensive film set in

South America. Sealeisvery tempted, butfor the moment he has to pu t these temptations aside and finish making 6 â&#x20AC;˘ CINEMA

PAPER S 79

'j&m

hisfirst feature film as a director, Till T here Was You . There is much riding on this adventure-romance set in the Vanuatu jungle, and notju st fo r Seale. Apartfrom the $13 million budget, the film is a showcase fo r post198 Os Australian cinema, fo r the producers (Jim McElroy in particular), fo r established stars, Mark Harmon andJeroen Krabbe, andfor relative newcomer Deborah Unger.

ANDREW

u r b a n

r e p o r t s

C IN E M A

P A PER S

7 9 -

her

ARK HARMON plays Frank Flynn, “an average sort of guy” from New York, who is sum m oned by his b rother Charlie in the depths of the Vanuatu jungle, only to find Charlie dead by the time he gets there. He meets the em bittered Viv (Jeroen K rabbe), who was C harlie’s partner, and Viv’s beautiful but unhappy wife, Amna (Deborah U nger). It seems Charlie had said som ething about an old wartime bom ber filled with Japanese gold that had crashed, b u t was never found. The search for the bom ber is m ade the m ore intense by the growing attraction between Frank and Anna, the presence of the Vanuatu tribespeople and a couple of choice baddies. Seale took a great interest in the final drafts of the script:

The conflict now doesn’t lie as much between the blacks and whites as among the whites. We show the native people as they are - noble and dignified - and it’s clear that it’s the white man who doesn’t fit into the jungle. Seale also wanted to keep a balance between the action and the relationships of the three central characters. Producer Jim McElroy has fond hopes that the film “will have the same sort of values as the great old Hollywood movies, like Elephant Walk and To Have and Have N o t... real characters and real situations”. For Seale, the biggest challenge has been directing perform ances; he is a good listener, but he also has a vision of the com pleted film: I learnt from Peter Weir that the scene you’re shooting is not the movie: it is before one scene and is followed by another. You play a sort of Moviola in your mind to determine what kind of pace to maintain.

John told me very clearly what he wanted. He even described several specific shots, like black faces floating in the rain ... He wants almost a documentary look, with lots of cuts and montage-like grabs of images.

Seale and his director of photography, Geoffrey Simpson, had many discussions on the film’s ‘look’, prom pted no doubt by Seale’s own experiences. “All I ever wanted from the directors I’ve worked with was to talk to me about what look they w anted”, he says. This time, he m ade sure he d id n ’t fail his own DOP. Says Simpson:

The shots are largely static, with the action inside the frame, but there are two crane shots, and some tricky underground sequences around the sunken bomber, which was specially built and sunk in the shallow waters that once boasted rich coral reefs - that is, before the last cyclone. Despite all the planning, unprepared-for things will always happen and one has to be able to adapt. ‘T hese are things I call lucky mistakes - gifts from nature. Especially with these villagers”, says Seale, as he nods towards the Bunlaps scattered in their newly built village outside Vila. The Bunlaps had been ‘im ported’ from the Pentecost island in the north ern region of the Vanuatu archipelago, after lengthy negotiations, which Seale initiated. He had been there in 1982, filming the extraordinary land dives that are unique to the Bunlaps, in which several m en of the tribe hurl themselves from various heights up to thirty metres, from a specially built sacred tower, once ayear (usually in A pril). The diver comes to within an inch of bashing his brains out on the ground, stopped short by carefully selected and m easured vines tied to one ankle. The tribe agreed to participate in the film as the villagers in the script, and also to assist with the land dive - includ ing one that features the once ordinary

• CINEMA

PAPERS

LEFT: DIRECTOR J O H N SEALE O N L O C A T IO N W ITH ACTRESS D E B O R A H U N G E R , W H O P L A Y S A N N A , V I V 'S W IFE. F A C IN G P A G E : F L Y N N IS CARRIED IN TO THE B U N L A P S ' V ILLA G E AFTER A N A IR C R A S H . B ELO W : B IG M A N (CHIEF T E LK O N W A T A S ) A N D F L Y N N . TILL THERE WAS YOU.

JO H N SEALE O N DIRECTING

“I’ve never realized in all those years how many answers you have to have. The actors want to know details about what happened to their characters years before the story begins. “How do I feel about it? Well, some days I don’t want to come to work ... Heh, but it’s also very exciting. Especially when every thing clicks. Getting it to click is the trick. “What I realize now is you have to be absolutely 100 per cent on your script It’s very hard to try and fly it once you’re shooting.” GOEFFREY SIM PSON O N C IN EM ATO G R A PH Y

“We’re not doing anything tricksy; it’s very simple. We want to let the action tell the story, and not let the cinematography overpower the film. But the light can be a nightmare here. It’s very change able. The jungle really comes alive with dapples of light through it. But getting the dapples just when you want to shoot is not easy.” M ARK H A R M O N O N A C TIN G

Frank having a go. The Bunlaps, dressed in nothing but grass skirts for women and nambas (penis sheaths) for men, became the location favourites, and some predicted they will steal the show with their mischievous good hum our and energetic performances. The village is one of the two major constructions that are an integral part of the action. It comprises some ten huts, built around a ceremonial circle studded with totems. The village sits naturally on the riverbank, as itwould if itwere inhabited. (Itis: the Bunlaps lived

“I’ve worked with quite a few first-time directors and writerdirectors, and I like to take those kinds of chances. That’s not to say if Sidney Pollack rang and asked me to do a picture I would say, ‘No’. “I work hard at trying not to let the effort show, so there is a degree of pride involved. But while I take my work seriously, I try not to take myself too seriously. “I very much wanted to work with John Seale; I admire his work. I also liked the idea of a regular guy in irregular circum stances, just an everyman really, who. comes to a place he can only find on a map, and, through situations he cannot control, discov ers a lot about himself. And it changes him. All in two weeks.” JEROEN KRABBE O N A C TIN G

“With my painting, when I want to paint the bluest blue, I start with a red. I let that dry, and then start painting the blue. It’s the same with acting: I start with the opposite. What you see here is a cynical, bitter Viv. But I play against it because that’s already in the lines. “If I find a problem with a role, I ask myself how would Dirk Bogarde do it, and how would Dustin Hoffman do it. They’re both the ultimate, and yet very different: Bogarde is very still, and Hoffman is the ultimate entertainer. Sometimes I use the Bogarde model, sometimes the Hoffman. And the older you get, the more you leave out.” DEBORAH UNGER O N HER FIRST LEAD ROLE

“I love working with John Seale; I have so much respect for him. And I love the way he sees life, his conceptual framework, and, as a person, how he interprets his environment. I watch him to see what he watches. “I love theatre and feel very comfortable there. I am beginning to feel playful and, as I am expanding, able to give more, to be more focused. But I’m not nearly as confident in front of the camera. “I love the sensation of giving something to the story, to be there 100 per cent with all the crew and other actors, all going for the same thing. But I don’t like it when the attention is focused on me. I hate it when someone says, ‘Oh, it’s such a good part for you.’ That’s external to the story. I hate people watching me instead of me being a part of the story.”

CINEMA

PAPERS

• 9

partner, and lived in a smaller adjacent house. They had a cocoa plantation, having bought the place for a dime. Yet all this time, Charlie was actually look ing for Betty Blonde, the B25 bom ber with the golden baggage. Viv had given up hope. Finally, when Charlie does find it, he doesn’t tell Viv: he can’t trust the man, and he, Charlie, has lost inter est since he knows it belongs to Vanu atu. Viv would try and steal it. All this happens before the story of the film begins. It’s the background to the action, and to some of the charac ters. The other thing about Viv is that he is so possessive of his wife he keeps h er virtually im prisoned. She even tries to escape - and Frank’s arrival on the scene only fuels this explosive scenario.

in the huts throughout filming.) The village only took four weeks to construct, using local Mele tribesmen. A round a small rise is the other main structure, the house where Viv and A nna live, a striking building beneath a giant banyan tree with a thousand roots shooting up together to form its main trunk. T he house is fram ed by ‘M ount H o p e’ and is aged to give it a suitably decayed facade. It is production designer George Liddle’s pride and joy: ‘T h e hill and the banyan tree dictated what we should build”, he maintains. Indeed, “finding the right location was the first thing we had to d o .” The task was largely the responsibility of line producer Tim Sanders, who surveyed m uch of the South Pacific. The house is contemporary, but with gentle echoes of the colonial 1940s. “There is nothing less than 50 years old in it”, says Liddle. “We brought it all out from Syd ney: polished wooden items, cabinets ... We avoided plastic altogether.” T he house was built for about $70,000 in six weeks, m uch to the am azem ent of the local population, to whom this seemed like unseemly haste. But then it was not built to last, its foundation piles are m ade of coconut trunks-free and available, but subject to rotting. “It’s great fu n ”, Liddle says with a grin; “A rem nant of the white m an ’s ways.” In the film, Viv had built this house fifteen years ago. T hen, after independ ence, all land ownership reverted to the Vanuatu people, with a lease for the occupant. It was this event that began Viv’s deterioration into bitterness. It was this that changed an appealing man, gradually eating away at him, into the festering sore he is today. C harlie, F ran k ’s b ro th e r, was his 10

• CINEMA

PAPERS

Till There Was You is expensive and yet it isn’t: both Jim and his brother, Hal McElroy, agree that Australia should be making low-budget films, u n d er $2.million, or bigger-budget films, such as this - nothing in between. The rationale is that a low-budget film with a good script has a better chance of recouping its cost than a mid budget film. And a big-budget film can accom m odate the extra ele ments that can make it Hable internationally - if n ot highly profit able. Besides, as Jim McElroy points out, Till There Was You is being made for about half what Hollywood could do it for. The one question McElroy can’t fully answer is why Australians haven’t made a good old adventure movie before now? “I really d o n ’t know”, he says. “But we d id n ’t sit down and try to find the gap in the m arket.” Hopefully, they have found it. ■ A B O V E : S IN G E R K A TE C E B E R A N O A N D F L Y N N A B O U T TO P E R F O R M A T THE BLUE N ILE C L U B . B E L O W : F L Y N N A N D V I V FIG H T BESIDE M O U N T H O P E . TILL THERE W AS YO U .

Alive and well after more than 60 years of world class service. Colorfilm, still the only laboratory to offer its clients: • Australia’s most respected group of post production technicians • Full professional liaison service during the shoot • Selection of screening theatres to accommodate any budget • Full 16mm/35mm sound mixing post sync dialogue and effects facilities Quality feature service for every production.

Q Colorfilm

35 MISSENDEN ROAD, CAMPERDOWN PHONE 516 1066 FAX 550 1530

H a l a r id J i m IVI o EI r o v Hal afid Jim McElroy are two of Australia’s most prominent and successful producers. Their first feature, T he Cars T hat A te P aris (Peter Weir, 1974), was at the near start of Australia’s much vaunted film revival. Their second film*, P icnic

H anging R o c k

(Weir, 1975), was a breakthrough success,

locally and overseas. Their third, T he L ast Wave (Weir, 1977), was thefirst to attract major American studio investment. The 1980s began with similar success. T he Year ously

L iving D anger

(Weir, 1982) was in many ways a consolidation and re-affirmation of

the cinematic philosophy of their production entity, McElroy & McElroy. It is a bold film, aimed squarely at the international market and utilizing the drawing power of the Australian star Mel Gibson, and rising American name, Sigourney Weaver. The film also used other international elements (such as composer MauriceJarre), as well as globally-recognized Australians (director Peter Weir and scriptwriter David Williamson). The rest of the decade has been more diversified for the McElroys. There was, at the time, the surprising move into television, a move that pre figured the later cross-over for Kennedy Miller. T he L ast Frontier (Simon Wincer, 1986) was an American network breakthrough and R eturn E den,

mini-series and series, a world-wide hit. The features have left less of

a mark, rangingfrom R azorback (Russell Mulcahy, 1983) to M elvin , S on of A lvin

(John Eastway, 1984). But McElroy & McElroy has big expectations

of its latest feature, the $13 million T ill T here Was Y ou , the first feature of acclaimed Australian cinematographer John Seale. The McElroys were first interviewed by Cinema P apers in the January 1973 issue, and again after T he L ast Wave. In many ways, these interviews are a record of the production and cesthetic issues of the time. This interview, again conducted by Scott Murray, is no exception. In Part 1, the McElroys examine, at times provocatively, many of the central concerns in filmmaking in Australia in the early 1990s. In Part 2, they look back to their past successes and forward to hopefully those of the future.

* Produced in association with Patricia Lovell.

CINEMA

PAPERS

•

i m

IV I

roy

Since you were last interviewed for Cinema Papers in 1977, the major change in the industry was the introduction o f 10BA. What is your perspective on 10BA, the pluses and minuses? We have built the film industry up and made it adult, turning it from a cottage industry into a business. T hat is a plus. Clearly, though, that business became too big. Too many films were made and inflation took over. From a commercial point ofview, the investors got nervous, as you would expect. There were some good films made, but there was a lot of bad ones, which harm ed the international reputation of this industry.

JIM:

At the time, we had some grave reservations, but we chose not to voice them. We thought that we would seem to be selfish because, at the time, 10BA was perceived to be a wonderful thing for the industry.

HAL:

We consciously adopted a low profile and d id n ’t speak about 10BA, because it is so easy to knock.

JIM:

HAL: It did

give people lots of opportunities and we hoped, along with everybody else, that these opportunities would produce a Second Wave of actors, writers, directors, etc. But the sad conclusion is that it d id n ’t. The inescapable conclusion is that there is an inverse relationship between the ease with which you can get money and the absence of genuinely resilient stars, directors and writers being thrown up. Some would disagree, arguing that the one benefit o f 1OBA was it broke the stranglehold the Australian Film Commission had which favoured a certain group o f established directors. 10BA gave a chance to many new people, most o f whom were disappointing. But if you look at the French or American film press, the most applauded Australian directors o f the late 1980s are new people who came out o f 10BA: Campion, Bennett, H illcoat...

the consequence of it, and there really is no point in regretting it. 1OBA was not as beneficial as everybody hoped, and certainly not as the politicians wished it to be, but it wasn’t a complete disaster. YoungBins teinwsLS made with it; so was Crocodile Dundee, Return to Eden and a lot of good Kennedy Miller stuff. O n that level, you have to ask, “W hat’s the regret?” The only regret, I suppose, is lost opportunities. As for waiting for the Second Wave, maybe out of the 15 million people we already had more than our fair share of ‘stars’. How seriously did the disappointing 10BA films damage the interna tional reputation o f Australian films, particularly in the U.S., where people put up a lot of pre-sales for films that turned out not to be even competent?

JIM:

people who put up pre-sales in America were not that com petent anyway. So they got what they deserved. I mean that slightly tongue in cheek, but, yes, those films did do a lot of harm. At the same time, there was the big w inner in Crocodile Dundee. T hat has made it easier for acceptance in a mainstream sense.

They would have come anyway because they’re talented. But look, it is real easy to criticize what happened and there is nothing any of us can do about it. It happened. We all have to live with

10BA has to receive credit for that. Dundee was a product, a result, of 1OBA and it was an astonishing success. So, arguing on that film alone, it paid everything back, all the debts. Perhaps the regret is that we m anaged to lose a lot of the inroads that we had made into the m arket generally by making bad films.

I d idn ’t see it that way, I must say. I recognize those names as being new talent, but I wouldn’t have thought they were the product of 10BA.

HAL:

• CINEMA

PAPERS

JIM: Most of the

HAL:

PRODUCTIVITY

COSTS

F A C IN G P A G E : THE FIRST T W O M cELR O YS -PETER W EIR C O L LA B O R A T IO N S . LEFT: THE CARS THAT ATE PARIS (1 9 7 4 ), W IT H THE LATE RO BERT M E IL L O N A S THE M A Y O R .

At the same time, the nature of the theatrical industry changed. The Hollywood industry got into the giant-killer mentality, whilst we let our costs run away. We painted ourselves into a corner. Most recently, Australian television has also gone sideways and we really have given ourselves a whole bunch of problems that have to be resolved before getting ourselves back on our feet. One of the things is to get costs down and productivity up. We need to get back a little more to reality and re-kindle the pioneering spirit and energy and com m itm ent we had in the 1970s. Even if we do make films that don’t work, and inevitably we will, the cost won’t be as great because hopefully the budgets will be lower, relatively speaking, and we will be able to survive it. But where you are making six or eight million dollar disasters, it is a m uch m ore painful and public problem.

RIGHT: C A U G H T IN THE SPIRIT O F ST V A L E N T IN E 'S D A Y IN PICNIC A T H A N G IN G R O C K (1 9 7 5 ). A B O V E : THE THIRD A N D FO UR TH M cE L R O Y S -W E IR C O L L A B O R A T IO N S . LEFT: D A V ID B U R T O N (R ICH AR D C H A M B E R L A IN ) A N D CH RIS LEE (GULPILIL) IN THE LAST W A V E (1 9 7 7 ). RIGHT: G U Y H A M IL T O N (M EL G IB S O N ) A N D JILL B R Y A N T (S IG O U R N E Y W E A V E R ) IN THE YEAR OF LIVING DANGEROUSLY (1 9 8 0 ).

from a financial point of view. There are only so many people here who can see a film. You can’t make the rules by the exceptions, like a Young Einstein, which grossed around $15 million in Australia.

Historically, costs always rise. O ur problem is that, if you graph it, you will find a rapid acceleration during 10BA, which was due to a shortage of facilities and talent. People just bid everything up. But equally, when you look back to ’73, ’74 and ’75, we were making films for unrealistically low budgets. I mean, Jim and I paid ourselves $11,000 to produce Picnic at 'WHAT I AM HOPING IS THAT THE Hanging Rock, which took us three years. It was When you were interviewed in 1977, the big only the profit that film made which enabled us HARSHER ECONOMIC TIMES ARE gest concern you had then was rapidly escalat to keep working on it full time. ing budgets. Is this just a continuing problem Now, of course, when there was money GOING TO FORCE PEOPLE TO LOOK or has it greatly worsened? available, we stopped working for $11,000 and AT THINGS IN A MUCH MORE started paying ourselves a bit more. T hat was JIM: Oh yes, much. If you com pare the cost of true in a lot of the above-the-line elements. The making a film in 1974 to that in 1990, the costs REALISTIC LIGHT, TO BE MORE FLEX actors, writers and directors were, relatively have rocketed. People will have to pull their IBLE AND PRAGMATIC. THIS SOspeaking, underpaid com pared to the grips belts in - everybody, n o tju st the crews, but the and electrics. So that is where the greatest rises actors, the producers, the directors, the writ CALLED PRINCIPLE OF DEFENDING occurred, which was only right. But it has now ers, the whole shooting match. got out of wack and the salaries no longer pay AUSTRALIA'S CULTURAL INTEGRITY Hal, in the speech you gave last year at the heed, as Jim said, to the size of the domestic Screen Production Association o f Australia HAS TO BE EXAMINED IN THE FULL market. (SPAA), you argued that Australian films should This situation creates great difficulties for LIGHT OF THE NEW ECONOMIC be made for under $2 million, like a Sweetie, younger filmmakers. It is therefore very im por which is already in profit, or for $10 to $15 tant to ensure that they still have a door to walk DAWN.' - HAL McELROY million with international muscle. through. It was hard enough trying to raise half a million dollars for Picnic at Hanging Rock, God JIM: Yes. And if Sweetie had been made for $10 knows how producers today, without a track record, can raise the two million, it would n o t be in profit; it’s about that simple. or three million necessary to make a film. Buggered if I know. I would As for the $10 million film, it m ust have a star and other interna hate to try to do it without a track record. tional elem ents that will make it work globally. Only then can you So, we must create an environm ent whereby people can make a start to get your budget back. movie for $1 million to $1.5 million. You must encourage the young One of H al’s thrusts in the speech was that going international and the energetic so as to keep the industry alive and vital. If we d o n ’t is not the only route. There are films that can be m ade for domestic do that, we are all going to calcify and petrify into middle age,because audiences, but you have to realize the limitations o f that audience HAL:

CINEMA

PAPERS

• 15

Meal

and

Jim

M c E I roy

the idea of going from a six-day week to a five-day week? T he answer is probably not. We are now operating in an econom ic environm ent where you have seen m ajor change, yet we are bound by an award form ulated in a completely different environm ent. Now, I am n ot necessarily advocating that we should go back to a six-day week, but I think that it behoves everybody in the industry to start thinking much m ore flexibly about everything we have been doing. We have to regain that exciting and adventurous desire to be flexible as an industry. I was staggered to hear that a friend of mine, who is one of the best television cam eram en in America, was shooting pilots in Los Angeles on a flat 12-hour day, five days a week. He was n ot getting overtime; nobody was. If they worked in excess of 12 hours, the production m anager m ight slip them $100.1 thought, “My God, that is what we used to do in Australia ten years ago.” But somehow we began to think it was more “professional” to do it another way. Consequently, we shot ourselves in the foot. In America they’ve re-learnt the lessons we once knew but have now forgotten. JIM:

And how many days did they shoot the pilot in?

It was 20 days for a 96-minute movie. Now, th at’s very efficient shooting and there are n ’t many directors in Australia who could do that. But that’s how the American industry survived. They d id n ’t say that everybody had to go on half salary; they said everyone is going to have to work faster and harder. T h at’s a challenge the American industry has responded to, particularly in television.

HAL:

THE

the paradox is that all those young turks of the 1970s are all middle aged now. Unless we encourage the young guys and women, we are going to be buggered. How do you get costs down? Do you re-negotiate awards and return to the sanity o f a six-day shooting week and cancelling those ridicu lous tea breaks? T hat would be good, but it would only go some of the way. To my m ind the answer is in working faster and m ore efficiently. We have got all slack and let laziness and unprofessional behaviour appear on the set. You knowwe shot Cars that AteParism fourweeks, Picnic in five and Last Wave in seven. Now, if you were to ask some of the directors or cam eram en around these days to make those sort of movies in five or seven weeks, they would simply say, “N ot possible”. But it is possible; we did it. We can ’t all have forgotten how, ourselves included. The American style is to have high-paid people and have them go very, very fast. T h e re ’s nothing wrong with that. HAL:

JIM:

I agree entirely with Hal: productivity is the issue.

Let’s also rem em ber the change from six days to five days occurred at the height of 10BA activity. Everybody was working flat out and they were n o t having ‘the hom e life’ they wanted. Today, where the production rate is maybe half what it used to be, I doubt the technicians out there would be anywhere near as supportive of the five-day week. W hat people want to do now is work. O ne o f the problem s with awards is they tend to be cast in concrete. If we had known as an industry that all three networks were going to go into technical bankruptcy, would we all have agreed to HAL:

• CINEMA

PAPERS

ROLE

SPAA

You were both active in 1977 in setting up the Independent Feature Film Producers Association (IFFPA). Could IFFPA, or SPAA as it became, have done more to control costs? Can it now be instrumental in adopting what you see as the solutions to the industry’s problems? JIM: We

were some of the founding people of IFFPA, b ut we became disenchanted with the way it was going in the middle of the 10BA period. So, we sort of cut loose. But we want now to try and get m ore involved, because we do see a leadership role for SPAA in trying to rationalize the industry.

The m ore active m em bers of SPAA got caught up in 10BA and d id n ’t pay enough attention to the very sorts of concerns we are talking about. We did a “C hristopher Skase”; our eye left the ball as we rushed around making money and movies. We all let a situation develop which we now have to correct. I do think SPAA should have been m ore responsible, b ut I d o n ’t m ean the executive, rather the m em bership. We all let som eone else worry about the problems. One of the perennial problem s with SPAA is that it has a broad cross-section of representation: it has som ething like 170 m em bers who range all the way from those making corporate videos to people m aking $12-14 million features. T here is, for instance, a divergence of opinion within SPAA in regard to Actors Equity’s policy on im ported actors. Some of the m ore inward-looking SPAA m em bers actually agree with Actors Equity, while a m uch larger section disagrees. So within the one organization you have a bit of conflict. W hat I am hoping is that the harsher econom ic times are going to force people to look at things in a m uch m ore realistic light, to be m ore flexible and pragmatic. This so-called principle of defending Australia’s cultural integrity has to be exam ined in the full light of the new econom ic dawn. I d o n ’t think it is appropriate for any HAL:

F A C IN G P A G E : T O P: H A L A N D JIM M cE L R O Y PO ST

THE LAST W AVE, 1 9 7 7 ; B E LO W : PETER W EIR , O N THE SET O F THE CARS THAT ATE PARIS. THIS P A G E : LEFT: RETURN TO EDEN: W O R L D W ID E TELEV ISIO N S U CCE SS . S T EPH A N IE H A R P E R (REB EC CA G ILLIN G ) A N D J A M E S R EY N E IN THE M IN I-SE R IES . B E LO W : LEFT: THE LAST FRONTIER, THE M IN I-SE R IES T H A T B R O K E IN THE U .S . T O P: S T E N N IN G (J A S O N R O B A R D S J U N .) A N D D A U G H T E R M E G (JU D Y M O R R IS ). RIG H T: THE M C E L R O Y S ' N E W FEATURE, TILL THERE W AS YO U (J O H N SEALE, 1 9 9 0 ). F L Y N N (M A R K H A R M O N ) A N D V I V (J O R O E N K R A B B E ) A T THE A N N U A L C A LC U T T A RACE D A Y IN V A N U A T U .

industry in Australia to say that we are making som ething just for Australians. Even the bloody car industry has decided to export cars to America. It is bullshit to say that bringing in an overseas actor is some sort of cultural rape, or that movies which d o n ’t have those elements are, Q.E.D., more Australian and therefore m ore valid. W ithout m en tioning the nam e of the movie I watched last night on television, it was a bad movie. It was an all-Australian movie, but it was a bad one. And please d o n ’t tell me it was m ore valid than some of the stuffwe’ve done with im ported actors. The industry has to get real. As I said in my SPAA address, there is an inverse relationship between budget and freedom . The higher the budget, the less freedom you have making the story. If you make a low-budget film, you get the freedom you want. If the average budget of films in Australia is going to be $3-4 million, then we all have to export, and to do that you are probably going to need im ported elements involved. Get your price down to a million and you get all the freedom in the world. JIM: There

have been some false argum ents used by interested parties in preserving the purity or whatever of Australian films. You have had statistics com piled which were simply false J u st to serve an argument. That is dishonest and distasteful. ACTORS

EQUITY

Do you think Actors Equity will change its position? I hope, but I d o n ’t expect so. They must be terribly proud that in their rush for cultural purity they have created a situation where the Australian producer is penalized for bringing in im ported people, yet there is an open-door policy of American films being made here. They can have whoever they want as long as they pay the

JIM:

rates. Now the effect of that is: (a) with an American film made here, crew and cast are paid basically what they ask for (including SAG rates) as it is still cheaper than shooting in America; (b) with an Australian film it inflates the indus try in terms of cost, because of the extra loading each actor gets as a penalty for having an overseas elem ent in the film. And when that actor goes to his next Australian film, he wants to get the same as on the last one and the crew m em ber wants what he received on his last American film; and (c) this has the effect of ensuring less films are made in Australia by Australian people with international potential. Is that really helping the industry? Hal and I have a conflict here in that we d o n ’t object philosophi cally to American producers coming here. We d o n ’t think it’s great; we d o n ’t think it’s going to build the industry but we aren ’t going to be hypocritical and say they can’t come. But we do ask that Equity at least give the Australian producer as m uch of a go as the Americans get. Let us do our stuff without penalizing us to the advantage of our American counterparts. It is ju st nuts. My view is that Actors Equity has produced a really unhealthy atmosphere in the industry by taking the positions it has. There was an actor we had provisionally cast for Till There Was You, who was quoted in the press as saying, “ Oh, well, this is just another ‘Ameri can’ film, so it won’t mean much to m e” , or words to that effect. He was taking that attitude because we’d engaged an American actor who happens to be playing an American character. Now, I think it is really offensive and destructive to our industry, and the movie, for a person to rubbish in print the movie he is about to be paid to work on. Needless to say, this guy was recast. If people want to be critical of the sort of movies we are making, we d o n ’t want to work with them. It appears that there are only two sorts of filmmaking happen ing in Australia and that’s inappropriate. There is the “international movie”, which is viewed as being mid-Atlantic and purely shitty, and th ere’s the “culturally exact”, m eaning Australian. If we keep on rushing down that path where everybody makes a choice all the time, then they are going to continue to trip ourselves up. Was Young Einstein culturally exact? I d o n ’t know. But it struck me as being a very Australian movie and it was very, very successful. But I d o n ’t think it was very exact. HAL:

C O N T IN U E D

CINEMA

PAGE

PAPERS

• 17

PHOTOGRAPH

CINEMA

IAN

PAPERS

MACPHERSON

RE P O R T B Y

SCOTT

M URRAY

T RACEY M offatt N I G H T AR U R A L

C R I E S T R A G E D Y

In a world where most film directors seem content to blandly record people talking, it is refreshing to find filmmakers concerned with image and sound, who realize that mise en scène

can rarry meaning more percipiently than mere words can.

In 1986, Jane Campion drew international acclaim at Cannes with her starkly visual P eel . This year, it could well be Tracey Moffatt with her new short film, N igh t Cries :

A R ural T ragedy . It is a breathtakingly visual film, shot entirely in a studio

a sparse narrative! suspended in an ab stract, surreal space of artificial light and sound. It attacks and disturbs with its blunt political advocacy and touches emotionally in its gentler moments on faltering human relationships. It is proof of a new Austra lian filmmaking sensibility at work.

—

visually begins with a Singer (Jimmy Little) crooning “Royal T elephone”, a religious song promising God’s personal attention to everyone’s needs. In this film, the principal needs are those of the Australian Aborigines, whose time since the white setdem ent began has been, am ong many things, a battle to retain cultural and spiritual independence in the face of powerful white repositioning. Thus, while in tone the Singer’s voice is soothing, his very presence rem inds one of the era of the mission school, where black Austra lians were re-educated and re-clothed in an attem pt to make them m ore ‘w hite’.

■

IGHT CRIES

CINEMA

PAPERS

•

TRACEY

C L O C K W IS E F R O M T O P LEFT: W H ITE M O T H E R (A G N E S H A R D W IC K ) A N D B L A C K D A U G H T E R (M A R C IA L A N G T O N ). THE O UTSID E TOILET, W H E E L C H A IR A N D IM PA T IE N T D A U G H T E R . THE D A U G H T E R , W ITH LETTER B Y THE S T A T IO N 'S M A IL B A G . THE S IN G E R (J IM M Y LITTLE) W ITH HIS S T O R Y O F THE " R O Y A L T E L E P H O N E ", W H IC H O P E N S A N D CLO SES THE FILM . THE Y O U N G E R M O T H E R (ELIZABETH GENTLE) A T THE R O C K S B Y THE S E A BEFO RE SHE 'D IS A P P E A R S '. N IG H T CRIES.

A parallel repositioning of that time was forced adoption, where black children were placed in, and raised by, white Australian families (usually middle-class). Thus, the black child-white m other relationship at the centre of Night Cries-becomes symbolic of the wider Aboriginal-white relationship. After the religious song is cut short, the film tracks to a middleaged Aboriginal woman who is nursing what one presumes to be her aged, adoptive m other (there is no dialogue, no names and only a glimpse of photographs to hint at their relationship). The Old M other (Agnes Hardwick) is incontinent and near senile, and awaiting death. She is suspended in a time continuum punctuated by wheelchair visits to the outside loo and by fitful sleep. The black D aughter (Marcia Langton) waits on her every need, with a resigned selflessness and, at times, a touch of suppressed anger. Unable to free herself from this stagnant fate - perhaps she feels too duty bound all she can do is to wait for the Old M other’s death. The frustration of that is shown when she sits outside the loo and violently twangs the handle of the bucket on which she is sitting. During her tending of the Old Mother, the D aughter has m emories of her youth. As she cools herself with a slowly-running hose, she recalls a bow being tied to her ‘pretty’ dress, of another in her hair. As the water runs down her skin, it is as if she is washing away the attem pts of white society to make her dress and behave as ifwhite. A latter memory, and the most puzzling in the film, is of her and two boys (her brothers?) at a rocky beach with h er younger-looking M other (Elizabeth G entle). The children toss seaweed at each other while the M other stares out to sea, oblivious to and perhaps uninter ested in the children. She then disappears, as if having fallen or ju m p ed from the rocks, and the Daughter begins to cry. The seaweed around her neck has now bizarrely turned into what looks like mag netic tape, shiny and frightening in the way it tangles around her neck and w on’t pull away. O ne knows the M other can’t have drowned, for one has seen her in old age, so her ‘disappearance’ is strange and unsettling. It is also the one m om ent where the Daughter, at any age, seems to have a need for the M other - a need based on a fear of loss.

M0 F F A T T

This connects strongly with the penultim ate and most disturbing scene. The Old M other lies dead on the ground; beside h er is the Daughter, curled in a foetal position. As a baby cries mournfully on the soundtrack, one experiences an intense sense of loss at that now broken bond between m other and daughter. So even though the Old M other is perhaps symbolic of white oppression, Moffatt por trays within this troubled family a love that has not been extinguished by the defects of the past. This is not to say that the white presence in the film is not in many ways shown quite harshly. After the opening fragm ent of song, the camera tracks across a stylized view of the Australian outback to the D aughter’s reading a tourist brochure on the South Molle Island resort: sacred land becomes a marina. The cam era then reverses its track toward the Old Mother, past a table strewn with tinned food: white processed food versus blacks living naturally off the land. That the Old M other also wears a ghastly hand support reinforces the view of whites as a decadent, dying race (a view ironically the first white settlers held about the Aborigines). T here is also the Old M other’s incontinence, suggesting a white society clogged by its own cancers. The image is tough, no doubt cruel, and the further one probes

the sparse images, the darker the vision becomes. It is hard to imagine the film n o t unsettling, n o t stirring emotions, wherever it is screened. •

•

Night Cries director, Tracey Moffatt, studied filmmaking at the Q ueensland College of the Arts in Brisbane. Moffatt: It was the only place then in Queensland where you could do a practical filmmaking course. It was not a formal course, like at the Film School [AFTRS],-but much looser. It had the basic equipment and I made some student films. But I wouldn’t want anyone to see them. They’re just exercises, like, ‘Go out and make a five-minute documentary’, or ‘Here’s a piece of music, go and put images to it.’ The good thing about the course, and we didn’t have fabulous visiting lecturers like the kids get at the Film School, was that they pushed an appreciation of film history. Ninety per cent of our time was spent watching films. It gave me a good grounding in film history, which has been very helpful. I’m glad I learnt filmmaking at an art school.

films. An inevitable question, then, is w hether Moffatt feels she has an obligation to make films about Aborigines. Moffatt: When I sit down to write a script, I don’t think about how I am going to represent my aboriginal characters. But I am very conscious of what has come before me. When I was studying film, I looked at a lot of late-1970s documenta ries, including My Survival as an Aborigine and Two I m w s , as well as Wrong Side of the Road. They are very good films for their time and they perhaps even inspired me to become a filmmaker. But I don’t feel the need to copy their gritty realist representation. Not all black films have to be like that. Yes I am Aboriginal, but I have the right to be avant-garde like any white artist. I have a lot to do with the art scene in Sydney, more than with the film scene. I enjoy working with people who are non-film people, like Geoff

Moffatt graduated in 1982 and moved to Sydney. The first film she worked on was a docum entary about the Commonwealth Games protest in Brisbane. Made by a group of black filmmakers, Guniwaya Ngigu (a Q ueensland aboriginal term for “we fight”) was not a rewarding experience. Moffatt: We had fights amongst each other because some people in the group didn’t like the tone of the film. They thought it showed black people in not too positive a light, like getting arrested and yelling at cops. I don’t really want to talk about that because nothing ever really happened with it. A $64,000 grant from the Australian Film Commission went down the drain and the film is sitting underneath my bed at home. The experience basically pissed me off and I don’t want to work in a collective on films any more. Moffatt then worked in Sydney as a stills photographer, including on other people’s films. She wrote her first screenplay, which was for Nice Coloured Girls (1987), and received a grant from the Creative De velopm ent Fund to make it. The film is a confronting look at the plight of urban Aborigines today. It effectively overlays images of black girls on the town at night in Kings Cross with a voice-over of early white texts on the Aboriginal people. The film drew some criticism from fellow blacks for, again, showing them in a poor light, the black girls in the film being portrayed as knowingly fleecing white men for the sake o f a night out. In some ways, Nice Coloured Girls prefig ures the deliberate artificiality of Night Cries, eschewing the documentary-realist tradition for a surrealist edge. At times the film strains too hard for effect (the image of the glass breaking over the white settle m ent painting achieves less than it at tempts) and the craft level is not always as confident as the technique. But it bravely mixes a variety of filmic styles to striking effect and its linking of the Aboriginal p eople’s past and present is often quite disturbing. Since Nice Coloured Girls, Moffatt has made Watch Out (1987), about the Abo riginal and Islander Dance Theatre, and a film on AIDS for the Aboriginal Medical Service. She has worked on commissions for Film Australia and, in 1988, directed part o f the SBS series, A Change of Face, about the lack of positive representation of black and ethnic people in Australian

Weary, a video and super 8 artist and photographer. I always work with him as my script editor because he is always reminding me, through his own work, that rules in filmmaking can be broken. For example, in Night Cries I originally had a sequence where you saw the old woman die. But Geoff said, ‘No, you don’t have to see it; you are dragging it out too much. Cutting to her dead is enough.’ It’s good having someone like that to stop you from becoming didactic. While working on A Change of Face, Moffatt again came across Charles Chauvel’s 1955 Australian feature, Jedda. Moffatt:

CINEMA

PAPERS

• 21

MOFFATT

TRACEY

and lushly inappropriate music. T h ere is rarely if ever an a ttem p t to convey thoughts an d feelings through sound, and R obert B resson’s maxim th at one should, w herever possible, replace an im age with a sound would no d o u b t be seen as a ratbag heresy. But n o t to MofFatt who has, with h e r sound crew, w rought a w onderfully eerie and disturbing soundtrack, one that at times m elds im perceptibly with the images and, at others, com m ents perceptively on them . MofFatt:

TH E W H IT E M O T H E R A N D B L A C K D A U G H T E R A T THE H O M E S T E A D . N IG H T CRIES.

I really like the set, which is the homestead interior. It is very American, very Bonanza, from the era when Australian films were trying to be like American westerns - even down to the landscape and music. So, I decided to recreate the set in a film. I then took two of the film’s characters, Jedda, the black woman, and her white mother, and aged them as if thirty years had past. In the original film, Jedda is thrown off a cliff and killed. I wanted to resurrect her, and place the two of them back in the homestead situation, living out their days. But as I developed the script, the film became less about them and more about me and my white foster mother. I was raised by an older white woman and the script became quite a personal story. The litde girl who appears in some of the flashback sequences looks a lot like me. That was quite intentional. W hile Jeddawas a starting point, MofFatt is reluctant to stress the connection for fear o f people looking to Jedda for clues to Night Cries. MofFatt: It’sjust the look of Jedda that I’ve copied, that sort of artificial interior. But as far as landscape goes, I created my own. In part it is a reaction to a lot of Australian films where there is an obsession with photographing real landscape. I’m not particularly obsessed with landscape, and I like to think I can create my artificial version of it. I am also very influenced by my photography, where I like to work in a studio situation, creating tableaux. I wanted to do the same with Night Cries. The art director, Stephen Curtis, is a theatre person, and what I like about his work' is its staginess. On Night Cries, he was inspired a lot by looking at some early Albert Namatjira paintings, with their faded pastel look. I didn’t want the chocolate boxy, saturated look that a lot of Australian films have. We also used Agfa, a European film stock, to get that softer, more tonal look. This concerned at firstjohn Witteron, the cinematographer, who was used only to Kodak and Fuji. Now he and everyone is ecstatic about the results. Another influence was Japanese cinema: Kobayashi’s Kwaidan, for example, was all shot in a sound stage. As for the shiny floor surfaces, they came from my looking at Paul Schrader’s Mishima, where excerpts of Mishima’s writings are illustrated by very staged studio set-ups. Schrader was influenced, I suspect, byJapanese theatre, Bhutto, where they work a lot with reflections on a stage. He didn’t go for realism at all, and I wanted to try and do the same thing. And if you are going to go artificial, go all the way. Night Cries' highly stylized soundtrack is also u nusual for an Aus tralian film, w here the sole aims seem to be clear-sounding dialogue

CINEMA

PAPERS

The soundtrack was by Deborah Petrovitch, who is a video artist. She is also a soundscape artist who performs in pubs around Surry Hills at three o’clock in the morning, dressed in leather and crawling around a floor shaking a rattle. She’s really into voodoo and the sound at the beginning of my film that sounds like crazy monkeys is actually a woman choking. It was recorded in Haiti in the 1930s during a voodoo cere mony. Sound is so important Often when I’m writing a script I think of sounds first I also did this film in mono as Dolby stereo can sometimes be too pretty, with sound coming all around you. I didn’t want that as it can take away from the intensity of a film. And it really is an intense piece. Some people have said that I should hand out tranquillizers to audiences walking out at the end. W hen the issue o f the film ’s black-white politics is raised, MofFatt distances herself from such a reading. MofFatt: I would like to think, to use a cliché, that my film is universal, that it isn’t particularly about black Australia and white Australia. It’s about a child’s being moulded and repressed - she is very sexually repressed. It could be the story of anyone stranded in the middle of the desert having to look after their ageing mother. American audiences understood it very well. They really liked it. It didn’t matter that they didn’t know the lead actress was Aboriginal. W hen pressed about the film ’s ending, which some may see as saying th at Aboriginal rebirth is conditional on the death o f m any of the prevailing white-black relationships, MofFatt smiles gently. MofFatt: Umm, sure. I wanted to end the film like that, leaving the Daughter in an emotional state, and then bring in Jimmy Little with his boppy song so that it would grate even more. He offers this Christian healing, which . can be so unwelcome and inappropriate at times. At the same time, I don’t want to make fun ofJimmy or his Christi anity. I present him as he is in real life. He is this smooth, soothing character who appears every now and then to punctuate the film. But, in fact, he’s not really soothing at all, but grating. It’s like something familiar which turns into something horrible. •

•

Now that Night Cries seems assured o f critical recognition aro u n d the world, what are M offatt’s future plans? I just got a grant from the AFC to write a feature film. That’s next, and hopefully I’ll get some money to make it. I haven’t started yet but I feel fairly confident about it, even though I haven’t written a feature screenplay before. I come from a short-film background and it does occasionally scare me to think about having to milk one idea for 90 minutes. Still, I want to try it. Making a feature is not something I feel I need to do, but I would like to try. It should be very challenging. ■

A BY

LOCATION HUNTER

REPORT CORDAIY

Independence with D ig n ity

'Struck by One of the Australian films going to Cannes this year is S truck

L ightning , a $2.6 million production from Adelaide, directed by

Polish filmmaker Jerzy Domaradzki, and co-produced by Terry Charatsis and scriptwriter Trevor Farrant. This year’s festival will be important for Australian films as productions emerge restruc tured from a base of tax-concession finance to a more commercial mixture of funding. S truck by L ightning is one of the new films com pleted during this uneasy period, a comedy about independence and ABO VE:

dignity set in a workshop for the mentally handicapped.

