Cinema Papers No.119 August 1997 by UOW Library

- j ,

Lu u u

p p p

CINEMA PAPERS « AUGUST 1997

N U M B E R 119

I N S I G H T S in bits light notes

2 10

Ten u nforgettable m ovie-gom g experien ces. CHRIS FITCHETT

lost and found

A postasy. HELEN GRACE

issues

W hose rights are they anyw ay? IAN COLLIE

The day J a c k Valenti came to town.

inprofile

Sullivan Stapleton.

inreview

F IL M S : Broken Eng Lidb, Mcibo: Life of an Id Land Man, Ulysses’ Gaze, Tide WeU BOOKS: Empire Building: The \ Remarkable Real Life Sto/y of Star \ Ward, The Godfather Legacy: The \ Untold Sto/y of the Making of the Claoeic Godfather Trilogy, Future \ Noir: The Making of Blade Runner, \ Harridon Ford: Imperfect Hero)

books received

legal ease

THE BIG DEBATE

The distributor and censorship.

8 I. CINEMA TC^AY IS! A. DEAD B. LOST C. MUTANT < D. A L IV E /

GABBY STEIN

technicalities

D igital editing. D om in o dom i nate? H igh light: high hopes. BARRIE SMITH

Broken English

Q 2. FILM CRITICISM in c r is is : A. TRUE B. FALSE

A. BERTOLUCCI POLANSKI CAMPION B00RMÂN hopper I CIMENT À MALCOLM V ETC. ... P. 28Î Ê

In his d ébut feature, G rego r N ich olas m ixes M aori, C roatian

and Chinese cultural influences on N ew Z ealan d soil with

Say Anything

striking results. Interview by

A nnem arie L o p ez trav erses the academ ic w astelan d m her review o f

L in d sa y A m os 24

Tom O ’R e g a n ’s Australian 32

National Cinema

the 7th Annual Women on Women Film Festival (WOW), a festival of new Australian short films produced by women. WOW will screen at the Chauvel Cinema on 18 and 19 Octo ber, and then travel to Brisbane, Melbourne, Adelaide and Perth. The Road Block, The House of Schlock Horror, The Animation Cell and The Other Room, and each has been cre ated by various artists to reflect the type of films screening. Films have been collected from var ious sources, and includes films from Scott Paterson (Pact, Lessons in the Language of Love), Christina Andreef (Shooting the Breeze, Excursion to the Bridge of Friendship) and Marcus Gale (Swerve).

PIGGING OUT ON SHORT FILMS ork Chop Productions, a con glomerate of writers, filmmakers, actors, artists and a bunch of other folk, is in the midst of this year’s Festival of the Pig. Along with a stage production of Tom Stoppard’s Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead, the Festival includes a series of formal debates about the future and art, an art exhibition displaying the works of Australian performers such as Barry Otto and Claudia Karvan, and a festival of short films, ChopFesT.

Pork Chop managers, Lou Grech and Danni Landa, have taken a differ ent approach with screening the films, and have set up six specificallydesigned theme rooms where short films are screened. It’s a whole all-sur rounding viewing experience. Lou Grech explains how ChopFesT came to be: “John Poison and Jeremy Sims, while they were working on Kan garoo Palace, came up with this idea, about doing another kind of film festival under Festival of the Pig. They asked me, ‘Do you want to do it?’ I said, ‘Yes’, and rang up my good friend Danni and asked her to give me a hand.” Rooms include The Lounge of Love,

Says Grech: “Danni and I went to the AFC, had a really good meeting with them and got their catalogue of short films. I went through the book and did a lot of cold calling. I’d seen a few things, but there were a lot of things where I thought, ‘Well, we have these themed rooms, and this sounds like it might fit.’ I spent a month calling people from all over Australia, but we were also able, through John Poison’s involvement, to view all of last year’s Tropicana entries, and we’ve acquired some films from there. So, between the two methods, we’ve got enough; we’ve got 35 films.” ChopFesT was installed at the Lansdowne Hotel in Sydney in early July, and will be doing the same in Melbourne at the Limerick Arms Hotel, South Mel bourne, between 20 and 24 August.