D IRECTO R J E R Z Y D O M A R A D Z K I, A T LEFT, W IT H A C T O R S B R IA N L O G A N (K E V IN ) A N D B R IA N V R IE N D S

The film mixes professional actors with non-professional disabled adults, knoum

(C A N N IZ Z A R O ) .

as the Heartbreakers. Their supervisor, Rennie (Garry McDonald), is challenged by a new physical education teacher, Cannizzaro (Brian Vriends). Cannizzaro’s enthusi asm and idealism is not what the cynical, world-weary Rennie needs but may help the workshop survive. Their conflict is based on the classic antipathies of cynical experience and youthful optimism, and caught in the middle are the Heartbreakers, defenceless and unwanted by a society that prefers to hide its problems away from view. Forfour days in November, Hunter Cordaiy was on the set of S truck by L ightning, where he saw some early scenes between Garry McDonald and Brian Vriends, arid spoke with writer-co-producer Trevor Farrant and director Jerzy Domaradzki. 24

• CINEMA

PAPERS

THE H E A R T B R E A K E R S O N THE B E A C H , W IT H A C T O R GARRY M C D O N A L D , CENTRE.

T h u rsd a y

Estcourt House, on the western side of Adelaide, is the set for ‘Saltmarsh’, a sheltered workshop. It is a desolate stone building overlooking the sea *3 that at one time was a school, and then a hospital. It has cavernous high N o v e m b e r ceilings, and this afternoon its corridors echo to the sounds of a film crew setting up equipm ent, actors in costume reading or playing cards, bath rooms that look m ore like places of medical ritual, perhaps a mortuary. At the back and seaward side is a brick extension and a dry brush hedge creating â small grassed courtyard, 1960s attem pts at m odernizing what really is a stately building in decline. Saltmarsh is described in the scriptas “a place no one wants, for people no one wants”. There is an arched sign between the building and the beach which reads “Indépendance with Dignity”, mis spelled but no less defiant for the mistake. It is the symbolic entrance to the world of the Heartbreakers. In the workshop, the H eartbreakers make bon-bons for the Christmas market, put brochures in envelopes and produce small wooden rocking-horses that balance on the edge of tables. It has a look o f shabby order with tables covered in boxes, stacks of envelopes and rubber bands. H ere the simplest tasks will be an achievement, an expression of hope that the employees do have a role in society, a function with even some economic possibility. Rennie is in charge of this uphill possibility. T he first scene after lunch brings out the flaw inherent in this idea: such production-line work denies the individuality a n d creativity o f the employees. Can such mentally disabled people be creative? It’s not a concept readily accepted by Noel (Henry Salter), a hunched figure in khaki overalls and with protruding ears who wants to be a sculptor and not a maker of identical balancing horses. A crisis is reached when the ever-suspicious Rennie finds some wood shavings that betray N oel’s artistic ambitions: he sculpts monster-like heads. For the audience, it will be an early introduction to R ennie’s managerial style, and Cannizzaro’s first gathering o f support am ongst the Heartbreakers. For the filmmakers, however, the scene has another dimension: the script requires Rennie to hit Noel over the head and warn him off his creative endeavours. In rehearsal, director Jerzy Domaradzki sees this action on the m onitor and realizes it is too violent, with possible adverse implications for the film. But writer-co-producer Trevor Farrant, who is on the set, resists Dom aradzki’s attem pts to soften the blow by insisting it shows R ennie’s frustration rath er than his inherentviolence. T he m om ent is made m ore poignant by the fact that Noel’s disobedience is creative, n o t destructive. It takes 1 m inute 45 seconds to get a take, and, while the crew sets up for the first of three close-ups, Domaradzki talks about the differences between making films in Australia and Poland: This production is better equipped, with all the small elements which create what I would call a film civilization. The lamps are more effective, the camera is very good —not an Arriflex, buta Moviecam -a n d the actors are available for as long as I want them, whereas in Poland they’d often be employed

A B O V E : A C T O R S B R IA N V R IE N D S A N D G A R R Y M C D O N A L D W ITH THE B O N - B O N B O Y S (R O G E R H A D D A D , J O H N C LIN I, D ICK T O M K IN S , D A V ID SM ITH ). A N D , D O M A R A D Z K I W ITH D IRECTO R O F P H O T O G R A P H Y Y U R I S O K O L .

CINEMA

PAPERS

• 25

'R iders on the S to rm '

doing a play and a film at the same time. Sometimes when I was filming I had to stop shooting at 5 o’clock because the actors had to leave. But the greatest advantage is a shooting ratio of 12:1. However, the pressure of time is greater here, because in Australia time is more expensive. So, in 40 days I have to do what would normally take 50 or 52 days.

THE C R E W A N D A C T O R S R EH EA R S E THE L O N G T R A C K .

T hat efficiency will m ean Domaradzki can shoot three close-ups in the next 35 minutes. These will be the flash-points of the confrontation between Rennie and Noel. Domaradzki works patiently with McDonald in the cold, cram ped workshop, discussing at length the motive and intention of the simplest words of dialogue (“B um it”; “I said d o n ’t ”) . It is a m ethod that will be repeated over the next few days, a way o f working which relies not on a storyboard but with director and actors blocking out the movements, reacting to the implications and needs of the dialogue, gestures, etc., before making any decisions about fram ing and the cam era position. “I prefer to look at the actors and n o t at the m onitor”, Domaradzki explains, “because when I look at them on the m onitor all I get is a cold message. Actors produce an energy and I think it’s always better to look for this directly in their perform ance.” The next scene, described by Domaradzki as “a very difficult shot”, begins in the small courtyard at the rear of the building, and then follows Rennie and Cannizzaro along the outside of the building to a large palm tree near the entrance. Outside, the full force of the wind coming off the sea makes everyone quickly p u t on winter jackets. To link these three distinct m om ents in such a long cam era m ovem ent is ambitious and fraught with problems of language, interpretation and cam era logistics. “We have to create a richer reality than the scriptwriter”, Domaradzki says with good hum our, loud enough for Farrant to hear. For the next hour, discussions am ong Domaradzki, Farrant, director of photography Yuri Sokol and first-assistant director David Wolfe-Barry centre on the cam era and the possible double m eanings of the dialogue. The scene has two sexual references which have to be kept in balance: R ennie’s lusting after the retarded Gail (Briony Williams) as she sits on the swing, and Cannizzaro’s challenging a retarded exhibitionist, Kevin (Brian L ogan), to a comparison of penises by the palm tree. The fifty-metre track will link these two m om ents, b ut rehearsals show that for m uch of the track the dialogue between Rennie and Cannizzaro is inform ational rather than inherently connected to the m om ent. Domaradzki feels the scene needs another reason to be entertaining. It takes 90 m inutes to find this elem ent - the hand movements of Kevin and Cannizzaro as they open their track-suit trousers - and then eight takes in quick succession in case some of the magic, and the light, evaporates.

F rid a y

A B O V E : P R O D U C T IO N M E E T IN G : D O M A R A D Z K I , CEN TRE, C H E C K S THE SCRIPT; S O K O L IS O N THE LEFT, V R IE N D S THE R IG H T . A N D , D O M A R A D Z K I , A T LEFT, LIN ES U P THE S H O T O F M R JEFFRIES (D O N B A R K E R ) G ET T IN G O U T O F H IS C A R .

• CINEMA

PAPERS

The first production conversation with Domaradzki over breakfast goes som ething like: “W hat cam era angles do you want and how many set-ups?” I " “I can’t tell you until I rehearse with the actors, b u t we’ll probably start N ovem ber a sma11 track.” T he wry smiles get broader when, an h o u r later, he decides to use a “big crane” as well as the track. Domaradzki m eans a high rather than a large crane, b ut the m isunderstanding causes its own m om ent of panic with line producer Sue Armstrong perpetuating the tension between art and finance. The first scene for the day will be outside at the entrance to Estcourt House, where Kevin’s father, Mr Jeffries (Don Barker), will bring his son back to Saltmarsh after a hom e visit and m eet Cannizzaro for the first time. By contrast with yesterday’s long track, this should be easier. T hough Domaradzki has planned as m uch as he can during the very short pre-production period, he is thinking on his feet and has to adjust his vision of the film to each location and scene, bringing out “the dynamics of the actors” rather than im posing a vision upon them through the camera. This is an im portant distinction because he often m eets supporting actors for the first time ju st before shooting and m ust react quickly to the possibilities they present. Don Barker is a good example. Getting out of the car to deliver a cruelly accurate im personation of Kevin’s distorted speech (“H e ’s too thick to rem em ber anything”), he towers over Brian Vriends and, by tilting the cam era up, an unforeseen joke against Canniz zaro is extracted from the decision to cast such a tall actor. “I have to create the aesthetic for this film from the reality I ’m given”, Domaradzki says. “I ’m looking for som ething which I feel is im portant for me to tell an audience, and the style will be a natural p art of that, b ut inside the story.”

At 10:35, the first rehearsal is over an d the ‘simple scene’ has becom e aesthetically com plex. T here is a quick re-write o f some dialogue, while b ehind the set a row o f H eartbreakers and their families are sitting patiendy, watching the snail-like process of filming the opening of a car door. By 11:00, th ere have been six takes and everyone is keen to get to the next scene which uses the H eartbreakers as a group. P art o f the interest in Struck by Lightning is filming with the H eartbreakers. If actors are the volatile or unknow n elem ent in filmmaking, then working with the H eartbreakers is unique, and takes the film even fu rth er into the areas of improvi sation an d risk. For the close-up of Jeffries’ getting out o f the car, there is an intense continuity discussion between D om aradzki and Sokol. T he tension eases when Domaradzki sees two ships on the horizon which he wants in the shot. In a low-budget film you take any extras you can find, and “ships for fre e ” will quickly becom e the slogan for the shoot at Estcourt House. By 12:15, after a rehearsal and a small change o f cam era position, several takes are good b u t ru ined by rapidly m oving clouds, planes, o r both. Sitting beside Domaradzki after Take 3 is cancelled there is a sudden silence: Domaradzki has slum ped in his chair while a concerned Sokol looks on. U n d er this level o f pressure it is difficult for any director to hold on to a vision o f the u n m ade film he sees in his head. Despite the cold wind, a row o f H eartbreakers and their parents still sit waiting on the lawn. T h eir patience is extraordinary. By 2:30 their tim e has come. T he parents will drive up to the fro n t o f Estcourt H ouse as Kevin’s father leaves. Domaradzki decides to do it in one shot, co ordinating th ree cars and ten people, m ost o f them H eartbreakers who m ust run towards and th en past the cam era. T he schedule then focuses on the first o f two m ajor scenes to be shot today: H eartbreakers on the beach. Dom aradzki decides to shoot the o pening scene in one take, with a perspective from infinity to close-up as R ennie and Cannizzaro lead the H eartbreakers from Estcourt H ouse across a narrow bridge to the beach. H e places the cam era at the beach end of the bridge so the shot will show a single-file, m ulti-coloured parade of H eartbreakers carrying sporting equipm ent. Leading the procession will be R ennie and Cannizzaro, but, as Farrant explains, the shot has risk as well as comedy:

R E N N IE A N D C A N N I Z Z A R O L EA D THE H E A R T B R E A K E R S T O THE B E A C H .

Cannizzaro says he has to first establish what they’re capable of. We have to do some aerobic testing, cardio-vascular evaluations, bring them down to the beach and put them through this basic commando course. He’s getting further and further ahead of the Heartbreakers carrying the equipment. By the time he hits the beach and turns around, they’re exhausted just from carrying the equipment. F arrant explains why there have been no rehearsals for this shot: “It depends entirely on their ability to pick up w hat they’re supposed to do. We may have to m arch them across the sandhills a few times to get a take!” By 4:30 the crew is setting up the second shot in the sequence when the line of exhausted H eartbreakers will crest the sand dunes. O u t o f the shelter of the dunes, the wind and sand bite into crew, actors and equipm ent. This m ust be one of the coldest beaches in Australia, and by 5:30 the pressure is on Dom aradzki to finish quickly by shooting in the few short m om ents between fast-moving clouds. T he quick pace - five takes in less than ten m inutes is difficult for the H eartbreakers who do n o t have to fake their collapse on the sand. “Push them to the lim its” is C annizzaro’s ironic dialogue as they fall. T he scene finishes with a close-up on R ennie, and the crew pack quickly for a return to Estcourt H ouse to shoot a sunset scene between Rennie and Cannizzaro. This will be a crucial confrontation between the two characters and puts Domaradzki back into the cinematic environm ent he loves: actors and a cam era in a room . In this scene, the ‘risks’ are that the golden light may fade and the possibility that, on film, the m om ent may be too beautiful for the dialogue, which has a dark, alm ost sinister, tone to it. ‘Tw o things ... together ... always” is D om aradzki’s succinct sum m ary o f the scene’s structure. T he windows o f the workshop directly overlook the sea and the setting sun, which is flooding the room with a suitably magic light for the last set-up on a Friday afternoon. By 6:00, Dom aradzki is blocking o u t m ovem ent and lines, Garry M cDonald and Brian Vriends are still being m ade-up so Alison Goodwin (continuity), and David Wolfe-Barry (first-assistant direc tor) stand in for them , moving, pausing and tu rn in g as Domaradzki begins to orchestrate them with the cam era. W hat he is searching for is nuance, the message in the words which will

JILL M c H U G H (C A T H ER IN E M cC L E M E N T S ), A S O C IA L W O R K E R "S H IT -S C A R E D O F R E T A R D S ", A N D H ER L O V E R , C A N N I Z Z A R O .

CINEMA

PAPERS

• 27

'R iders on the S to rm '

support the image of Rennie and Cannizzaro at either end of the sunlit room. T heir dialogue is about failure: Rennie senses a conspiracy to ensure the sheltered work shop does n o t succeed because he has been put in charge. It is a perverse acknowledgment of his own flawed self, which leads him to doubt Cannizzaro’s motives for also accepting ajo b at Saltmarsh. The m om ent has the added resonance of McDonald, established actor, quizzing Vriends, rising star: “Why are you here? Who the fuck sent you?” Such overlapping o f career and character goes straight to the psychic nerve all actors feed off, and each time McDonald says the lines he is able to see the sun visibly sinking. After the first rehearsal (it is now 7:00), Domaradzki is n o t happy with the physical space between Rennie and Cannizzaro, which he wants to be a m etaphor for their psychological relationship. He re-arranges the furniture and changes the path Brian must take along the side of a large table, m omentarily replacing Vladimir Osherov as cam era operator so that Sokol can watch on the m onitor. Sokol agrees this new arrangem ent is better and a short discussion follows on Cannizzaro’s dialogue: he is forced to adm it he is a failure, b ut this is a ploy to gain R ennie’s trust. Then, ju st before a full rehearsal, Sokol and Domaradzki p u t boxes and chairs in Vriends’ way to give his m ovem ent m ore obstacles. By 7:30 they have a ‘serious’ rehearsal which runs 78 seconds, but should be shorter and on the next it is down to 66. By now there are only 15 m inutes of sunset left and on the next rehearsal McDonald misses his lines. Domaradzki comments that the sunset is producing a peculiar circle of reflected light behind M cDonald’s head and he is instantly dubbed “St R ennie”. T he first take is good, the second is better, and shorter, but the cam era battery fades ju st before the third take as the sun sinks on cue. Everything is running on adrenalin and team work now as the battery is quickly replaced and another take catches the last m om ents of light. From D om aradzki’s “Cut!” the relief is instant and the verdict unanimous: best shot of the day. It is a warm Monday m orning after the weekend break and, by 10:00 am, it is obvious that there is some longing for the creative tension of last Friday’s sunset scene. The first exterior scene of the day involves the 13 H eartbreakers having a packed lunch at the rear of Saltmarsh while N ovem ber Rennie introduces Cannizzaro to Gail. Domaradzki decides to begin with a short track to emphasize R ennie’s attraction to Gail’s pale beauty and the possibility of his going ‘out of bounds’. The first take, at 10:25, is stopped by the sudden arrival of a plane, and several m ore by mistakes in positioning or dialogue until Take 6, which is acceptable. The series o f problem s continues with the close-up of Gail on the swing, and an hour later the scene is all the better for the re-thinking of subtle movements, such as R ennie’s hand touching h er shoulder as the symbolic gesture of his physical attraction. The ironic rebuff he gets is because Gail is in love with another H eartbreaker. The difficulty with the scene has been how to translate the idea of Gail’s idealized love into a gesture that needs no further explanation. Before lunch there are two m ore short scenes scheduled, a close-up and a reverse angle. They are interesting because the H eartbreakers have been patiently sitting with packed lunches on their laps and now are told they can only pretend to eat them in case there has to be another take, which is almost certain. Sokol, Domaradzki and Wolfe-Barry are coaching the H eartbreakers to ‘eat’, and to respond to each other while the cam era takes a group shot. It can only be done twice before the lunches are gone and the effort of co-ordination proves too difficult. The advantage of mixing the professional actors and H eartbreakers together is shown when, after lunch, Kevin has to dance around the palm tree before stopping suddenly when Cannizzaro and Rennie approach. At first Kevin’s dance is awkward, exaggerated, so Donald (Dick Tomkins) is asked to dance for Kevin. T he result is brilliant and Domaradzki comes to the conclusion that perhaps n o t everything from the world of the H eartbreakers can be imitated. Domaradzki then moves on to the nex t scene: a series of reaction shots o f Kevin’s exhibitionism which will require delicate direction to rem ain funny and n o t tacky. T he scene is m ore than ‘flashing’ because it shows Cannizzaro will cross any boundary to be accepted by the H eartbreakers, and this forces Rennie to re-evaluate his new employee. Domaradzki and Sokol decide to exaggerate the cam era movements and play down the dialogue which begins, “Look at this!” They do four quick takes and then another four for the reverse angles on Cannizzaro’s face, as he meets Kevin’s display with equal bravado.

M onday

A B O V E : D O M A R A D Z K I , R IG H T, D E M O N S T R A T E S T O A C T O R G A R R Y M C D O N A L D H O W HE W A N T S HIS C H A R A C T E R , R E N N IE , TO T O U C H G A IL (B R I O N Y W IL L IA M S ) W H IL E S H E IS O N THE S W I N G . A N D , THE FIRST K IS S O F L O V E R S S P E N C E R (S Y D W IL L IA M S ) A N D G A IL .

• CINEMA

PAPERS

T he nex t h o u r is taken up by shots o f Foster (Denis Moore) ju d g in g the dual exhibition ism of Kevin and Cannizzaro, and th en an nouncing the results to an assembled group of H eartbreakers. His decision is th at “Kevin wins easily.” By 4:00, they are ready for the first take: Foster looks down into the o p en ed tracksuits, turns and addresses the H eartbreakers who th en ru n past the cam era. T he g roup dynamics o f the movem ents are difficult to perfect and, after a n o th e r fo u r takes, D om aradzki decides to shoot the reaction of one H eartbreaker, Jody (Jocelyn B etheras), who rem ains in love with Cannizzaro, despite losing the challenge from Kevin. She is the H eartb reak er m ost infatuated with h e r ‘stardom ’ in the film: “I ’m having the best tim e”, she says. H e r in n o cen t “But I still love h im ” is the sentim ent need ed to balance R en n ie’s earlier attraction to Gail, and should be one o f the strong m om ents in the film. This has been achieved against the odds with hot, windless air aggravating the problem of doing so m any shots in succession with the H eartbreakers. T he crew begins to draw on em otional credit as they move into the early evening schedule: film ing the unpacking o f soccer uniform s from the boot o f a Mercedes. But if the strain of this M onday is showing, it h asn ’t reached Brian Vriends who is consistently perfect in m ovem ent and dialogue thro u g h rehearsal to Take 3, which finishes the shoot for the day at 6:40 p.m.

D O M ARAD ZKI SHO W S A C T O R B R I A N L O G A N H O W TO F L A S H .

Tuesday

Tuesday begins at 8:00 a.m. in R en nie’s office. T he scene, between R ennie and Cannizzaro, hinges on contrasting the cruel cynicism of 14 R ennie with the idealism o f the younger Cannizzaro over the prospects N o v e m b e r ^or t*ie H eartbreakers’ exercise program m e. T he room is small, cluttered and difficult to film in. R ennie is m eant to be doing exercises in the door way, b u t this im m ediately creates focus problem s, which are solved by Sokol with another “small track”. (These two words, along with “ships for fre e ”, can now be guaranteed to bring a grin.) Dom aradzki takes the scene one step fu rth er and decides to start it with R ennie’s jogging in the co rridor outside the office before energetically entering the room . Cannizzaro wants to talk ab o u t exercising the H eartbreakers, b u t R ennie is preoccupied with making tea and looking for a h id d en bottle o f Scotch with which to spike the brew. It is a strong scene for Garry M cDonald, with witty dialogue, b ut the short m ovements require fine timing. In the next forty m inutes, the scene is gradually rewritten by Domaradzki to becom e fu n n ier a nd m ore dynamic, b u t it also loses its ending. “W here to cut?” becomes the big question. T he crew, squashed into the small office, are beginning to w onder if Tuesday will becom e an o th e r M o n d ay -u p h ill. T h en Domaradzki announces to the room with a broad smile: “I have found the ending to the scene. O ne o f the actors disappears.” T he simplicity of using a classic storyline trick from Hollywood will work perfectly because Cannizzaro will now suddenly leave and R ennie will be alone holding two cups of tea in the empty room . T he effect is to catch R ennie off balance and transfer the m om entum of the relationship back to Cannizzaro. O nce the disappearing trick is integrated into the scene, the rehearsals focus on details o f perform ance and positioning in the room . T he scene is also too long, b ut this is solved by speeding up the dialogue. T he last o f six takes is com pleted by 10:50 a.m. and confidence visibly returns to the set. Several exterior scenes on the soccer field follow, which continue the spirit of jmprovisation w hen some m om ents involving the H eartbreakers do n o t go according to the script. A scene that requires them to stand on one leg during warm-up exercises disintegrates into chaos as some fall over on cue and others defiantly take pride in rem aining upright. T he rem aining scenes after lunch are back in Estcourt H ouse an<j-allow the H eartbreak ers to live up to th eir nam e. T h e first has two o f them silhouetted agaihst the workshop window doing a stand-up routine from Laurel and Hardy, throw ing imaginary buckets o f water and slapping faces. They are perfect on two takes and the crew spontaneously applauds. T he second scene is m ore involved, shot partially in a narrow corridor, and involvesjody’s pushing a trolley in which R ennie will find the wood shavings from N oel’s carvings. H er “o h o h ” will be a simple com m ent on the disaster th at follows. T he h eat in the corridor is stifling and it takes ninety m inutes before the first take, b u t the scene is m ore com plicated, in term s o f actors and cam era, th an anyone im agined and if th ere is a hero on the set today it isjocelyn Betheras as Jody. T he problem s o f tim ing are solved by a loud handclap to cue h er and later, in the close-up, \vhen she is told to “forget ab o u t the cam era”, it is clearly an am bitious request for an actor who is starstruck. , i .

A B O V E : THE ID EALISTIC C A N N I Z Z A R O A N D THE C Y N I C A L R E N N IE . A N D , D O N A L D (D IC K T O M K IN S ) C O N S O L E S C A N N I Z Z A R O O N TH E S O C C E R FIELD.

CINEMA

PAPERS

• 29

INTERVIEW

HUNTER

B Y

CORDAIY

Jerzy D om aradzki Director o f 'Struck b y Ligh tn in g' Jerzy Domaradzki was bom in Poland in 1943 and graduated with a Master’s degree in Social Sciencesfrom Warsaw University in 1970, and in Film and Stage Directionfrom the Lodz Film School in 1974. During his period at the Film School he worked as an assistant director with Andrzej Wajda. Domaradzki made his directorial debut with the episode “Romance” from

P ic t u r e f r o m L if e

in 1975. He has since directed seven features,

two telefilms and one mini-series. He was chairman of the Polish Feature Filmmakers’Associationfrom 1982 to 1987, and subsequently a member of die Prezidium Polish Filmmakers’Association. Since 1988, he has been Director-in-Residence at die Australian Film Television and Radio School in Sydney.

How did you become involved with Struck by Lightning? Like m ost of the im portant things in my life, it was by accident. I was working with Trevor Farrant on another script when he gave me the Struck by Lightning script to read. When I started it, I couldn’t stop. It was so moving that I told him, “If you want a director for this script, I’m ready anytime.” T hat was February 1989 and a m onth later he called me and asked me to direct it. Terry Charatsis then applied to the Film Finance Corporation for the production money and here we are, in November, shooting the film. It is unusual for a film to be prepared so quickly. How has this affected the production? Trevor Farrant is a very precise scriptwriter, so the only difficulty was finding the right location. W hen I arrived in Adelaide I found the perfect location fifty metres from the hotel! It was an old building and would have been excellent for Saltmarsh, but it turned out we couldn’t use it. However, the image of this building was so strong that we looked for som ething similar and eventually found Estcourt House, where we’ve been filming this week. The logic of these kind of places is similar. They are both old buildings, too big for a new owner and in a state of decay. To restore them would cost a for tune and, because only big com panies can finance that level of restoration, som etim es these buildings are given to the gov ernm ent. Estcourt House was a Centre for Aboriginal Art and Activity, and before that a hospi tal. Nobody wanted it, so it was p e rfe c t fo r o u r story ab out people nobody wants. Working with Downs Syndrome adults on Struck by Lightrringmust have problems and advantages for a filmmaker: one o f the

• CINEMA

PAPERS

LEFT: P O U S H D IRECT O R J E R Z Y D O M A R A D Z K I . F A C IN G P A G E : D IS A B LE D A C T O R D IC K T O M K I N S W IT H B R IA N V R IE N D S ( C A N N I Z Z A R O ) A N D G A R R Y M C D O N A L D (R EN N IE).

STRUCK BY UGHTNINO.

were afraid of the price they m ight have to pay afterwards. Nobody could tell us how being in the film would affect them , and we were afraid that the reality of the film would get confused with the reality of their lives. How did you choose which Downs Syndrome adults to use in the film?

problems would be the aesthetics o f disabled people. People might say that you are exploiting the disabled. This an issue film about retarded people: W hat should we do with them? T here is an elem ent o f curiosity in a film like this, ju st as we are curious about certain tribes in New Guinea or Africa. This will happen wherever you touch an unusual problem or people. But the approach in the script has always been m ore universal, and shows the Downs Syndrome people as ‘norm al but different’. They are insom e ways m ore happy: they d o n ’t have a past, or a future, and live in the presertt. So m aking this film might, I think, help us to understand not only these special people, b u t also ourselves. T heir problem s are what we create because we d o n ’t have a m ethod for dealing with them , or helping them exist, in our society. Their parents feel guilty and keep them at hom e; that d oesn’t give them social relationships. So, they slip back. In this film, we try to show that if they can work it’s good because they are with each other; they can exchange some em otion and learn simple skills. So the main subject is to give them a chance, to show how to be tolerant. All my efforts have been to m ake this a m ore universal film and n o t ju st a curiosity.

We invited them to a workshop and set up some thing like a screen test. T here are some limits to their abilities, but at the same tíme I discovered that most of them are like children, with very natural reactions. They are all potentially actors. Youhave cast Garry McDonald as Rennie. McDonald is better known for his television work, so presumably this film is a challenge for him. Because I’m new to the Australian film industry, I haven’t had the experience ofworkingwith any of these actors. So in some ways I d o n ’t have “Wo ‘normal' people have preconceptions, like, for example, that

preconceptions about

G arrT can>t PlaY a ^ g

what is abnormal and so

In another way, the film is also a chal lenge for Brian Vriends.

it was difficult for the actors to find the interior motivations. What I dis covered in the workshop was that often the reaction of the Heartbreakers was the same

ñ ^

r e -

Yes. H e ’s a new face and for him it’s a chance to be the m ain character in a film and to work opposite Garry. His casting was a very com plex decision because I had to find two compatible actorswho were opposites. How did the professional actors learn about their retarded characters?

as our ‘normal’ ones.”

The film mixes professional actors with the Downs Syndrome adults. Yes. O ur first decision was th at they should be actors and n o t play themselves, so we created characters for each o f them . But some characters, particularly those who have love affairs, we cast with actors. It would have been too risky, for technical reasons, and we

T hat was the awkward question: how to m atch them . We ‘norm al’ people have preconceptions about what is abnorm al and so it was difficult for the actors to find the interior motivations. W hat I discovered in the workshop was th at often the reaction o f the H eartbreakers was the same as our ‘norm al’ ones. For exam ple, when I was in some parts CINEMA

PAPERS

RIG H T: C A N N I Z Z A R O IS IN T R O D U C E D TO J O D Y (JO C E L Y N B ETH ER AS ), A D IS AB LE D W O R K E R , B Y R EN N IE . B E L O W : JILL (CAT H ER IN E M cC L E M E N T S ) IS U PSET B Y TH E D R U N K E N R E N N IE A N D C A N N IZ Z A R R O ). A N D , N O S Y M P A T H Y O N THE S O C C E R FIELD F R O M R EN N IE FO R C A N N I Z Z A R O ; PETER (R O G E R H A D D A D ) IS A T LEFT. STRUCK BY LIGH TN IN G .

of America the people I m et were sur prised that I looked ju st like them , even though I came from a Com m unist country! They had created a stereotype of the stranger. I found a similar expe rience here. What changes has this mixing o f actors made to your directing? W hat I’ve found is that the non-professional actors are perfect on most of the first takes. Why? Because in the next take they’ve learnt and they fix a reaction; they are not motivated by em otion but by memory of the first time. T heir spontaneity is lost. W hen we repeat shots, they d o n ’t try to be, they pretend to be. So, the general m ethod we developed is a technical rehearsal and, when everything is ready, we bring on the H eartbreakers and shoot. O f course, this is interesting for the professional actors be cause they know the dialogue, but they d o n ’t know how the Heartbreakers, their partners, will react.

You have used a lot o f tracks, and cranes. When should the camera move? The point of view must be emotional, so that when the emotions change the cam era must change. Unfortunately, I can’t do as m uch movement with the camera as I would like because the technique is too heavy: it takes time and m ore m ovem ent means m ore barriers between me and the actors. I want to create an em otional tension by arranging the actors in a space. We are all concerned with space: our culture is connected with space in rooms, how we build houses, where we put fences, what is private and public, and how people behave in different spaces. Does this affect the lighting as well? With a low-budget film, with limited days and hours, we can ’t wait for the best light. And the agreem ent with Yuri Sokol from the begin ning was that we would use a softer lig h t-w e d id n ’t want to have con trast on their faces which would accentuate their mongolism. So we used lighting like for movie stars who are over forty, with more flattering, soft, dispersed light and not too many close-ups. Why should audiences care about this story o f Rennie, Cannizzaro and the Heartbreakers? I care, and I have to believe that I have an understanding of the world and stories. I liked what Milos Form an said about filmmaking: because h e ’s making the film for millions and it must be shown to millions, a director must give the audience some entertainm ent, hum our and humanity. If a film is n ot for the mass audience, it has lost its power. Though television has created a m uch bigger audi ence, it is passive. I ’m interested in cinem a audiences because I prefer the viewers who vote on my film by buying a ticket.

DOMARADZKI

FILMOGRAPHY

1975 “Romance”, episode of Picture from Life 1975 A Long Wedding Night (tele-feature, 60 mins) 1976 Test Shots (feature, 85 mins) - also co-writer 1977 Beast/White Harvest (feature, 100 mins) - also co-writer 1980 The Laureat (tele-film, 55 mins) 1981 Great Race/Big Run (feature, 100 mins) - also co-writer 1983 The Tailor’s Planet (feature, 87 mins) - also co-writer 1984 Three Watermills (mini-series, 3 x 60 mins) —also co-writer 1985 The Legend of the White Horse (feature, 85 mins) 1987 Cupid’s Bow (feature, 100 mins) - also co-writer) 1990 Struck by Lightning (feature, 90 mins) 32

• CINEMA

PAPERS

QLD

NSW

T H E S T U N T A G E N C Y is ha p p y to announce the opening of its new Q ueensland office.

From April 1990 T H E S T U N T A G E N C Y will proudly be part of the exciting new W A R N E R R O A D S H O W S T U D IO S on Queensland’s Gold Coast. So, now there are 2 places to contact Australia’s premiere stunt group IN Q U E E N S L A N D :

Warner Roadshow Studios Pacific Highway, Cades County Oxenford QLD Ph (075) 53 3877 Fax (075) 53 3698

IN N E W S O U T H W A L E S : O u r S y d n e y office has m oved to:

109 Lawrence Street Alexandria NSW 2015 Ph (02) 519 1491 Fax (02) 519 9071

C R E D IT S O V E R T H E L A S T D E C A D E IN C L U D E :

76 FEATURE FILMS 42 TELEVISION MINI-SERIES 24 TELEVISION SERIES 60 TELEVISION COMMERCIALS A U S T R A L IA ’S T O P

2ND UNIT DIRECTORS STUNT CO-ORDINATORS STUNT PERFORMERS STUNT ACTION DESIGN SPECIALIST RIGGING THE STUNTAGENCY PROUDLY IN ASSOCIATION WITH WARNER ROADSHOW STUDIOS

CINEMA

PAPERS

• 33

A U S T FEATURES

This is the firs t known attempt at listing all the Australian theatrical

R A L I A N

features and, if so, how many other

statem ent w ithout punctuation.

documentaries should also be re

For example, John Duigan's

programme cinemas show a partic

categorized?

Fragments o f W ar: The Story of

measurement.

cinema release gone unrecorded. Cinema Papers therefore invites readers to w rite in w ith comments so th at a more definitive listing can be published in the near future.

So, the rule adopted here is at least one cinema screening where tickets w ere sold for that film. It does not, therefore, include a festival screening, where tickets are sold for a number or series of films. A film w hich meets this criterion, but not say the AFC's, is Hayden Keenan's Pandemonium, w hich had tw o tic k

FEATURES D E F I N I T I O N

eted sessions at the Carlton Movie House.

Features and tele-features are here

Damien Parer.

ular film only once or tw ice a week,

W hile efforts have been made to possible, it perhaps inevitable th a t a

In some cases, a theatre may

DATING Of the many alternative dating systems, the one chosen here is the year of Australian theatrical release. The most-adopted standard is com mercial w orld release, but this has not been adopted here as inform a tion about those Australian films readily available.

TI TLES As per the recent, apparently much-

have been hired to release a film

read "B rie fly" item on titles (thank

standard, as dramas of more than 60

(Snow: The Movie, fo r example),

you to those who have pointed out

minutes w hich have been shot on 16,

w hich some feel is not a fair release.

Now, Voyagerhas a comma),

35 or 65 mm film.

But, in fact, this was once a common

accuracy here is both a pedant's

The difficult determination to

practice in Australia known as "four-

dream and nightmare. The approach

make is w hether a film is a feature or

w alling". (The N akedB unyip was the

here adopted is:

tele-film . In the past, this was easier

breakthrough 1970s Australian film to

as there w as little cross-over. Tele

use this distribution technique.)

1. The title is th a t on the A ustra

DRAMATI C CONTENT

the archivist standard. Regrett

the 1980s, the demarcation lines

A feature must have a considerable

idiosyncrasies.However, this is

blurred. W hereas in the 1970s almost

amount of 'acted' drama. Thus, in the

being done for a new reference

every Australian feature received a

Cinema Papers 1970-79 listing, The

book and variations from the

theatrical release, by the end of the

Naked Bunyip was included. A l

past decade that was true of less

though a documentary in many

'a c ce p te d 'title w ill be docu mented; and

"han 50 per cent. M ost films w ent

senses, it has a large dramatic

features, although shot on film, video (especially the titles).

lian release print. Again, this is

But as production escalated in

ably, not all films have yet been checked fo r titular

straight to video, others to television,

content centred on the researcher

2. Titles have been standardized

some to oblivion. A new delineation

played by Graeme Blundell. A

to upper and lower case.

w as required.

more recent example is Paul Cox's

A fter considering various possi bilities, the following tw o-category system was settled on: 1. Features theatrically released

Vincent. A particularly intriguing case is

In the rare cases where a film has a sub-title, the standard archivist

the "W orld Safari" series. The first

style of a colon is used to separate

tw o films w ere promoted as straight

the tw o. There are tw o principal types:

documentaries, but the third,

in Australia (published this

Escape: W orld Safari III, was billed

issue); and

as a dramatized account of Alby

1. A main title and an additional

M angels' adventures. The decision,

one in smaller type. For

2. Feature-length films released

then, seems straightforward: include

example, Tracey M offatt's new

on video or television, or not at

the third as a feature. However, a

film is N ight Cries: A Rural Trag

all (published next issue).

recent episode of A Current A ffa ir

edy, the "N ight Cries" appearing

This does not include mini

did a story on Mangels w hich

in large capitals, the "A Rural

claimed th a t he had a habit of

Tragedy" in smaller script

'arranging' scenes (e.g., a so-called

across the bottom of the screen.

series or series. The next step w as deciding

"w ild stallion" had been trucked in

w hat constituted a theatrical re

the day before). So, should the first

2. Titles w here the tw o or more

lease. The Australian Film Com-

tw o also be considered as dramatic

parts do not form a continuous

• CINEMA

PAPERS

A different case is M ad M ax Beyond Thunderdome, w here the w ording flow s normally, though dif ferent type faces are used in the titles. IS I T A U S T R A L I A N

w hich premiered overseas is not yet

defined, in accord w ith the archivist

tended also to be completed on

P R

misssion's standard is a cinema run

and a w eek's run seems an arbitrary

film may have been overlooked, a

L M

of at least a week. But some mixed-

features made during the 1980s. make it as complete and accurate as

F I

This is the hardest determination to make. Again, production standards have changed and simple delineations blurred. The country of principal photo graphy has been often used as one test, w hile other archivists have argued fo r origin of financing. The location standard falls down with w hat are obviously Australian films th a t are largely shot off-shore (Far East, fo r example). Then again, most films today have a mix of financing from various w orld territories and th a t criterion is equally flawed. W hat then of the nationality of the production company? W ell, that is usually set up to maximize tax benefits and may reflect neither w here a film w as shot nor who fi nanced it. Some think Race to the Yankee Zephyr is Australian; others regard it is a New Zealand film. Perhaps the most important cases are those 1970s films, Wake in Fright and Walkabout. To this writer, they are, w ith M ad M ax 2, the best films made in Australia. They are more profoundly perceptive about this country than the often fine efforts of local filmmakers. Certainly, no other film has come close to exposure of the sinister tyranny of mate ship in Wake in Fright, no other film could be argued on them atic or aesthetic grounds to be more Australian. Does it matter the director w as Canadian? A fter all, is Roxanne not an Am erican film because an Australian directed it? Is not, ultimately, a film 's financing structure one of the least important factors? In the end, common sense must be applied, w ith all its flaw s. No perfect alternative exists.

1980

I O

Squizzy Taylor (Kevin

Blood Money (Chris

fitchett )

Breaker Morant (bruce

dobson )

Mad Max Beyond Thunderdome

Starstruck (Gillian Armstrong )

beresford )

The Chain Reaction ( ian

1 9 8 0 -

barry )

Sweet Dreamers (tom Turkey Shoot (Brian

trenchard s m ith )

The Club (BRUCE BERESFORD)

We of the Never Never (Igor au zins )

The Earthling (peter collinson )

The Year of Living Dangerously (peter w eir )

Fatty Fin (Maurice Final Cut (Ross

m urph y )

mclennan )

Harlequin (Simon w incer ) Manganinnie (John

honey )

peak )

Wills and Burke: The Untold Story

Australian Dream ( rivka

hartman )

safran )

stevens )

Fighting Back (Michael caulfeld ) keenan )

Goodbye Paradise (carl schultz )

1981

Hostage (frank shields )

Against the Grain (Tim

burns )

Kitty and the Bagman ( don

Alison’s Borthday ( ian

coughlan )

Man of Flowers (Pau l cox)

paterson )

M idnite Spares (Quentin

crombie )

masters )

Gallipoli (PETER WEIR)

M olly (NED LANDER)

Grendel Grendel Grendel (Alex stitt )

Moving Out (Michael pattinson )

Hoodwink (Claude w h ath am )

Now and Forever (ADRIAN carr )

The Killing of Angel Street ( don

crombie )

Mad Max 2 [U.S.: The Road Warrior]

The Return of Captain Invincible

1984

Race to the Yankee Zephyr

A nnie’s Coming Out (GIL brealey ) Buddies (ARCH NICHOLSON) The Camel Boy (yoram

gross )

(GEOFF KELSO, LANCE CURTIS) The Survivor ( david

The Coolangatta Gold (igor au zins )

Winter of Our Dreams (John

duigan )

Wrong Side of the Road (Ned

gross )

Epic (YORAM GROSS)

lander )

Melvin, Son of Alvin (John

eastaway )

My First Wife (Pau l cox) Mystery at Castle House ( peter

Echoes of Paradise (Phil

Cool Change (George m iller ) Crocodile Dundee [U.S.: “Crocodile” Dundee] (peter

faiman )

Dead-End Drive-In (Brian trenchard sm ith ) Death of a Soldier (Philippe Dot and Keeto (yoram

m ora )

gross )

Dot and the Whale (yoram

gross )

Fair Game (Mario andreacchio ) Fortress (ARCH NICHOLSON) The Fringe Dwellers (BRUCE beresford )

Jenny Kissed Me (Brian

trenchard sm ith )

Malcolm (NADIA TASS) Playing Beatie Bow ( don crombie ) Short Changed (George ogilvie )

m axw ell )

noyce )

jessop )

Escape: World Safari III (alby (MICHAEL THORNHILL)

Evil Angels [U.S.: A Cry in the Dark] (FRED SCHEPISI) Grievous Bodily Harm (m ark joffe) The Manfrom Snowy River2[U.S.: Return to Snowy River] ( geoff burrowes ) The Navigator (Vincent w ard ) Pandemonium (Hayden

keenan )

The Pursuit of Happiness (Martha ansaraj Rikky and Pete (Nad ia tass ) Shame (steve jodrell ) The Surfer (FRANK SHIELDS) The Tale of Ruby Rose (Roger

With Love to the Person Next to Me

ellis )

(BRIAN McKENZIE)

Windrider (Vincent monton ) The Winds of Jarrah (MARK egerton ) pringle )

Young Einstein (yahoo

serious )

1989

Bushfire Moon (George m iller )

Bullseye (carl schultz )

The Settlement (Howard

Dogs in Space (Richard

rubie )

scholes )

Warm Nights on a Slow Moving Train

Razorback (Russell m ulcahy )

Around the World with Dot [aka Dot and

duigan )

mangels )

The Everlasting Secret Family

(BOB ELLIS)

Traps (JOHN HUGHES)

Wrong World ( ian

Emma’s War (clytie

Against the Innocent (Daryl

One Night Stand (John gross )

“ Crocodile” Dundee II (John Cornell )

CactUS (PAUL COX)

1987

1988 Santa Claus] (yoram

The Big Hurt (BARRY PEAK)

Unfinished Business (bob

Fast Talking (ken cameron )

h e m m ing s )

Breaking Loose (ROD hardy )

The More Things Change (ROBYN nevin )

gross )

Dot and the Bunny <yoran ’

Snow: The Movie

Boulevard of Broken Dreams (Pino am enta )

bennett )

(BRIAN TRENCHARD SMITH)

Puberty Blues ( bruce beresford )

franklin )

Belinda (Pam ela gibbons )

Frog Dreaming [U.S.: The Spirit Chasers]

Pacific Banana (JOHN lam m o n d )

(DAVID HEMMINGS)

Backstage (JONATHAN HARDY)

For Love Alone (Stephen Wallace )

Phar Lap (simo n w incer ) (PHILIPPE MORA)

(GEORGE MILLER)

(STEPHEN MACLEAN)

(BOB WEIS)

Backlash (bill

Touch and Go (peter

Going Down (Hayden

bennett )

1986

kavanaugh )

Dusty (JOHN RICHARDSON)

pringle )

Around the World in 80 Ways

Bush Christmas (henri

Stir (STEPHEN WALLACE)

The Seventh Match (Yoram

1988

(KEN HANNAM, DON CROMBIE)

As Time Goes By (barry

Careful He Might Hear You (carl schultz )

m axw ell )

duig an )

Robbery Under Arms

Warming Up ( bruce best)

Double Deal (Brian

Roadgames (Richard

The Year My Voice Broke (John

A Street to Die ( bill

Nightmares (John

Centrespread (tony

Vincent (Pau l cox)

Rebel (MICHAEL JENKINS)

1983

The Clinic (David

Wronsky (ian

Twelth Night ( neil armfield )

BMX Bandits (BRIAN TRENCHARD SMITH)

Maybe This Time (Chris McGill ) lam m o n d )

The Naked Country (TIM BURSTALL)

The s till Point (BARBARA BOYD-ANDERSON)

dim sey )

Hard Knocks ( don

Travelling North (carl schultz )

(GEORGE MILLER)

cowan )

1 9

lowenstein )

dellora )

Candy Regentag [aka Kiss the Night]

S ilver City (So p h iaturkiew icz )

Dot and the Smugglers (yoram

Sky Pirates (Colin

Frenchman’s Farm (RON w ay )

Cappuccino (Anthony bo w m an )

The Slim Dusty Movie ( rob stewart )

Going Sane (M ichael robertson )

Celia (ANN TURNER)

Corpse (JAMES CLAYDEN)

Stanley (ESBEN storm )

Ground Zero

Daisy and Simon [aka Where the Outback

Crosstalk (m ark

Street Hero (M ichael pattinson )

Attack Force Z (tim

burstall )

The Best of Friends (M ichael Breakfast in Paris (John

robertson )

lam m o nd )

egerton )

A Dangerous Summer (Quentin Doctors and Nurses (Maurice Duet for Four (tim Far East (John

masters )

m urph y )

burstall )

eggleston )

Tail of a Tiger (ROLF de heer )

Kangaroo (tim

The Delinquents (Chris Thomson )

Undercover ( david

Les Patterson Saves the World

stevens )

Heatwave (Phil

burstall )

(SCOTT MURRAY)

noyce )

w incer )

Peter Kenna’s The Umbrella Woman

1985

[U.S.;The Good Wife] (ken

BliSS (RAY LAWRENCE)

noyce )

Devil in the Flesh [U.S.: Beyond Innocence]

(GEORGE MILLER) The Lighthorsemen (simon

daw son )

Ends] (STASCH RADWANSKI) Dead Calm (phil

lowenstein )

Freedom! (SCOTT HICKS) Ginger Meggs (johnathon

(MICHAEL PATTINSON, BRUCE MYLES)

(JAMES RICKETSON)

High Tide (GILLIAN ARMSTRONG)

Strikebound (Richard

The Wild Duck (HENRI SAFRAN)

duigan )

gross )

cameron )

Emerald City (MICHAEL JENKINS) Georgia (ben

lew in )

Ghosts... of the Civil Dead(JOHN hillcoat )

Lonely Hearts (PAUL COX)

Burke and Wills (Graeme Clifford )

The Place at the Coast (GEORGE OGILVIE)

Incident at Raven’s Gate (Rolf de heer )

The Man from Snowy River (GEORGE MILLER)

The Coca-Cola Kid ( dusan

makavejev )

The Right Hand Man (Di

Island (Pau l cox)

Dot and the Koala (yoram

gross )

Monkey Grip ( ken cameron ) Norman Loves Rose ( henri

safran )

The Pirate Movie ( ken an nakin ) The Plains of Heaven ( ian

pringle )

Running on Empty (JOHN CLARK)

drew )

Running from the Guns (John

dixon )

Luigis Ladies (jud y m o rr is )

Emoh RUO (DENNY LAWRENCE)

Slate Wyn & Me ( don Mclennan )

Minnamurra ( ian

The Empty Beach (Chris Thomson )

Those Dear Departed (ted

robinson )

Mull [aka Mullaway] ( don Mclennan )

Fran (GLENDA HAMBLY)

The Time Guardian (Brian

hannant )

An Indecent Obsession (lex m arinos )

To Market, To Market (Virginia

rouse )

barry )

A Sting in the Tail (Eugene schlusser ) Tender Hooks ( m ary Callaghan )

CINEMA

PAPERS

• 35

The Australian Film Commission congratulates the Australian films on their Official Selection at Cannes, and has pleasure in inviting you to view the latest work by new and experienced Australian filmmakers. To get in touch with Australian filmmakers in Cannes, and obtain information on new Australian feature films please contact the Australian Film Commission at: â&#x20AC;˘ Carlton Hotel, Ground Floor, Desk PB 08 â&#x20AC;˘ Australian Sales Office, 8th Floor, Residence du Festival, 52 La Croisette

The Australian Film Commission is proud to be associated with the development, production and marketing of Australian programmes.

AUSTRALIAN FILM COMMISSION SYDNEY

LOS ANGELES

MELBOURNE

LONDON

WËmmmËËml

THIS SPECIAL SECTION OF CINEMA PAPERS COVERS THE FILMS TH O U G H T M O ST LIKELY, AT THE TIME O F G O IN G TO PRESS, TO BE AT CA N N ES, IN A N EVENT OR THE M ARCHÉ.

9THE ENTRIES HAVE BEEN COMPILED BY PAT GILLESPIE.

FOR INFORMATION ON ALL THE FILMS AND FILMMAKERS AT CANNES, PLEASE CONTACT AUSTRALIAN FILM COMMISSION • 8TH FLOOR RESIDENCE DU FESTIVAL • 52 LA CROISETTE

N I G H T

<Q A N

O U T

A HOMOSEXUAL is bashed outside

C L O C K W IS E F R O M A B O V E : T O N Y (CO LIN B A T R O U N E Y ) A N D STEVE (D A V ID B O N N IE ). T O N Y IN H O S P IT A L AFTER A 'P O O F T E R B A S H I N G '. M A N (T O M S H E R L O C K ) A N D TO NY.

• CINEMA

PAPERS

beach public toilets and then humil iated during a nightmarish car ride, all unbeknownst to his live-in lover. Guilt, societal hostility, desire and fidelity are candidly explored in N ight Out, a 16 mm short w ritten and directed by Swinb urne Film School graduate Lawrence Johnston. Based on news reports of various 'poofter bashings', and partly on per sonal experience, this bleak film noirstyle film covers a number of generic issues: the nature and consequences of promiscuity, lack of communication between couples, guilt as a conse quence of infidelity and the notion of commitment in an AIDS age. Deliber ately uncomfortable in undertone and subject matter, N ight Out explores iss ues common to all people, regardless of their sexual preference. The film was shot in Melbourne w ith a limited budget of $17,000, partly funded by Swinburne as part of its fin a l-year graduate schem e, the rest com ingfrom the Australian Film Comm ission and Johnston. Armed w ith a skeleton cast and crew, who in most instances waived their fees, Johnson captured most scenes in one take. Johnston is adamant th a t the film is not "m erely a gay love story" or a glorified anti-gay message:

"I had heard th a t many homosex ual assaults had gone unreported, part icularly in this time of AIDS and homo phobia. I only touch on this in the film. Tony's com placency about it is almost brushed over. I could have gone the other w ay and made a rights-and-justice drama, but that w a sn 't w hat inter ested me. It is the small events that change people's viewpoints and their lives - the 'W hat if I hadn't done that?' after they already have. W ith Steve and Tony's relationship, I wanted to explore the issue of communication, w hat saying 'I love you' means when it really comes down to it. Lack of comm unication and expectations in relation

ships becom e a m inefield through w hich irrevocable situations arise." Director: Lawrence Johnston. Executive pro ducer: Chris McGill. S criptw riter: Lawrence Johnston. Photography: BrentCrocket. Sound recordist: Valerie Fisicaro. Editor: Lawrence Johnston. A rt director: Lawrence Johnston. Clothes supplied by: Isolate. Composer: Neil Maizels. "Losing M y M ind" and "Tonight is Forever" by Liza M innelli and The Pet Shop Boys used courtesy of CBS records. "Please Please Please Let Me Get W hat I W ant" by The Smiths used courtesy of Rough Trade Records. Cast: Colin Batrouney (Tony Healy), David Bonnie (Steve Gray), John Brumpton (Rob), Andrew Larkins (Garry), Luke Elliott (Johnny), Andrea Swifte (Cathy), M athew W illis (Young Lover).

G O L D E N

ADAPTED FOR THE SCREEN by

Paul Cox and Barry Dickins, and in spired by a Guy de Maupassant short story, Golden Braid is a black, erotic tale about a w atchm aker who pur chases an antique cabinet, and finds and fetishizes about a braid of hair in side one of its compartments. Chris Haywood stars as Bernard, the man caught between his fantasies and an affairwithTerese(GosiaDobrowolska), the w ife of a Salvation Army Major. Paul Cox has been hailed over seas as one of Australia's leading film ambassadors, yet at home his unorth odox filmmaking methods have att racted some notoriety. Preferring to script as he films, Cox often re-shoots, discards or re-w rites scenes. Some people claim his methods are unortho dox, yet others applaud him fo r his desire to involve the crew and produc tion team in a collaborative process. Cox's film s invariably generate heated critical debate when they are released, such as the controversial Is land. And like that film, Golden Braid continues Cox's personalized explora tion of the human condition and man's obsessions w ith the past. Cox adds: "People ask me, 'W hy don't you

B R A I D

make political films?' I think my films are political. They deal w ith the human condition and try to penetrate the human psyche. That's a very difficult thing to do. You become a target and people attack you. They don't w ant to be disturbed; they think it's too arty. To make a film about the human condition is a threat." Golden Braid was shot in M elb ourne and Venice, and was funded by the Australian Film Commission and Film Victoria. Director: Paul Cox. Producers: Paul Cox, Paul Ammitzboll, Samantha Naidu. Screenplay: Paul Cox, Barry Dickins. Inspired by a Guy de M aupassant short story. Photography: Nino M artinetti. Editor: Russell Hurley. Production designer: Neil Angwin. W ardrobe supervis or: Gail Mayes. C ast Chris Haywood (Bern ard), Gosia Dobrowolska (Terese), Paul Chubb (Joseph), Norman Kaye (Psychiatrist), Marion Heathfield (Cleaning woman). T O P TO B O T T O M : TERESE (G O S IA D O B R O W O L S K A ) , CEN TRE, W ITH HER H U S B A N D , JO S E P H (P A U L C H U B B ), A N D B E R N A R D (CH RIS H A Y W O O D ), THE W A T C H M A K E R . B E R N A R D W ITH T W O C U S T O M E R S . B E R N A R D A N D TERESE.

CINEMA

PAPERS

MARK CLARK VAN ARK

C L O C K W IS E F R O M A B O V E : D A N N Y (B E N M E N D E L S O H N ) A N D J O A N N A (C L A U D IA K A V A N ) . M A R K (D A M O N H E R R IM A N ), D A N N Y A N D V A N G E L IS (A N G E L O D 'A N G E L O ). M R C L A R K (M A R S H A L L N A P IE R ), W ATCHED BY M R S CLARK (M A G G IE K IN G ) A N D D A N N Y .

M A R K CLARK V A N A R K is a

comedy set in Melbourne about a 17year-old boy, Danny Clark, who buys a J a g u a r to im p re ss his g irlfrie n d , Joanna. O ntheirfirstdate,the car blows upanda plan devised by Danny and his friends to make things right goes awry, w ith hilarious results. M ark Clark VanArk\s the third film from director Nadia Tass and cinema tographer David Parker. It follow s the highly successful Malcolm, and Rikky and Pete. Tass says: "I see myself as a se rvant-1 serve the script. Certainly I take the script and make it my own, but I must be fa ith ful to the film 's ideals." Director: NadiaTass. Producers: Nadia Tass, David Parker. Co-producer: Timothy White. Associate producer: Bryce Menzies. Screen play: D avid. Parker. P hotography: David Parker. Sound recordist: John W ilkinson. Editor: Peter Carrodus. Production designer: Patrick Reardon. Costume designer: Anje Bos. Production company: Cascade Films Inter national. Cast: Ben M endelsohn (Danny Clark), Claudia Kavan (Joanna Johnson), S teve B is le y (G ordon Farkas), A n g e lo D'Angelo (Vangelis Petrakis), Damon Hernman (M ark Jorgensen), M arshall Napier (M r C la rk), M a g g ie K ing (M rs C la rk), Tim Robertson (M r Johnson), Sheryl M unks(Pam Shaeffer), Lise Rodgers (M rs Johnson).

• CINEMA

PAPERS

€ A N

S U B S C R I B E TO CINEMA PAPERS, AUSTRALIA'S LEADING FILM AND TELEVISION MAGAZINE. CINEMA PAPERS IS PACKED WITH FEATURES, INTERVIEWS, NEWS, REVIEWS, AND THE ONLY COMPREHENSIVE PRODUC TION GUIDE TO W H O 'S MAKING W HAT IN AUSTRALIA • IN EVERY ISSUE YOU CAN READ IN-DEPTH INTERVIEWS WITH LEADING FILMMAKERS AND ACTORS, HERE AND OVERSEAS; REVIEWS BY LEADING WRITERS OF THE LATEST RELEASES; STORIES ON THE BEST OF MAINSTREAM AND INDEPENDENT FILMMAKING IN AUSTRALIA; PROVOCATIVE, ANALYTICAL FEATURES O N THE ISSUES THAT MATTER IN FILM AND TV; COVERAGE OF TECHNICAL DEVELOPMENTS; AND A COMPLETE LIST OF THE LATEST CENSORSHIP DECISIONS • OUR NEXT ISSUE IS A SPECIAL COMEDY ISSUE COVERING AUSTRALIAN FILM AND TELEVISION COMEDY - THE SCRIPTS, THE PERFORMERS, THE CONTEXT.

BACK

ISSUES: ::

E E r:

CINEMA

W H A T ' S

PAPERS

A V A I L A B L E

NUMBER 1 (JANUARY 1974):

NUMBER 60 (NOVEMBER 1986)

David Williamson, Ray Harryhausen, Peter Weir, Antony Ginnane, Gillian Armstrong, Ken G. Hall, The Cars that Ate Paris.

Australian Television, Franco Zeffirelli, Nadia Tass, Bill Bennett, Dutch Cinema, Movies By Microchip, Otello.

NUMBER 2 (APRIL 1974):

NUMBER 61 (JANUARY 1987)

Censorship, Frank Moorhouse, Nicolas Roeg, Sandy Harbutt, Film under Allende, Between The Wars, Alvin Purple

Alex Cox, Roman Polanski, Philippe Mora, Martin Armiger, film in South Australia, Dogs In Space, Howling III.

NUMBER 3 (JULY 1974):

NUMBER 62 (MARCH 1987)

Richard Brennan, John Papadopolous, Willis O ’Brien, William Friedkin, The True Story O f Eskimo Nell.

Screen Violence, David Lynch, Cary Grant, ASSA conference, production barometer, film finance, The Story Of The Kelly Gang.

NUMBER 10 (SEPT/OCT 1976)

Nagisa Oshima, Philippe Mora, Krzysztof Zanussi, Marco Ferreri, Marco Belloochio, gay cinema.

NUMBER 63 (M AY 1987)

Gillian Armstrong, Antony Ginnane, Chris Havwood, Elmore Leonard, Troy Kennedy Martin, The Sacrifice, Landslides, Pee Wee’s Big Adventure, Jilted.

NUMBER 11 (JANUARY 1977)

Emile De Antonio, Jill Robb, Samuel Z. Arkofif, Roman Polanski, Saul Bass, The Picture Show Man. NUMBER 12 (APRIL 1977)

Ken Loach, Tom Havdon, Donald Sutherland, Bert Deling, Piero Tosi, John Dankworth, John Scott, Days O f Hope, The Getting O f Wisdom. NUMBER 13 ( JULY 1977)

Louis Malle, Paul Cox, John Power, Jeanine Seawejl, Peter Sykes, Bernardo Bertolucci, In Search O f Anna. NUMBER 14 (OCTOBER 1977)

Phil Noyce, Matt Carroll, Eric Rohmer, Tern,’ Jackman, John Huston, Luke’s Kingdom, The Last Wave, Blue Fire Lady. NUMBER 15 (JANUARY 1978)

Tom Cowan, Francois Truffaut, John Faulkner, Stephen Wallace, the Taviani brothers, Sri Lankan cinema, The Irishman, The Chant O f Jimmie Blacksmith. NUMBER 16 ( APRIL-JUNE 1978)

Gunnel Lindblom, John Duigan, Steven Spielberg, Tom Jeffrey, The Africa Project, Swedish cinema, Dawn!, Patrick.

NUMBER 27 (JUNE-JULY 1980)

NUMBER 47 (AUGUST 1984)

NUMBER 64 (JULY 1987)

Randal Kleiser, Peter Yeldham, Donald Richie, obituary of Hitchcock, NZ film industry', Grendel Grendel Grendel.

Richard Lowenstein, Wim Wenders, David Bradbury, Sophia Turkiewicz, Hugh Hudson, Robbery Under Arms.

Nostalgia, Dennis Hopper, Mel Gibson, Vladimir Osherov, Brian TrenchardSmith, Chartbusters, Insatiable.

NUMBER 28 (AUG/SEPT 1980)

NUMBER 48 (O CT/NO V 1984)

NUMBER 65 (SEPTEMBER 1987)

Bob Godfrey, Diane Kurys, Tim Burns, John O’Shea, Bruce Beresford, Bad Timing, Roadgames.

Ken Cameron, Michael Pattinson, Jan Sardi, Yoram Gross, Bodyline, The Slim Dusty Movie.

Angela Carter, Wim Wenders, Jean-Pierre Gorin, Derek Jarman, Gerald L’Ecuyer, Gustav Hasford, AFI Awards, Poor Man’s Orange.

NUMBER 29 (OCT/NOV 1980)

NUMBER 49 (DECEMBER 1984)

Bob Ellis, Uri Windt, Edward Woodward, Lino Brocka, Stephen Wallace, Philippine cinema, Cruising, The Last Outlaw.

Alain Resnais, Brian McKenzie, Angela Punch McGregor, Ennio Morricone, Jane Campion, horror films, Niel Lynne.

NUMBER 36 (FEBRUARY 1982)

NUMBER 50 (FEB/MARCH 1985)

Kevin Dobson, Brian Kearney, Sonia Hofmann, Michael Rubbo, Blow Out, Breaker Morant, Body Heat, The Man Front Snowy River.

Stephen Wallace, Ian Pringle, Walerian Borowczvk, Peter Schreck, Bill Conti, Brian May, The Last Bastion, Bliss.

NUMBER 37 (APRIL 1982)

Lino Brocka, Harrison Ford, Noni Hazlehurst, Dusan Makavejev, Emoh Ruo, Winners, The Naked Country, Mad Max: Beyond Tlmnderdome, Robbery Under Arms.

Stephen MacLean, Jacki Weaver, Carlos Saura, Peter Ustinov, women in drama, Monkey Grip. NUMBER 38 (JUNE 1982)

Geoff Burrowes, George Miller, James Ivory, Phil Noyce, Joan Fontaine, Tony Williams, law and insurance, Far East.

NUMBER 17 (AUG/SEPT 1978)

Bill Bain, Isabelle Huppert, Brian May, Polish cinema, Newsfront, The Night The Prowler.

NUMBER 39 (AUGUST 1982)

NUMBER 18 (OCT/NOV 1978)

Helen Morse, Richard Mason, Anja Breien, David Millikan, Derek Granger, Norwegian cinema, National Film Archive, We O f The Never Never.

John Lamond, Sonia Borg, Alain Tanner, Indian cinema, Dimboola, Cathy’s Child.

NUMBER 40 (OCTOBER 1982)

NUMBER 19 (JAN/FEB 1979)

Antony Ginnane, Stanley Hawes, Jeremy Thomas, Andrew Sarris, sponsored documentaries, Blue Fin.

Henri Safran, Michael Ritchie, Pauline Ivacl, Wendy Hughes, Ray Barrett, My Dinner With Andre, The Return O f Captain Invincible. NUMBER 41 (DECEMBER 1982)

NUMBER 20 (MARCH-APRIL 1979)

Ken Cameron, Claude Lelouch, Jim Sharman, French cinema, My Brilliant Career.

Igor Auzins, Paul Schrader, Peter Tammer, Liliana Cavani, Colin Higgins, The Tear O f Living Dangerously. NUMBER 42 (MARCH 1983)

NUMBER 22 (JULY/AUG 1979)

Bruce Petty, Luciana Arrighi, Altaic Thoms, Stax, Alison's Birthday

Mel Gibson, John Waters, Ian Pringle, Agnes Varda, copyright, Strikebound, The Man From Snowy River.

NUMBER 51 (M AY 1985)

NUMBER 52 (JULY 1985)

John Schlesinger, Gillian Armstrong, Alan Parker, soap operas, TV News, film advertising, Don’t Call Me Girlie, For Love Alone, Double Sculls. NUMBER 53 (SEPTEMBER 1985)

Bryan Brown, Nicolas Roeg, Vincent Ward, Hector Crawford, Emir Kusturica, New Zealand film and television, Return To Eden. NUMBER 54 (NOVEMBER 1985)

Graeme Clifford, Bob Weis, John Boorman, Menahem Golan, rock videos, Wills And Burke, The Great Bookie Robbery, The Lancaster Miller Affair. NUMBER 55 (JANUARY 1986)

James Stewart, Debbie Byrne, Brian Thompson, Paul Verhoeven, Derek Meddings, tie-in marketing, The RightHand Man, Birdsville. NUMBER 56 (MARCH 1986)

Fred Schepisi, Dennis O’Rourke, Brian Trenchard-Smith, John Hargreaves, DeadEnd Drive-In, The More Things Change, Kangaroo, Tracy.

NUMBER 24 (DEC/JAN 1980)

NUMBER 43 (MAY/JUNE 1983)

Brian Trenchard-Smith, Ian Holmes, Arthur Hiller, Jerzy Toeplitz, Brazilian cinema, Harlequin.

Sydney Pollack, Denny Lawrence, Graeme Clifford, The Dismissal, Careful He Might Hear Ton.

NUMBER 25 (FEB/MARCH 1980)

NUMBER 44-45 (APRIL 1984)

NUMBER 58 (JULY 1986)

David Puttnam, Janet Strickland, Everett de Roche, Peter Faiman, Chain Reaction, Stir.

David Stevens, Simon Wincer, Susan Lambert, a personal history of Cinema Papers, Street Kids.

Woody Allen, Reinhard Hauff, Orson Welles, the Cinémathèque Française, The Fringe Dwellers, Great Expectations: The Untold Story, The Last Frontier.

NUMBER 26 (APRIL/MAY 1980)

NUMBER 46 (JULY 1984)

Charles H. Joffe, Jerome Heilman, Malcolm Smith, Australian nationalism, Japanese cinema, Peter Weir, Water Under The Bridge.

Paul Cox, Russell Mulcahv, Alan J. Pakula, Robert Duvall, Jeremy Irons, Eureka Stockade, Waterfront, The Boy In The Bush,A Woman Suffers, Street Hero.

NUMBER 66 (NOVEMBER 1987)

Australian Screenwriters, Cinema and China, James Bond, James Clayden, Video, De Laurentiis, New World, The Navigator, Who’s That Girl. NUMBER 67 (JANUARY 1988)

John Duigan, George Miller, Jim Jarmusch, Soviet cinema- Part I, women in film, shooting in 70mm, filmmaking in Ghana, The Tear My Voice Broke, Send A Gorilla. NUMBER 68 (MARCH 1988)

Martha Ansara, Channel 4, Soviet Cinema Part II, Jim McBride, Glamour, nature cinematography, Ghosts O f The Civil Dead, Feathers, Ocean, Ocean. NUMBER 69 (M AY 1988)

Special Cannes issue, film composers, sex, death and family films, Vincent Ward, Luigi Acquisto, David Parker, production barometer, Ian Bradley, Pleasure Domes. NUMBER 70 (NOVEMBER 1988)

Film Australia, Gillian Armstrong, Fred Schepisi, Wes Craven, John Waters, A1 Clark, Shame Screenplay Part I. NUMBER 71 (JANUARY 1989)

Yahoo Serious, FFC, David Cronenberg, The Year in Retrospect, Film Sound - the sound track, Toung Einstein, Shout, The Last Temptation of Christ, Salt Saliva Sperm and Sweat NUMBER 72 (MARCH 1989)

Charles Dickens’ Little Dorrit, Australian Sci-Fi movies, Survey: 1988 Mini-Series, Aromarama, Ann Turner’s Celia, Fellini’s La dolce vita, Women and Westerns NUMBER 73 (M AY 1989)

Cannes Issue, Phil Noyce’s Dead Calm, Franco Nero, Jane Campion, Ian Pringle’s The Prisoner of St. Petersburg, Frank Pierson - Scriptwriter, Australian films at Cannes, Pay TV. NUMBER 74 (JULY 1989)

NUMBER 59 (SEPTEMBER 1986)

Robert Altman, Paul Cox, Lino Brocka, Agnes Varda, The AFI Awards, The Movers.

The Delinquents, Australians in Holly wood, Chinese Cinema, Philippe Mora, Yuri Sokol, Twins, True Believers, Ghosts... of the Civil Dead, Shame screenplay.

FILM V IEW S

ALSO AVAILABLE

AVAILABLE ISSUES BACK OF BEYOND

V IE W S WIM WENDERS

SOLVEIG D O M M ARTIN JE A H -P IE R R E GORIN H Z FILM A R C H IV E W E N D Y TH OM PSON ANTONIONI M IC H A E L L E E

D IS C O V E R IN G A U ST R A L IA N FILM A N D TELEVISION

A i_i__

LIMITED NUMBER o f the beautifully designed catalogues especially prepared for the 1988 season o f Australian film and television at the UCLA film and television archive in the U .S. are now available for sale

~ in Australia. Edited by Scott Murray, and with exten

sively researched articles by several o f Australia’s leading writers on film and television, such as Kate Sands, Women of the Wave; Ross Gibson, Formative Landscapes; Debi Enker, Cross-over and Collaboration: Kennedy Miller.; Scott Murray, George Miller, Scott Murray, Terry Hayes; Graeme Turner, M ixing Fact and Fiction;

NUMBER 123 AUTUM N 1985

NUMBER 131 A UTUM N 1987

The 1984 Women’s Film Unit, The Films ofSolrun Hoaas, Louise Webb, Scott Hicks, Jan Roberts

Richard Lowenstein, New Japanese Cinema, Ken Russell, Taking a Film Production Overseas, Richard Chataway and Michael Cusack

Michael Leigh, Curiouser and Curiouser; Adrian Martin, N u rtu rin g the N ext Wave. The Back of Beyond Catalogue is lavishly illustrated with more

NUMBER 124 WINTER 1985

Films for Workers, Merata Mita, Len Lye, Marken Gorris, Daniel Petrie, Larry Meitzer

NUMBER 132 WINTER 1987

Censorship in Australia, Rosalind Krauss, Troy Kennedy Martin, New Zealand Cinema, David Chesworth,

NUMBER 125 SPRING 1985

Rod Webb, Marken Gorris, Ivan Gaal, Red Matildas, Sydney Film Festival NUMBER 126 SUMMER 1985/86

The Victorian Women’s Film Unit, Randelli’s, Laken Jayamanne, Lounge Room Rock, The Story of Oberhausen

NUMBER 133 SPRING 1987

Wim Wenders, Solveig Dommartin, The Films of Wim Wenders, Jean-Pierre Gorin, Michelangelo ¿Antonioni, Wendy Thompson, ¿Michael Lee, Jonathan Dennis, Super 8

than 130 photographs, indexed, and has full credit listings for some 80 films.

PRICE: The Catalogue price is S 24.95, which includes postage and

packaging.

NUMBER 134 SUMMER 1987/88 NUMBER 127 AUTUM N 1986

AFTRS reviews, Jane Oehr, John Hughes, Melanie Read, Philip Brophy,Gvula Gazdag, Chile: Hasta ■Cuando?

Recent Australian Films, Film Music, Groucho’s Cigar, Jerzy Domaradzki, Hong Kong Cinema, The Films of Chris Marker, David Noakes, The Devil in the Flesh, How the West Was Lost

NUMBER 128 WINTER 1986

NUMBER 135 AUTUM N 1988

Karin Altmann, Tom Cowan, Gillian Coote, Nick Torrens, David Bradbury', ¿Margaret Haselgrove, Karl Steinberg, ¿AFTRS graduate films, Super 8, Pop Movie

¿Alfred Hitchcock, ¿Martha Ansara, New Chinese Cinema, Lindsay ¿Anderson, Sequence Magazine, Cinema Italia, New Japanese Cinema, Fatal Attraction

NUMBER 129 SPRING 1986

Film Theory and Architecture, Victor Burgin, Horace Ove, Style Form and History in Australian Mini Series, Blue Velvet, South of the Border, Cannibal Tours

NUMBER 136 WINTER 1988

Reinhard Hauff, 1986 Sydney Film Festival, Nick Zedd, Tony Rayns, Australian Independent Film, Public Television in Australia, Super 8

NUMBER 137 SPRING 1988 NUMBER 130 SUMMER 1986/87

Sogo Ishii, Tom Havdon, Gillian Leahy, Tom Zubrvcki, John Hanhardt, Australian Video Festival, Erika Addis, Ross Gibson, Super 8, Camera Natura

Hanif Kureishi, Fascist Italy and American Cinema, Gillian ¿Armstrong, Atom Egovan, Film Theory' and ¿Architecture, Shame, Television Mini Series, Korean Cinema, Sammy and Rosie Get Laid ■

NUMBER 75 (SEPTEMBER 1989)

NUMBER 77 (JANUARY 1990)

Sally Bongers, The Teen Movie, Animated, Edens Lost, Mary Lambert and Pet Sematary, Martin Scorsese and Paul Schrader, Ed Pressman, Sweetie, Batman, Lover Boy, Dead Poets Society, New York Stories, Georgia

Special John Farrow profile, Blood Oath, Dennis Whitburn and Brian Williams, Don ¿McLennan and Breakaway, “Crocodile” Dundee overseas.

NUMBER 76 (NOVEMBER 1989)

Simon Wincer and Quigley Down Under, Kennedy Miller, Terry Hayes, Bangkok Hilton, John Duigan, Flirting, Romero, Dennis Hopper and Kiefer Sutherland, Boulevard Films / Frank Howson, Ron Cobb, Island, Sex Lies and Videotape, Buried Alive, Blind Fury, Paris By Night.

NUMBER 78 (MARCH 1990)

George Ogilvie’s The Crossing, Ray Argali’s Return Home, Peter Greenaway Interview, The Cook, The Thief, His Wife and Her Lover, Michel Ciment Interview, Jack Clayton, Bangkok Hilton and A Long Way From Home:Barlow and Chambers

SEE OVER PAGE FOR SUBSCRIPTION FORM AND ORDER FORMS COVERING ALL ITEMS

CINEMA PAPERS SUBSCRIPTIONS

N A M E ____

I w ish to subscribe at the Special Rate o f 25% o ff

T IT L E ____

(Note: offer ends 2 0 April 1 9 9 0 ) for

CO M PANY ADDRESSL.

□ 6 issues at $ 2 1 .0 0 □

12 issues at $ 3 9 .0 0

□

18 issues at $ 5 8 .5 0

C O U N T R Y ___________________

P O S T C O D E ________

Please □ begin □ renew my subscription from the next issue I originally subscribed to

T E L E PH O N E

hom e

______________ w

o r k

__________________

Enclosed is m y cheque for $ or please debit m y □ BANKCARD □ MASTERCARD

□ Cinema Papers

□ VISACARD

□ Filmviews N ote: I f renewing your subscription please state your C a r d N o .D D □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □

□ □ □ □ □ □

record n u m b e r ___________________ Expiry D ate_______________________________________ _ Signature----------------------------------------------------------------Total C o s t _____________ Cheques should be made payable to: M TV P U B L IS H IN G LIM ITED

ADDITIONAL ITEMS

and mailed to: M TV P ublishing lim ited, 4 3 Charles Street, A bbotsford, V ictoria 3 0 6 7

1. BACK OF BEYOND: DISCOVERING AUSTRALIAN FILM AN D TELEVISION

NB. ALL OVERSEAS ORDERS SHOULD BE ACCOMPANIED BY BANK DRAFTS IN AUSTRALIAN DOLLARS ONLY

I wish to order___________ no. o f copies. INTERNATIONAL

□ $ 2 4 .9 5 per copy (Includes Postage)

6 Issues

12 Issues

18 Issues

Back Issues

1 Year

2 Years

3 Years

Add to Price per copy

Surface

36.00

65.00

97.00

1.20

Air

90.00

136.00

3.35 '

Surface

Total C ost $ Zone 1: N ew Zealand N iugini

2. BACK ISSUES

48.00

I wish to order the follow ing back issues □ C INEM A PAPERS Issue nos.

□ FILMVIEWS Issue nos.

Surface

Malaysia Fiji

36.00

65.00

97.00

1.20

Air

Singapore

42.00

77.00

116.00

2.25

Surface

36.00

69.00

102.00

1.20

India

Air

Japan

59.00

112.00

168.00

5.15

Surface

Zone 2:

Zone 3: H o n g Kong

Philippines China

□

1-2 copies @ $ 4 .5 0 each Surface

Surface

□

3 -4 copies @ $ 4 .0 0 each

U SA

37.00

67.00

101.00

1.40

Air

□

5-6 copies @ $ 3 .5 0 each

Canada M iddle East

Air

65.00

125.00

187.00

6.20

□

7 or m ore copies @ $ 3 .0 0 each

Surface

Zone 4:

Total no. o f issu es. Total C ost $ .

Surface

U K /E u rop e

37.00

68.00

187.00

1.50

Africa

Air

South America

71.00

136.00

205.00

7.20

Zone 5:

B a n k o f M e lb o u r n e

cuts the cost of personal banking for Professional People The Personal Current Account o you work all hours and Saturdays to m eet your D deadlines? Are you sick of bank charges, bank hours and lack of bank service? Then you should open a Personal Current Account at the Bank of Melbourne, and discover a more professional approach to costs, service and hours. Free cheques, no fees. Earn up to

13'5pÂ°^,daily interest

Open 9 to 5 weekdays* 9 to 12 Saturday. Helpful staff - personal service. 110 branches, over 6 0 0 agents.

How to apply: To open your Personal Current Account, visit your nearest Bank of Melbourne branch. Or call

522 7500 â&#x20AC;˘Also late Friday, some branches. Saturday morning most branches.

Head Office: 52 Collins Street Melbourne, 3000.

B A N K 40945

Bank of Melbourne cuts the cost o f banking

€ À N

SWEETHEARTS

A B O V E : JULIET (C H RISTAB EL W IG L E T ) A N D Z (J O H N F. H O W A R D ). RIG H T: JULIET. B E L O W : S C H O O L G IR L S

• CINEMA

PAPERS

w him sical novel by ColinTalbot, Sweetheartsis a contemp orary 'Romeo and Juliet' story of mis matched lovers. Juliet, played by new comer Christabel W igley, is a brittle, money-hungry nymphet searching for her Romeo. But her search is hindered by Z (John F. Howard), an ardent ad mirer, low in sex appeal but w ho has enough money to keep the lucre-ob sessed nymphet tem porarily satisfied. Summed up, Sweethearts poses the question, "W hy does good love go bad, and is there romantic fulfilm ent in the real w orld?" Talbot makes his directorial debut w ith this off-beat, music video-style BASED ON A

feature th a t w as shot in and around Melbourne. Featuring carnival colours, bizarre imagery and an assortm ent of odd characters, including a menacing cameo from the Bachelors of Prague's Henry Maas, the film showcases the music of many M elbourne talents, in cluding Steven Cummings, Red Symons, Kenny Lopez and Paul Grabowsky.

W riter-director: ColinTalbot. Producer: Lynda House. Executive producers: Kim Lewis, Colin Talbot. Photography: Terry Howells. Produc tion designer: N ick Van Roosendael. Editor: Christina De Podolinsky. Composer: Paul Grabowsky. Cast: Christabel W igley (Juliet), John F. Howard (Z), Richmond Clendinnen (Doug), Marianne Steele (Laura), Henry Maas (M.C. at Zero Motel), Bethany Lee (Davida), M argot Duell (P.M.).

A K I N K I N THE P I C A S S O

is a comedy of errors loosely inspired by the 1986 theft of Picasso's "W eeping W om an" from the Victorian National Gallery. A cultural te rrorist spoof, it begins w ith news of a Picasso painting, val ued at $10 million, getting ready to go on display at the State Gallery. The situation is exacerbated by Gallery director Bella McLeod (Jane Clifton) and cohort adviser Lionel Meadows (Jon Finlayson), who have a reputation fo r rejecting many Australian works. An outraged artist, Alex Nichols (Jane Menz), and her boyfriend, Joe Connors (Peter O'Brien), steal the Picasso in the hope of embarrassing Bella and Lionel. But their victory is short lived ... A Kink in the Picasso was shot in inner Melbourne and features a num ber of bohemian cafes and galleries. Production design was kept to simple, bold primary colours to create an al most hyper-real setting. Other loca tions include Flemington racecourse, Melbourne University and the Victo rian Artists' Society. Although produc tion ran smoothly, there w ere initial problems scouting for a suitable gal lery location. Says executive producer Rosa Colosimo: "W e wanted to shoot in the Na a k in k in th e p ic a s s o

tional Gallery and they w rote back say ing th a t they fe lt it would be absolutely irresponsible fo rth em or any other gal leries to be involved in a project that had to do w ith the theft of paintings from the gallery!" Financial backing for M arc Gra d e 's firs t 35mm feature w as arranged through Duesburys and a Melbournebased accounting firm. D ire c to r: M a rc G racie. P ro du ce r: W ill Spencer. Executive producer Rosa Colosimo. S criptw riter: Hugh Stuckey. Photography: Jaems Grant. Sound recordist: Jon W ilkin son. Editor: Edward McQueen-Mason. A rt director: M aria Ferro. Costume designer: Anita Fioravanti. Composer: Frank Strangio. Cast: Peter O'Brien (Joe Connors), Jon Fin layson (Lionel M eadows), Jane Clifton (Bella McLeod), A ndrew Daddo (N ick Parsons), Jane M enz (A lex N ichols), T irie l M ora (Stanley Goodlett), Peter Farago (Harvey Schreck), Mike Bishop (Tony Watson).

C L O C K W IS E F R O M B ELO W : LIO N EL M E A D O W S (J O N F IN L A Y S O N ), BELLA (J A N E CLIFT O N ) A N D THE P IC A S S O . N IC K (A N D R E W D A D D O ) A N D J O E (PETER O 'B R IE N ). J O E , L IO N EL A N D BELLA.