ANIMATED OPPORTUNITY ustralian animators will have the opportunity to have their work screened on television next year, thanks to an initiative from the Aus tralian Film Commission and SBS Independent. Swimming Outside the Flags will be a 50-minute collection of animations no longerthan five min utes. Projects based on ideas rather than technology are encouraged. Application forms are available from the Australian Film Commission: (61.2) 9321 6444 or (61.3) 9279 3400

WIFT NATIONAL CONFERENCE

c o v e r : Ben Mendelsohn is lensed and lit

by Tamara Harrison, dressed by Saba, on location at Lure Hair Salon (art: Bryce Ritchie and Natalie Rolfe)

elebrating the increasing success of women in the film industry, WIFT (Women in Film and Television) Australia is hosting a two-day confer ence, Tools of the Trade - Skilling Up for the Future. The conference will be held at the Sebel Hotel in Sydney on 16 and 17 October, and will be looking at the ‘nuts and bolts’ of women’s careers in the screen industries, as well as bringing together an interna tional range of guests and speakers. WIFT has also recently announced

, aug 1997 no: 119 116 Argyle St, Fitzroy, VIC, Australia 3065 PO Box 2221, Fitzroy MDC, VIC 3065 Tel: (03) 9416 2644 Fax: (03) 9416 4088 email: cp@parkhouse.com.au

For more information, contact WIFT Australia: (61.2) 9332 4584.

E d ito r: Scott Murray D e p u ty E d ito r: Paul Kalina E d ito ria l A ss is ta n ce : Tim Hunter

QUEENAN COMETH

A d v e rtis in g : Terry Haebich S u b s c rip tio n s : Mina Carattoli

he American film writer who considers himself to be a “mean-

A cc o u n ts : Tory Taouk P ro o fre a d in g : Arthur Salton

spirited turnip”, Joe Queenan, is travelling to Australia as the AFl’s guest for the Melbourne Writers’ Festi val. Best known in Australia for his two

O ffice Cat: Oddspot Le gal: Dan Pearce (Holding Redlich) M T V B o a rd o f D ire c to rs: Ross Dimsey (Chairman),

Natalie Miller, Matthew Learmonth, Penny Attiwill, Michael Dolphin F o u n d in g P u b lish e rs : Peter Beilby, Scott Murray, Philippe Mora

books, If You’re Talking to Me, Your Career Must be in Trouble (1994) and The Unkindest Cut: How a HatchetMan Critic Made His Own $y,ooo Movie and Put it All on His Credit Card (1995)» Queenan is a multi-media personality in the USA, where he has regular television and radio spots. His articles are published in several reputable monthlies. Queenan will be at the Diva Cafe, adjacent to the George Cinema in Mel

D esig n & P ro d u c tio n :

Parkhouse Publishing Pty Ltd Tel: (03) 9347 8882 P rin tin g : Printgraphics Pty Ltd F ilm : Condor Group D is trib u tio n : Network Distribution © COPYRIGHT 1997 MTV PUBLISHING LIMITED Signed articles represent the views of the authors and not neces sarily those of the editor and publisher. While every care is taken with manuscripts and m aterials supplied to the m agazine, neither the editor nor the publisher can accept liability for any loss or damage which may arise. This m agazine m ay not be reproduced in whole or part without the express perm ission of the copyright owners. Cinema Papers is published every month by MTV

bourne on Friday 17 October, and as a special guest of the Melbourne Writ ers’ Festival at the Malthouse in South Melbourne on Saturday 18 October. He will also be visiting Sydney, but dates and venues had not been confirmed at

Publishing Limited, 116 Argyle St, Fitzroy, VIC, Australia 3065.

COMMISSION

CINEMA PAPERS IS PUBLISHED WITH FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE FROM THE AUSTRALIAN FILM COMMISSION AND CINEMEDIA

the time of going to press.

DOCO AS ART he 5th International Documentary Conference, presented by Q.DoX Inc, the Queensland Documentary Association, will be held in Brisbane over four days, 20-23 November 1997. Its general aim is to increase the awareness of documentary film, and to provide a forum for raising issues, opinion and information. It is one of few events in the region to combine a film conference, festival and market place. Under the theme New Frontiers, the conference will explore the future directions and opportunities the docu mentary form is facing.