CINEMA

PAPERS

• 43

IN TOO DEEP

C L O C K W IS E F R O M A B O V E : W E N D Y

IN TOO DEEP has already been lik

( S A N T H A PRESS) A N D B A N D A T A J A Z Z

ened to Body Heat and 9 1/2 Weeks w ith its film noir-ish sensual imagery. Shot around M elbourne on a tig h t budg e t, the sto ry evolves around W endy (Santha Press), a singer, drifter and low -life love junkie who is admired by her younger sister, JoJo (Rebekah Elmaloglou), a 15-year-old rebel w a n t ing to break free. W endy starts an a ff air w ith M ack (Hugo Race), a cruel, manipulative petty criminal who is being w atched closely by policemen Miles (John Flaus) and D inny (D om inic Sweeney).The story istold from JoJo's perspective, the little sister w atching, at firs t w ith admiration, then horror as things start to turn nasty. Caught up in th e w o rld of w a tc h in g and being watched, of being used, of cruelty and desire, JoJo suffers the consequences of everyone else's actions. The film was entirely shot on loca tion, using tw o directors, tw o produc ers and tw o directors of photography, and features Melbourne's best jazz ta l ents. Despite a limited budget, m eticul ous attention w as devoted to the pro duction design. As co-director John Tatoulis says: "It could have been shot in black and w hite, butw e decided against that. W e gave it a hard, golden look, w ith lots of shadows, unusual angles, and sev ere lighting. W e let the action happen w ithin the frame, rather than relying on heavy cutting. Lightand camera angles became part of our set dressing. "W e wanted to have a distinctive look: it had to look hot. W e shot it over quite an extended period and w e n t into w inter. W e chose a new Kodak stock (5297) th a t w as a fa st daylight stock and it gave the scenes a w arm rich, golden-orange look."

C L U B . W E N D Y A N D M A C K (H U G O R ACE). W ENDY AN D M ACK.

€ À N N

• CINEMA

PAPERS

Producer-directors: Colin South; John Tat oulis. Associate producers: Peter Bain-Hogg, Deborah Parsons. Screenplay: Deborah Pars ons. Photography: M ark Gilfedder, Peter Zakharov. Editors: M ichael Collins, Nicolas Lee. Production designer^ Phil Chambers. Sound recordist: John W ilkinson. A rt direct or: Phil Chambers. W ardrobe: Lilly Chorny. Composer: Tassos loannides.

Cast: Hugo Race (M ack), Santha Press (Wendy), Rebekah Elmaloglou (JoJo), John Flaus (Miles), Dominic Sweeney (Dinny), Craig A lexander (Ivan), Richard Aspel (Henry), Helen Rollinson (M argaret), Gerda Nicolson (M rs Lyall), Robert Essex (M r Lyall), Ian Rae (Pike), Jam es Cox (Loch), Ja c k B ulm er (Bruno), Laurie Dobson (Ron), Duke Bannister(Jim Tibor),Tassosloannides(Tom M ella).

V IC T O R IA NF IL M L A B O R A T O R IE Sp r e s e n t s a t o t a l l yIN D E P E N D E N Tp r o d u c t i o n

choi,man PETER WATSON Laki S BRUCE BRAUN

't S PETER WATSON JNR

u 2 £ DEREK RICHARDS c . Ä

PAMELA HAMMOND end LOUISE CHESLETT

ÜSSI STEVE MITCHELL and KEVIN WILLIAMS Ä ; TONY CARR and PETER ROWE Ä 8S 5 PHILLIP GRACE Ä

MALCOLM MARR end LIZ WALDRON and SHARON MARTIN

Printing CHARLES BAYLISS and RICHARD DYMOND and ARNO KOERNIG

S £ g MEG KOERNIG

Gradtni AUSTIN BARTOLO SupeÄ : /**&% KEVIN WILLIAMS ° f i d / S * PETER WATSON JNR and STUART BEATTY A“0üntî VAL CORKE and PAT MILO

“

Tn&

GEOFF SHARDLOW

w,erie! VICTOR MITCHELL

= ! STAN HARDER

Retep,i0" LINDA MURPHY

□□ D D D O L B Y

H A W T H O R N V IC T O R IA 3 1 2 2

Telephone Q 3 g jgQ 4 6 1

o ,5 KEVIN WILLIAMS

PETER WATSON JNR

DD Dolby is a trademark of Dolby Laboratories Licensing Corporation

4G U E S TS T R E E T

MARK FREEMAN

0 3/ 8 1 91 4 5 1

6 A N

ADDITIONAL LISTINGS

Darling. Sound recordist: David Lee. Editor: HenryD angar.ProductiondesignenlgorN ay. Costume designer: Katie Pye. Cast: Robert Mammone (Sam), Danielle Spencer (Meg), Johnny (Russell Crowe), Patrick W ard (Nev), M ay Lloyd (Peg), Les Foxcroft (Pop), George W h a le y (S id), D aphne G ray (J o h n n y 's mother). [See Cinema Papers No. 78, pps 6 - 1 4 for a full production report]

HEAVEN TONIGHT D irector: Pino Am enta. P roducer: Frank Howson. Executive producer: Peter Boyle. Production company: Boulevard Films. Cast; John W aters, Rebecca Gilling, Kym Gyngell,

George Ogilvie's The Crossing is the story of how three young people cope w ith the effects of an unstoppable yearning, a love that divides as w ell as unites. It is set in the mid 1960s, in a small New South W ales country tow n, and ends in a heart-stopping car chase near a railw ay crossing.

Director: Stephen W allace. Producers: Charl es W aterstreef, Denis W hitburn and Brian W illiam s. Co-producer: Annie Bleakley. Line producer: Richard Brennan. Screenplay: Denis W illiam s and Brian W illiams. Photog raphy: Russell Boyd. Sound re co rdist Ben Osmo. Editor: Nick Beauman. Production de signer: Bernard Hides. Costume designer: Roger Kirk. C ast Bryan Brown (Cooper), John Clarke (Sheedy), Deborah Unger (Littell), George Takei (Takahashi), Nicholas Eadie (Keenan), Jason Donovan (Private Talbot). [See Cinema Papers No. 77, pps 6 -1 5 , fo r a full production report] 46

• CINEMA

PAPERS

D irector: George Ogilvie. P roducer: Sue Seeary. Executive producers: Al Clark, Philip Gerlach. Associate producer: Jenny Day. Screenplay: Ranald Allan. Photography: Jeff

kin. Editor: A leksi Vellis. A rt director: Lisa Th ompson. Cast: M ark Little (Boady O'Hagan), Ben M endelsohn (Luke O'Hagan), M ary

HUNTING

ley (Smeg).

Kondos. Production company: Boulevard Films. C ast John Savage (M ichael Bergman), Kerry Armstrong (M ichelle Harris), Jeffrey Thomas (Larry Harris), Rebecca Rigg (Debb ie McCormick), Rhys M cConnochie (Stockton), Ian Scott (Holmes), Stephen W hittaker (Roberts), Guy Pearce (Sharp), Nicholas Bell (Piggott), Stacey Valkenburg (Young M ich elle).

Shortly afterthe surprise attackon Pearl Harbour, Japanese troops capturedthe Australian garrison on Ambon Island, 650 km north-w est of Darwin. Of the 600 Australian prisoners of w ar held there, only 120 survived. Stephen W allace's Blood Oath is the story of the w ar-crim es trial held on the island after the w ar. It was w ritten by Denis W hitburn and Brian W illiams, W illiam s' father having been the pros ecuting army lawyer at the actual trial. In the film , Bryan Brown plays lawyer C aptain C ooper, "a q u intesse n tia l 'A ussie': decent, irreverent, tough, sensitive, butch and clever".

Director: Aleksi Vellis. Producer: Fiona Co chrane. Screenplay: Aleksi Vellis. Photogra phy: M ark Lane. Sound re co rd ist M ark A t

Coustas (Helen), Sheila Florance (M olly), Russell Gilbert (Boss), Roberto M icale (Hec tor), Tamara S aulw ick (Penny), George Hux

Frank Howson. Sound re co rdist John Rowley. Editor: Philip Reid. Production designer: Jon D ow ding. Costume designer: A ph ro d ite

THE CROSSING

Nirvana Street M urder is a black com edy w ith a blend of action, drama and farce. It centres on the lives of tw o outlandish brothers w ho w ork at the local abattoirs. Boady is violent and childish; Luke is normal by com paris on. It is the firs t feature of Aleksi Vellis.

Guy Pearce.

Director: Frank Howson. Producer: Frank Howson. Executive producer: Peter Boyle. Line producer: Barbi Taylor. Screenplay:

BLOOD OATH

NIRVANA STREET MURDER

WHAT THE M OON SAW D irector: Pino Am enta. P roducer: Frank Howson. Executive producer: Peter Boyle. Based on a musical w ritten by Frank How

STRANGERS

The story of an ambitious young stock broker who, after meeting an attractive stranger on a plane, finds herself en snared in an ever-spiralling nightmare web of complication and intrigue which eventually leads to ruin and death. Director: Craig Lahiff. Producers: Craig Lahiff, W ayne Groom. A ssociate producer: Ron Stigwood. Screenplay: John Emery. Photog raphy: Steve Arnold. Sound recordist: Mike Piper. Editor: Denise Haratzis. Production designer: Derek M ills. Production company: Genesis Films. Cast: James Healey (Gary), Anne Looby (Anna), M elissa Docker (Reb ecca), Tim Robertson (King), Jim Holt (Gra ham), Geoff M orrell (Frank), M ary Regan

son. Production company: Boulevard Films.

(Joanne), Paul Mason (Sergeant), John Clay ton (Agent).

Cast: Kym Gyngell, A ndrew Shephard, Pat Evison.

STRUCK BY LIGHTNING

[For information on Heaven Tonight, Hunting

Director: Jerzy Domaradzki. Producers:Terry

and W hat the M oon Saw, see the article on Boulevard Films in Cinema Papers No. 76, pps 42 - 46]

Charatsis, Trevor Farrant. Screen play: Trevor Farrant. Photography: Yuri Sokol. Cast: Gary McDonald (Rennie), Brian Vriends (Cannizz-

LEFT: PR IV A T E T A LB O T ( J A S O N D O N O V A N ) A N D C A P T A IN C O O P E R ( B R Y A N B R O W N ) . S T E P H E N W A L L A C E 'S BLOOD OATH. B E L O W : S A M (RO BE R T M A M M O N E ) A N D M E G (D AN IELLE S P E N C E R ). G E O R G E O G IL V IE 'S THE C R O S S IN G . R IG H T : KATE (C A TH E R IN E M C C L E M E N T 5 ) A N D R IC H A R D M U I R (C O L IN FRIELS). A R C H N I C H O L S O N 'S WEEKEND W ITH KATE.

THE A U S T R A L I A N R E C O R D

THE

A UST RA LIA N AT

RECORD

CANNES

C O M P E T I T I O N

1978

T h e C h a n t o f J im m ie B la c k s m ith

1979

M y B r illia n t C a re e r

Fred Schepisi

Gillian Armstrong

Bruce Beresford

1980

B re a k e r M o ra n t

1983

T h e Y e a r of L iv in g D a n g e ro u s ly

Peter Weir

- classified as an Australia-U.S. co-production 1985

B lis s

Ray Lawrence Dusan Makavejev

T h e C o c a -C o la K id

1986

T h e F rin g e D w e lle rs

1988

T h e N a v ig a to r

Bruce Beresford

Vincent Ward

- an Australia-New Zealand co-production aro), Brian Logan (Kevin), Henry Salter(Noel), Catherine McClem ents (Jill McHugh), Don Barker (M r Jeffries), Syd W illiam s (Spencer), Briony W illiam s (Gail); Dick Tomkins, Roger Haddad, John Clini, David Smith. [See pps 2 4 -3 2 fo r a production report]

VICIOUS

An explicit thrille r from Karl Zwicky, director of Contagion and much te le vi sion, including the recent children's mini-series, E llyandJools. Viciouswas re-cut before its Australian video re lease, but attempts are being made to show the film in its original form. Director: Karl Zwicky. Executive producer: Tom Broadbridge. Producers: David Hannay, Charles Hannah. Screenplay: Paul J. Hogan, Karl Zw icky. Photography: John Stokes. Sound recordist: David Glasser. Editor: Roy Mason. Production designer: Darrell Lass. Wardrobe: M argarita Tassone. Cast: Tamblyn Lord (Damon Kennedy), Craig Pearce (Terry), John Godden (Felix), Kelly Dingwall (Benny), Joanna Lockwood (Diane Kennedy), Gerard M aguire (B rian Kennedy), Frank McNamara (Gerry), Joseph Dicker (Police man 1), Leather (Claire), Tiffany Dowe (Sondra Price), John Clayton (Graham Price), Louise Cullen (Adele Price), Ralph Cotterill (Professor).

WEEKEND WITH KATE

Richard M uir is juggling a high-pow ered career as a public relations exec utive for Origin records and a fiery affairw ith his dominating colleague Carla. Meanwhile, his beautiful w ife, Kate, is feeling n e g le c te d ... Weekend w ith Kate is the final film of the late A rch Nicholson, whose prev ious features w ere Fortress, Buddies

Lloyd. Editor: Rose Evans. Production de signer: Larry Eastwood. Costume designer: M ichele Leonard. Production company: Phill ip Emmanuel Productions. Cast: Colin Friels (Richard), Catherine M cClem ents (Kate), Jerome Ehlers (Jon Thorne), Helen Mutkins (Carla), Kate Sheil (Phoebe), Jack Mayers (Gus), Rick Adams (Ted),Zoe Emanuel (Girl at airport), Brian Vriends (Staffman), Bruce Venables (Bugman), John Fielder(Fishmonger),AlanTobin (Jeweller), Emily Limbers (Staff

1989

Jane Campion

S w e e tie UN

CE RT AI N

R E G A R D

M o n k e y G rip

1984

M a n of F lo w e rs

1986

B a c k la s h

B urke a n d W ills

T w o F rie n d s

Glasgow cop Neat McBride is a cynic al loner who likes to go undercover. The rest of the police w ish he'd stay there. M cBride has a chip on his should er and can't keep his mouth shut. And after busting a crooked city councill or, he is re-assigned to Australia. There he is partnered w ith an easy-going Aussie, Lancelot Cooper. Rejecting the dull routine w ork on offer, they plunge into an undercover drug operation. Harbour B eat is the firs t feature as director for long-time producer David Elfick. His previous credits include S tarstruck, Emoh Ruo, A ro u n d the W orld in 80 Ways and the mini-series Fields o f Fire (and its tw o sequels).

1989

and Dark Age. Director: Arch Nicholson. Producer: Phillip Emmanuel. Co-producer: David C. Douglas.

M illike n (Simone), C hristopher Cummins (Bazza), Rhondda Findleton (Carol), Aleesa Henricks (Trudy), Peta Toppano (M rs De San

Screenplay: Henry Tefay, Kee Young. Photo graphy: Dan Burstall. Sound re co rd ist Tim

tos).

Graeme Clifford Jane Campion

P a s s io n le s s M o m e n ts

1988

designer: M ichael Bridges. Costume de signer: Bruce Finlayson. Production com pany: Palm Beach Pictures. Cast: John Han nah (Neal), Steven Vidler (Lancelot), Gary Day (W alker), Emily Simpson (Mason), Bill Young (C im ino)Jony Poli (De Santos), Angie

Paul Cox

Bill Bennett

A G ir l’s O w n S to ry

HARBOUR BEAT

on an original idea by David Elfick. Photogra phy: Ellery Ryan. Sound re co rdist Paul Brincat. Editor: S tuart Arm strong. Production

Ken Cameron

1982

woman).

Director: David Elfick. Producers: David Elfick, Irene Dobson. Associate producer: Nina Ste venson. Screenplay: M orris Gleitzman. Based

(aka E vil A n g e ls ) Fred Schepisi

A Cry in th e D a rk

Jane Campion

A S ong of A ir

Merilee Bennett

Bill Bennett

M a lp ra c tic e

T h e P ris o n e r of S t P e te rs b u rg LA

1986 LA

S E M A I N E

D e v il in th e F le s h Q U I N Z A I N E

Ian Pringle

CRI TI QUE

(CRITICS’ WEEK)

Scott Murray DES

R E A L I S A T E U R S

(DIRECTORS’ FORTNIGHT)

Ken Hannam

1975

S u n d a y to o fa r A w a y

1976

T h e D e v il’s P la y g ro u n d

Fred Schepisi

1978

T h e G e ttin g of W is d o m

Bruce Beresford

1982

H e a tw a v e

1986

C actu s

1987

T h e S u rfe r

Phil Noyce

Paul Cox Frank Shields

S H O R T S

C O M P E T I T I O N

1986

P eel

Jane Campion

1987

P a lis a d e

S P E C 1A L

1987

Laurie Mclnnes

S C R E E N I N G S

F e a th e rs

John Ruane

T h e S e n tim e n ta l B lo k e JUNI OR

1986

Raymond Longford

C A N N E S

F a s t T a lk in g

Ken Cameron

A W A R D S

1980

Jack Thompson, fo r Best Supporting Actor

1986

P e e l,

1987

P a lis a d e ,

(in B re a k e r M o ra n t) Palme d’Or fo r Best Short Film ' Palme d’Or fo r Best Short Film

■ CINEMA

PAPERS

7 9

• 47

R I S S I E N T F

Frenchman Pierre Rissient is an activist for films and filmmakers he believes in. He has discovered and promoted many new directors, overseen the critical revival of others whose careers have faulted, and argued eloquently for those unjustly ignored. Some of these filmmakers are Australian. Since 1985, at the wise request of the Australian Film Commission, Rissient has regularly come to Australia to seek out the innovative and idiosyn cratic. He has then helped guide thosefilms through the seemingly labyrinthine selection procedures of Cannes and other festivals. An occasionally practising filmmaker himself, Rissient does not do this championing as a living, but because of a deep love for and commitment to the cinema. Like many others, he is gravely concerned about the declining standards of world cinema and is doing his utmost to seek out and promote new talent. Rissient began his film career as a distributor and publicist. He was notable for bringing to world attention several American directors, including Raoul Walsh. In fact, French director Jean-Pierre Melville held Rissient wholly responsiblefor Walsh’s present standing. But Rissient is also a writer-director, having made the features O ne A B O V E : THE C R O W D E D CROISETTE D U R IN G THE C A N N E S FESTIVAL.

N ight S tand and Cinq et P eau, neither of which have been seen widely in Australia. It is yet another

of those film ironies that while Rissient works so generously to aid the exposure of Australian films overseas, Australia has not CANNES

returned the favour. Rissient was here recently looking at films for ones he could see making an impact at Cannes this year. In the fol lowing interview, conducted in English by Scott Murray, Rissient speaks of the role and importance of the Cannes Fes tival and, then, his activist role with the Australian cinema. 48

• CINEMA

PAPERS

FILM

FESTIVAL

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------—

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

How important is Cannes as a festival? Cannes is the most im portant festival in the world, m ore im portant than all the other festivals put together. It has contributed to the recognition of directors, some new and others making a comeback, and it shows most of the interesting films - at least 60 per cent of them. As well, these films are exposed immediately to the attention of the whole world. O f course, it does happen that some pictures get massacred at Cannes, sometimes for the right reasons - they are n ot good films and sometimes for wrong ones. T hat is what we would call in French un accident par cours. In what way is it important? Those who make American genre pictures in Australia tend to argue that Cannes is little more than a critical wank.

LEFT: DIRECTOR A N D FILM ACTIVIST PIERRE RISSIENT. (PH O T O : SCOTT M U R R A Y ). B ELO W : A FR EN C H FILM C R E W T A K ES A L U N C H B R E A K O N THE M AJEST IC H O T EL'S STRETCH O F B EA C H .

First, such people would say the same thing about an opening in Canada or Paris, or even in New York. To a large extent it is selfdefence, because most of the time these people are envious of this kind of international recognition. Second, many pictures got well sold out of Cannes. If you take a picture which personally I d o n ’t like, O lm i’s The Tree of Wooden Clogs, it would never have been an international success without Cannes. And last year there was Sex, Lies, and Videotape, which would certainly not have done that well commercially without a place and a prize in Cannes. So far, I have been speaking of films in the official Competition, but there are also many examples in the other sections. So, while it is not automatic that if a picture goes to Cannes it will be a commer cial success, it will have a much better chance of being sold and well exposed. If a picture is well received at Cannes, distributors and exhibitors around the world are encouraged to give it more atten tion. It will have a better career.

picture from particular countries because of censorship, but all the pictures that were shown were selected by Cannes. Occasionally there was some political pressure, especially from the exFrench territories. The last picture shown at Cannes against its wishes was an Algerian film about four or five years ago. Again, one or two years later, the Ministère de la Coopération tried to impose Sembene O usm ane’s last film, which was really disappointing. However, for the past several years, Cannes has successfully resisted such pressures. Apart from the different methods of selec tion for the Competition, there have been sev eral innovations. First, in the late 1950s or ex tremely early ’60s, the critics started the La Semaine de la Critique (Critics’W eek), which is open to the two first pictures of a director. Because it thought only in terms of features, some people who have done ten or twelve tele vision films have still got into the Critics’ Week. I think they should renew their way of consider ing that. Anyway, the Critics’ Week has been basically following the same process since its creation. In 1969, one year after May 1968, there was the creation of La Quinzaine des Réalisateurs (Directors’ Fortnight), which was considered as a kind of fringe festival in Cannes. The first Quinzaine was located on the Rue d ’Antibes and went through several locations before maturing at the Star theatres. Then, when the official sections moved from the old Palais to the new Palais, the Quinzaine went into the old Palais. However, the old Palais was destroyed last year and the Quinzaine had to move again. So they decided to move to the new Palais, where they are splitting time in the same theatre as the Un Certain Regard, which I’ll talk about in a moment. This I think was a mistake. The Quinzaine’s identity has been lost and most film critics todaywouldn’tbe able to rem em berwhatpictureswere shown last year at the Un Certain Regard and what were at the Quinzaine. Next year, or the year after, the Quinzaine will have a new locale. In the meantime, it can concentrate on finding good films, because the one problem that is starting to exist everywhere is the lack of good films. Finding the good ones is not always easy. Then, in the mid to late 1970s, the Festival itself opened a new section, not competitive, called Les Yeux Fertiles (Fertile Eyes). Its aim was to show pictures which were different and which, for right or wrong reasons, were not considered ripe for going into Compe tition. Les Yeux Fertiles then became quite soon after Un Certain Regard.

You mentioned the other sections at Cannes. What are their various functions and importance? When Cannes was created - and I was too young a boy to really know about it - there was only the Competition. But it was not the kind of Competition we have today. The films were selected by the participat ing countries, n ot by the Festival. Germany would select a picture to send, so would Russia, England, Canada and so on. As things pro gressed, Cannes discussed with the countries what pictures should get in. But basically it was the countries that sent the films, and they could have been selected for political, social or conventional taste reasons. By the late 1960s or early ’70s, Cannes reversed the process and selected pictures by itself. O f course, sometimes they couldn t get a CINEMA

PAPERS

P I E R R E

R I S S I E N T

reacted against the film is actually a positive thing. It was like when Victor Hugo in 1830 established romanticism. Many people booed and whistled, b ut romanticism was established after that. So the fact that some people did not like Sweetie helped Jane Campion become established: she has became a controversial figure. Did you at any time consider offering Sweetie to the Critics’ Week or Un Certain Regard instead o f Competition? That was never my thinking, but I heard that some others thought that. No, I clearly said it should go to Competition. First, it gives greater status to the film. Second, I knew that if there were adverse reaction, itw ouldbe from a specific audience. We could then say that this specific audience did not like the film, which would be a positive thing for the film. Third, I suspected that many people would like the film and that the picture would receive much more coverage in the different media. It is because of that coverage that the picture has developed since. If Competition is more prestigious for a director, could it be seen as a backward step if a later film goes into a section other than Compe tition?

Basically, the differences between Un Certain Regard, the Quinzaine and the Critics’ Week are no longer that clear. A picture could be in one section, it could be in another. What is im portant is the quality of a film and the way the picture is prom oted. One other im portant change in the past two or three years, especially last year and I hope this year, is that the Competition has become m ore adventurous and daring in the choice of films. It is a less official, in the bad sense of that word, and a m ore adventurous selection. T hat in itself has made the selection process for the Directors’ Fortnight, Un Certain Regard and the Critics’Week more difficult. They are now looking in certain ways more academic and old-fashioned than the Competition. Are films always better o ff being in the Competition, or are there some films which are better served in one of the other sections? T hat is a tricky question. O f course, if a film goes into Competition it gets much more exposure and interest. However, in the past it could be dangerous for a fragile film to go into Competition. So, in the past two or three years, we have tried to be aware of that and devise a different way to present films. Most films in Competition are shown three times a day. But some films are now shown two times a day or even only once, which is an indication to people that a picture is a bit different, a bit more difficult. Those people who go for m ore easy-going story-telling films are now warned by the num ber of screenings which pictures are not as easy as the others. This will also m ean there is a better concentra tion at the screening of people equipped to follow these films. So, the danger is less than it would have been a few years back. O f course, there is still danger for any picture in Competition, but that has always been the case. W hen A ntonioni’s L ’Avventurawas shown, there was a lot of disagreem ent about it. But despite the fact some 80 per cent didn’t like it, the film won the Critics’ Prize and it opened very well in Paris. Last year, it was reported in Australia th atjan e Cam pion’s Sweetie was not well received at Cannes, which was a completely wrong im pression. I know for a fact that Sweetie was extremely well received at Cannes. All the critics, film festival directors, exhibitors and distribu tors who could like and defend that film liked itverym uch. That was the seed from which the picture has since become a success around the world. You must also rem em ber that the people who did n o t like it at Cannes would no t like it wherever they saw it. And the fact that they 50

• CINEMA

PAPERS

I believe that there is no rule on that. O f course, a director who has been in Competition may feel that his vanity is bruised if a later film goes to Directors’ Fortnight or Un Certain Regard. But the selecting committee for Competition can be wrong from time to time, and if the picture goes to the Directors’ Fortnight then people m ight say, “Oh my God, it was wrong that this picture was not taken for Competition.” So the director can get a kind of sweet revenge. Then again, maybe the selection committee was not wrong, and maybe sometimes my partners there - if you want to call them that didn’t take a picture, n ot because it isn’t as good as other films in Competition, but maybe because they felt the audience was n ot ready for it. If Sweetieh.a.d not been preceded at Cannes b y ja n e ’s shorts, I probably would have not thought it should have been in Competi tion. But there was an expectation of Ja n e ’s next film because those shorts had been discovered at Cannes and, after that, travelled around the world. If tomorrow I saw a first film that was just as good as Sweetie, but by someone about whom nothing was known, I might hesitate about putting it in Competition. Does Cannes like to nurture a filmmaker from the Critics’ Week or Un Certain Regard up to Competition? Obviously there is a bit of that. I d o n ’t think it is an altogether conscious attitude and I d o n ’t think it should be considered as patronistic, although it may be. If you think of literature, people are discovered by the publishing house, which usually doesn’t submit the first book for literary prizes, but tries to get the author known first. You find the same thing with art galleries and the painters they discover. Naturally, if you have had a film in either Critics’ Week or Un Certain Regard, it is easier to come back and try for Competition because you are already established. There is an expectation about you and your work which makes people interested. But there are some people who have come once and never come again. It used to be the case that many of the best critics at Cannes didn’t go to Competition films because they were thought too mainstream and boring. The real discoveries were in the other sections or even in the Marché (Market). I d o n ’t really agree with you. I d o n ’t think that in years past the best critics from around the world went more to the Directors’ Fortnight or Critics’ Week. They may have pointed out that there were some interesting things outside the Competition, b ut that’s all. Today, you will probably find even m ore excitem ent about the Competition films than there was fifteen years ago.

FIRST

ASSOCIATIONS

How did your association with Cannes begin and what forms has it taken? After my military service, I was looking to make money. Having worked as a film critic an d also as a film organizer o f the Preview Club, I had becom e som ewhat influential. Some people th en told me to use my capacity for influencing people by becom ing an activist for the pictures I liked. So, I started doing th at in Paris. I was also a small distributor and p ioneered the reissue of u n known classics. At th at time, the only classic pictures which were issued in France were Citizen Kane, King Kong and Grapes of Wrath. I re-issued pictures which at th at tim e were com pletely unknow n or forgotten, taking care o f the prom otion myself. I was n o t m aking any money on that; I was doing it for love o f cinema. Anyway, I think I can say I was very successful and some people say that I established a new style o f public relations. T h at m eant that in the following years I was asked to take care of pictures during the Cannes Film Festival, as a press agent o r whatever you like to call it. I only took pictures which I liked and for which I was willing to fight. I’m a good fighter for what I like. I cannot hide my em otions if I am disappointed by a film. Soon, the circle o f in terest which I had in Paris also spread over Cannes and by the late 1960s m ost o f the pictures which were praised at Cannes were pictures I was taking care of. O ne year, the three first prizes went to pictures I was representing. A nother year, out of the eleven prizes given in all categories, eight went to my films; three years in a row the pictures which got to Golden Palm were my pictures - n o t my pictures, b u t pictures I was looking after. Naturally, I becam e m ore and m ore in dem and. T here was even a funny story which I think I can rep eat now. I d o n ’t rem em ber which picture I was representing, except it was a Universal film, maybe Taking Off. Anyway, Universal was talking to R obert Favre le Bret, who was the délégué general, and they m entioned my nam e. Apparently Favre said exasperatedly, “I know Pierre is im portant in Cannes, but he is n o t the one to ru n C annes!” I m ust say I had no problem with Favre le Bret. Bu; he was a kind of distant old star, as if living in a n o th er time. H e h ad a vision of what Cannes could be, b u t n o t o f the films which could develop the festival. T hen, in 1971, Favre le Bret becam e président and Maurice Bessy became the délégué general. M aurice was a m uch m ore subtle diplomat, m ore aware o f what was going on. O ne o f the first things he did was to com e to see me. “P ierre”, he said, “your flare has been

very sharp. I would like to be in constant touch with you.” In 1972, for example, I geared quite a lot of films towards Cannes. For example, there was Panic in Needle Park, which is a very small film, about an u n popular subject and with a director who was completely unknown. Schatzberg’s earlier films had been a total flop in America and A1 Pacino was virtually unknow n at that time. But I got it into Com pe tition. Anyway, from 1972,1 was m ore in a position to suggest. I knew that if I defended a film there was a kind of guarantee that the picture would receive some attention. I think people would have said that; I d o n ’t want to say it pretentiously. Bessy ran Cannes up until 1978 when Gilles Jacob became délégué general. I had known Gilles as a film critic since 1961. T hat relationship with Gilles, and with Cannes, has kept developing, I believe for the best on both sides. So now, if you ask me what is my relationship, I would say it is n ot a formal one. But for the past two years, and even m ore this year, Gilles has asked me to be a kind of emissary. It could be for a picture which would be difficult to get from a certain country, or some director who is n ot easy to deal with. So probably my role has increased in the past two or three years. But n ot only in Paris and in Cannes, b ut in many countries, people realize that since I was a very young m an I have been in advance of the public taste. I was the one to initiate recognition of many filmmakers who are highly regarded today. A nd when I was n ot the one to initiate things, I was the one who forcefully fought for their films. In the past few years, I have n o t been less right than I was 20 years ago. So, if I call Peter Scarlet in San Francisco or Richard Pena in New York, if I call Larry Kardish of the New Directors or Sheila W hitaker in London, they will pay attention to what I say. They will, o f course, want to see the film, b ut the smallest film, the m ost unknow n film from the most unknow n territory, they will see. THE

AUSTRALIAN

CONNECTION

When did the films that you are associated with begin including Australian ones? T he first Australian picture which I got into Cannes was Sunday toofar Away. I had known David Roe at Cannes and he was able in his role at the Australian Film Institute to suggest some A ustralian films for festivals. I was in H ong Kong one day when I received a p hone call from David asking if he could send me Sunday too fa r Away to look at it regarding Cannes. I saw and really liked the film, and I told David I though t it should be at Cannes. But I didn ’t see it in C om petition, n ot because of quality but because of the nature of the film and the nature of the C om petition at the time. I may n o t say that today. At that time, there was no U n Certain Regard and the Critics’ Week was into over-structuralist films which were either really left wing or looking to be left wing. O f course, Sunday toofa r Away is n ot a rightest film, b u t it is n o t an overly leftist film, and certainly wasn’t a structuralist film. So I d id n ’t feel the Critics’ W eek was the right place for it. In fact, I felt that the best chance would be D irectors’ Fortnight, so I told Pierre-H enri Deleau [Q uinzaine director] about it. He liked it, and the film got into D irectors’ Fortnight. T he year after, Fred Schepisi’s The Devil’s Playground also got into the D irectors’ Fortnight, and I think two or three years later Fred had The Chant of Jimmie Blacksmith in C om petition. It was n o t exactly, as some people say, the first Australian picture in Com petition - rather, it was the first identified Australian picture in Com petition. F A C IN G P A G E : G E R A R D D E P A R D IE U A N D N A S T A S S J A K IN S K I (B A C K S T O C A M E R A ) A R R IV E F O R A B L A C K -T IE C A N N E S P R EM IER E. LEFT: D IR ECT O R B R U C E B E R E S F O R D , C E N T R E , A N D A C T O R J A C K T H O M P S O N , R IG H T , A R R IV E F O R TH E 1 9 8 0 C O M P E T IT IO N S C R E E N IN G O F B R E A K E R M O R A N T.

CINEMA

PAPERS

• 51

R I S S I E N T

PI ERRE

I was then involved in the selection of My Brilliant Career for Competition, b u t I was n o t involved with BreakerMorant, n o t that I was against it, it was ju st that the circumstances d id n ’t happen that way. T hen, in 1984, at the M ontreal Festival, where I was invited by W arner Bros, to accompany Clint Eastwood, who is a good friend of mine, I saw David Stratton. David was at that time a commissioner of the AFC, and he asked me if I would be interested in being invited by the AFC to come to see Australian films in order to recom m end them for C annes and, eventually, other festivals. I came for the first time in 1985 invited by the AFC and since then every year. You had been to Australia before that. Yes, b u t n o t as an invitee o f the AFC to look at films. When you come here, do you look only at films screened by the AFC or will you consider anything producers may wUh to show you? O f course. Usually, producers inform the AFC if they have a picture ready and want to submit it to Cannes. Once I get to Sydney, I am told which pictures have been scheduled, though I also try to see other films which could be available, even if they’re on 1.6 mm or shorter than feature length. I try out of principle to see everything around. Once I have seen a film, I give the producer my best judgem ent about w hether I think it should go to Cannes. I do not have an official point of view. I am very cautious of any such established value system, even I would say the values I have established for myself in previous years. People can criticize my choices, but anyone can see that the pictures I have supported from Australia were not the obvious choices. I was not taking what was the official taste choice. Fortunately, most of the time the pictures have been well re ceived at Cannes. So if some people are disappointed that I d id n ’t take their film, which is never a personal attitude, I think they will have difficulty pretending that I am taking pictures which d o n ’t achieve a certain reputation out of Cannes. It is not an exclusive thing, either. If you don’t think the film can be usefully presented to Cannes, it doesn’t mean the AFC won’t help in other ways. Exactly. Anyway, I d o n ’t dis-recommend films. If I see a film and like it, I recom m end it. And if I like it very m uch, I will fight for it to be somewhere. But I d o n ’t dis-recommend films. Now, it is true that if I d o n ’t recom m end a film it kind of looks as

• CINEMA

PAPERS

if I did dis-recommend it, but it’s n ot really that way. A nd some people, when I said I d id n ’t care for their film, have sent it to Cannes anyway. As far as I can rem em ber, n o t one has been accepted by Cannes. Some people will say I have spoken to the selection commit tee beforehand and influenced them. T hat is n o t the case. If I see a film which I d o n ’t like, I d o n ’t call GillesJacob or the com m ittee and say that I d id n ’t like it. I ju st d o n ’t say anything. Have there been disappointments in that you have fought for films that didn’t get into Cannes? It has happened, but the percentage worldwide is n ot big -10-15 per cent at most. But I d o n ’t rem em ber an Australian film that failed. All those which I have recom m ended have been at Cannes. I cannot say it will be the same in the future, b u t ... O f the films that you are an activist for around the world, what percentage is Australian? It depends from year to year on what is com ing from Australia and from other countries. But since 1985 there have been two years during which there were more Australian films than o th er years. One year was 1986 when your film, Devil in the Flesh, was there with Jane, Bill Bennett and others. Is there a danger in becoming too associated with an advocacy o f the Australian cinema and thus losing an independent standing? Maybe some people in Australia think that, but in Paris and London and New York that is not the case. For a long time I was considered as an advocate of American cinem a and American genre. T hat was not correct, though I have defended American films, it is true. Not only the old pioneers, like Raoul Walsh, but also the new American directors. I brought practically all of them to recognition: Schatzberg, Altman, Coppola, Boorman, Scorsese. But I have also brought a lot of people to Cannes from England, as well as Fassbinder, Milos Forman, Makevejev, King Hu, Lino Brocka and many people from Asia. It is true I know less of eastern European cinem a than I know the Asian cinema, but, if people think of me, they d o n ’t think of Australia first. What have been some o f your Australian successes at Cannes? The most obvious case is Jane Campion. W hen h er short films were at Cannes in 1986, that was the first time som ething like that had happened. The success she had thatyear at Cannes led, I guess, to her

F A C IN G P A G E : M E L G IB S O N (LEFT P H O T O ) A N D S IG O U R N E Y W E A V E R (RIG H T), W IT H IN TE R VIEW ER R O B IN L E A C H , D O THE R O U N D S A T C A N N E S FO R THE 1 9 8 3 C O M P E T IT IO N S C R E E N IN G O F PETER W E IR 'S THE YEAR O F LIVIN G DANGEROUSLY. B E L O W : J A N E C A M P I O N , LEFT, W IT H ACTR E SS K RIS M c Q U A D E , D U R IN G THE F IL M IN G O F TW O FRIENDS, W H IC H W A S S H O W N IN U N C ER T AIN R E G A R D A T C A N N E S IN 1 9 8 6 .

getting some m oney to make a picture as difficult as Sweetie. T hen Sweetie came to Cannes and was extremely well re ceived. It got very good distributors around the world, and got into the good theatres. To a certain extent what is a pity is the fact that some o f your directors have not followed up on their first successes at Cannes, either because they may not have done the right pic tures afterwards, or maybe because they were n ot given an opportunity to make a picture. Why Ken H annam has n o t followed the success o f Sunday too far Away only p eo p le who know Ken H a n n a m ’s psyche can say. F re d Schepisi is a success out of Cannes, and I would say also Gill A rm strong got a lot of advantage out of Cannes, as did Bruce Beresford. One reason for a lack o f follow-up is the schism between what you and others are doing to help Australian cinema overseas and the funding psychologies o f the bureaucracies back here. In 1986, as you know, the main Australian critical suc cesses at Cannes were Campion, Bennett and myself. Yet all three were rejected by the AFC for script development when they returned to Australia. Obviously I have a vested interest in raising such a question, but do you see this situation as a problem and one that needs to be addressed? First, let me say I d o n ’t do anything to help a film or a filmmaker. It would be condescending to put it that way. But if by bringing a film to Cannes I can contribute to its success, that makes me happy. Equally, if I like a filmmaker, I like to see him develop. And it’s true that I have som etim es been disappointed to see that some of those filmmakers who were appreciated in Cannes a^e n o t being given a chance to develop properly back in Australia. So, 1quite often say to the people I m eet here that we should think m ore about protecting and developing the talent for the future. It is the best and only way to go. I wish it had been done m ore in the past, and I certainly hope itwill be done m ore in the future. B u tfam n o ta n Aus tralian citizen, so what can I do? Does the situation reflect within some o f the funding structures a lack o f understanding o f the importance o f events like Cannes? Probably. It also probably reflects hypocrisy. N ot only in administra tion, but everywhere else, people m anoeuvre opinion. It is definitely the same in Los Angeles, which is an easier situation to talk about. For example, when je rry Schatzberg’s first three films - Puzzle of a Downfall Child, Panic in Middle Park and Scarecrow —were trem en dously well appreciated in Europe, and especially in France where Scarecrow won th e Palme d ’Or, th ere were a lot o f film people in Los Angeles who were very envious o f that success. So there developed a kind of a plot - n o t a cautiously established plot, b u t a kind of conspiracy —to dim inish what happens in Cannes and in France. And in 1973 a certain Schatzberg project did n o t go ahead because a powerful director at the studio was hoping to go to Cannes next year. The same kind o f thing I expect exists here. I ’m sure some people get the jobs because they court the right people. It is a worldwide situation. How do you perceive the standing o f the Australian cinema at this point? First, I believe very few people worldwide think o f th e Australian

cinema as such, ju st as very few people worldwide think of the H ong Kong or Brazilian cinemas. Most people think of what films went to Cannes or the other festivals, which ones opened in Paris or New York. I d o n ’t think many people try for a grasp of what is happening in any particular country. Maybe they do a little about Hollywood, because it is easier to speak about the Hollywood film industry, and maybe also a little about France because there was the New Wave. In France there is a kind of cult, which is exaggerated and not well founded, about a group of people working together. Occasionally people around the world think of a particular director, like George Miller. But I’m sure that most people who see Mad Max in Spain, in Turkey or elsewhere d o n ’t know it is an Aus tralian film. Most people think it is an American film set in Arizona, or somewhere like that. Even Crocodile Dundee, which is more Austra lian than Mad Max, was sold m ore on the jungle and the crocodile than being Australian. You could probably adjust the myth of Paul Hogan to other planes. Personally, I think cinem a worldwide is bad right now. The level of cinem a is disintegrating, just as taste is disintegrating in literature and in life values. I d o n ’t think Australia is any different. But, from time to time, some interesting films do appear, and sometimes from Australia. Some year there are m ore from Australia than maybe some other countries, another year it will be different. I am here in M elbourne today, Sydney tomorrow. But I w ouldn’t have reacted differently last week in H ong Kong, or next week in Los Angeles and New York. I react from my own instinct and experience and impulse. O f course, I am aware that a Chinese film has to reflect Chinese culture, but really it is n ot like a screen between me and the film. Since 1975, there have been very few innovative films, worldwide. So Australia is n o t the only country where innovative cinem a has n ot existed. Again, after 1975, there are very few idiosyncratic films. If you think of the American cinema, it is possible the last idiosyncratic film from a new filmmaker was Mean Streets. A lot of filmmakers have come after, and some were maybe good, b ut none were really idiosyncratic... No, maybe th at’s n ot true this year. Do the Right Thing is an idiosyncratic film. Basically, I would say the same thing about France. And, if we speak of Australia, we come to Jane Campion, who is certainly idiosyncratic. Based on all the years since 1975, the percentage o f idiosyncratic, well-crafted films m ade in Australia is probably the same as elsewhere in the world. No better, maybe n ot worse. ■ CINEMA

PAPERS

• 53

U R B A N EYE FILM R E L E A S I N G proudly presents

THE LIFE & DEATH OF COLONEL BLIMP THE TERENCE DAVIES TRILOGY THE TALE OF RUBY ROSE GOLDEN EIGHTIES WRONG WORLD DIMBOOLA ROADGAMES RAW DEAL DUET FOR FOUR COLARADO AKA RUN FOR COVER SOUTH SEA FURY AKA HELL’S ISLAND

Video Production • Education and Training courses • Hi and Lo Band Facilities Hire •

COMING SOON

MY ARBALL’S “ RETURN HOME” LOUISE BROOKS IN “ PANDORAS BOX” IAN PRINGLE'S “THE PRISONER OF ST PETERSBERB” U RBA N FILM 89

M IDDLE 306

13 Victoria Street Fitzroy Victoria Telephone (03) 419 5111 Facsimile (03) 419 1404

EYE

R E L E A S IN G S T R E E T

V IC T O R IA (03)

O pen C hannel C o - operative L td

1669

G L E N R O Y

3046

(03)

306

6443

BANG IN THE MIDDLE OF ST KILDA...WE TOO HAVE AN ANNUAL FILM FESTIVAL

REQUIRE FUNDING FOR

THE VERY BEST OF AUSTRALIAN SHORTS, D0C0S AND EXPERIMENTAL WORK

YOUR NEXT FILM PROJECT

o• Independent Producer offers professional represent* ation. Project m ay be at concept, treatment or developed script stage. Affiliations with Japanese and American independent film companies. Confidentiality assured. N o client too small.

KILDA

SEA

FESTIVAL

NATIONAL THEATRE BARKLY STREET ST KILDA MELBOURNE AUSTRALIA WEDNESDAY 2 - SATURDAY 5 MAY 1990

TELEPHONE (06) 251 6807

VEE

FILM

IF YOU CAN'T BE OVER THERE - BE HERE!!

FILMS

A U S T R A L I A N FI LM C R E W S S L O C A T I O N S E R V I C E S “D O N ’T S H O O T Y O U R B U D G E T

S H O O T IN Q U E E N S L A N D ”

Australia-uuide P ro d u c tio n S £ a ff and C re w L is tin g s , Eq u ip m e n t R e n ta l, L o c a tio n S u rv e y s, T r a n s p o r t and A cco m m o d a tio n . Full S t a t e and L o ca l G o v e rn m e n t C o -o p e ra tio n . A u s t r a lia ’s L a r g e s t and B e s t Film S tu d io F a c ilitie s .

AUSCREW TELEPHONE (075) 53 1011

• CINEMA

PAPERS

ONE

CALL

DOES

ALL

FACSIMILE (075) 53 22 8 0

Going Forward or Going Backward? Conversations with R od H ailey on cinema technology, the constraints of business on cinema image quality, and about having your eyeballs sucked out.

o d e r i c k h a i l e y is the regional en g in eer for G reater U nion Village Technology, and along with his counterpart from Great er Union, Bob Lucas, is responsible for the evaluation and installa tion of the theatre projection and sound equipm ent for their fifty plus theatres across Victoria. Having come from Village, Hailey’s ac count naturally reflects his experiences there.

Four-Walled Monsters Cinemagoing habits have changed. Unless you confine yourself to the AFI theatres, the Valhallas and their like, you will have experi enced the ‘pleasures’ of a multiplex. Rod Hailey tells a story of an aggravated cinema patron who rang up to complain that he had been going to their local cinema and was upset by the limited choice of only two theatres. He had been to a m ultiplex and liked to be able to stand there, stunned by the range of films. He angrily wanted to know when this choice would be offered him at his local shopping centre. T h at’s the im pact of the multiplex. In a consum er society, two choices are simply n o t enough. People want cinemas uear where we live, and part of their suburban shopping centre, so that they can drift from shopping to the movies and park just five m inutes away. Cinemas are now being built at a rate that reflects the rise in at tendances worldwide. But the construction and installation of equip m ent are creating problem s for cinema engineers. First, is it correct to assume that the new cinemas will be fitted with the best and latest projection and sound equipm ent? Second, is THX, Lucasfilm’s initiative to improve the presentation of all features, considered to be the standard to which they should all con form? The answers, as Hailey explains, are “Yes” and “Maybe”:

THX, The Theatre After Star Wars went into release in the U.S., producer-director George Lucas was extremely disappointed by the poor quality of the projected image and sound in many of the theatres he visited. With the movie’s success and the ensuing financial clout, he resolved to address the problem. His engineering departm ent then developed what was called TAP, the Theatre Alignment Program, whereby con tracted technicians visited all the theatres intending to run a Lucas or Spielberg movie and reported back on the problems. They did, in fact, deny a 70mm release to those theatres that were thought to be of a poor standard. Hailey: The stories that the technicians told were horrific. They found mirrors that were years old, xenons way out of alignment, old valve systems, lowpowered amps, magnetic heads that hadn’t been cleaned in years ... standards that were below what you found in a drive-in! Lucas was concerned that the hundreds of hours and millions of dollars spent on making films were being wasted, and that the industry should get off its tail and do something ab ou t it.

As always, the problems come back to money and to the foresight of theatre m anagement. Hailey:

We have really just got the city complex [Vil lage, Melbourne] up and running. We con sider it to be state of the art, especially in audio, where we have followed Lucasfilm’s THX standards. From there we spread into the multiplex operations. The first was Knox, where four of the ten theatres are set for THX sound. The reason that the other theatres don’t have THX is primarily cost-related. In a multiplex, the expense of the building is a very important factor.

After Knox, THX was considered too expensive for the multiplexes, a decision Hailey obviously doesn ’t share, believing that there should be at least two theatres in each complex set up for THX (particularly for the larger auditorium s).

It’s all right to have the architect design a cinema to how the theatre operator wants it to look like - and it’s his money after all - but from the technical side you can be left with a four-walled shell that is a monster to drag into alignment visually and aurally. With the Village complex in the city, the building was underway when Tom Holman from Lucasfilm came out and conducted a seminar at the Russell Cinema. When I heard the potential of what they were offering, I knew that this is what the cinemas of today should be giving the public. We approached Tom Holman for information and the process was then bounced forward by our managing director, Graham Burke, who went to the States and visited the Skywalker Ranch at San Francisco. He was impressed by the system and his message came back to look at it. I was fortunate in having done some groundwork. It was decided to make Cinema One in the city a THX house. I felt that if it worked there, it would be just as good in all three theatres. So we set them all up for the possibility of THX sound, and they were finished, as far as their sound systems, noise levels and acoustics, to that standard.

ROD HAILEY R E G IO N A L E N G IN E E R FO R G R EA TER U N I O N V IL L A G E T E C H N O L O G Y .

This move must have been personally satisfying to Hailey and his team as it was onlytwo m onths later, after everyone had seen the success of Cinema One, that they were told to set up the others as THX. THX (nam ed after Lucas’ first sci-fi feature, THX-1138) is a specification for the whole environm ent of the cinema. It is a CINEMA

PAPERS

7 9 • 55

Technicalities

standard that Lucas uses in conjunction with Dolby laboratories and ensures that the sound that you are hearing is as close as possible to the sound in the recording theatre. Although it allows some devia tion, it has to be rigorously applied. THX is really a stamp of approval, an endorsem ent to say that you have passed the THX criteria. You are then given a licence to operate as THX for three years for a fee. T hat fee gives you all the technical back-up, the logos and the advertising material. Every six m onths there is a check on the cinem a to see that it is m aintaining the standard, and that inform ation goes back to Lucasfilm. If it passes their checks, you are endorsed for a fu rther period. Hailey explains what the testing process involves: We bought from Lucasfilm a very expensive [more than $10,500] ana lyzer called an IVIEPC-40, to which they have added a minicomputer. This gives you their testing program for THX. You can do any kind of theatre with this unit, but it is optimized for THX. You then dump all the information on to a disc that is sent back to Lucasfilm, which uses its analyzer to detect problem areas and tell us to address them. I have visited Skywalker Ranch and, compared to their system, I’d say we were within 95 per cent o f the original. We’re very close, and we’ve done it by spending a lot of money. I believe that THX is a definite boon for Village. There is a lot of oneupmanship involved and there are people who think it’s all a lot of baloney. The fact that we were the first may be part of the reaction.

Great Expectations Hailey becomes m ore passionate when talking about the right of filmmakers to see their work presented properly. His voice rises as he admits that m aintaining the standard is n o t easy: It is tough! But when we talk to the guys in the industry, Dick Leathers at Adab, Roger Savage at Soundfirm and Les Mackenzie at Colorfilm, THX gives them only what they have a right to expect. Why should they spend coundess hours mixing, dubbing and re-recording to get a result that falls apart in the theatre?

Roger Savage’s work is som ething Hailey feels particularly proud to be involved with. Savage has a THX licence for his mixing suite and he also uses Village theatres so that he try out the mixed sound in a big theatre environm ent. But does a norm al Dolby mix sound better in THX theatre? Not always, as Hailey explains: THX is a pretty stringent requirement for recording and reproduction. So if you do a mix and it doesn’t sound right on a wide-range sound system such as THX, it might play well on one of the older cinema systems that are using old speakers and amps. THX can pick up inherent fault in dubbing and mixing, and dtere have been directors and sound recordists who have turned their noses up at it because, and I hate to say it, their recording wasn’t right. It may have been okay for a normal cinema, but for our wide range ones ... In the city, we have a situation where we have purchased another set of Dolby equalizer cards so that we can remove the house cards, put them aside and give them the three cards and say, ‘Play with it and line it up for yourself and make it sound like you want it to. ’ At the end o f that time, we put our EQ cards back to the standard that Dolby and Lucasfilm say is correct. There is no wide deviation between Dolby and THX. Dolby has specific requirements which we follow rigorously. THX is an extension o f that which allows the film to be played even better. Using modern wide-range speaker systems, it allows a film to be played louder, with flatter frequency response, cleaner sound and with better dispersion as far as high frequencies go. 56

• CINEMA

PAPERS

DolbySR T here was a well-attended Australian Audio Engineering Society seminar last year where they brought outT om Holm an from Lucasfilm and loan Allen from Dolby Laboratories. T he presentation was pri marily a paper on the history of stereo sound on film, starting from when Blumline was working on stereo soundtracks, through to CinemaScope with four-track m agnetic sound, then to 70mm Dolby A stereo and finally to Dolby Lab’s latest release, Dolby SR. T he results surprised many people. Hailey: The examples of SR were so stunning that people came up and said, ‘It can’t be optical. You must be playing off digital!’ We said, ‘No, take a look in the box and you will see a piece o f 35 mm film with an optical soundtrack running through the projector.’ It was that good, and the feedback we had was tremendous. It confirmed what the industry can do in sound reproduction, from the perspective o f the audience’s re sponse. The standards are achievable here and we seem to get it right with films like Crocodile Dundee, The Fringe Dwellers and, more recent, The Delinquents We do have the ability. Actually, a lot of the problems we see are related to the printing part o f the process. I despair sometimes wadi the American material. Some of their prints fall apart on the screen focus-wise.

In a Recycled Bin Near You T hrough the Theatre Alignm ent Program , there is the opportunity for the projection staff to feed inform ation about specific failings in the .quality of prints back to Lucasfilm. T hat is then passed on to laboratories. But one of the biggest problem s the theatres are seeing is n o t one that will be easily rectified. It relates directly to the trend to “splash release”. Com pared to only a few years ago, films are now on m uch shorter release, six-to-eight weeks is an average, with m ajor features like Batman running twelve weeks. T he film is then tu rned over to the video m arket and the prints are ju nked. With this “splash release” form at, the idea is to g et the m axim um num ber o f prints o ut simultaneously. T hat requires the laboratories to ru n their p rin ting

" A u s tra lia n p rin ts a re o f a b e tte r q u a lity th a n m o s t A m e ric a n p rin ts and c e rta in ly b e tte r th a n a n y o f th e re c o n d itio n e d o n e s . W e t a k e m o re c a re in A u s tra lia and I re a lly h a v e h igh p ra is e f o r th e p e o p le a t A tla b a n d C o lo rfilm and th e o th e r la b s d o in g r e le a s e p rin ts . T e c h n ic a lly , no o n e ca n sh o w u s a n y th in g o u t h ere, in re g a rd to c in e m a o p e ra tio n o r th e p ro d u ctio n s id e .”

m achines non-stop, putting a com m ercial pressure on quality con trol. Com bine this with the tren d to bigger and bigger screens in auditorium s o f existing size, w here you need short-focal length lenses, and the image m agnification over a short viewing distance becom es huge. If there is any blem ish related to the p rinting quality, you are going to see it m agnified up to 20,000 times. Hailey thinks this puts the pressure back on the industry to improve positive print stocks, and thinks th at the majority o f the com plaints are the result of n o t enough attention being paid to quality in the printing stage. Taking Hailey’s exam ple of Knox as an average multiplex, of the ten cinemas, four have large screens with projectors requiring m edium to short focal-length lenses where focus is critical. T he other six have small screens with longer focal-length lenses were the depth o f focus is n o t a problem . In the city com plex, one o f the big theatres has very short focal-length lenses, blowing up to a very big screen, 15m by 7.5m high. As Hailey says, “T he film only has to breathe in the gate and we have serious focus problem s.” Focus has becom e a constant problem . T he reason is one that most cinem agoers would never be aware of: namely, of having the prints from the A m erican “splash release” retu rn ed to the laborato ries for repair and reconditioning, and then being sent out to other m arkets such as Australia. Unlike a new (and expensive) print, these reconditioned prints cause focus problem s. Hailey is sure that, whatever they are doing to them in the reconditioning process is degrading the image and the stability of the print as it runs through the projector. These prints flop in and out of focus, and they flutter badly in the gate. We know it’s not the projectors and the result is an unaccept able image on the screen. The projectionist just can’t do anything.

W hat Hailey knows about the process involves ultrasonic clean ing, and then coating the film with a chemical that acts like the fluid in a liquid gate, filling the scratches in the em ulsion and on the base. He admits that, Some o f them come up quite well, but the image on others falls apart and drive us nuts. The film bookers can’t understand what the problem is, but it must be something that happens to the base that makes it unstable. You can go into a theatre and it’s weaving between the platter and the projector, which is trying to plane this twisted and buckled film flat in the gate. When it does hold it flat, the image in the light path shifts, and you can look in the gate and see it breathing in and out. The other problem with large screens is that with the high-light sources (4000w xenon lamps) there is a heat problem, especially on a platter that is running for two hours. Couple this with the reduced projection staff, where the guy is moving around and can’t check each one all the time, there is nothing you can do. The poor paying public gets their eyeballs sucked out. In the past six months, we seem to have had some improvement but I don’t know yet if it’s because the distributors are bringing in better prints. But I know that the Americans recognize there is a big problem and maybe they are doing something about it. I’ve talked to people in production who have had feedback from release houses, and I’ve talked to projectionists in America who have had exactly the same experiences. Another aspect may be that we are bringing negs in and printing them in Australia. These Australian prints are of a better quality than most American prints and certainly better than any o f the reconditioned ones. We take more care in Australia and I really have high praise for the “Technicalities” welcomes any information readers might have to offer regarding the production side o f the industry. Please write to: “Techni calities”, MTV Publishing, 43 Charles Street, Abbotsford, 3067, Victoria; or information can be faxed to (03) .427 9255.

people at Adab and Colorfilm and the other labs doing release prints. Technically, no one can show us anything out here, in regard to cinema operation or the production side. I have the utmost praise for our industry; the guys here are a dedicated bunch.

The Light at the End ... A nother factor that affects the screen image is the colour tem pera ture of the light source. With the move from carbon-rod arc lights to the enclosed xenon lamps (called initially, with a touch of derision, “the arc in a bottle”) , they are now ju st part of the low-maintenance and autom ated projection booth, with all the advertisements, trailers and feature assembled on a large, continuous platter. Hailey tells the story of working with P eter Weir on the release of Dead Poets Society. Peter was being very exact about the projection colour temperature so that the colours were accurate to the landscape and the period o f the year when he shot it. In our initial release, he was particular that we got it right, and fortunately we did. But we had to bring things back up. to standard that had slipped slightly. It was mostly alignment: all xenon bulbs have colour temperature differences from cold white to warm white, but the biggest factors are the mirrors. Mirrors are batch made and when you look at the cold light [dichroic] mirrors that are used nowadays, they can have varying colours in the coatings. I’ve seen three new mirrors from the same company: one was green white, one was blue white and one was pink white. All you can do is use a colour temperature meter, or more usually show a director the film with each o f them and ask which he prefers. One of the restraints is that management usually doesn’t want to go changing bulbs and mirrors. A mirror costs about $1800 and a 4000w bulb costs almost $2000. It is a lot of money and we know we don’t have that problem alone. It’s the same for GU and Hoyts. I believe that you must keep the quality to the best you can get, or even stretch a little further. The public deserves it. There is too much competition and we are saying to the public go out and look at our big screens, hear our great sound. We have to allow them to see the difference that a good 70mm print makes with the aural spread of the discrete soundtracks. On the 70mm print o f the release o f Lethal Weapon, I can remember there was a darn dog barking on the right-hand channel. It was so real that you would almost shout, “Tell someone to shut that dog up!” And in the Return of the Jedi, when Luke is fighting with his father and he throws his light sabre to the right, your head was dragged around to follow the sound out the exit doorway. 70mm has that advantage. SR is getting there, but can’t quite achieve the channel separation. I believe we should be trying td give the public that kind o f experience. But it all revolves around the high cost of bringing 70mm prints into the country. Exhibitors have to look at the viability and, when they can’t afford it, it’s 35mm.

Hailey believes that as an industry we have to continue cultivating the desire to go to the movies and encourage audiences to appreciate 70mm releases. He feels that, You will only do that by giving them what they want to see and hear. And although I shudder at the technical problems the big screens give us, if you are going to compete with television, home video and the domestic surround-sound devices, you have to give the public good brightly-lit pictures and great sound. It’s the only way. It is the paradox o f being in the dark in the cinema: there is intimacy and a sharing o f the experience with an audience around you. You can’t achieve that in your lounge room because o f the familiarity of the room and the distractions of the kettle whisding in the kitchen or the dog that really is barking outside the back door. I still get a real buzz out o f sitting in an audience. ■ CINEMA

PAPERS

• 57

C R I T I C S '

AN D

B E S T

W O R S T

A PANEL OF FILM REVIEWERS HAS RATED TWELVE OF THE LATEST RELEASES ON A SCALE OF 0 TO 10, THE LATTER BEING THE OPTIMUM

CAM ILLE CLAUDEL

EN EM IES, A LO V E S T O R Y

Paul

runo

üytten

azu r sk y

Bill Collins

Jo h n Flaus

Sandra Hall

Paul Harris

Ivan H utchinson

8 -

Stan Jam es

N eiljillett

Adrian Martin

A drian M artin

Scott Murray

Mike van Niekerk

Tom Ryan

David Stratton

Peter Thom pson

Peter T hom pson

Evan Williams

THE C O O K THE T H IE F ...

THE FA B U LO U S B A K ER B O YS

P eter

Steve K oves

reenaw ay

Bill Collins

Jo h n Flaus

Sandra Hall

Paul Harris

Ivan H utchinson

Stan Jam es

RATING (A DASH MEANS NOT SEEN). THE CRITICS ARE: BILL COLLINS

N eiljillett

(CHANNEL 10; THE DAILY MIRROR, SYDNEY); JOHN FLAUS (3RRR);

Adrian Martin

Adrian M artin

Scott Murray

SANDRA HALL [THEBULLETIN, SYDNEY); PAUL HARRIS (3LO; "E G ", THE

AGE; MELBOURNE); IVAN HUTCHINSON (SEVEN NETWORK; THE SUN, MELBOURNE); STAN JAMES [THE ADELAIDE ADVERTISER); NEIL JILLETT

[THE AGE); ADRIAN MARTIN [TENSION, MELBOURNE); SCOTT MURRAY;

Mike van Niekerk

Tom Ryan

David Stratton

Peter Thom pson

Evan Williams

MIKE VAN NIEKERK [THE WEST AUSTRALIAN); TOM RYAN (3LO; THE

SUNDAY AGE, MELBOURNE); DAVID STRATTON [VARIETY; SBS); PETER

D R IV IN G M ISS D A ISY

G LO R Y

ruce

er esfo r d

dw ard

ic k

THOMPSON [SUNDAY; THE SUNDAY AGE); AND EVAN WILLIAMS [THE

AUSTRALIAN, SYDNEY).

BRUCE BERESFORD'S BEST O SCAR-W INNING DRIVING M ISS DAISY: SCORES RANGE FROM 1 - 9, WITH AN AVERAGE OF 6.5.

• CINEMA

PAPERS

Bill Collins

Jo h n Flaus

Sandra Hall

Paul Harris

Ivan H utchinson

Stan Jam es

N eiljillett

A drian Martin

Adrian M artin

Scott Murray

Mike van Niekerk

Tom Ryan

David Stratton

Peter T hom pson

Evan Williams

6 —

HENRYY

L O O K W H O 'S T A L K IN G

Ke n n e t h B r a n a g h

A my H

SOUNDTRACKS

ecke r u n g

NEW & IM 8IAL SIIMTIACK l E C I I I I M S FIIM I I I LAUE IANEE

Bill Collins

John Flaus

J o h n Flaus

Sandra Hall

Paul Harris

Ivan H utchinson

Stan Jam es

NeilJillett

N eilJillett

Adrian Martin

—

Adrian Martin

Scott Murray

Mike van Niekerk

Tom Ryan

David Stratton

Peter T hom pson

Peter Thom pson

Evan Williams

1990 Oscar W inner - B est Score and Song

Little Mermaid • Allan Menkin • CD $29.99 Fabulous Baker Boys • Dave Grusin c CD $29.99 Bom on the Fourth ofJuly • John Williams • CD $26.99 Enemies - A Love Story • Maurice Jarre • CD $29.99 Glory • James H orner • CD $26.99 Steel Magnolia’s • G eorges D elerue • CD $26.99 Mahabharata • T elevision • CD $26.99 The Music Teacher • Fabulous Classical Music • CD $28.00 Stanley and Iris • new John Williams score • CD $29.99 Masada • Gerry Goldsmith - reissue • CD $29.99 Dracula • John Williams - reissue • CD $29.99 N ew series o f MGM soundtracks - CD, Cassette and LP - from $14.99 includes

Ryan’s Daughter, Dr. Zhivago, Singing in die Rain -

Easter Parade, Gigi, An American in Paris, El Cid. THE H O N E Y M O O N KILLERS

S H IR L E Y V A L E N T IN E

L eo nard K a st le

L ew is G ilb e r t

READINGS«SOUTH YflBBfl

Bill Collins

John Flaus

Jo h n Flaus

Sandra Hall

Paul Harris

Ivan H utchinson

Stan James

Stan Jam es

NeilJillett

N eilJillett

Adrian Martin

Scott Murray

Mike van N iekerk

Mike van Niekerk

Tom Ryan

David Stratton

Peter Thom pson

Evan Williams

LET'S GET LOST

A M aher of Life A nd Death

B ruce W eber

M ic h a e l P o w el l

[ classic]

Bill Collins

John Flaus

Jo h n Flaus

8 -

Sandra Hall

Paul Harris

Ivan H utchinson

Stan James

Stan Jam es

NeilJillett

N eilJillett

Adrian Martin

Scott Murray

Mike van Niekerk

Tom Ryan

David Stratton

Peter T hom pson

P eter T hom pson

Evan Williams

—

Evan Williams

151 TIIIAK HAD • 117 1115 • H i l l / LP* / Cl* / CASSETTES 7S-75 DAVIS AVENIE • I I I 5177 • SECINIIANI LP* & CASSETTES S i l LYGIN STIEET CAILTIN • 147 7471 Z U GLENFEIIIE H A I MALVEIN • 511 1152 711 ILENFEIIIE H A I lAWTHIN • 811 1117 MAIL I H E I • P .I.H X 414 S IIT I YAHA VIC. 1141

FINANCING AUSTRALIAN FILMS The Australian Film Finance Corporation has been established to provide new impetus for the production of Australian feature films, television dramas and documentaries. In 1989-90 the FFC will aim to underpin production of approximately $100 million. The FFC has offices in Sydney and Melbourne. Investment executives in each office are available to discuss proposals for funding. The FFC welcomes funding proposals from the industry. Guidelines and application forms are available at the Sydney and Melbourne offices.

THE AUSTRALIAN FILM FINANCE CORPORATION PTY. LIMITED (Incorporated in A.C.T.)

SYDNEYS Level 6, 1 Pacific Highway, North Sydney, NSW 2060. Telephone (02) 956 2555. Toll free: (008) 251 061. Fax (02) 954 4253.

MELBOURNE: 11th Floor, 432 St Kilda Road, Melbourne, VIC 3004 1 0

Telephone (03) 823 4111. Toll free: (008) 333 655. Fax (02) 820 2663.

CINEMA

PAPERS

7 9

> 59

THIS ISSUE: H E N R Y V , D R I V I N G M I S S D A I S Y , BEYO ND

EL R O C C O , R A W

NERVE

AND

BLO O D M O O N .

H E N R Y V (K E N N E T H B R A N A G H ) , O N H IS H O R S E , LE A D S H IS B A N D O F B R O TH ER S IN BATTLE. "T H E G R E A T N E S S O F G R E A T W O R K S N EE D S T O BE TESTED IN S U C C E E D IN G G E N E R A T IO N S . TH IS, W IT H S O M E ECLAT, IS W H A T B R A N A G H H A S D O N E IN HEN R Y V ."

HENRY V BRIAN

MCFARLANE

NE DOESN’T NEED THINK OF Kenneth

Branagh’s new film version of Henry Vas a remake in the way that Bzg was a re-make of Vice Versa or John Byrum’s The Razor’s Edge was are-make of Edmund Goulding’s 1947 film. Popu lar novels, plays and original screenplays: all these are susceptible to the idea of the re-make, but curiously Shakespeare seems outside such a cate gorization. There is a sense in which the finest dramatic talents of their time ought to be measur ing themselves against what Shakespeare offers, that every new screen version offers a kind of contemporary commentary on what has long since passed into the common cultural heritage. The 1944 Olivier film, which has also passed into the cultural heritage, obviously hangs as a spectre over any succeeding film version of Henry V. Once one gets over the awkward stuff about why Henry and his forces should be in France in the first place, it is possible to see the rest of the play as a hymn to British courage and solidarity. Certainly, Olivier’s beautiful and romantic war

time film, made at the instigation of the Ministry of Information, subscribed to such a view and the result was one of the great patriotic texts of the century. At the time of its making, England was literally embattled and Henry’s “happy few”, his “band of brothers”, could easily be read as a metaphor for an England imperilled in 1944. Whether some essence of “Englishness” is imper illed in the Thatcherite England of 1990 is an other, more problematic, issue, though one many would have no trouble asserting. The point is two-fold: inevitably a new film reading of Henry V will be compared with the Olivier version, and, in the case of many older viewers, not to the advantage of the new film. This may be partly a matter of the sheer conservatism that tends to believe that what was good and old must be better than what is new. It may also be to do with the second point to be made here: that is, one must take into account the different politicalsocial-cultural climates in which the two films - 45 years apart - were made. The Olivier film, if appearing for the first time today, might well appear jingoistic; Branagh’s film, with its often graphic stress on the physical horrors of war, CINEMA

PAPERS

• 61

might well have been seen as dangerous in terms of 1944 public morale. They are, that is, both films of their times, and Branagh is on record as seek ing to reclaim the Shakespearean text from its World War II mythology. But the Olivier film came first. Speaking as one who has seen it only twice, once in 1968 and again last year, I have to say that I find Branagh’s film haunted by the ghosts of Olivier’s at every turn. Will the flight of arrows from the British bows describe the same graceful parabola? No, they don’t: this time they look more like sleety rain. Will the “little touch of Harry in the night” be done with the same heart-stopping regard for a leader who has almost no resources left than the courage and devotion of his band of brothers? Yes, it strikingly recalls the earlier rendering of the scene. Can Emma Thompson and Geraldine McEwan, as Princess Katherine and her (more or less) English-speaking lady-in-waiting, lay the ghosts of Renee Asherson and Ivy St Helier, or Richard Easton, Robert Stephens, Christopher Ravenscroft and Judi Dench, as the Constable of France, Pistol, the Herald, Mountjoy and Misstress Quickly, lay those of Leo Genn, Robert Newton, Ralph Truman and Fredajackson? The answer, variable across so large a cast, is, in gen eral, ‘Yes, they can”, but there is a sense of their having to work at it. Those earlier players were so vivid and so varied that, in one’s memory, they cast long shadows over the new interpreters, but the latter, who know how to speak Shakespearean verse and made it sound like conversation, even tually - some more than others - step out of the shadows of their notable precursors. Judi Dench, at least, is as fine a bouncing, humane Mistress Quickly as one could imagine and her report of Falstaff s death is as moving as Margaret Ruther ford’s in Welles’ Chimes at Midnight. While writing about the cast, it is worth not ing that the film is full of sensationally good per formances right down the line. Branagh has gath ered together not only those noted above but H E N R Y V W O O S P R IN C E S S K A T H E R IN E ( E M M A T H O M P S O N ). HENRY V.

• CINEMA

PAPERS

such other major British stage stars as Paul Sco field (King of France), Ian Holm (Fluellen), Alec McCowen (Ely) and Brian Blessed (Exeter), who bring individuality and authority to their brief scenes. But it is on Branagh’s own role, his interpre tation of the warrior king, that the film must finally rest, and it is with relief and gratitude that one records his near-triumph in shaking himself free from the ghost of his great predecessor. His initially somewhat passive, boyish demeanour acquires a dangerous glint as he responds to the Dauphin’s insolent gift of tennis balls. If it seemed at first that he could not quite live up to the huge silhouette in which he enters the dusty court, this impression is quickly erased, and his dealings with the three traitors - Grey, Scroop and Cam bridge - confirm one’s sense that here is a mon arch to be reckoned with. If he is a less romantic, less lightsome Henry than Olivier was, he is á more dangerous figure for more cynical times. The stirring speeches - “Once more unto the breach ...” and the St Crispin’s Day aria - do their inspiriting work with a passion that grows as we watch Henry warm to his task. The elements of the bully boy carried away by his own rhetoric, the football coach rousing the dispirited followers to perilous challenges, are subsumed into a moving truth about the nature of heroism in the face of improbable odds. Branagh, at 28, has achieved so much already on stage (memorably as Henry at Stratford in 1984, for instance; as Jimmy Porter for his own Renaissance Theatre Company), on film and television, and as author of volume one of his autobiography, that he comes to the film role with a status comparable to Olivier’s when he, at 36, made his film. If the knives are out, as they seemed last year in London to be, waiting for him to trip, they will have to wait longer to strike. At the Olivier Memorial Service (20/10/89), Alec Guinness made oblique reference perhaps to Branagh when he spoke of the folly of talking of “another Olivier” (whose own voice, from the soundtrack of Henry V, was heard in Westminster Abbey, enshrining its mythological status as it

were). It is folly. Branagh’s Henry offers a differ ent reading of the role, just as his film offers a harsher, muddier reading of the play. This is nowhere better seen in the battle se quences which begin with an urgent synecdoche of preparations (horses’ hooves pawing the mud, arrows being fitted to bows) and then give way to more violent metonymies of death, blood, fero cious blows and moments of sharp poignancy. There is a mixture of balletic beauty and horrify ing immediacy in the conduct of the battle, sharply punctuated with moments of piercing human suffering. In this respect, one recalls especially the King’s cry of “I was not angry since I came to France/Until this in stan t...” as he discovers the death of young boys, or his embracing, in tears, of Fluellen with “I am Welsh you know. ” The whole Agincourt sequence is brilliantly edited to juxta pose the personal and the corporate, the touch ing close-up and the Breughelian activity of bat tlefield long shots. Branagh not only produces, directs and stars but is also author of the screenplay. Here his intel ligence is seen to impressive effect: he knows how to trim those long and, in truth, tedious speeches from the Archbishops’ sophistical warranty for the invasion of France; more telling still is the way in which he draws on the two earlier plays, Henry IVPart 1 and Part 2. As Falstaff lies dying, a voice over recalls that “we have heard the chimes at midnight” (actually Justice Shallow’s words in Part 2 but attributed here, quite properly, to Falstaff), and, as the low-life characters gather round his bed, there is a brief shot of a blankly affectless King saying, “I know thee not old man.” The play-acting from Part 1 in which Prince Hal warns Falstaff that he will banish him when the time is ripe (“I do, I will”) , and Hal’s recollection of a jest about hangmen with Bardolph from Part 1 as Bardolph hangs from a tree in France, pun ished for robbing a church, are further examples of the skilful culling of salient moments from the two earlier plays. Apart from enriching the tex tures of the film by giving a sense of a world that’s been left behind, these brief inserts also provide a persuasive background for the purposeful Henry V that Branagh presents. He was always, that is, a man who knew his business. Given the nature of his con struction - of plays that leap from place to place, sometimes cover ing half the known world, and from time to time - and given the wonderful concreteness, the pictorialism of his language, it seems to me beyond question that Shakespeare would have fallen rapturously on the possibilities of the screen. The screen has too often been unduly decorous in dealing with him. The excep tions stick in the mind: Welles’ Othello and Chimes at Midnight, Polanski’s Macbeth, and Olivier’s Henry Land Richard III. In a rich culture, one would expect that there might be some conver gence among the arts, artists in one medium inspired by work in another. Kenneth Branagh’s film belongs in this context: he is not daunted by Shakespeare but clearly inspired by him. Not everything works: the Chorus figure (Derek Jacobi) in modern dress, presumably to underline the film’s contempo rary relevance, jars our imagina

tive involvement rather than directing it; too much of the film looks murky (perhaps in the interests of the war-is-hell ideology, but inappro priate for lighter and more heroic moments); and the surprising sombreness of the ending deflates the charm of Henry’s wooing of Kather ine. Not everything works, but a great deal does. Branagh has made a bold and venturesome as sault on what might have seemed scarcely the Shakespearean Play for Today. Jim Schembri’s Oscar round-up has this philistine word on the subject of Branagh’s Best Oscar nomination: ‘There should be no awards for rehashing 400 year-old plays, however clever.” (“EG”, The Age, 23 March) Given the cinema’s very brief role in the history of the arts, this seems an extraordinarily foolish remark, one which sees the arts as having nothing to do with each other and no history. The greatness of great works needs to be tested in suc ceeding generations. This, with some éclat, is what Branagh has done. HENRYV Directed by Kenneth Branagh. Producer: Bruce Sharman. Associate producer: David Parfitt. Screenplay: Kenneth Branagh. Based on the play by William Shakespeare. Director of photography: Kenneth McMil lan. Editor: Mike Bradsell. Production designer: Tim Harvey. Supervising art director: Norman Dorme. Cos tume designer: Phyllis Dalton. Composer: Patrick Doyle. Cast: Kenneth Branagh (Henry V), Derek Jacobi (Cho rus), Simon Shepherd (Gloucester), James Larkin (Bedford), Brian Blessed (Exeter), Ian Holm (Fluellen), Robert Stephens (Pistol), Robbie Coltrane (Falstaff), Judi Dench (Mistress Quickly), Paul Scofield (French King) .MichaelMaloney (Dauphin),AlecMcCowen (Ely), Christopher Ravenscroft (Mountjoy), Emma Thompson (Katherine), Geraldine McEwan (Alice). A Renaissance Films presentation, in association with the BBC and Curzon-Film Distributors. Distributor: Hoyts. 137 mins; 35 mm;. U.K. 1989.

DRIVING MISS DAISY

M IS S D A IS Y (JES SICA T A N D Y ), S E C O N D F R O M

JOHN

BRU CE B E R E S F O R D 'S DRIVING MISS DAISY.

CONOMOS

RIG H T, W ITH HER FR IEN D S A T THE A T L A N T A S Y N A G O G U E .

N MANY WAYS this admirable, old-fashioned

movie about social change, interracial friend ship and dignity is a fairly solid achievement. Driving Miss Daisy is a well-crafted, beautifully performed and written film (Alfred Uhry’s finely chisTled script glistens like a diamond in its extraordinary ability to capture fleeting and touch ing moments about black-white relations in the American South). And like the film’s sturdy three cars, which epitomize American know-how and reliability, and are commonly regarded as being impressive achievements of industrial design, so too is Driving Miss Daisy a propos of current Holly wood filmmaking. Only this time, it is Australian Bruce Beresford who is in the driver’s seat. Despite initial reservations about the film from the outset, it looked like a syrupy liberal movie with a white-meets-black-and-we-can-workit-allout storyline and, given the increasing pub licity attached to it (i.e., a star cast and a screen ad aptation of a Pulitzer-winning play with the same nam e), it had all the features of a hyped-up Oscar movie - Driving Miss Daisy is a refreshing and absorbing surprise. The three Oscars it received are well deserved, though, if truth be told, Mor gan Freeman (Pauline Kael’s 1987 question: “Is Morgan Freeman the greatest American actor?” needs to be answered) should have been up on the stage alongside with Jessica Tandy receiving an Oscar, too. And in no way underrating Beresford’s unobtrusive, subtle direction, DrivingMiss Daisy belongs to Freeman, Tandy and Uhry (like Tandy, he won an Oscar - justifiably so). Driving Miss Daisy is a poignantly observed and an incr edibly moving film about a rather odd couple. Miss Daisy Werthan (Jessica Tandy) is a

fiercely independent, 72-year-old Jewish matron who manages one day to reverse her Packard car into her neighbour’s garden. As a direct conse quence of this, and thanks to her persistent son Boolie (Dan Aykroyd), she finds herself with a chauffeur, Hoke Colburn (Morgan Freeman). At first, Miss Daisy is reluctant and too proud to have a driver, but she eventually accepts and over a twenty five-year period (1948 to 1973) a remark able friendship develops. It is a genuine friend ship premised on empathy and sincerity, a friend ship that is elastic enough to test their attitudinal and behavioural differences, and cuts across class and race. Driving Miss Daisy is a richly textured film that has much to say in an eloquent way about being a member of a minority group - be itjewish or AfroAmerican - in the racist milieu of Georgia. This racist prejudice is a source on many occasions for humour, hurt and mutual understanding - of each other’s identity, past and deep-seated val ues. The movie touches upon so many ideas and feelings that are central to racism and interracial understanding; it is pregnant with cultural and moral truths that connect with, to use novelist Ralph Ellison’s neat phrase, “the deep centres of American emotion” (Shadow and Act, 1972, p. 280). Encapsulated in the developing relation ship between Miss Daisy and Hoke is a metaphori cal expression of the intricate dynamic that has existed, and is still existing, in a symbiotic rela tionship between two minority groups. Appar ently, Uhry’s creative impulse was the attractive notion of putting together two minority figures who respond to racism in different ways. Hoke is

someone who has come to terms with being a victim of racial prejudice and Daisy is someone who has not experienced racism in any dramatic, overt manner. Woven into the film’s narrative are certain historical details that give it an aura of historical authenticity. In particular, there are two signifi cant scenes which refer to the civil rights move ment in the 1950s and ’60s: the 1958 bombing of Atlanta’s oldest Jewish synagogue (in this scene Miss Daisy is seated behind Hoke in her car on her way to the synagogue; she can’t believe that racists would want to bomb it) and the scene where Hoke is forced to listen to Dr Martin Luther King’s speech on the car radio because Miss Daisy feels uncomfortable about having Hoke with her inside the Dinkier Plaza Hotel, where King is speaking. To say that Driving Miss Daisy is blessed with an exceptional script and two seminal screen per formances is quite an understatement. Tandy is impeccably credible as the feisty, cranky eccentric in complete charge of her world. She goes from room to room in a manner befitting a benign despot. The bric-a-brac that fills her enormous house (Peterjames’ expressive photography gives the place an overwhelming sense of a warm, monied atmosphere) informs us that Miss Daisy is someone whose life is built on family pride and tradition. Her relationship with her maid, Idella (Esther Rolle), is one that is built on mutual trust, though at times Miss Daisy treats her like a daugh ter, as in the affecting scene where Miss Daisy enters the kitchen to caution Hoke and Idella against the ills of watching too much television. Both Tandy’s and Freeman’s roles are ideal for each respectiveperformer. Tandy’s immensely pliable performative skills come to the fore in so many scenes. One that stands out is where Miss

Daisy and Hoke take a refreshment break during their car trip to Mobile. She is sitting in the ear and he is standing outside, admiring the scenery. Miss Daisy tells Hoke how as a young girl in the 1880s she would travel to Mobile to visit her relatives. Her eyes stare beyond Hoke in the direction of the horizon and her finely modu lated voice, with its Southern accent, conjures a stirring scene of childhood memories. She speaks of how as a child at Mobile she tasted the water of the Gulf of Mexico. It is a very vivid image and one can almost taste the water. This idyllic scene is rudely shattered by two redneck speed cops who are suspicious of the two resting off the highway. One cop says to his friend how Miss Daisy is a Jew (she is questioned about the origins of her surname) and is probably hav ing an affair with her “nigger” employee (the dialogue is shot through with Southern preju dice). Morgan Freeman as Hoke is something to be hold. From the moment he enters the story, looking for work, to the final one, where he visits Miss Dais)' in a nursing home, he near dominates every scene. This is not to detract from Tandy’s performance, but with Freeman there is an extra dimension, a certain stoical dignity in his charac terization. Freeman’s performance resonates on so many different levels: his perpetual stoop (echoingjimmy Stewart’s gangly body) is not too dramatically obvious, it is a subtle stoop, and an appealing source of fascination. Every shuffle Hoke takes is a telling reminder of Freeman’s Afro-American peers who graced the American screen in their demeaning Uncle Tom roles or as equally stereotyped rapists. Freeman’s pursing of his lips, the pregnant pauses in his speech and the subtle hand gestures suggest that Hoke is a per son who is trying to live his life according to his

code of values. Driving Miss Daisy allows Freeman the rare op portunity to perform a character that is morally complex and not predicated on cultural and ideological stereotypes. Contrary to the well-est ablished history of Afro-American actors and actresses playing one-dimensional characters, Freeman gives a screen performance that is de monstrably linked to the small number of memo rable performances in American cinema by AfroAmerican performers: Canada Lee in Body and Soul, Ethel Waters in Member of the Wedding and Juano Hernandez in Man with a Horn are three examples that come to mind. The thing that we have to remember is that previously Afro-Ameri can performers because of lousy characteriza tions were forced to give “moments - indelible moments, created, miraculously, beyond the confines of the script; hints of reality, smuggled like contraband into a maudlin tale, and with enough force, if unleashed, to shatter the tale to fragments” (James Baldwin, The Devil Finds Work, 1978, p. 104). There is no need for Freeman to perform in such a subversive manner because Driving Miss Daisy is a gift from the Gods for an Afro-American actor. Directed by Bruce Beresford. Pro ducers: Richard D. Zanuck, Lili Fini Zanuck. Executive producer: David Brown. Screenplay: Alfred Uhry. Based on Uhry’s play. Director of photography: Peterjames. Editor: Mark Warner. Producdon designer: Bruno Rubeo. Costume designer: Elizabeth McBride. Composer: Hans Zimmer. Cast: Morgan Freeman (Hoke Colburn), Jes sica Tandy (Daisy Werthan), Dan Aykroyd (Boolie Werthan), Patti Lupone (Florine Werthan), Esther Rolle (Idella),Joann Havrilla (Miss McClatchey), William Hall jun. (Oscar), Alvin M, Sugarman (Dr Weil), Clarice F. Geigerman (Nonie), Muriel Moore (Miriam). A Zanuck Co. production. Dist: Hoyts. 99 mins. 35 mm. U.S. 1989. DRIVING MISS DAISY

RAW NERVE ADRIAN

MARTIN

S THE HISTORY of writing on film proves again and again, very few reviewers, critics or theorists have a good ear for film sound tracks - by which I mean not just the musical score, but the whole ensemble of relations be tween voice, noise, music and silence. If you are hoping to cultivate such an ear, I suggest you take a listen to Raw Nerve. For, very soon into the film, one becomes aware of a very bizarre noise: a droning track of bird calls, presumably designed to add the ambient reality of ‘outside’ to a threehanded drama that takes place mostly inside a single house. Try as you might to ignore this grating sound, its presence insists during every dramatic pause, every intense dialogue exchange, every blast of doodling jazz music. It seems, in deed, to run on continuously for the entire 90 minutes of the film. Hence, perhaps, the title Raw Nerve. The ad slick, with its tableau of lounging teens gazing defiantly into the camera, tells the truth: Raw Nerve is something like an Australian transposition of John Hughes’ The Breakfast Club. These teens are spending an intense day together not on account of school detention, but because they have broken into a high bourgeois home on Sydney’s North Shore. Like Hughes’ film, Raw Nerve moves towards the point where each teen ager, in turn, lets down his or her ‘mask’, and reveals a painful, hidden truth. The comparison between the two films more or less stops there. Unlike many American teen movies, Raw Nerve does not display much of a ‘pop’ feel, either for the contemporary culture in which these teenag ers live, or for the way the film itself might be constructed. It is brave of director Tony Wellington to have written for himself such a ‘talky’, potentially static debut feature. The film avoids this fate by knowing some of the classic ‘moves’ that are possible within this situation: using different rooms for different moods; distributing the three char acters into successive ‘twosome’ scenes; dynami cally cutting into the flow of events with sudden intrusions; having several of the characters per form elaborate ‘play acting’, dress-up rituals. In this way, the film endeavours to be always modu lating and transforming itself, its characters, and their interrelationships. John Poison’s perform ance as the working class lad Billy fits particularly well with this aspiration: he has a wiry, angular, mobile energy that flows well on screen. Beyond its interestingly needling insistence on the class division amongst the characters, Raw Nerve betrays rather conservative thematic inter ests. The ‘revelations’ that the teens eventually pour out are ho-hum affairs, revealing of only what the filmmaker regards as ‘aberrations’ of an ideal life: a mother with an extra-marital lover, a 17-year-old girl with (horror of horrors!) stretch marks. The woman’s role in all this is not promis ing. Rebecca Rigg does what she can with the part of Michelle (like Kelly Dingwall as David, she is lumped with some truly terrible dialogue). But mostly she is a male fantasy ^cf. her dress-up costume) who progresses from seeming ‘frigid’ to admitting she is a ‘bruised cherry’ (ahem!). It’s a far cry from the militant celebration of the men strual flow in that most radical of teen movies, Matthew Robbins’ The Legend of Billiefean. The charming development of Michelle’s

LEFT: E M O T IO N S ER U PT IN T O N Y W E L L IN G T O N 'S R A W

NERVE: D A V I D (K E L L Y D IN G W A L L ) , O N F L O O R , B ILLY (J O H N P O L S O N ) A N D M IC H ELLE (R E B E C C A R IG G ).

character locks into a narrative stru ctu re which is a virtual obses sion of contemporary Australian cinema, from Newsfront to Slate Wyn & Me. the two man-one woman triangle pow ered by that sleaziest of ocker questions, namely, which of the guys is going to ‘have’ the woman first. At least it can be reported in Raw Nerve’s favour that, once the burning revelations begin, the sex question is put aside for good. Indeed, the whimsical friends-again ‘life goes o n ’ ending, with its clever narrative pay-off co n cern in g stolen money, is probably the best thing in it. The limitation of Raw Nerve as a film is in dicated by that 90 min ute bird call on the soundtrack. Of course, any filmmaker or sound d esigner faced with characters stuck in one room or house has an interesting problem on their hands: what do you do with the background sound to avoid either laying on too much music or capitulating to large holes of silence? Here, a good listen to The Break fast Club is indeed instructive. One realizes very quickly that a realistic sound ambience is not the primary goal of its aural design. Rather, like in most American movies, the sound ensemble thick ens and thins, ebbs and flows, in strict accordance with the feel and flow of the drama. This is an abstract, quietly poetic, pleasingly ‘plastic’ (in the sense of ‘the plastic arts’), wholly cinematic aesthetic working at the heart of even the most seemingly naturalistic American films (like Light of Day or River’s Edge). Raw Nerve gives the occa sional sign that it is aware of these dynamics that are so central to ‘popular’ cinema. But mainly it’s just another Australian film. Directed by Tony Wellington. Producer: Michael Lynch. Associate producer: Richard Harper. Screenplay: Tony Wellington. Director of photography: Kim Batterham. Sound recordist: Noel Quinn. Editor: Marcus D’Arcy. Production designer: Judith Harvey. Composer: Dale Barlow. Cast: John Poison (Billy), Re becca Rigg (Michelle), Kelly Dingwall (David), Kate Reid (Policewoman), Sylvia Coleman (Neighbour). A Lynchpin & Tosh presentation, in association with the Australian Film Commission. Distributor: Valhalla. 85 mins. 35 mm. Australia. 1990. RAW NERVE

BEYOND EL ROCCO RAFFAELE AND

PETER

CAPUTO LAWRANCE

T AN EARLY POINT IN Beyond El Rocco, a

feature documentary on the history of jazz in Australia since the late 1950s, Don Bur rows tells the story of an unnamed, young, black American pianist hurriedly arriving to sit in with the band at the El Roccojazz Cellar after finishing his gig behind Sarah Vaughan at Chequers Nightclub. Asked what he’d like to play, he chose “Body and Soul”, which he had been playing for

KEITH H O U N S L O W P E R F O R M S A T M E L B O U R N E 'S H ISTO RIC J A Z Z CEN TRE 4 4 , C IR C A 1 9 5 8 . K E V IN L U C A S ' BEYOND EL ROCCO.

Vaughan. But on this particular night at the El Rocco, the pianist’s rendition of “Body and Soul” was so uncharacteristic of his playing at Chequers that it left Don Burrows and the rest of the band bewildered. As described by Burrows, the pianist started off by slamming the lid down over the keyboards and then quickly opening it, before half disappearing into the piano as he plucked the strings and banged the keys with his elbows. “It was like Jekyll and Hyde”, says Burrows. With Sarah Vaughan, the pianist was being what Vaughan needed, but given the opportunity at the El RoccO he was another person, someone looking for himself musically. ThisJekyll-and-Hyde description serves to il lustrate the unpredictable and improvisational atmosphere that had developed at the El Rocco, and hence to explain the attraction it held forjazz musicians at the time. Beyond this, however, that description can also stand good for the way in which the film conceives of two different camps within the jazz scene in Australia. There is what David Tolley in the film refers to as “traditional gentleman’s jazz”, and there is modern, improvi sational jazz. This looks arid sounds like a fairly familiar op position, that between the underground and the mainstream. This is articulated in the film largely through the dramatized sequences, and with a fictional narrator, Zoot Finster (Tony Barry), as he indirectly assimilates the voices of a number of jazz personalities with his own. Zoot journeys through three major periods. The first is roughly centred in the late 1950s and early ’60s, and is characterized as a period of emu lation: Joe “Be-Bop” Lane recalls having Bird’s CINEMA

PAPERS

style down pat in only 2 years; John Sangster virtually apologizes for playing jazz and not being black, but pretending to be; while the El Rocco in Sydney and Jazz Centre 44 in Melbourne tended to demand Miles Davis and John Coltrane as models for their artists. Thus, according to Zoot, the White Ivy League-style jazz musician was re placed by the Black Hipster. With his comment that “There’s no need to feel like an underdog”, only Bernie McGann doesn’t seem to fit in with the prevailing view of the time. Next, the mid-1960s to the early ’70s was a period of disintegration, alienation, withdrawal and experimentation: McGann headed into the bush for a time, practising his horn in the open spaces; the Jazz Club scene almost died out; and experimentation groups like Free Carter divided the Zoot Finster types, leaving many jazz musi cians insecure as well as alienated from the freethinking spirit of the 1960s pop scene. Yet through the mood for experimentation, artists like Phil Treloar and Roger Frampton attempted to dis cover a distinctive Australian voice, carrying this spirit over into the next period. Finally, 1973 into the ’80s was marked by rebirth. 1973 saw two significant events: the open ing of a jazz club, The Basement, at Circular Quay, and the institution of a jazz course at the Conservatorium ofN.S.W. By the late 1970s, there emerged from the Conservatorium a new breed of musicians and with them came a contemporary version of Zoots. Co-operative groups were formed to exist independently from the mainstream of jazz, and with a desire to get out from the under dog mentality, to move away from overseas mod els, and to discover this country’s influences and unique sounds. Also, early in the decade, McGann returned from the bush and formed a band, The Last Straw. In the 1980s, the jazz scene thrived, with exciting things on the horizon. And it is in this third period that Beyond El Rocco seems to place most of its weight. On the one hand, it certainly stands apart from Zoot’s mythologizing of earlier periods, and, on the other hand, the role of Zoot Finster is not only that of witness to the evolution of a tradition, but also, as one learns from the first image of Zoot in his 1940s garb, he plays the role of a detective, a man in search of something. In a way, the film is an extended version of Burrows’ pianist in search of his musical self. Yet, one cannot help but feel somewhat suspicious, for when one steps back and takes a long, hard look, it all seems to flow a litde too smoothly. Indeed, the film patterns a rather orthodox trajectory, and a rather orthodox bi-partisan conception of a musical tradition. Perhaps it is part of the genre, but the kind of genre that springs to mind isn’t part of documentary; it is more like the musical bio-pic. One thinks of films like The Five Pennies (about comet player Red Nichols) or the AlJolson Story where there is a similar kind of trajectory to that of emulation, withdrawal and rebirth. Most recent, there is a film like Bird with its bi-partisan conception of a unique individual’s talent being placed against the conventions of the prevailing form. There is a sense of another history1to be told, and Beyond El Rocco is not a film completely lack ing in this regard. Nor should its qualities be under-admired. First, it is hard to find much else which attempts to document the history of Aus tralian Jazz, despite anyone’s misgivings about it. Second, through the curious figure of Bernie McGann some form of revisionist thought about Australian Jazz is made possible. While this revi sionism is suggested in the film through the McGann figure, what is surprising is that it is not 66

• CINEMA

PAPERS

more fully and widely developed. In the three major periods that Beyond El Rocco lays out, McGann’s place within them is always uncertain: he is never quite there, always apart from what is happening around him. Yet, in another way, the film marks McGann out as an ex emplary figure, and McGann kicks off the narra tive trajectory of the film, not by playing, but by being seen packing away his instrument and heading into the streets. He indirectly leads us to Zoot Finster, who subsequendy takes us on a journey into the past. At the film’s end, on Zoot’s return to the present, we cross paths with McGann again, only this time h e’s returning to the gather ing and blows a brief solo before they all set in. Certainly, these two vignettes with McGann seem to mirror and individuate the film’s trajec tory, but they also make him a central figure in a way that is undisclosed elsewhere. In a film that continually speaks volumes about influences, it is surprising to find that more is said about McGann by what isn’t said, that the opening and closing of the film reveals a sense of an existentialist pur pose in his relation to his playing - a genuine de parture and a genuine return. BEYOND EL ROCCO Directed by Kevin Lucas. Pro ducer: Kevin Lucas. Associate producer: Aanya Whitehead. Director of photography: Simon Smith. Editor: Danny Cooper. Cast: Tony Barry (Zoot Finster). Musicians appearing include: Don Burrows Trio, Errol Buddie Quintet, Mike Nock, Bob Bertles, Bernie McGann Trio, Last Straw, Ken James Quartet, Brian Brown Quar tet, Ted Vining Trio, Dale Barlow Quartet, The Necks, Sandy Evans Quartet, Mark Simmonds Freeboppers, Paul Grobowsky Music. Production company: Lucas Produkzions, in association with Channel 4 (UK) and the AFC. Distributor: Lucas Produkzions. 100 mins. 16 mm. Australia. 1989.

BLOODMOON JIM

SCHEMBRI

L O O D M O O N is a truly memorable cine matic experience - but for all the wrong reasons. It is an unspeakably funny film, but in the saddest possible way. It is a film pro moted as a horror film, and it is for anyone with any faith left in Australian mainstream film. Bloodmoon is the worst of all possible worlds: it has the worst acting, story, dialogue, camerawork and promotional gimmick, and it is the worst possible omen for where the Australian Film Industry' is headed. Bloodmoon is so unfathomably bad it is hard to know where to begin with it, although a public burning of the film’s negative would be a good start. Bereft of originality or even the ability to copy with style, the story' in a nutshell - a kind of conglomerate of Romeo and Juliet, Halloween, Fri day the 13th, Revenge of the Nerds and The Film with No Brain - goes something like this. The woods near an all-girl Catholic school, where the inmates seem to do nothing but sing in choral choirs and flash their developing breasts at the camera, is being stalked by a psycho who likes strangling teenagers with a custom-made strand of barbed wire. The Catholic girls like to have it off in the woods with the Catholic boys from the nearby Winchester school, something frowned upon by the Head Nun. Now, the posh boys from Winchester have a running war with the working-class lads from town, known as “The Townies”. A forbidden romance blooms between one of the said Town ies and the lead Catholic girl. Sub-plots involving their romance, the iden tity of the psycho, two girls who want to cheat on

their exams, the background of the ‘mysterious’ married couple who run the school and the grow ing concern of the local policeman develop with the grace and subdety of a surgical chainsaw to build to an ‘action’ climax for which the cine matic term “truly crappy” must have been origi nally invented. The main problem with Bloodmoon is that it was made. T he second major problem is that it lacks a convincing killer who looks motivated enough to scare you. It also lacks convincing victims who look scared enough to scare you. Even in the Nightmare on Elm Street sequels, going right up to numbers 4 and 5, the makers were very careful to develop victim characters who had life, personalities and charisma, and to hire actors who could act. Thus, when they were killed, there was at least some dramatic weight to the affair. In Bloodmoon, there is an array of flat, uninter esting teenage characters who fail to raise one iota of concern from the audience. You simply couldn’t give a toss whether they live or die. And the fact that they are played by a cast of unknowns, whose acting talents certainly have an awful lot of developing to do, doesn’t help. Now, the easy way out of this would have been to contract some novel ways for these characters to die - maybe with some nice make-up effects, a dash of New Wave disembowelling or a new ap proach to dismemberment - but the film can’t even manage to do that. All one gets are a few spurts of Heinz Big Red around the neck and eyes. Stylewise, the film is totally void. The biggest indictment is its inability to master the basic rule of the Red Herring. Only two are set up - the psycho is either the nun or the sexually inade quate husband - and before long there’s no doubt who it is, hence no suspense. Visually, the film is a technical travesty. The camerawork is drab and the lighting is flat. If horror could be made as soap opera, this film is what it would look like. The film’s idea of creating a creepy mood or a threatening atmosphere is to turn the lights out and drench the film set with rain. But the biggest stylistic problem with Blood moon is the clever editing. There isn’t any. In films of this genre, editing is where the best scares come from. Carrie, Cujo, An American Werewolf in London and, more locally and relevantly, Dead Calm extract their biggest jolts from the audience with great cutting. The cleverest the editing gets in Bloodmoon is a cut from a screaming mouth in the woods to a singing mouth in the choir. Yo, brilliant. Now, none of this would be quite so bad if Bloodmoon wasn’t heralded as a major film getting a major push through a major cinema chain. But it is, which highlights a crippling anomaly of the local industry that such a bad film should get such a big push when many good films (Shame, Fran, Grievous Bodily Harm, High Tide, AStreet toDie, etc., etc.) get almost no push at all. And something must be said about the cunning way the film has been promoted. Advertisements and posters for the film dare people to survive an entire screening of the film. Half an hour before the end there is a “fright break” and those too scared to sit through the rest of it can follow the yellow streak road out of the cinema to “chicken’s corner” and get their money back. It sounds like one of those goofy scare tactics they used to use in the 1950s, which would be fine, if these were the 1950s and not the 1990s - or if the film was good enough to warrant such a brazen display of marketing bravado. As it is, the

A N U N S E E N KILLER S T A L K S L O V E R S M A R Y (H ELEN T H O M S O N ) A N D K E V IN (IA N W IL L IA M S ) IN THE W O O D S . A LEC M IL L S '

BLOODMOON.

“fright break” gimmick is nothing more than a gimmick that reeks of panic. Obviously the film is a dud, the promoters knew it, and this was one way to help fill theatres. Fortunately, Australian filmgoers are not as stupid as the promoters would like to believe. The response to the film in Melbourne and Sydney has generally been that the majority of people do leave during the “fright break”, not because they are scared, but because they are appalled. Cer tainly, the packed 7:30 p.m. screening of the film I attended in the 386-seat Cinema 4 at Melbourne ’s Village Complex in Bourke Street on Saturday 24 March 1990 was an unforgettable and hilarious cinema experience. People obviously turned up expecting to see what was advertised: a horror movie. They were in high spirits, ready for a good fright. Ten minutes into the film, people started to groan. “I thought this was meant to be a scary movie” and “nothing’s happening”were two typical comments, although the most disturbing was the guy who quipped to his girlfriend: ‘This is an Australian Movie! If I’d have known that I would’ve gone to see Tango and Cash.” Many reams of dialogue in the film - the scene between the boy and the girl at the lake, the wife berating her sexually inadequate husband, the sex scenes, anything that required a modicum of skill or wordsense —were greeted with uproari ous, hostile laughter. The only character to get a friendly peal of laughter was the small girl at the beach picnic who disobeys her mother and pours lemonade into a cup, only to spill it. The mother scolds her. “I’m

sorry” the little girl chirps cheerfully, flashing a gorgeous, natural, cheeky smile. The audience laughed loudly with her as if she and they knew something the rest of the people in the film didn’t. Her cameo was certainly the acting high light of the film. But apart from the derisory laughter, the cackles, the heckles, the fake screams, the big momen t for the audience came during the “fright break” when the killer was about to total two budding exam cheats. At least 60 per cent of the packed cinema flew bodily out of their seats and rushed for the exit, laughing, yelling, celebrating their impending refund and their emancipation from the wretched film. It looked like a scene from an Irwin Allen movie as hundreds filled the aisles and filed out. Those who remained continued to groan, and at film’s end people dashed out as the first production credit was supered onto the screen. On the way out one person was heard to quip to the ladies at the box office: “I know I stayed ’till the end, but can I have my money back anyway?” It is with films like Bloodmoon that people start spouting phrases like “it’s so bad it’s good”and “at

least it was funny” and “unintentional comedy”. To say this about a $l-a-week video is fine; to say it about the first mainstream Australian film re lease of the decade is not. The 1980s had its share of the worst Australian films ever made - Luigis Ladies, The Pirate Movie, Freedom!, Turkey Shoot, Boulevard ofBroken Dreams and Double Deal to name a few - but for a film as awful, as cliché ridden, as derivative, as unimaginative and as poorly made as Bloodmoon to be made in Australia in 1990 is a cause for national mourning. Directed by Alec Mills. Producer: Stanley O’Toole. Executive producers: Graham Burke, Greg Coote. Associate producer: David Munro. Screenplay: Robert Brennan. Director of photography: John Stokes. Sound recordist: Ian Grant. Editor: David Halliday. Composer: Brian May. Cast: Leon Lissek (Miles Shef field) , Christine Amor (Virginia Sheffield), Ian Williams (Kevin Lynch), Helen Thomson (Mary Huston), Hazel Howson (Sister Mary-Ellen), Craig Cronin (Matt Desmond), Anya Molina (Jennifer), Suzie McKenzie (Michelle), Samantha Rittson (Gretchen), Tess Pike (Kylie). Distributor: Greater Union Distributors, 100 mins. 35 mm. Australia. 1990. BLOODM OON

CINEMA

PAPERS

• 67

£ » n d

CONTINUED

JIM:

i m FROM

M PAGE

l r o

I d o n ’t think Einstein was born in Tasmania.

Fortunately, Yahoo basically said “ Fuck you” to the world and m ade his own movie. Good luck to him. I m ean, how do you figure the ‘cultural exact’ argum ent with some of the hits we ’ve had in Australia? Was Dead Poets Society cultural exact? I ’m n o t sure. It was m ade by an Australian director and an Australian cam eram an, and set in a supposedly New England boys school, that probably doesn’t exist, and was m odelled on Cranbrook in Sydney, where the director went to school. But it was a wonderful movie. Cultural exactness has nothing to do with successful and appro priate storytelling. HAL:

AUSTRALIAN

FILM

FINANCE

CORPORATION

(FFC)

How do you think the FFC is doing? We are the recipients of a large cash loan, so it is pretty easy to be the supportive o f them . But I was shocked by all the carry-on when the FFC opened up. It seem ed to be pretty vitriolic. I think the FFC is pretty efficient. T here seems to be some criticism of their scrutiny process, but you have to have some sort of scrutiny, and taking a commercial basis is entirely reasonable. It is taxpayers’ m oney and the FFC has a legitimate right to commercially scrutinize projects in the m arket place. If a producer puts up a proposal on a $1 million feature, it would be appropriate for the scrutiny to occur essentially in Australia, because th at’s where the film will be aim ed essentially. If we are talking about a $10 million film, then it’s entirely appropriate for the scrutiny to involve America as well as Australia, because th at’s where you are going to have to return the money. It seems to me unfair to cry foul if the vote goes against you. Projects need scrutiny.

JIM:

But part o f the criticism , surely, is that the FFC doesn’t have sufficiently skilled scrutineers. A G R O W I N G A N D D A N G E R O U S A T T R A C T IO N : B E L O W , A N N A (D E B O R A H U N G E R ) A N D F A C IN G P A G E , F L Y N N ( M A R K H A R M O N ) , W IT H S O M E B U N L A P C H ILD R EN . J O H N S E A L E 'S TILL THERE W AS YO U .

HAL: T he

only way you can make that assessment is on a case-by-case basis. Some of the biggest successes in Hollywood are people who have lucked into m aking what happened to be the right decision for the right project. But you can’t say we shouldn’t scrutinize projects because we can’t agree on who is going to do the assessment. Jim ’s absolutely right. We are asking millions of people to sit down and watch a film, so let’s ask some people their opinion at the start. You d o n ’t have to accept it. Part of this com plaining has to do with the ‘national living treasure’ syndrome, where some people believe they have a Godgiven right to be given money on a platter to make films. I am n o t sure any of these people can dem onstrate that they deserve that opportu nity. Nobody else in the world gets it, so why should they? It is taxpayers’ money and I would have thought that the obligation on the governm ent and the bureaucrat is to try and ensure that it is sensibly spent. What are your feelings about the principle o f the minimum 30 % [now 35%] up-front private investment? HAL: Unless som eone comes u p with a better criterion, w hat’s wrong with that?

I am just asking... HAL: I

d o n ’t think anybody has come up with a convincing argum ent that this criterion is wrong; some ju st bitch that criteria exist at all. But you ju st can’t have a criterion-less situation. T h at’s grant time, and the question then is: Who is going to give the grants?

That’s what you essentially have with the FFC’s Trust Fund. Some see it as a return to the ‘paternalism ’ o f the AFDC era. HAL: Apparently,

there was som ething like sixty scripts subm itted for the Fund. The FFC and Beyond International did some sort of sifting process and one hopes, if they were doing their jo b at all honestly, and certainly Beyond International has a big investm ent to recover, they thought bloody hard about it. You had a race with sixty people in it and five crossed the line. Well, good luck to them . To my m ind that is perfectly fair and reasonable. W hat some people are propos ing is that there n ot be a race, but that, whenever they want to w ander in, they get handed the money.

It seems like an argum ent between a race and a lottery. However, getting back to the scrutiny process, I think there is a persuasive argum ent to say that the scrutineers ought to be known to the applicant. If you go to a distributor asking for a pre-sale, you know whom you are talking to and how to slant your proposal. T here are some films out there that distributor X is ju st simply n o t going to go for, whereas distributor Yjust might. T he people the FFC goes to for opinions are pretty hardened individuals and they should be able to cope with having their names known. It’s probably a fairer way of behaving. It would remove a lot of frustration.

JIM:

My sense is not that they d o n ’t know the names, they ju st object to the principle. It’s a lot of bullshit.

HAL:

2. M C E L R O Y

& MCELROY

When last interviewed, you worked together on each project. But since them you appear to have specialized m ore as individuals. Financially it wasn’t m aking sense to both work on a particular project. So we took the conscious decision to try and enlarge our talents by doing individual projects. At the same time, each of us consults with the other quite closely on each o th e r’s projects. Hal primarily went into television, very successfully. I stayed in the feature area, less successfully. T he picture I ’m doing now is the first success I’ve had since The Year of Living Dangerously, which was the first picture I did on my own. T he reason for th at is that we had a relationship with Peter Weir, who is one of the world’s greatest directors, and it has taken a long time to find som eone of n ear similar brilliance. I ’ve found it on this one.

JIM:

Hal, why did you move to television?

HAL: A bout

ten years ago, we decided we should get to know more aboutit. Both Jim and I had worked in television years previously: Jim had started in television on In Melbourne Tonight, and I had produced commercials for it. So, it wasn’t the big change for us that it was for other people in the industry. And, somewhat foolishly and arro gantly, we believed it was going to be a lot easier than it proved to be. We spent the first two or three years ju st trying to figure out television. It is ju st as com plicated and difficult as feature films. As it turn ed out, I was one of the first feature film producers to make the move, and, with hindsight, we can say how sm art we were. But there was a fair am ount of econom ic imperative involved be cause we had ju st lost all the money we had ever made on Picnic at Hanging Rock on a laser light show. We were flat, motherless broke. We had to sell the house and everything. But necessity is the m other of invention, and we went into television at the right time. We were able to do program m es like Return to Eden on the staggeringly low budget of $2.25 million. And it’s still making us money; we get a cheque every m onth. What it taught us was that the fundam ental difference between film and television - and we always want to do both, if we can - is that the swing between loss and profit in television is pretty small, and basically negligible if you do your sums right. It is pretty hard to lose money making television and you can make quite good profits. In feature films, you can lose the lot the first weekend, or bust out and make a h un d red million dollars. O ur aim is to find a balance. We do television, which makes us regular money and keeps us working, and we do feature films which give us a fantastic blue sky. If we do it right, one m ightjust be the mega-hit that makes the kind of money you can only dream about in television. Television also keeps you honest. You are rem inded that a fair amount of filmmaking can be wanking. You d o n ’t have to have four cameras and 12 weeks shooting, with a shooting ratio of 15 to 1 and a crew of a hundred. You can actually make som ething that works for a lot less than that. And th at’s healthy. As well, you get the chance to work with people who may ultimately becom e feature filmmakers. JIM: With

television, you need to define your audience more carefully going in. T here is less of a risk. With film, there is a higher risk and a higher possible return. It is m ore of a gamble.

HAL: There

is also a disappointm ent level with television because it is so instant: it goes to air and is g one. You can spend a year or so of your life creating a wonderful mini-series and, because people are going out on one of the nights, they d o n ’t b other to watch any of it. T hat is kind of disappointing. A movie, on the o th er hand, kind o f hangs around for longer, if it is successful. It enters the consciousness m ore strongly.

Except that re-runs are reminding audiences at the moment o f Return to Eden. And Clive James spoke o f it the other night, calling it the “King o f all soaps”. JIM: Well,

it was huge in England.

HAL: And

it was a hit in France three m onths ago. Poland was huge, as were Jordan, Indonesia and Argentina - everywhere.

It is interesting that when you went into television, and it was a couple of years before Kennedy M iller, television was seen as being ‘down market’ compared to cinema. That changed over the next five years, when the mini-series were often better than the Australian film s in the cinemas. HAL: Absolutely.

I couldn’t agree more.

But now things have changed: 10BA, which funded the mim-series boom, is finished. What, then, is the future o f good drama on Australian television? JIM: Product

is still needed and good producers will still be around. Don’t forget, Australian program m es still rate better than foreign programmes. Of course, there will be some rationalization and all of us will have to lift o u r game.

HAL: The

television stations are, asjim said, going to want to keep on buying. So it is not a question of will they buy. Yes, they will. Will they be able to pay as much as they did before? No, the price has gone down. Will they buy as much as they did before? No. Will they buy from as broad a range of people? No. If they have less money to spread around, then they will be really selective about who they give it to, because they can’t afford to make a mistake. Amongst that raft of television mini-series that were made, there was some exceptional television and some terrible television. Sta tions d o n ’t want to make those mistakes again, so the people who made marginal television, or who are perceived as about to make marginal television, won’t get a shot. In the old days of 10BA, the stations m ight have said, “Sure we’ll buy it”, because they thought it would rate. Well, it did n ’t rate. I won’t quote productions, but we all know the bad ones. From now on, the television stations are going to get real tough. One of the network executives recently said that there are now only six or seven Australian producers from whom stations will be buying. Unless you are in that group, forget it. Now, I think most people can sit down and figure out who those six or seven are. You then have the situation where people who want to make something will have to form an association with one of those six or seven. T hat way they will have a shot at getting it made; if they go about it on their own, they won’t. T hat is part of a very necessary consolidation the industry has to have. Australia can’t afford 170 members of SPAA; i f sju st ludicrous. We have all to start co-operating with each other.

JIM: As

happens in America ...

Where the studios have satellites spinning around them, and around those satellites are other satellites and so on. You have to link them up to get the production made. T hat’s what should happen here much more than it does.

HAL:

What you are saying was a major part o f your SPAA address: namely, the days o f the lone independent producer are over. JIM:

Absolutely.

HAL: The

big six producers we have been talking about have enormous experience and contacts. It’s n ot so m uch the idea, but w ho’s making it that is im portant. Dead Poets Society in the hands of anyone other than Peter Weir could have been a complete disaster. Peter breathed a magical quality into it and turned the thing into a hit movie. He was the X factor for that movie. The same is true in television. T he right sort of input at the right time in the creative process can turn a n ot very good idea into something wonderful. I’ll never forget that when the Zuker and Abraham team were putting together Airplane, they went to Para CINEMA

PAPERS

• 69

m ount with the idea. Param ount loved it but was really worried about letting these relatively inexperienced people direct jt. So they hired as producer the toughest old bastard, Howard Kochi and he hired the toughest old cam eram an, Joe Biroc, who had shot Towering Inferno. Param ount stuck those two old stagers with these young turks and came up with a hit movie. In Hollywood, they always put young guys with old guys to keep each other honest. T h at’s the sort o f cross-fertilization that should occur in our industry. We actually have now stratas of experience, where some have been doing it for 25 years, and presumably have learnt something. I’m always delighted to pass on any knowledge I have; it just amazes me that nobody ever bothers to ask. LOOKING

BACK

The 1970s for McElroy and McElroy are easy for an outsider to define because you made three o f the most important Australian film s o f that decade. How do you view your achievements in the 1980s? 1980s started brilliantly with The Year of Living Dangerously. People had said that an American studio would never back an Australian feature. Well it did, and that was a great trium ph for us. The film gathered the prestige it deserved. The other highlight would be the great successes in television. Last Frontier was the first Australian-produced mini-series on Ameri can network television, and it won the year for the network. That is a very considerable success. As well, Return to Eden was hugely successful in syndication in America and all around the globe. We then did a series on it, again successfully. There was one other thing in television which I’m going to be slighdy immodest about. T here were two program m es we did - Hal did one, I the o th e r - called Ratbagsand Late Night withfono and Daño. N either worked from a ratings point of view, but they were in a way forerunners to programmes such as Fast Forward and Comedy Com pany. I’m not suggesting ours were as good a quality, but maybe they helped that whole thing off. Some of the people we engaged were Mark Mitchell - it was his first time on television - and Stephen Blackburn, the writer Geoffrey A therden and so on.

¡JÍM: The

We were truly teenagers when we were making those early movies. We have m atured a lot, but we still have a long way to go. That makes it very exciting.

HAL:

JIM: We

have today a far greater ability in recognizing what works in a story. We have improved ourselves m ore in that area than anywhere else. We are less likely to make mistakes storywise.

HAL: We

have always been perceived as businessmen and, yes, we have certainly become m ore sophisticated at the business end. But the real growth has been creatively, particularly in the story telling, story structure, story building, the im portance of casting. If your story is im portant and your casting is right, you have three-quarters of a shot at winning. JIM:

T here is also the casting off-screen.

Yes, getting the right creative elem ents together, working successfully with writers and directors. We actually had a mixed fortune in working with Peter Weir. He is one of the great directors in the world and the big plus was working on our first four films with som eone of that calibre. But we had to figure out a way of replacing him and learn some of the things that Peter did instinctively. He was bom with the skills, the bugger, whereas we have had to leam them. T hat has taken a while and we are still learning. I look back on our filmography and each produc tion has been ju st that little bit better than the previous one; we haven’t m ade the same mistakes. HAL:

Oh, I think we went sideways on a couple of occasions. And the failures were m ore often due to the concept than the execution. On some occasions we also screwed up in execution, but basically it was concepts. HAL: T hat is why we are taking m uch m ore care with the concept. After all, people make decisions to go and see movies a n d /o r watch

JIM:

• CINE MA

PAPERS

television based on a concept - they sure as hell d o n ’tread the script! And once the concept’s right, then everything else seems to fall into place. T hat’s why we have never had trouble finding finance; we have kind of gone for concepts, and, if the concept is right, people give us the money. I mean, the concept of Sex, Lies, and Videotape is terrific: a guy videotapes women talking about their sex life, but doesn’t really have sex with them. T hat is incredible, so no wonder it’s successful. JIM:

Today, a film must have a ‘must see’ quality about it.

What is the ‘must see’ quality o f Till There Was You. JIM: There

are elements of the story that have never been seen before. And the setting is an exotic, fantastic part of the world. HAL: You haven’t seen anything like this since Daktari. The natives are so black they are actually blue. And into that exotic context, you put rom ance, some laughs and a bit of action, and you have something totally different.

Given the problems you have had in replacing Peter Weir, it is interesting that you have gone for a cameraman as director. What happened is that Jo h n Seale filled two bills which are contradictory. We needed someone with an international reputa tion, on the one hand, and on the other we wanted new blood. Getting the two is like a contradiction in terms. But Jo h n was that individual and he has proved himself. It has been a marvellous experience; I trust Jo h n Seale has a similar view. He is a great director and h e ’s made a terrific film; I can see it. Jo h n is a different director to Peter, but h e ’s a very talented one. I made the right choice. The writer-director-producer relationship is the base of the creative triangle and all the other triangles come off it - you know, cameraman-editor-director and so on. These triangles are vital in any sort of film and, unless they work, the film w on’t.

JIM:

Till There Was You is a film which sits at the top end o f your twobudgets scale. JIM: T hat’s right.

It is the sort of movie that in American terms would cost $20 to $30 million. T hat’s starting to become a big-budget movie. We’re not com peting against t h e Batmans and so on, but we are com peting against, I guess, Romancing the Stone.

$13 million was our assessment of what we needed to give it the oom ph to get it on that ‘must see’ list. Conceptually it was one of those films that could be made for less, so we made a conscious decision when we developed it that this was going to be a big movie. We are developing another movie at the m om ent that Michael Thomas [ Scandal, Till There Was You\ is writing for us. It is a sciencefiction thing and it’s going to need at least $20 million to make. But we have very little doubt that we’ll be able to finance it easily because it’s such a wonderful concept. Jim is also developing another project that’s going to c o s t... HAL:

Maybe as little as $3 million. It is a little bit more than the $1.5 million we were talking about earlier, but it’s in that general cate gory. It does have international legs, but I want to keep it a really low budget because it’s a hard one. We want as m uch freedom as possible. ■

JIM:

M celroy

& M ce lroy

f i l m o g r a p h y

(All titles are features unless otherwise specified) 1974 The Cars That Ate Paris; 1975 Picnic at Hanging Rock; 1977 The Last Wave; 1978 Blue Fin; 1979 D eadline (tele-feature); 1981 A Dangerous Summer; Ratbags (13-episode television series); 1982 The Year o f Living Dangerously; Return to Eden (6-hour mini-series); 1983 Razorback; 1984 Melvin, Son o f Alvin; 1985 R em em ber Me (tele-feature); Return to Eden (22episode television series); 1986 Late N ight with Jono and Dano (live televi sion variety) ; Sharks Paradise (tele-feature) ; The Last Frontier (4-hour mini series); 1988 A Dangerous Life (6-hour mini-series); 1989 Till There Was Y o u -in post-producdon 1990; 1990 Which Way H om e (mini-series) - in preproduction.

want titles? m

C A M E R A Q U IP FILM EQUIPMENT RENTALS

OPTICAL & GRAPHIC’S SPECIALITY! With over 600 typefaces (and increasing by the month) the new imagesetter enables supply of the variety of typefaces you want. It can do wonderful things like stretching or condensing to achieve an individual look for your film.

ARRI Zeiss sachtler Cooke angënieux ronford motorola C an o n S o le Agents:

-lim /Q jie m e

Logos are a breeze as they can be scanned in if not already in the library. If you run a PC or MAC computer, supply a disc of title copy and recieve a discount off your artwork costs. 110 West Street, Crows Nest, NSW 2065 Australia Phone: (0 2 ) 9 2 2 3 1 4 4 Modem: (02) 922 7642 Fax: (02) 9 5 7 5 0 01

iAéAAéftAAÉA ELECTRIC

SHADOWS

66 TOPE ST, SOUTH MELBOURNE

VICTORIA 3205, AUSTRALIA PHONE(03)6993922 FAX(03)6962564 48 ROBERTSON QUAY, #05-04 OUB WHAREHOUSE, SINGAPORE 0923 PHONE(65)7376500 FAX(65)7333280

BOOKSHOP

Specialising in FILM, MEDIA and TV Services ■ ■ ■ ■ ■

discount fo r libraries Individual / overseas orders mail / telephone orders fre e q uarterly catalogue th e a tre and music catalogues ..... OPEN 7 DAYS A WEEK....

UPPER LEVEL BOULEVARD SHOPPING CENTRE AKUNA ST. CIVIC A C T. P.O.Box 1005 Civic Square 2608

Telephone: (062) 488352

Fax: (062) 491640

■

S U P E R B

C O M P U T E R

F IL M A N D T E L E V IS IO N

A N I M A T I O N

253a RICHARDSON STREET MIDDLE PARK VIC TELEPHONE 03 690 8857 • SUITE 2, 60 HUTT STREET ADELAIDE SA 5000 TELEPHONE 08 223 2430

CINEMA

PAPERS

Production Survey forms now adhere to a revised form at Cinema Papers regrets it cannot accept information received in a different format, as it unfortunately does not have the staff to re-process the information.

1 I

FEATU RES PRE-PRODUCTION

ALMOST ALIEN

Prod. co. Entertainment Partners Prod. James Michael Vernon Director Rolf de Heer Scriptwriter Peter Lofgren Penny Wall Assoc, producer D.O.P. Martin McGrath 1st asst director Don Cranberry Editor Pippa Anderson Casting Forcast Publ. Lionel Midford Cast [No details supplied] Synopsis: A television weather forecaster goes through a mid-life crisis when he discovers, after 18 years of marriage and two children, that his wife is an alien. BACKSTREET GENERAL

Producer

Phil Avalon [No details supplied]

UNTIL THE END OF THE WORLD

Prod, company

Road MoviesArgos Films Trans Pacific 26/3/90 ...

Dist company Production Principal Credits

Director Producers

Wim Wenders Jonathan Taplin Anatole Dauman Scriptwriters Wim Wenders Peter Carey Robby Müller D.O.P. Cast: William Hurt, Max von Sydow, Solveig Dommartin, Jeanne Moreau, Rüdiger Volger, Sam Neill, John Lurie, Chico. Synopsis: The ultimate road movie. FEATURES PRODUCTION

DEAD SLEEP

Prod, company

Village Roadshow Pictures (Aust.)

Principal Credits

Director Alec Mills Stanley O’Toole Producer Village Roadshow executive producer Vincent O ’Toole Graham Burke Exec, producers Greg Coote Scriptwriter Michael Rymer John Stokes D.O.P. Sound recordist Ian Grant David Halliday Editor Phil Warner Art director Brian May Composer P la n n in g

and Development

Judy Hamilton

Casting

B H

Prod’n runner Financial cont’ller Prod, accountant Paymaster Camera Crew

Camera operator Focus puller Clapper-loader Camera asst Key grip Asst grip Gaffer Asst gaffer Electrician

72 • C I N E M A

Rose Spokes Toni Wing Annette Bass Rebecca Coate Steve Brett

PAPERS

Gene Moller Bob Foster Paula South Damien Wyvill Kurt Olsen Bob Eden John Bryden-Brown Murray Head Darrin Ballengarry

On-set Crew

1st asst director 2nd asst director 3rd asst director Continuity Boom operator Make-up Safety officer Unit nurse Still photography Unit publicist

Bruce Redman Wade Savage Elizabeth Williams Carolina Haggstrom Basil Krivoroutchko April Ilarvic Ken McLeod Yin Mei Chee Karl Fehr Hunt Downs

Art Department

Asst art director Art dept coord. Set dresser Props buyer Standby props

Jonathon Leahy Nikki Cavanagh Nick Brunner Krisdn Reuter Peter Boundy Rodney Surawski

Wardrobe

Wardrobe super. Wardrobe asst

Helen Mains Jill Loof

Construction Department

Construct, m’ger Leading hand Carpenter Studios

Terry Mashford Pat Hogan Barry Breed Warner Roadshow

Post-production

Post-prod, super. Asst editor Editing assts

Judy Hamilton Patrick Stewart Andreya O ’Reilly Trish Graham Foley John Simpson Mixers James Currie Peter Smith Mixed at Hendon Studios Colorfilm Laboratory Lab liaison Simon Wicks Shooting stocks Eastmancolor 5296. 5247 Cast: Linda Blair (Maggie), Tony Bonner (Dr Hackett), Christine Amor (Sister Kereby), Craige Cronin (Dr Lark), Sueyan Cox (Kaye Richards), Andrew Booth (Hugh Clayton), Ian Cope (Flats man ager) , Brian Moll (Dr Shamberg), Slim de Grey (Mr McCarthy), Suzie MacKenzie (Nurse Wendy). Synopsis: none supplied. DINGO Dog o f the Desert

Prod, company

Production Budget

Gevest AustraliaAO Prods SARL (Paris) Dedra Prods (Paris) 26/3/90 ... $5.3 million

Principal Credits

Director Producers

Production Crew

Prod, manager Prod, coordinator Producer’s asst Prod, secretary Unit manager

Amanda Walton Vincent O’Toole Lyn Paetz Angela Kenny

Exec, producers Scriptwriter D.O.P. G o vern m e n t

Agency Investment

Gauge 35mm Screen ratio 1:1.85 Shooting stock Eastmancolor Cast: Noni Hazlehurst (Clare), John Hargreaves (Michael). Synopsis: An assortment of old friends converge at an isolated farm house to await the birth of a baby. An irreverent comedy of errors.

ISABELLE EBERHARDT

Prod, company Production

Les Film AramisScon Films Inti 12/2/90 ...

Principal Credits

Director Producers

Ian Pringle Daniel Scharf Jean Petit

Government Agency Investment

Production FFC Cast: Matilda May, Tcheky Karyo. Synopsis: Based on the life of Isabelle Eberhardt. [No details supplied] THE MAGIC RIDDLE

Prod. co. Yoram Gross Film Studio Dist. co. Beyond International Group Producer Yoram Gross Director Yoram Gross Scriptwriters Yoram Gross Leonard Lee John Palmer Assoc, producer Sandra Gross Music Guy Gross Storyboard Ray Nowland Prod, supervisor Jeannette Toms Prod, manager Rod Lee Length 80 minutes Gauge 35 mm Government Agency Investment

Production FFC Cast Robyn Moore, Keith Scott Synopsis: An enchanting story which borrows characters and events from popu lar fairy tales and weaves them into one charming and suspenseful tale of love, mystery and mirth.

B 1

F EATU RES P O S T - P R O D U C T 10 N

AYA

Goshu Films Ronin Films $1,800,000

Prod, company Dist. company Budget Principal Credits

Director Producers Assoc, producer Scriptwriter D.O.P. Sound recordist Editor Prod, designer

Solrun Hoaas Denise Patience Solrun Hoaas Katsuhiro Maeda Solrun Hoaas Geoff Burton Ben Osmo Stewart Young Jennie Tate

Planning and Development

Script editor Annette Blonski Casting cons. Katsuhiro Maeda (Aya) Prue’s Zoo (Aust. supports) Dialogue coach Julie Forsythe Production Crew

Prod, coordinator Jo-anne Carmichael Prod, manager Robert Kewley Prod, secretary Ros Jewell Location scout Hugh MacLaren Unit manager Leigh Ammitzbol Prod’n runner Tony Gilbert Prod, account. Simone Higginbottom Insurer Steeves Lumley Complet, guarantor Motion Picture Guarantors Legal services Roth, Warren & Menzies Camera Crew

WAITING

Prod. co. Pre-production Production Post-production

Filmside Prods-ABC 2 9 /1 /9 0 - 1/4/90 2 /4/90 - 25/5/90 2 6 /5 /9 0 - 1/11/90

Principal Credits

Director Producer Exec, producer Assoc, producer Orig. screenplay Written by Editor Prod, designer Art director

Jackie McKimmie Ross Matthews Penny Chapman Wayne Barry Jackie McKimmie Jackie McKimmie Mike Honey Murray Picknett Michelle Milgate

Planning and Development

Casting Extras casting

Liz Mullinar Irene Gaskell

Production Crew

Prod.manager Prod, coordinator Prod, secretary Location manager Unit manager

Carol Chirlian Roberta O’Leary Lisa Hawkes Paul Viney John Downie

On-set Crew

Rolf de Heer Marc Rosenberg Rolf de Heer Giorgio Draskovic Marie Osterrieth Marc Rosenberg Dennis Lenoir

Post-production

Prod’n FFC (approx. $3.4 million) Gast: Miles Davis, Colin Friels, Helen Buday, Bernadette Lafont, Joe Petruzzi. Synopsis: A chance encounter with a legend of jazz begins a life-long dream for a young boy in the outback. Years later, he journeys to Paris to revive the dream.

Continuity

Rhonda McAvoy

Focus puller Clapper-loader Camera type Key grip Asst grip Gaffer Best boy Generator op. On-set Crew

1st asst director 2nd asst director 3rd asst director Continuity Boom operator Make-up Stunts asst Unit publicist Still photography Catering Unit publicist

Sandra Carrington Roy Eagleton Susan Glavich

Construction Dept

Carpenter Set finisher

David Hawke Gary Hansch

Euan Keddie Sonya Pemberton Tony Gilbert Victoria Sullivan Gerry Nucifora Kirsten Veysey Glen Rueland Jeremy Thompson (Ronin Films) Jennifer Mitchell Rudi Renz Keith Fish Richard Payton

Art Department

Art director Asst art director Art dept, runners

Art Department

Set dresser Senior props Props buyer

Darrin Keough Kathryn Milliss ARRI BL IV Ian Benallack Arthur Manoussakis Colin Williams Greg Wilson Roby Hechenberger

Props buyer Standby props

Kris Kozlovic Merryn K. Trim Paul Macak Matthew Wilson Danae Gunn Chris James

Wardrobe

Costumier Wardrobe sup. Standby wardrobe

Lynne Heal Margot Lindsay Bronwyn Doughty

Construction

Editing assistants High Rise Flats

Post-production

Asst editor Sound editor Laboratory Lab liaison Film gauge Shooting stock Length

John Penders Peter Clancy VFL Bruce Braun 35mm Fuji 96 mins

Government Agency Investment

Development Production

ADR Sound editors Musical director Music perf. by

Laboratory Laboratory liaison Length Gauge Shooting stock

Shaun Seet Bronwyn Murphy Angus Robertson Andrew Plain Adrienne Parr Gary Warner Johnny Willsteed John Howie Peter Walsh Andrew Frost Atlab Ian Russell 90 mins 35mm Fujicolor

Film Victoria Film Victoria FFC Cast: Eri Ishida (Aya), Nicholas Eadie (Frank), Chris Haywood (Mac), Miki Oikawa (Junko), John O’Brien (Kato), Mayumi Hoskin (Nancy), Marion Heathfield (Lorna), Julie Forsythe (Mandy), Tim Robertson (Willy), Tava Straton (Tina), DJ. Foster (Barry). Synopsis: A post-war story of love, marriage and friendship, begun during the occupation of Japan, and set in 1950s and ’60s Victoria. Here the cultural shift and new pressures force three people through inevitable change.

Production AFC Cast: Richard.Roxburgh (Johnny), Ag nieszka Perepeczko (Alexandra), Tibor Gyapjas (Manny), Lynette Curran (Pearl), John Doyle (Mr Keats), Gandhi MacIn tyre (Lester), Noah Taylor (Skip),. Kris Greaves (Kogarah), Paul Chubb (Sgtjack Grant), Paul Goddard (Bobby). Synopsis: A tale of real estate and revenge set in the ominous inner-city of the imagination.

DEAD TO THE WORLD

DEATH IN BRUNSWICK

Government Agency Investment

Post-production

Sound transfers Sound editor Mixer Mixed at Laboratory Shooting stock

Eugene Wilson Dean Gawen Roger Savage Soundfirm Cinevex Kodak

Government Agency Development

Development Production

Film Victoria FFC Film Victoria

Marketing

Int. sales agent

Overseas Film Group Flat Out Ent. Pubi. Farmer & King Cast: Sam Neill (Carl Fitzgerald), Zoe Carides (Sophie Papafagos),John Clarke (Dave). Synopsis: Carl Fitzgerald, the chef in a seedy rock ’n ’ roll club, struggles to main tain his dignity amidst brutality and squalor. He sees a chance of escape when he meets the voluptuous Sophie, but a nasty accident at the club involving his kitchen-hand Mustafa leaves Carl feeling more threatened than ever. FLIRTING

Prod, company Pre-production Production Post-production

Huzzah Prods 1 5 /1 /9 0 -'2 3 /2 /9 0 26/2/90 - 6/4/90 9 /4 /9 0 - 10/8/90

Principal Credits

Director Producer Co-producer Scriptwriter D.O.P. Sound recordist Editor Prod, designer Costume designer

Meridian Films 30 October 1989 15 January 1990 5 March 1990

Ross Gibson John Cruthers Adrienne Parr Ross Gibson Jane Castle Bronwyn Murphy Andrew Plain Edie Kurzer Amanda Lovejoy Alison Barrett

Director Producer Exec, producer Assoc, producer Scriptwriters Based on novel by D.O.P. Sound recordist Editor Prod, designer

John Ruane Timothy White Bryce Menzies Lynda House John Ruane Boyd Oxlade Boyd Oxlade Ellery Ryan Lloyd Carrick Neil Thumpston Chris Kennedy

Production Crew

Planning and Development

Prod, manager Adrienne Parr Prod, coordinator Christine Johnson Pip Brown Location manager Prod, accountant Liane Colwell (Moneypenny Services) Nikki Marshall Runner FIVA Insurer (Neil McEwin) Film Finances Completion guarani (Helen Watts) Legal services Roth Warren & Menzies

Casting Greg Apps Casting consultants Liz Mullinar Casting

Camera Crew

Camera operator Focus puller Clapper-loader Key grip Asst grip Gaffer Best boy 3rd electrics Generator operator

David Williamson Mike Kelly Julie Wurm Greg Molineaux Dallas Kilponen Phil Golombick Steve Gordon Peter Pecotic Ian Bosman

On-set Crew

Corrie Soeterboek 1st asst director Elizabeth Lovell 2nd asst director Angus Clunies-Ross 3rd asst director Heather Oxenham Continuity Kate Gunn Boom operator Angela Bodini Make-up Rebecca Simon Asst make-up Angela Bodini Hairdresser Bernie Stunts coordinator Ledger Jim Brown Boxing coach Anne Zahalka Still photography Jude Morrell Dallas Kilponen Gayle Lake Unit publicist The Shooting Party Catering Will Soeterboek Ruth Bracegirdle

Wardrobe

Wardrobe asst

Kate Green

Lynda House Christine Hart Judith Hughes Chris Odgers Leigh Ammitzbol Tony Yegles Joanne Aarons Mandy Carter Janine Martorejo Steeves Lumley Performance Guarantees Legal services Roth Warren & Menzies Showtravel Travel coordinator Ellery Ryan Katina Bowell Gayle Hunt Barry Hansen Darren Hansen Ted Nordsvan John Brennan Adam Williams

On-set Crew

1st asst director 2nd asst director 3rd asst director Continuity Boom operator Make-up Make-up asst Special fx Unit publicists Catering Art dept coord Art dept runner Set dresser/buyer Standby props

Spectrum Films Tania Nehme

Wardrobe super. Wardrobe asst

Jungle Pictures

Principal Credits

Director Producer Scriptwriter D.O.P. Art directors Editor Composer

Leo Berkeley Fiona Cochrane Leo Berkeley Brendan Lavelle Margaret Eastgate Adele Flere Leo Berkeley Sam Melet

Other Credits

Story editor Prod, manager Script editor Budget Dist. guarantee

Doug Ling Peter Jordan Doug Ling $425,000 Film Finance Corp.

Government Agency Investment

Production

AFC Film Victoria Length 95 mins Gauge 16 mm Cast: Craig Adams, Luke Elliot, Tahir Cambis, Alex Menglet, Synopsis: Eddie and Mick are out-of-work teenagers. They become involved with a gang of would-be mercenaries who are heading for Africa. What they hope will be a great adventure starts to go horribly wrong. QUIGLEY DOWN UNDER

Camera Crew

John Wild Andrew Merrifield John Martin Anne Beresford Chris Goldsmith Noriko Neill Nicky Gooley Peter Stubbs Maria Farmer Meredith King Sweet Seduction Victoria Hobday TBA Georgina Campbell Dean Sullivan

Wardrobe

Post-production

Post-production Asst editor

Prod, manager Prod, coordinator Producer’s asst Location manager Unit manager Asst unit manager Prod, runner Prod, accountant Accounts asst Insurer Completion guar.

Art Department

Art director Standby props

Production Crew

Camera operator Focus puller Clapper-loader Key grip Asst grip Gaffer Best boy Generator op.

HOLIDAYS ON THE RIVER YARRA

Prod, company

Principal Credits

Planning and Development

Casting

Prod, company Pre-production Production Post-production

Prod, company Kennedy Miller Director John Duigan [See issue 76 for details]

Vicki Friedman Cheyne Phillips

Prod, company Producers

Quigley Down Under Stanley O’Toole Alex Rose Director Simon Wincer Original screenplay John Hill Script editor lan Jones D.O.P. David Eggby Sound recordist Lloyd Carrick Supervising editor Adrian Carr Editor Peter Burgess Prod, designer Ross Major Associate prod. David Munro Prod, supervisors Pamela Vanneck David Munro Production m’ger Stephen Jones Prod, coordinator Barbara Ring Producer’s asst Rosemary Marks' Prod, secretary Toni Wing Location manager Andrew Ellis Aboriginal liaison Craig Bolles (Gove) Mark Leonard (Alice Springs) Continuity Judy Whitehead Prod, runner Shane Rooney 1st asst director Bob Donaldson 2nd asst director Hamish McSporran Co-2nd asst dir. Nikki Long 3rd asst director Debbie Atkins Derry Field Focus puller

Clapper-loader Cam. maintenance Grip Asst grips

Adrien Seffrin Peter Stott Graham Litchfield lan McAlpine Mark Ramsay lan Dewhurst Gaffer Lex Martin Best boy Tim Morrison Asst electrics Trevor Ripper Darryl Pearson Generator op. Chris Goldsmith Boom operator Unit manager ChrisJones Ken Moffat Asst unit manager Craig Dillon Unit assts Bob Graham Dennis Hulm Kevin McDonald Mark Taylor Lon Bentley Make-up Vivienne Rushbrook Anna Karpinski Make-up asst Tony Meredith Hairdresser Asst hairdresser Greg Staines Doug Glanville Asst hair/make-up Animal trainer Evanne Chesson Cody Harris Animal handler Horsemaster Gerald Egan Jim Willoughby Horse wranglers Bill Willoughby Malcolm Pritchard Lloyd Ventry Brendon Egan Stable girl Nidra Watson Bullock master Graham Young Bullock wranglers Happy Bradford Max Scanlon Ken McLeod ■ Safety officer Stunt coordinator Guy Norris Asst stunt coord. Danny Baldwin Stunts Gary Amos Ken Connley Murray Chesson Lou Horvath Rick Anderson Rocky McDonald Paul Murtagh John Raaen Greg Stuart Stunt horse wrang. Colin Lowe Brian Faye Armourer Brian Burns Asst armourer Peter Gronow Special fx sup. Steve Courtley Special fx coord. Conrad Rothman Special fx Monty Feiguth Chris Murray Paul Gorrie Tom Davies Special fx asst Rodney Burke Asst cost, design. Jean Turnbull Wardrobe sup. Julie Middleton Wardrobe buyer Rosalie Hood Standby dresser Andrea Hood Asst standby Morag Smart Wardrobe asst Lauryn Forder Cutter Sheryl Pilkington Seamstresses Kate Green Laura Jocic Art director lan Grade Art dept coord. Sue Jarvis Chris Robson (Syd.) Set decorator Brian Edmonds Buyers Brian Dusting Peta Lawson Asst props buyers LenJudd Peter Forbes Graphics Jane Murphy Draughtsman Glen McDermot Standby props Robert Moxham Asst standby props Murray Gosson Storyboard artist Graeme Galloway Construction sup. Wayne Allan Scenic artist Christo Reid Construct, managers lan Doig Alan Good Leading hand Alan Fleming Carpenters Phil Backler lan Baxter Andrew Chauvel John Kingston Guy Miller Gordon McIntyre CINEMA

PAPERS

• 73.

Brandon Mullen Frank Phipps David Robson Jeremy Sparks Driver Mark Schultz Set finishers Gus Lobb Alan Bromhead Brush hands Anthony Smith Brendon Cavallari Peter Munro Unit nurse Judith Knapp Personal manager David Muntz American publicist Hunt Downs Australian publicist Susie Howie Publicity sec. Antonine Kacala Stills photographer Barry Peake Casting cons. Michael Lynch Rae Davidson (Forcast) Extras casting Jo Warren Caterer Chris Smith Asst caterers Roger Jarrett Rosalind Jarrett Hali Gordon Glen McDermot Asst editor James Harvey Sound editor Terry Rodman Cost controller Vincent O ’Toole Asst accountants Angela Kenny Tunya Williamson Travel Kabe Yeowart Freight Greg Helmers 2nd unit director Adrian Carr 2nd unit D.O.P. Ross Berryman 2nd unit focus David Stevens 2nd unit clapper Peter White Laboratory Colorfilm Lab liaison Denise Wolfson Simon Wicks Synopsis: Matthew Quigley, a troubleprone cowboy with a fabulous long-range rifle, arrives in colonial Australia to face two problems: Crazy Cora, who thinks he is her husband, and a ruthless landowner who wants him to kill Aborigines. Quigley wants nothing to do with either, but ends up involved with both to become an unlikely legend. Cast: Tom Selleck (Matthew Quigley), Laura San Giacomo (Crazy Cora), Alan Rickman (Elliot Marston), Tony Bonner (Dobkin), Chris Haywood (Major Ashley Pitt). THE RETURNING

Prod, company Matte Box David Hannay Prods for Echo Pre-production 2 /1 /9 0 -2 9 /1 /9 0 Production 5 /2 /9 0 - 26/3/90 Post-production 2 /4 /9 0 - 30/7/90 Principal Credits

Director Producer Exec, producer Scriptwriters Based on orig. idea D.O.P. Sound recordist Editor Prod, designer Composer

John Day Trishia Downie David Hannay Arthur Baysting John Day Simon Willisson John Day Kevin Haywood Mike Westgate Simon Clothier Mike Beacroft Clive Cockburn

Other Credits

Kate Curtis Prod, manager Jackie Clark Prod, secretary Keith McKenzie Prod, accountant Jackie Clark Prod, assistant Stewart Main 1st asst director Sue Wylie Continuity Nevin Rowe Casting consultants Peter McCaffrey Focus puller Simon Roelants Clapper-loader Barry McGinn Key grip Spotty Asst grip Matt Slattery Gaffer Steve Buckland Boom operator Rodger Guys Art director Christine West Costume designer Maijorie Hamlin Make-up Christine West Wardrobe Wardrobe asst Christine Illingworth 74

CINEMA

PAPERS

Ken Drury Pierre Alec Gow Eddie Simms NFULab 90 mins 35 mm Eastman Kodak Colour Cast- Phillip Gordon (Allan Steadman), Alison Routledge (Jessica), Max Cullen (Donahue), Jim Moriarty (George), Ter rance Cooper (Allan’s father), Judie Douglas (Miriam), Grant Tilly (Dr Pitts). Synopsis: Someone keeps making love to Allan. H e’s trying to find out whom. Special effects Still photography Tech, adviser Best boy Laboratory Length Gauge Shooting stock

TILL THERE WAS YOU

Prod, company Dist. company Budget Production

Ayer Prods Sovereign Pictures $13 million 6 /1 1 /8 9 -1 9 /1 /9 0

Principal Credits

Director Producer Line producer Scriptwriter D.O.P. Sound recordist Editor Prod, designer Costume designer Composer P la n n in g

John Seale Jim McElroy Tim Sanders Michael Thomas Geoffrey Simpson Gary Wilkins Jill Bilcock George Liddle David Rowe Tony Meillandt

Brian Pearce Peter Armstrong Grant Page Stunts coordinator Janene Reade Stunts asst Safety officers Archie Roberts Chris Hession Unit nurse Jacqui Ramsay Gary Johnston Still photography Victoria Buchan Publ. Kathy Trout (Vanuatu) Catering Marike Janavicius (Syd.) Unit runners Sara Probyn Brooke Smith 1st asst director 2nd asst director Coordinator Key grip Sound recordist Continuity Cameraman Assistant 1st asst director Helicopter pilot Art directors Asst art director Art dept coord. Art dept runner Set dressers

Wardrobe

Prod, supervisor Prod, coordinator Producer’s asst Prod secretary Location manager Unit manager

Wardrobe super. Standby wardrobe Wardrobe assts

Focus pullers Clapper-loaders 2nd unit D.O.P. 2nd unit focus Camera types Key grip Asst grips Gaffer Best boy 2nd gaffer Asst electrics Generator op On-set Crew

1st asst director 2nd asst director 3rd asst director Continuity Boom operator Make-up Hairdresser Special fx super Special fx

Ian Allen Brian Edmonds Michelle McGahey Wendy Huxford Liam Liddle Michael Tollerton Marta Statescu Fiona Scott John Murch James Cox Brian Bums Kerry Thompson John Shea Heather Laurie Susanne Head

Construction Dept

Const, manager Scenic artist Construct, foreman Leading hand Carpenters

Bill Howe Peter Collias Larry Sandy John Stiles Steve Snowden Andy Tickner Ross Cairns Claudia Goodman-Davies Labourer Matt Connors Set finisher Greensman Peter Hordern Plane construction Walter Van Veemendaal Studios Waterloo Studios

Director: Vince Martin [See issue 78] STRANGERS

Director: Craig Lahiff [See issue 78] WEEKEND WITH KATE (formerly Depth o f Feeling)

Producer: Phillip Emmanuel. Director: Arch Nicholson [No details supplied]

1st asst editor 2nd asst editor Assembly editor Sound transfers Laboratory Lab liaison Gauge Shooting stocks

WENDY CRACKED A WALNUT

Director: Michael Pattinson [See issue 77] D OCU M E N T AR IE S

Prod, company

Education Shop (Min. of Education, Vic.) Director LilySteine Producer LilySteine D.O.P. Peter Doherty Sound recordist GeoffSpurel Editor LilySteiner Prod, designer AnnGrieve Length 20 mins Synopsis: An interview with award-win ning children’s author Paul Jennings. MANAGEMENT OF VIOLENCE IN A HOSPITAL

Prod, company

Flinders Media, Flinders Medical Centre Pre-production 1 /2/90 ... Production Late 1990 Post-production Late 1990 Principal Credits

Director Producer Exec, producer Assoc, producer Scriptwriters

Mike Davies Mike Davies Alan Bentley Rod Larcombe Peter Fitzsimmons Mike Davies Based on orig. idea Peter Fitzsimmons D.O.P. David Summerhayes Sound recordist Andrew Ganczarczyk Editor Mike Davies Composers John Fearnside David Kottlowy

Planning and Development

Casting Casting consultant

Jane Moran Jane Maguire Julia Gelhard Atlab Atlab Peter Willard 35mm Kodak 5296, 5247; AGFA XT320

Government Agency Investment

Production FFC Marketing FFC Cast: Mark Harmon (Frank Flynn) Jeroen Krabbe (Viv), Deborah Unger (Anna), Shane Briant (Rex), Lech Mackiewicz (Muzza), Ivan Kesa (Snowy), Ritchie Singer (Robbo), Jeff Truman (Nobby). Synopsis: Frank Flynn, an American jazz musician, comes to Vanuatu in search of his brother and finds murder, intrigue and romance - it’s a jungle out there.

CO M P LE T ED

BLOOD OATH

Director: Stephen Wallace [See issue 77] BLOODMOON

Director: Alec Mills [See issue 78]

Spotlight Artists Lyn Pike

Camera Crew

Camera operator

Post-production

RE CE N T LY

Steve Andrews Toby Pease Emma Schofield Pam Willis Mark Wasiutak Violette Fontaine Pascal Satet Brian Cox David Hardie David Young

Michael McIntyre Mark Robertson

Art Department

Production Crew

Danny Batterham Martin Turner Neil Cervin Laurie Kirkwood Mark Zagar Kate Dennis David Burr Barry Idoine Arriflex BLIV, BLIII Paul Thompson George Tsoutas JoJohanson Trevor Toune Werner Gerlach Simon Lee Darren Bellangarry John Lee Ron Ware

Director: Frank Shields [See issue 78] THE SHER MOUNTAIN MYSTERY

COVER TO COVER: PAUL JENNINGS

Wolfgang Knochell Jeremy Rayner

Aerial Unit

Draftsperson Props maker Standby props Armourer

Camera operators

Phil Patterson Karan Monkhouse Vicki Popplewell Warren Grieef George Craig Jenny Quigley

Underwater Unit

and Development

Camera Crew

Director: Mark Grade [See issue 77] NO CAUSE FOR ALARM

Second Unit

Casting Mike Fenton Casting consultants Faith Martin Extras casting Siobhan Hannan Dialogue coach Sandra Lee Paterson Grant Hill Jennie Crowley Lorelle Adamson Amanda Selling Robin Clifton Tic Carroll (Vanuatu) Hugh Johnston (Syd.) Unit assts Alison Robb (Vanuatu) Ken Rule (Syd.) Prod, asst Jo Gibson (Vanuatu) Prod, runners David Holmes John McDonald Financial cont. Kevin Wright Prod, accountant Christine Robson Accounts asst Annette Piggott Paymaster Gavan Davidson Insurer Hammond Jewell Completion guar. Film Finances Travel coord. Helen Francis Freight coord. Michael McLean Base office liaison Fiona King

A KINK IN THE PICASSO

Mike Davies

Post-production

Sound editor Music perf. by

Andrew Ganczarczyk John Fearnside David Kottlowy Gauge Low-band U-matic Synopsis: Discussion on prevalence of violence in hospitals, reasons for it and means of dealing with it. Dramatization of violence scenario and Violence Response Team in action. MARKET OF DREAMS

Director Russell Porter Producer Kate White D.O.P. Jaems Grant Sound recordist Jock Healy Editor Peter Carrodus Prod, manager David Barnes Prod, coord. (NT) Deborah Annear Prod, secretary Katie Smith Prod, accountant David Barnes Completion guarantor MPG (Christine Suli) Laboratory Cinevex Synopsis: An exploration of one of the most extreme cultural contrasts in the world today: that between the traditional Pintubi and Walpiri artists of the Western Desert of Australia and the high com merce of the world’s art capitals.

BREAKAWAY

Director: Don McLennan [See issue 77] HARBOUR BEAT

Director: David Elfick [See issue 78]

SOOTHING THE PAIN OF CHILDBIRTH

Prod, company

Flinders Media, Flinders Medical Centre

Budget Pre-production Production Post-production

$5000 12/3/90 - 14/4/90 9 /4 /9 0 - 27/4/90 4 /6 /9 0 - 18/6/90

Principal Credits

Director Producer Exec, producer Assoc, producer Scriptwriters D.O.P. Sound recordist Editor Composers

Mike Davies Mike Davies Alan Bentley Rod Larcombe Mike Davies Dr Peter Brownridge David Summerhayes Andrew Ganczarczyk Mike Davies John Fearnside David Kottlowy

Camera Crew

Camera operator

Mike Davies

Post-production

Sound editor Narrator Music perf. by

Andrew Ganczarczyk John Ovendon John Fearnside David Kottlowy 3 / 4-inch

Gauge Cast: not supplied. Synopsis: Follows ai woman from before the birth of her child until after the birth. An anaesthetist explains the various forms of pain relief available to the woman, and these are demonstrated. Explanation is given of the advantages of using painrelieving techniques. AU STRA LIAN FILM, RADIO & TELEVISION SCH OO L

THE LAST NEWSREEL

Prod, company AFTRS Dist. company Greater Union Org. Director Karen Borger Producer Stewart Burchmore Consult, producer Tony Buckley Assoc, producer Elisabeth Knight Scriptwriter Grace Barnes

Editor Prod, designer Researchers

Paul Saunders Mami Raprager Karen Borger Jenny Ward Paul Saunders Budgeted by Stewart Burchmore Prod, assist Jenny Ward Insurers AFTRS FAI Cinesure Camera operators Brigid Costello Josie Keys Rohan Smith Frank Vidinha Camera types ARRI III, BL IV 1st asst director Paul Saunders Make-up Dawn Morrison Tech, adviser Joseph Demion Still photography Astri Baker Unit publicist Ian Phipps Animals Sunny The Surfing Dog Sound editor Jenny Ward Mixed at AFTRS Harrison Titles Marni Raprager Laboratory Colorfilm Lab liaison Wayne Hayes Neg matching Colorfilm Gauge 35mm Screen ratio 1.85: 1 Shooting stock Kodak B &W Print stock Kodak 5231, 5222 Production National Film & Sound Archive Cast: Annie Looby (Mable), Patrick Falzon (Johnny), ex-Cinesound and -Movietone staff and the people of Australia. Synopsis: The L a st Newsreelis a short blackand-white film that celebrates Operation Newsreel and is a fitting finale to the Newsreel era.

Principal Credits

Director Producer Scriptwriter D.O.P. Sound recordist Editor Prod, designer Costume designer Composer

Planning and Development

Casting consultant

AFTRS AFI $122,824

SAFE TAPE & FILM M E L B O U R N E ’S O N LY S P E C IA L IS E D S TO R A G E F A C IL ITY FOR:

Joy Sargent

Production Crew

Prod, manager Location manager Unit manager Production runner

Frances McGivern Ruth McHugh Annabel Scholes Ian Moxon

Camera Crew

Camera operator Focus puller Key grip Asst grips Gaffer Best boy

Peter Borosh Andrew Worson Tony Bosch Nick Rubic Ian Bosman Phil Glen

On-set Crew

1st asst director 2nd asst director 3rd asst director Continuity Boom operators

Terry King Michael Barlow Todd Le May Frances McGivern Mark Cornish Nicole Lazaroff Dawn Morrison

Make-up Art Department

Art director Art dept runner Standby props

Bart Groen Andrew Robinson Bart Groen

Wardrobe

Wardrobe super.

Terri Kibbler

Post-production

Asst editor Music performed by

ONCE IN TIME

Prod, company Dist company Budget

Isao Morimoto Felicity Nove Hillary Bell Peter Borosh Christian Bass Tanya Nehme Tor Larsen Terri Kibbler Anthony Partos

Recording studio Mixer Laboratory

Linda Ljubilic Guy Cross Anthony Partos Yoram Gross Studio Paul Neeson Colorfilm

Lab liaison Martin Hoyle Gauge 16 mm Screen ratio 1: 1.85 Shooting stock Fuji Print stock Fuji Cast John Poison (David, aged 17), Juliet Taylor (Trish, 17), Aaron Deer (David, 11), Sophie Edwards (Trish, 11), Luke Manywether (David, 5), Amanda Masters (Trish, 5), Annabel Scholes (Genee). Synopsis: Set in a small town in Western NSW, the film witnesses the growth of two children through the poetic recollection of memories, and explores the geography of their lives together. A PARTING

Prod, company Dist. company Budget

AFTRS AFTRS $45,000

Principal Credits

Director Producer Scriptwriter D.O.P. Sound recordist Editor Prod, designer Composer

James Middleton Stewart Burchmore James Middleton Dion Beebe Christian Bass Karen Weldrick Luigi Pittorino Robert Moss

Other Credits

Shooting schedule

Stephen Prodes Budgeted by Stewart Burchmore Prod, supervisor Elisabeth Knight Prod, manager Marcella Hayward Production runner Belinda Mravicic Insurers FAI AFTRS Camera operator Dion Beebe Focus puller Geoffery Downes Clapper-loader Rhoan Smith Camera Type Arri BL Key grip Tony Bosch Asst grip Shanon Baughn

Your complete Negative Matching Service

including • Time Coding onto 8" Floppy Disc • Super 16mm • Syncing Neg or Pos Rushes • 16mm & 35mm Edge-Coding Service (“ Rubber Numbering”) • Tight deadlines our speciality • 24 hours a day, 7 days a week if required. Contact Greg Chapman

• FILM S T O C K • VIDEO TA P E • ARTW ORK • COM PUTER TA P E • BUSINESS DOCUMENTS NOW YOUR VALUABLE MATERIAL CAN BE STORED IN A TOTALLY SECURE AND CLIMATICALLY CONTROLLED ENVIRONMENT 111 THISTLETHWAITE STREET SOUTH MELBOURNE 3205 TELEPHONE (03) 696 6219

Tel (02) 439 3988

Fax (02) 437 5074 105 /6-8 c l a r k e s t „

PIY LID crowsnestnsw2065

MASCARADE — a team of experienced, highly trained makeup designers and makeup artists geared to produce the face, the look, the feel you need... for film, television, theatre, video and still photography. MASCARADE —

competent specialists in Period Makeup — very natural "No Makeup" look, Special Effects Makeup, Fantasy, Prosthetics.

s c

r a

U n iq u e ^

Make-Up A gency

MASCARADE —

the Makeup Agency in Melbourne for all Makeup needs: Handmade Bald Caps, Eyebrow Covers, etc. Supplers of Visiora - Joe Blasco - Pola Makeup.

The agency has grown from the unique Metropolitan School of Theatre Arts, established in 1984 to ensure the highest standard of training for future makeup artists. Enquiries for Agency and School:

Shirley Reynolds on (03) 2662087 or AH (03) 687 3435

CINEMA

PAPERS

• 75

Gaffer Ian Bosnian Best boy .Chris Cox 1st asst director Stephen Prodes 2nd asst director Priscilla Thorley Condnuity Nicole Cassor Boom operator Nicole Lazaroff Make-up Dawn Morrison Still photography Iris Wakalenko Unit publicist Ian Phipps Catering Bread & Circuses Standby props Chris Darvel Construct, manager Jake Hogges Edidng asst Leigh Elmes Mixer Christian Bass Mixed at AFTRS Harrison Laboratory VFC Lab liaison Tom Angel Neg matching Karen Clark Gauge 35mm Screen rado 1 : 1.85 Shooung stock AGFA 125 & 320 Cast: Anthony Mardn, Ratchel Szalay, Ralph Cotterill. Synopsis: A short film about love, memory and isoladon.

Production Crew

Prod, manager Location manager Prod, assistant Prod, accountant Camera Crew

AFTRS 1 6 /1 0 /8 9 -1 0 /1 1 /8 9 1 1 /1 1 /8 9 -1 7 /1 1 /8 9 1 7 /1 1 /8 9 -2 3 /2 /9 0

Pascale Ferradini Josie Keys Arri SR Steve Warren

Camera operator Focus puller Camera type Lighting asst On-set Crew

1st asst director 2nd asst director 3rd asst director Continuity Boom operator Still photography

Penny Fowler-Smith Jude Fowler-Smith Emma Oakley Liz Crosby Debbie Lee Jude Fowler-Smith

Post-production

Helen Lovecock Asst editor Mary Anne Hamilton Sound editor Music performed by Paul Neeson Mixer Mary Anne Hamilton Atlab Laboratory Lab liaison Kerry Jenkins Cast Dasha Blahova (Petro), Terry Brady (Martin). Synopsis: A film about travelling —about outward and inward journeys. Briefly two people’s paths cross.

RETREAT

Prod, company Pre-prod’n Producdon Post-producdon

Bronwyn Coupe Matthew Duchesne Emma Oakley Alison Baillache

■

FILM

AUSTRALIA

Principal Credits

Direttor Producer Scriptwriters

Trish FitzSimons Bronwyn Coupe Trish FitzSimons 'Catherine Zimdahl Pascale Ferradini Leonie Dickinson Linda Kruger Luigi Pittorino Paul Neeson

D.O.P. Sound recordist Editor Prod, designer Composer

Planning and Development

Casting consultants Shooting schedule Budgeted by

Joy Sargant Penny Fowler-Smith Bronwyn Coupe

KOALAS

Prod, company Dist. company Director Exec, producer Scriptwriter D.O.P.s

Sound recordist Editor Researcher Budgeted by Prod, supervisors

FA FA Paul Scott Bruce Moir Paul Scott ■ Jim Frazier Lindsay Cupper David Lourie Paul Finlay David Lourie Paul Scott John Russell John Russell

Hilary May Sally Price Sally Tyson Sally Price Kathy Grant Marsh & McLennan Casper Pieters Peter Mitchell Paula Lourie Asst editor FA Mixed at Adab Laboratory Michelle Weiss Marketing consult. Lesna Thomas Publ. Cast [Details not supplied] Synopsis: K oalas is a humorous and dramatic look at the hidden side of koalas which reveals some very interesting and unusual behaviour. Using footage never before seen, Koalas highlights the extent to which Australians will go to help these lovable creatures. Prod, manager Producer’s asst Unit manager Prod, assistant Insurer Animal handlers

TOYTIME

Prod, company Budget Production Director Producer Scriptwriter D.O.P. Editor Prod, designer Costume design Puppet design Composer Prod, manager Prod, secretary Prod, assistant Prod, accountant Key grip Gaffer Puppet maker Props maker Standby props Seamstress

FA $600,000 24/1/90 - 2/3/90 Ian Munro Ron Saunders John Patterson Kim Batterham Robin Archer Robert Dein Caroline Jones Caroline Jones Chris Neal Kin Anning Sandie Morris Bronwyn Thompson Rebekka Blackman Tony Bosch Ian Anderson Ross Hill Richard Weight Marcus Erasmos Kim Royle

Construct, man’r Rob Ricketson Leading hand Gordon McIntyre Set finisher Eric Todd Studios AFTRS Gauge 1” tape Cast Gary Scales (Johnson the Elephant), Katrina Sedgwick (McDuff the Concer tina), Bruce W edderburn (Diesel the Truck), Peter Browne (Alfred the Hot Water Botde), Kristen Lyons (Squeaky the Robot). Synopsis: The adventures of a group of toys that come to life in a child’s bedroom when their owner is asleep. Aimed at 2 - 6 year olds.

FILM VICTORIA PRE-PRODUCTION

THE LAW DECIDES

Producer Bronwyn Evans Exec, producer Lucy MacLaren Scriptwriter John McKay Length 8 mins Synopsis: A video that alleviates any con cerns that people may have about the operations of the Sheriff s office, and encourages men and women to consider a career as a Field or Special Officer. RIVER MANAGEMENT

Producer Janina Craig Exec, producer Rachel Dixon Scriptwriter Bridget Goodwin Length 30 mins. Synopsis: A video to educate people in strategies to halt degradation of river managements. SHOWING A LITTLE RESTRAINT

Exec, producer Lucy MacLaren Scriptwriter Dennis K. Smith Length 10 mins Synopsis: An entertaining look at how a family copes with the different restraints

SELL US YOUR UNEXPOSED FILM STOCK SHORT ENDS-RECAN S-UN OPEN ED STOCK Ring Nichola W harton STEADI SYSTEMS PTY LTD 405 Sussex St., H aym arket NSW 2000 Tel. (02) 281 6033 or (02) 438 1541 Fax (02) 211 5252

35mm & 16mm Negative Cutting

\ C H B S ROWELL PRODUCTWHS

WARDROBE • MAKE-UP VANS • CAMERA TRUCKS • CAST VANS • PROPS VANS • UNIT VEHICLES • TRACKING VEHICLES

FO R T H E S U P P L Y O F A L L FILM P R O D U C T IO N T R A N S P O R T C O N T A C T D A V ID S U T T O R ON (02) 436 3191

PROUD TO BE SUPPLYING:

• • • • •

4 Day Revolution Rainbow Warrior Kokoda Crescent A Long Way From Home Australian Break

318 WILLOUGHBY ROAD, NAREMBURN, SYDNEY STATION WAGONS • SEDANS • HI-ACE VANS * 4 X 4 TOYOTA LANDCRUISERS • ACTION VEHICLES • TRAY TOPS • BOSES

• CINEMA

PAPERS

needed by different-aged children, and suggests how to keep them amused on long, boring car trips.

Sound Length Gauges

GeoffWhiteProd. manager Brian Garvey Post-prod Visualeyes 10 mins Animation Meredith Prods Length 15 mins 16mm, 1” videotape Gauge Betacam Graphics Meredith Prods Synopsis: Designed to prom ote Mel Narrator David Paterson Synopsis: A programme designed to ex FILM VICTORIA bourne as a stylish, design-conscious city, Lab. Barry NancarrowProdsplain, in layman’s terms, how careful sit PRODUCTION as evidenced in its architecture, fashion, Post-prod Barry NancarrowProdsing and design can produce saleable/ and entertainment. acceptable villas and townhouses, creat Length 10.5 mins THE CRIMINAL COURT Gauge BVU ing a lifestyle that is both practical and Prod, company Balcony Prods THEIR LIVES IN OUR HANDS appropriate to the environment Synopsis: An archival record of the con Director Luigi Acquisto Director Mark Atkin struction of the project. Producer Richard Jones Producer Kathie Armstrong IMPORTANT PARLIAMENTARY Exec, producer Rachel Dixon Exec, producer Lucy MacLaren • CLEAN WATER, CLEAN SAND OFFICE HOLDERS Scriptwriters Rob Phillips Scriptwriter Dennis Tupicoff Prod. co. Barry NancarrowProdsProd, company Alfred Road Films Luigi Acquisto D.O.P. GraemeWoodSponsor Hunter District Water Board Sponsor NSW Parliament House D.O.P. Jaems Grant Sound PhillipHealyDirector Barry Nancarrow Director NedLander Sound Chris Izzard Length 10 mins Producer ChrisFord Producer RichardMason Music Not Drowning Waving Gauge 1” master Scriptwriter Brian Garvey Scriptwriter RodneyLong Paul Kelly Synopsis: A video that explains the prob D.O.P. Brian Garvey D.O.P. SteveMason Length 27 mins lems that pre-school children have in Sound recordist Martin Adnum Sound recordist PatFiske Gauge Betacam SP coping with traffic, and suggests strategies Editor David Paterson Editor Margaret Sixel Cast [No details supplied] for parents and teachers to help children. Prod, manager Meredith Prods Prod, manager Joylon Bromley Synopsis: A docu-drama to be screened to Narrator John Bell Animation Barry Nancarrow Prods all first-time offenders, which outlines FILM VICTORIA Graphics Barry NancarrowProdsLab Colorfilm procedures of the court to help them POST-PRODUCTION Narrator David Patterson Post-prod. Filmworks form a realistic expectation of what will Lab. Barry NancarrowProdsLength 23mins happen during their case. FRESH EVERY DAY Post-prod. Barry Nancarrow Prods Gauge 16mm Director Wayne Tindall Length 20mins Synopsis: A series of four programmes DRINK DRIVING Producer Anne Tindall Gauge BVU which give an insight into the working life Prod, company Supervision Exec, producer Lucy MacLaren of the Premier, the Leader of the Opposi Synopsis: Illustrates the activities of the Director Peter Campbell Editor Wayne Tindall Hunter Water Board (NSW) to preserve tion, The President and the Speaker and Exec, producer Lucy MacLaren Length 8 mins Parliament House itself. clean water and clean sand for the people D.O.P. John Carter Synopsis: A video demonstrating the cor of the Hunter Valley. Sound Brett Cocking rect procedure of dental care for the dis LEARNING TO BE SAFE Length 8mins abled. FROM STOP TO SLOW Prod, company LumiereProds Gauge 1” master Prod, company EVS Sponsoring body NSW Dept of Cast [No details supplied] MELBOURNE - THE BIG EVENT Sponsor Roads and Traffic Authority Education Synopsis: Gino Tagiatelli explains the Director [Not given] Director BrianFaullDirector Shalagh McCarthy dangers of drink driving to a young man Producer Terence McMahon Producer Tony Coyte Producer Lynne Broad who thinks he knows everything about it. Exec, producer Rachel Dixon Scriptwriter BrianFaullScriptwriters Roger Hudson Editor Peter Carrodus D.O.P. Joseph Pickering Jonathon Clemens FOOD AND WINE IN MELBOURNE Length 8mins Sound recordist Paul Collock D.O.P. Jack Swart Prod, company Broadstone Synopsis: M elbourne - T he B ig E ven t is de Prod, manager Kevin Powell Sound recordist PeterRead Directors Terence McMahon signed to promote Melbourne as a vital Laboratory EVS Editor Murray Ferguson Venetia McMahon centre of arts and culture. Post-prod. EVS Prod, manager Laura Zusters Producer Terence McMahon Length 24mins Narrator Noni Hazlehurst Exec, producer Lucy MacLaren PROCESS OF GROWTH Gauge Betacam Lab Visualeyes Scriptwriter Salik Silverstein Director [Not given] Synopsis: Designed as part of a training Post-prod. Visualeyes Sound Geoff White Producer Grant Gaston package for trainee traffic controllers. Length 20mins Length 10 mins Exec, producer Rachel Dixon Traffic controllers are responsible for the Gauge Betacam Gauges 16mm, 1” video tape Editor GeorgeTosi flow of traffic through, or around, road Synopsis: A video showing parents the Synopsis: Designed to prom ote Mel Length 8minsworks conducted by the Roads and Traffic New South Wales’ Department of Educa bourne as a city of taste and style, as Synopsis: A corporate video profiling Authority of New South Wales. tion’s child-protection programme which evidenced in its restaurants and wineries. Victoria’s potential for international in develops children’s interpersonal skills, vestors focusing on the food-processing GETTING STRAIGHT helping them to recognize dangerous industry. GRASS FED BEEF Prod, company Albie Thoms Prods situations and protect themselves from Prod, company The Film House Sponsoring body NSW Department of potential sexual assault. NSW FILM AND Director RobertMarden Corrective Services TELEVISION OFFICE Director Albie Thoms Producer Phillip Pappas PARLIAMENT AT WORK Producer Albie Thoms Exec, producer Rachel Dixon Prod, company Alfred Road Films BETWEEN THE LINES Scriptwriter Albie Thoms Scriptwriter Glen Blackmore Sponsor NSW Parliament House D.O.P. RobertMarden Prod, company Vector Prods D.O.P. John Leahy Director Ned Lander Sponsoring body Adult Literacy Sound recordist Geoff Fairweather Producer Sound Laurie Robinson Richard Mason Through Video Campaign Editor John Hollands Scriptwriter Length 8 mins Rodney Long Director Roger Hudson Prod, manager BrigittaZeizig Gauges 16mm, 1” video D.O.P. Steve Mason Producer Jonathan Clemens Narrator TonyBarrySound recordist Synopsis: This video will outline the Victo Pat Fiske Jonathan Clemens Laboratory HoytsTramEditor Scriptwriters rian grass-fed beef industry, including all Margaret Sixel Roger Hudson Post-prod. HoytsTramProd, manager aspects from farm production, process Joylon Bromley Graeme Ross Length 30 mins Narrator ing and packaging to local and export D.O.P. John Bell Bronwyn Murphy Sound recordist Gauge Betacam Laboratory Colorfilm distribution. Peter Sommerville Editor Synopsis: A documentary-style p ro Post-prod. Filmworks Simeon Bryan Prod, manager gramme about the drug rehabilitation Length ME AND MY BIG MOUTH 11 mins Elliott Street Prods scheme operating within New South Wales Laboratory Gauge 16mm Prod. co. Tupicoff and Hubbard Elliott Street Prods prisons. The video follows the story of Post-prod. Director Louise Hubbard Synopsis: This programme examines the 16 mins “Dave”, a young prisoner convicted for a Dennis Tupicoff Length role and function of the Parliament of Producer Betacam drug related offence, over a twelve-month Gauge Lucy MacLaren New South Wales and its Members. It Exec, producer Synopsis: A series of eight videos pro period. We see his gradual progress from Dennis Tupicoff opens with an historical overview of the Scriptwriter addiction to health and rehabilitation as a duced as a learning resource for adults Kevin Anderson Parliament itself and moves on to survey D.O.P. useful member of society. with low literacy levels. They are intended Mark Tarpey the composition and character of the two Sound to break down feelings of isolation and Mark ^Ferrie Houses of Parliament: the Lower House Music raise awareness of the availability of literHOUSING BY DESIGN or Legislative Assembly and the Upper Terry Doolan acy tuition. Prod, company Godfrey Payne Prods 10 mins House or Legislative Council, the House Length Sponsoring body NSW Dept of 16mm, Betacam of Review. Gauges BURWOOD BEACH OCEAN Planning Synopsis: What is our mouth for and what Director OUTFALL Christine Godfrey RAINFOREST PARKS OF NSW are each of the teeth designed for? An Producer Barry Nancarrow Prods Christine Godfrey Prod. co. Prod, company Sky Visuals entertaining look at our mouths for priSponsor Hunter District Water Board Scriptwriter Christine Godfrey Sponsor National Parks & Wildlife mary-school children. Barry Nancarrow D.O.P. Director Michael Middleton Services Chris Ford Editors Producer Jeremy Linton Mann Director MELBOURNE DAWN TO DUSK Peter Hicks Scriptwriter Bob Purser Dana Hughes Producer Broadstone Gary Steer Prod, company Barry Nancarrow Animation D.O.P, Sonicvision Scriptwriters Salik Silverstien Peter Hicks Director Brian Garvey Graphics Sound recordist Sonicvision Terence McMahon Steve Phillips Producer Martin Adnum Lab Visualeyes Editor D.O.P.s Rachel Dixon Gary Steer Exec, producer CINEMA

PAPERS

Ian Marden Phillip McGuire Guy Blackmore 13 mins 16mm Synopsis: Introduces the rainforest parks in North-eastern New South Wales. Shows how the management programme of the Nadonal Parks and Wildlife Service has made the parks accessible to visitors.

Editor Narrator Length Gauge

1 /1 /9 0 -2 2 /2 /9 0

Post-production Principal Credits

Director Producer Exec. prod. Supervising prod. Scriptwriter

ACTF

Budgeted by Production Crew

Insurer

THE RIGHT PERSON IN THE RIGHT PLACE

Prod, company EVS Sponsor Roads and Traffic Authority Brian Faull Director Tony Coyte Producer Scriptwriter Brian Faull Joseph Pickering D.O.P. Paul Collock Sound recordist Prod, manager Kevin Powell EVS Laboratory EVS Post-prod. 22 mins Length Betacam Gauge Synopsis: Designed as part of a training package for supervisors who are respon sible for selecting for training traffic controllers employed by the Roads and Traffic Authority of New South Wales. THE ROLE OF A MEMBER OF PARLIAMENT

Cliff Green

Planning and Development

RIGHT ANGLES

Prod, company Silvergrass Prods Sponsor NSW Dept of Education Director Michael Mundell Producer Saadia Winter Scriptwriter Barbara Chobocky D.O.P. Phil Balsdon John Parmentier Sound recordist Julie Hickson Editor Jo Malcolm Prod, manager Laboratory Visualeyes Visualeyes Post-prod. 20 mins Length Gauge Betacam Synopsis: A docum entary-style pro gramme designed for secondary school teachers to demonstrate how gender-inelusive teaching practices can benefit female students in gaining confidence and skills in areas of learning which have, traditionally, been ‘angled’ towards male students, such as Science, Industrial Arts, Computers and Mathematics.

Mark Joffe Margot McDonald Patricia Edgar Ewan Burnett

Complet’n guarant.

Steeves Lumley (Tony Leonard) Film Finances (Sue Milliken)

On-set Crew

Unit publicist Gauge

Howie and Taylor Publ. 16mm

Government Agency Investment

Production

FFC

Marketing

Int. sales agent Diana Quintner Publ. Howie and Taylor Publ. Cast: [No details supplied] Synopsis: In 1910, the Australian Govern ment passed a law requiring all boys aged between 12 and 17 to register for compul sory military training. Between 1911 and 1915, more than 30,000 boys were prosecuted for failing to obey this law. This story tells of one such boy. MORE WINNERS (“Deadly Score”)

ACTF Prod, company Dist. company Quartier Latin Int. Budget $4.,5 million (series of six dramas) 2 3 /1 0 /8 9 -2 6 /1 0 /8 9 Pre-prod’n 2 7 /1 0 /8 9 - 16/11/89 Production 1 /1 /9 0 -1 6 /2 /9 0 Post-production Principal Credits

Director Steve Jodrell Margot McDonald Producer Patricia Edgar Exec. prod. Ewan Burnett Supervising prod. Roger Simpson Scriptwriter Jaems Grant D.O.P. John Rowley Sound recordist Editor Edward McQueen-Mason Edie Kurzer Prod, designer Rose Chong Costume designer Michael Atkinson Composers Yuri Worontschak

(“The Journey”)

Principal Credits

ACTF Prod, company Quartier Latin Int. Dist. company Budget $4.5 million (series of six ' dramas) Pre-production 5 /2/90 - 9 /3/90 Production 12/3/90 - 23/3/90 Post-production 26/3/90 -1 8 /4 /9 0

Director Producer Exec. prod. Supervising prod. Scriptwriter D.O.P. Sound recordist Editor Prod, designer Costume designer

Principal Credits

Director Producer Exec. prod. Supervising prod. Scriptwriters

Jane Oehr Richard Mason Patricia Edgar Ewan Burnett Jane Oehr Ken Cameron ACTF

Budgeted by Production Crew

Insurer Completion guarant

Steeves Lumley (Tony Leonard) Film Finances (Sue Milliken)

On-set Crew

Unit publicist

Howie and Taylor Pubi.

Post-production

Gauge Government Agency Investment

16mm

Production

Esben Storm Antonia Barnard Patricia Edgar Ewan Burnett Steve J. Spears Stephen Dobson Paul Brincat Ralph Strasser Larry Eastwood Kerri Barnett

Planning and Development

Casting Shooting schedule Budgeted by

Forecast ACTF ACTF

Production Crew

Planning and Development

Liz Mullinar Casting Casting Camilla Gold Extras casting ACTF Shooting schedule ACTF Budgeted by

Post-production PAPERS

On-set Crew Cinevex Unit publicist Howie and Taylor Publ. Ian Anderson Post-production 16mm Gauge 16mm Government Agency Investment Government Agency Investment Production FFC Production AFFC Marketing Marketing Int. sales agent Diana Quintner Int. distributor Quartier Latin Int. Int. distributor Quartier Latin Int. Publ. Howie and Taylor Publ. Publ. Howie & Taylor Publ. Cast: [Details not supplied] Cast: Josephine Byrnes (Pauline Jonas), Synopsis: Cherry Williams befriends Mr William Gluth (Denzil Gwynne),. Jacki Edmund, one of the rather impoverished Kelleher (Gwenneth Keane) John Q’Hare guests at her mother’s boarding house. (Mike Nowacek), Simon Grey (Flea), Edmund has a dream that he will one day Jonathan Hardy I(Mr Bretherton, care sing at the Sydney Opera House. Cherry taker) , Erica Kennedy (Greta Thornsen), has a dream too, that she will become a Scott Major (Martin Taylor), Cathy lawyer. Cherry’s m other believes they Godbold (Sarah O ’Grady), David Presser should both “grow up”. (Jason Pengalli). Synopsis: A music camp at an old country MORE WINNERS estate brings together a diverse group of (“Pratt and the Prince”) children, not all of whom have music Prod, company ACTF foremost in their minds. The estate has an Dist. company Quartier Latin Int. air of mystery about it and, when mention Budget $4.5 million (series of six is made of a live-in ghost, some of the dramas) children, especially Flea, a practical joker, Pre-production 3 0 /1 0 /8 9 -3 /1 2 /8 9 become fascinated. Production 4/12/89 - 23/12/89 Post-production 1 /1 /9 0 —16/12/90 MORE WINNERS

Planning and Development

Prod, company Alfred Road Films Production Crew Sponsor NSW Parliament House Prod, manager Ann Darrouzet Director NedLander Prod, coordinator Fran O’Donoghue Producer Richard Mason Di Lynn Scriptwriter RodneyLongProd, secretaries Naomi Silver D.O.P. SteveMason Janine Schepisi Location manager Sound recordist Pat Fiske Manuel Bachet Unit manager Editor Margaret Sixel Marcus Hunt Prod’n runner Prod, manager Joylon Bromley ACTF Financial controller Narrator John Bell Prod, accountant Robert Threadgold Lab Colorfilm Accounts asst Mary Makris Post-prod. Filmworks Insurer Steeves Lumley, Tony Leonard Length 11 mins Completion guarant. Film Finances, Gauge 16mm Sue Milliken Synopsis: This programme introduces ACTF Legal Services three Members of the Parliament of New Camera Crew South Wales and shows how they operate Kattina Bowell Focus puller and the types of problems they encoun Clapper-loader Gayle Hunt ter. Highlighted is the fact that, although Ian Park Key grip Members may belong to political parties Lez Frazier Gaffer or be Independents, they are, above all, Gary Scholes Best boy representatives elected by the people to On-set Crew give them a voice in governing the State. John Powditch 1st asst director A U S T R A L I A N C H I L D R E N ' S Brett Popplewell 2nd asst director T E L E V I S I O N F O U N D A T I O N Julie Burton 3rd asst director Ann Beresford Continuity Christopher Roland MORE WINNERS Boom operator Nik Doming (“Boy Soldiers”) Make-up Laura Morris Prod, company ACTF Hairdresser Howie & Taylor Publ. Dist. company Quartier Latin Int. Unit publicist Catering Sweet Seduction Budget $4.5 million (series of six dramas) Marcus Hunt Runner Pre-production 6 /1 1 /8 9 -9 /1 2 /8 9 Wardrobe Production 1 1 /1 2 /8 9 -2 3 /1 2 /8 9 Tania Sloan Standby wardrobe 79 • C I N E M A

Laboratory Lab liaison Gauge

AFFC

Marketing

Int. distributor Quartier Latin Int. Publ. Howie and Taylor Publ. Cast: [Details not supplied] Synopsis: In the 1850sJustus Zukermann, a wealthy prospector, lives with his daugh ter, Ada, and a housekeeper, Martha, and her stepdaughter, Agnes. Before Justus dies, he orders Ada to travel south to find her true inheritance. Agnes is to go with her. Martha, who has for years envied Justus’ wealth orders Agnes to kill Ada and steal her inheritance. MORE WINNERS (“Mr Edmund”)

Prod, company ACTF Dist. company Quartier Latin Int. Budget $4.5 million (series of six dramas) Pre-production 22/1 /90 - 23/2/90 Production 26/2/90 - 10/3/90 Post-production 12/3/90 - 27/4/90

Julie Forster Prod, manager Prod, coordinator Caroline Bonham Christine Johnston Prod, asst Christine Johnston Prod, secretary John Meredith Location manager Phil Urquhart Unit manager Christine Johnston Prod, accountant Prod, runner David Holmes ACTF Financial controller Prod, accountant Moneypenny Services (Liane Lee) Steeves Lumley Insurer (Tony Leonard) Film Finances Completion guarant. (Sue Milliken) ACTF Legal Services Travel coord. Entertainment Travel Services Camera Crew

Focus puller Key grip Assist grip Gaffer Best boy

Nick Mayo Roy Mico Simon Spencer Warren Mearns Dean Bryan

On-set Crew

Make-up Hairdresser Safety officer Unit nurse Unit publicist Catering

Lesley Vanderwalt Lesley Vanderwalt George Mannix Sue Andrews Howie & Taylor Publ. Out to Lunch

Art Department

Art director Deborah Eastwood Set designer Tim Ferrier Props buyer Tim Ferrier Standby props Principal Credits Igor Lazareff Director GeorgeWhaley Wardrobe Producer AnthonyBuckley Wardrobe supervisor Andrew Exec. prod. Patricia Edgar Short Supervising prod. Ewan Burnett Standby wardrobe Kate Rose Scriptwriter Steve J. Spears Post-production Planning and Development Asst editor Pam Barnetta Budgeted by ACTF Laboratory Atlab Production Crew Lab. liaison Peter Willard Insurer SteevesLumley Gauge 16mm (Tony Leonard) Shooting stock Kodak Completion guarant. Film Finances Government Agency Investment (Sue Milliken) Production FFC

Marketing InL sales agent InL distributor

Diana Quintner Quartier Latin InL Publ. Howie & Taylor Publ. Cast: Cameron Nugent (Christopher Walter Pratt), Justin Rozniak (Prince Wilton), Richard Moir (King), Rowena Wallace (Queen), Maggie Dence (Lady Mikeevil), Paul Livingston (Gobbo), Sandra Collins (Yobbo), Caz Lederman (Mum), Ebony Ricketson (Katie). Synopsis: In the Enchanted Realm the faeries are in trouble. They must give away seven wishes to the humans every 100 years or they will lose their magic powers. The last wish was given away 99 years and 364 days before. When Prince Wilton reaches earth, the only human who will believe him is Christopher Walter Pratt.

Based on pilot Written by Scriptwriters

I n General Practice

James Davem Judith Colquhoun David Boutland David Phillips Graeme Koetsfeld Sally Webb Graeme Andrews Steve Muir Mike Peijanik

Editor Art director Composer

Prod, company ACTF DisL company Quartier Latin InL Budget $4.5 million (series of six dramas) Pre-production 1 5 /1 /9 0 -1 6 /2 /9 0 Production 19/2/90 - 9 /3/90 Post-production 12/3/90 - 4/4 /9 0 Mario Andreacchio Jane Ballantyne Patricia Edgar Ewan Burnett Morris Gleitzman ACTF Steeves Lumley (Tony Leonard) Completion guarant. Film Finances (Sue Milliken) Unit publicist Howie & Taylor Publ. Gauge 16mm Government Agency Investment

Production FFC Int. distributor Quartier Latin InL Publ. Howie & Taylor Publ. Cast: [Details not supplied] Synopsis: When a new family moves next door, Mark meets Annie who believes she is the reincarnation of Phar Lap. Mark is fascinated by the concept and becomes convinced that he is the reincarnation of J. Edgar Hoover. His friends at school also get into the act believing they were Queen Victoria and Albert Einstein.

Planning and Development

Story depL

Linda McGrail Jenni Wilks Lindy Bartter Robyn Sinclair Sue Ellis Margaret Morgan Francine Finnane Shauna Crowely

Script editors

Casting Prod, manager Prod, coordinator Producer’s assts

David Watts Barbara Lucas Justine Slatter Pip Nacard Prod, secretary Tom Higginbotham Location manager Peter Warman Unit manager Margie Muir Camera operators

Glen Steer John de Ruvo Andrew Short Peter Westley Dietrich Bock

Camera assistant On-set Crew

1st asst directors

2nd asst directors Directors’ assts

Boom operators

Make-up

Still photography Unit publicist Catering

Mark Moroney Andrew Turner Ian Simmons John Hartley Mark Armstrong Karen Willing Karen Mansfield Elizabeth Russell Dave Masala Colleen McNamara Sean Burnett Rachel Del Santo Joanne Stevens Kit Moore ATN 7 stills dept Georgie Brown Taste Buddies

Art Department

Set dresser Propspersons

Doug Kelly Malcolm Gregory Dirk van den Dreisen Julie Puglisi Jane Parker

Wardrobe

Wardrobe super. Wardrobe assts

BEYOND TOMORROW

[See issue 77 for details]

Therese Rendle Alan Burns Amanda Bloomfield

Construction Dept

Prod, companies Entertainment Media Cinema Verity BBC Enterprises DisL company Verity Lambert Producers Jane Scott Peter Beilby Exec, producers Robert le Tet Fred Schepisi Scriptwriter Douglas Livingstone Prod, manager Tony Leach Synopsis: [No details supplied] Cast [No details supplied].

Studios ATN 7, Sydney Cast Lorrae Desmond (Shirley Gilroy), Shane Porteous (Dr Terence Elliott), Brian Wenzel (Sgt Frank Gilroy), Michael Muntz (Dr Cris Kouros), Georgie Parker (Lucy Gardener), John Tarrant (Matt Tyler), Mary Regan (Ann Brennan), Sophie Heathcote (Stephanie “Steve” Brennan), Matt Day (Luke Ross), Joyce Jacobs (Esme Watson), Syd Heylen (Ver non “Cookie” Locke), Gordon Piper (Bob H atfield), G eorgina Fisher (Jessica Kouros). Synopsis: Set in the rural town of Wandin Valley, this medical drama follows the lives of its inhabitants, and features Aus tralian countryside and wildlife.

A COUNTRY PRACTICE

THE FLYING DOCTORS

BEYOND 2000

[See issue 77 for details] BOYS FROM THE BUSH

Prod, company DisL company

JNP Films Seven Network

Principal Credits

Directors

Producers Exec, producer Orig. screenplay

Robert Meillon Peter Maxwell Julian McSwiney Mark Piper Denny Lawrence Bill Searle James Davem James Davem

Script editors Casting coord. Casting consulL Extras casting Script coordinator Nurse consulL

(Series VI) [See issue 77 for details]

Michael Miller Kristen Dunphy Tim Pye Charlie Strachan Hatice Kanli Maura Fay Prods Iremne Gaskell Kris Wyld Carol Long

Production Crew

Prod, manager Asst prod, manager Prod, secretary Location manager

Wayne Henry TBA Glenda Gevert Suzy Parker

On-set Crew

1st asst directors

Camera Crew

Props buyer TELEVISION PRODUCTION

Costume designer Composer

Researchers

Principal Credits

Director Producer Exec, producer Supervising prod. Scriptwriter Budgeted by Insurer

Scriptwriters D.O.P. Prod, designer Prod, designers

Penny Chapman Kim Vecera Judy Murphy Various Various Julie Belle Stephen Gow Ken Muggleston James Murray Simon Walker

Planning and Development

Production Crew MORE WINNERS (“Second Childhood”)

Assoc, producers

Gary Stephens Scott Feeney Steve Stannard Alan Parsons

Construction Dept

Studios

ABC

Post-production

Mixed at Gauge Length

ABC 1 ” videotape 1 hour per week

Marketing

InL dist. Thames Television Int. Cast: Michael Craig (William), John McTernan (Robert), Sarah Chadwick (Cathy), Michael O’Neill (Steve), Denise Roberts (Julie), Brian Rooney (Michael). Synopsis: Drama series detailing the comings and goings of an inner-city medical practice. HOME AND AWAY

Prod, company

ATN 7

Principal Credits

Director Producer Exec, producer Assoc, producer Scriptwriter Composer

Various Andrew Howie Des Monaghan Marcel Zammit Various Mike Peijanik

Planning and Development

Script editor Casting consulL

Sharyn Rosenberg Liz Mullinar Casting

Production Crew

Prod, Prod, Prod, Prod,

manager coord. secretary runner

Grahame Murray Lynda Burke Bronwyn Cooksley Daniel Heather

On-set Crew

Script asst

Fiona Hile

Art Department

Asst art director

Glenn Turner

Wardrobe

Wardrobe super Lucinda White Cast Roger Oakley (Tom Fletcher) Va nessa Downing (Pippa Fletcher), Nicolle Dickson (Bobby Sim pson), Sharyn Hodgson (Carly Morris), Craig McLachlan (GrantMitchell),DanniiMinogue (Emma Jackson), Adam Willits (Steven Matheson), Judy Nunn (Ailsa Hogan), Ray Meagher (Alf Stewart), Norman Cobum (Donald Fisher). Synopsis: A warm family drama featuring the lives, loves and relationships of the residents of Summer Bay.

SOUTH PACIFIC ADVENTURES (“The Phantom Horsemen”)

Prod, company

Grundy Television

Principal Credits

Director Producer Exec, producer Scriptwriter D.O.P. Sound recordist Editor Prod, designer

Howard Rubie Philip East Roger Mirams David Phillips Joe Pickering Phil Tipene Kerry Regan Ken McCann

Other Credits

Prod, manager Sandra Alexander Prod, coordinator Lori Flekser Prod, secretary Belinda Pribil Unit manager Richard Montgomery Prod, runner Grayden le Breton Prod, asst Deborah Green Gemma Rawsthome Prod, account 1st asst director Carolynn Cunningham 2nd asst director Philip Robpe 3rd asst director Robert Helliwell Script super. Jackie Sullivan Focus Puller Keith Bryant Gaffer Richard Curtis Key Grip Graham Litchfield Boom operator Cathy Gross Props buyers Fiona Scott Philip Cumming Set dresser 1 Sam Richard Set dresser 2 Judy Kelly Art dept coordinator Lee Bulgin Standby props Loroy Plummer Cost, manager Danie Daems Wardrobe super. Andrea Bums Standby wardrobe Heather Laurie Cathy James Wardrobe coord. Terri Lamera Stunt Coord. Claude Lambert Wrangler Tony Jablonski Make-up/Hair arL Cassie Hanlo Wayne Perrot Catering Robert Howarth Safety officer Rangi Nicora Stills photographer Jim Townley Post production The Editing Machine Casting Inese Vogler Casting asst Kirstin Truskett Laboratory VFC (Colorfilm) Tape house Bob Dog Inc. Cast Beth Buchanan (Charlotte), Bfian Rooney (Toby), Bryan Marshall (Tremayne), James Coates (Longworth), Vi oleta Bravo Cela (Rita), John Bonney (MacArthur), Antoinette Byron (Ara bella), Marshall Napier (Johnston), M ichael Gow (M aulé), Bill Conn (Marsden), Martin Vaughan (Cross), Ken Radley (Blake), Marc Gray (Martin). Synopsis: “The Phantom Horsemen” is an adventure set in early Sydney. A mysteri ous masked horseman is the only defence the colonists have against corrupt officials and marauding soldiery at the time of the rum rebellion. SOUTH PACIFIC ADVENTURES “Pirate’s Island”

Prod, company Grundy Television Director Viktors Ritelis Producer Philip East Exec, producer Roger Mirams Synopsis: “Pirate’s Island” is a fantasy. A group of children are swept away in a hot air balloon and land on an island out of time, an island where a group of Spanish pirates have been marooned for a hundred years or more.

ROSE AGAINST THE ODDS

Onset Prods Beyond DisL Prod, co.s Roadshow Coote & Carroll. Ross Close ABC Russell Kennedy Principal Credits Cast Telly Savalas (George Parnassus). Director Various Synopsis: Mini-series on the life story of Super, producer GregShears Australia’s greatest boxer, Lionel Rose. [No further details supplied] Series producer SueMasters Exec, producers MattCarroll GP

SKIRTS

[No details supplied]

Prod, company DisL company Producers

SOUTH PACIFIC ADVENTURES “Mission Top Secret”

Prod, company Grundy Television Director Howard Rubie Producer Philip East Exec, producer Roger Mirams Synopsis: In “Mission Top Secret”, a group of children from all over the world are linked through their computers, and in CINEMA

PAPERS

David Foreman Liz Steptoe D.O.P. Continuity Set finisher Mick Wilkinson Toivo Lember Sound recordist Suzanne Brown 2nd u n it cont. Studios DMG Denise Haratzis Editor Greg Rossitor Asst to constr. man. Will Davidson Boom operators Tel Stolfo Prod, designer Chris Nilsen Post-production Costume designer Jane Hyland Garry Siutz POST-PRO D UCTION Post-prod, super. Dee Liebenberg Make-up Composer David Hirschfelder Ron Bassi Asst editor Jan Louthian P l a n n i n g and Development Suzie Clemo JACKAROO Labs Movielab/Vic. Film Labs Story editor Peter Cawler Chiara Tripodi Prod, company Crawford Prods Gauges 16mm, 1” Make-up asst Casting consult’s Maura Fay & Assoc. John Neal Principal Credits Special fx sup. Shooting stock 7291 Production Crew Glenn Boswell Director MichaelCarson Stunts coord. Video transfers by Complete Post Prod, manager Ron Stigwood Richard Boue Safety officer Producer Bill Hughes Off-line facilities Crawfords Australia Prod, coordinator DianeStuart Virginia Speers Exec, producer Terry Ohlsson Still photography Cast Annie Jones (Clare), Tina Bursill Location manager MasonCurtis Virginia Sargent Unit publicist Assoc, producers Terrie Vincent (Martha), David McCubbin (Jack), Dot Unit manager Gary Buss John Faithfull Catering Collard (Jimby), Colin McEwan (Mallory), Vince Smits Production runner Christie Marc Ayre-Smith Catering asst Scriptwriter John Cundill Leith Taylor (Jo-ann), Leedham Cameron McGuinness Geoff McDowell Amenities driver (Murrawambah). D.O.P. Jeff Malouf Prod, accountant Sharon Jackso Art Department Sound recordist Don Connolly Synopsis: A four-hour mini-series, Ja cka Accounts asst ' Val-Smithers John Prycejones roo is the story of a wild Australian stockEditor Dee Leibenberg Art director Insurer Willis Faber Johnson Higgins Kerrie Reay Asst art designers Prod, designer David Copping man, a part-Aboriginal young man whose Completion guarant. Finances Marc Ryan Costume designer AnnaSenior struggle to win the woman he loves and Camera Crew Brian Nickless Planning and Development Design asst claim the land he has inherited erupts Focus puller John Foster Robert Hutchinson into a saga of family love, passion, power Script editor BarbaraBishop Set dressers Clapper-loader Liddy Van Gyen Janine Ranford and loyalty. Casting Jan Pontifex Key grip Robin Morgan• Scott Gray Extras casting Susan Haworth Asst grip Robert Van Amstell Brent Bonheur Dialogue coach THE PAPER MAN Richard Walley Gaffer Graeme Shelton Paddy McDonald Production Crew Prod, co.s Roadshow Coote & CarrollProps buyers Best boy Keith Johnson Cathy Young Prod, manager Terrie Vincent ABC Prod, coordinator Asst electrics ScottBrokate Standby props Don Page Christine Hart Dist co. Granada Television Intern’l Chris Ryman On-set Crew Location manager Graeme Nicholas Pre-production 7 August 1989 1st asst director ' Ed Prylinski Steve Pembroke Unit manager Peter Simon Production 30 October 1989 2nd asst director MonicaPearce Susan Haworth Post-production 12 March 1990 Wardrobe Prod, assist 3rd asst director H eatherjean Moys Wendy Falconer William Wake Delivery 30 July 1990 Wardrobe coords Prod, runners Glenn Suter Suzana Cako Type Mini-series Continuity Judy Whiteh Principal Credits Boom operator Des Kenneally Vince Smits Prod, accountant Standby wardrobe Philippa Wootten Make-up WendyFreema Film Finances Completion guarant. Director Peter Fisk Wardrobe asst Cathy Wallace Hairdresser Tony Meredith Set In Motion Producers Greg Ricketson 2nd u. w/robe assts Lorraine Verheyen Travel coord. Camera Crew Lindy Wylie Catering SteveMarcus Sue Masters Art Department Camera operator Jeff Malouf Exec, producers Matt Carroll (RC&C) Asst costume design Theo Benton Construction Department Art director Bemie Wynack Focus puller Marc Edgecombe Penny Chapman (ABC) Scenic artist Paul Brocklebank Clapper-loader Mark Muggeridge Assoc, producer Ray Brown Art dept coord Toni Forsyth Scriptwriters John Lonie Construct, mgr LaurieDornArt dept runner PaulWinter Aerial photog. Alex McPhee Standby carpenter ScottPatonSet dresser MichaelRumpf Arri SR Keith Aberdein Camera type D.O.P. IanWarburton Key grip Karel Akkerman Standby set fin. SteveBurnsProps Master Daryl Mills Kelvin Early Sound recordist Nicholas Wood Post-production Props buyer Brian Dusting Asst grips Editor Tony Kavanagh Asst editors Fabian Sanjuijo Standby props John Santucc Richard Blackadder Prod, designer MarcusNorth Nicole La Macchia Wardrobe Craig Bryant Gaffer Sound transfers IanDonato Steve Johnson Costume designer AnnieMarshall Costumier Sandra Cichello Best boys Mike Ewan Composer Chris Neal Laboratory Atlab Wardrobe coord. PhilChamb P l a n n i n g and Development Peter Rasmussen Lab liaison IanRussell Animals Government Agency Investment Phil Mulligan Asst electrics Script editor Penny Chapman Animal handler TimeaDickson On-set Crew Casting/Consult. Maura Fay & Assocs Production FFC Horse wrangler BillWilloug Marketing Extras casting LucyMonge Jake Atkinson 1st asst director Construction Dept Michael Mercurio Production Crew Internat’l dist. Granada Television In t 2nd asst director Studios LipsStudio H eatherjean Moyes Cast: John Bach (Phillip Cromwell), Ol Prod, manager Fiona McConaghy 3rd asst director Post-production iver Tobias (Ian Harris), Rebecca Gilling Prod, coords RowenaTalacko Colette McKenna 4th asst director Asst editor SallyFitzpatr Chris O’Connell(Virginia Morgan), Robert Taylor (Johnny (RC&C) Continuity Editing asst DavidBirrell Maureen Charlton (ABC) Bryant Coates), Olivia Hamnett (Irene Hamp Mixed at Hendon Studios Jenny Sutcliffe den), Peta Toppano (Kate Cromwell), Prod, asst SarahMilsome Boom operator Laboratory Victorian Film Lab. Karen Sims Robert Reynolds (James Bell), Angie Prod, secretary Jane Symonds Make-up Gauge : g 16mm Loca. manager MaudeHeathMilliken (JoannaMorgan) Jonathan Hyde Jude Smith Hairdresser Video transfers by AAV (Tony Dalton). Loca. asst Trisha Rothkrans Tom Priemus Special fx Post-prod. Network 8 Peter West Unit manager John Downie Stunts coord. Synopsis: A fictional, six-hour, mini-series Length 2 x 2 hours Prod, runner Lucindajane Ashton Art Thompson drama which traces the path of an idealis Safety officer Marketing tic young Australian newspaper proprie Prod, controller HowardParker Johannes Akkerman Unit nurse Int. distributor Beyond International Skip Watkins tor, and the repercussions of his personal (ABC) Still photography Cast Josephine Byrnes, Jerome Ehlers, Bus. affairs mgr Kim Vecera (RC&C) Susan Elizabeth and professional ambitions. Unit publicist Marcus Graham, Robyn Nevin, Lisa Hen Prod, accountant Jennifer des Champs Wood sley, Jason Donovan, Nadine Garner, (Moneypenny Services) Big Belly Bus SHADOWS OF THE HEART Sherrie Krenn, Michael Caton, Harold Catering Insurer Hammond Jewell Prod. co. South Australian Film Corp. Art Department Hopkins. Pre-production 20 November 1989 Ken James (Tony Gibbs) Art directors Synopsis: Summer, 1927: Doctor Kate Completion guar. Film Finances Production 22January 1990 Julieanne Mills Munro arrives at remote Gannet Island to (Sue Milliken) Steve Manning Post-production 18 March 1990 Art dept asst take up a practice. The locals resist Kate’s Legal serv’s Mallesons Stephen Jaques Louise Grant Principal Credits Art dept runner modern medicine as vigorously as they (David Williams) Director Rod Hardy Peter Marlow Props buyer oppose her stormy romances with the two Marcus Erasmus Camera Crew Producer Jan Mamell Standby props Hanlon brothers. She must call on all her Kim Sexton Camera op. ^Russell Bacon Exec, producer Jock» Blair Asst standby props courage before she wins acceptance and Focus puller Brendan Shaw Scriptwriter. Deborah Cox » Patrick Cameron finds happiness. Wardrobe Clapper-loader Sean McClory Anna Senior 2nd unit op. GaryRussell Wardrobe supervisor Paula Ekerick 2nd unit focus Matthew Temple Wardrobe buyers Key grip Greg Tuohy i Denise Goudy Paula Ekerick Asst grip Aaron Walker Standby wardrobe Gaffer Tim Murrayjones Denise Goudy A n im a ls Electrician Anthony Waldron Asst electrics Pierre Drion § Rob Greenough Horse master John Fairhead Gennie op. BobWoods Horse wranglers On-set Crew Glenn Suter Shayne Williams 1st asst director Bob Donaldson 2nd asst director. Karin KreicerS' Construction Dept 3rd asst director Rod Oliver Andy Dolphin Scenic artist John Parker 1st a.d. attach. Tony Tilse Const, manager David Boardman 2nd unit director Paul Faint Leading hand touch with Centauri Headquarters, which enlists their aid to fight against a gang of terrorists in a Middle-eastern State.

• CINEMA

PAPERS

IN T H E C A N N E S

THE CROSSING

STRANGERS

STRUCK BY LIGHTNING

Directed by George Ogilvie

Directed by Craig Lahiff

Directed by Jerzy Domaradzki

THE MAGIC RIDDLE A nim ation Directed and Produced by Yoram Gross

BEYOND I N T E R N AT I O N A L G R O U P

EMERALD CITY Directed by M ichael Jen kin s Starring N icole K idm an

Contact Gary Hamilton or Kaki Kirby Apartment 107 Second Floor Residence du Festival 52 La Croisette 0 6 4 0 0 CAN N ES Tel 33-93 99 0652

BEYOND FI LMS LTD 53-55 Brisbane Street SURRY HILLS Sydney NSW 2010 Australia Tel 61-2-281 1266 Fax 61-2-281 1153 Tx AA177130 GASMAN BEYOND INTERNATIONAL GROUP 1875 Century Park East Suite 1300 Los Angeles CA 90067 USA Tel 213-785 2255 Fax 213-785 2260

Tina Turner kicked off the NSW Rugby League TV commercials and I used EXR stock to cover the play. Thrown in with these tough football players, Tina was great - and looking through the end of a 400mm lens she was electric, dynamic. Day interior, day exterior, night interior and night exterior with a chopper landing in the rain. I was amazed at how far into the black EXR 5296 searched. A lot of our shooting was at 50,75, 100 frames and with this stock I knew I’d have m ore depth. It’s good to shoot with a decent s t o p ... something like 4 or 5.6. And pretty quick! A true El 500. Grain? None! There was no grain and the blacks w ere black. It’s simply the best. I could use EXR 5296 all the time. I know Tina and our director Dick Marks (of Dick Marks: the Australian Film Company) are m ore than happy.

David BunDirector of Photography

Eastman Motion Picture Films K odak a n d E astm an a re reg iste re d .tra d e m a rk s . 4 9 0 G C D & E1DB