Early guest confirmations include: • John Marshall, former SecretaryGeneral of the European Media Project for Creative Documentary • Veteran American filmmaker, Barbara Kopple • Martin Freeth, Head of the BBC’s Multimedia Unit • Dr Henry Reynolds, historian • Chris Masters, Executive Producer of Four Corners. The Conference will be situated in the South Bank cultural precinct in Brisbane, and will utilize the Queens land State Library and Museum, the Queensland Art Gallery, the Conservatorium of Music and the Cultural Centre Trust Auditorium.

contributors Lin d s a y A m o s

Sy d n e y

is a

w r it e r w ith

AN INTEREST IN CINEMATOGRAPHY. Ian C o l l ie of the

is t h e e x e c u t iv e d ir e c t o r

A u str a lia n S c r e e n D ir e c t o r s ’

A s s o c ia t io n . D ia n e C o o k

is a

M el b o u r n e

w r ite r

an d s c r ip t e d it o r .

Jan E p s t e in

is a

M el b o u r n e

w r ite r

AND FILM REVIEWER. C h r is F it c h e t t

is t h e w r it e r - d ir ec to r

o f B l o o d M o n e y , an d is p r e s e n t l y

CHIEF EXECUTIVE OF THE COMMERCIAL T e l e v is io n P r o d u c tio n Fu n d . H elen G r a c e

is a w r it e r , fil m m a k e r ,

TEACHER AND PHOTOGRAPHER M ic h a e l K it s o n

is a

M el b o u r n e

WRITER ON FILM. A n n e m a r ie Lo p e z b a s e d in

is f r e e l a n c e w r it e r

Syd n ey .

Ba r r ie S m ith

is a

Syd n ey

d ir e c t o r ,

w r it e r a n d p h o t o g r a p h e r .

Ma r g a r e t S m ith

is a

Sydn ey

w r ite r

AND DIRECTOR. G a b b y ST ein is a at

Ha r t

and

law s t u d e n t w o r k in g ’§

S p ir a .

C I N E M A P A P E R S • A U GU S T 1 997

Thereâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s a perfect time to

anything

on Quantel Now anything is possible

WALKER LASSALLY, FRAME BY FRAME alker Lassally, the cinematog rapher of Zorba the Greek (for which he won an Academy Award), A Taste of Honey, Loneliness of the Long Distance Runner, Heat and Dust, The Bostonians and more than seventy other feature films and documentaries, told the Sydney Film Festival’s Frame by Frame audience that he favours black-and-white film stock. “Black is beautiful, but black and white is more beautiful.”

Lassally said he could invent more moods and have more control of the style of a film with black-and-white cin ematography: “A style is an attitude, an attitude is a style.” Walker Lassally started in the industry almost fifty years ago, when he was a clapper-loader in London. His family had left Germany, where his father had made industrial films during World War I. In England, where he was a projectionist as well as a clapperloader, he began to shoot his first independent film which was never finished. Lindsay Anderson saw the rushes and asked him to shoot a documentary, and he hasn’t stopped working since. Anderson also introduced him to Tony Richardson and Karel Reisz and the four of them formed the “Free Cin ema” group. The group brought him more projects, and Lassally developed his own dramatic documentary style in his early feature films. In Zorba (1961), Lassally explained, he used documentary techniques to capture the action and violence of some scenes between Anthony Quinn and Alan Bates. He also used filtration on the skies to give them lighter shades of grey, or more menacing darker tones. Interiors were spot lighted for more dramatic effects. Director Michael Cacoyannis employed local Crete villagers in minor roles and real locations were favoured. It is a film that looks remarkably modern today. Lassally admitted he admires blackand-white films more than he does colour, though Antonioni’s Red Desert and Visconti’s Senso were exceptional: “Only in the studio can you really experiment with colour. Outside in the sunny climates like Australia, colour is really difficult to control.”

IT’S A DOC’S UF T he observation will come as no surprise to many, but, along with the current disaster film craze

exploding around us, comes a rash of canine survival stories. An inordinate number of pooches are living through some of the most spectacular catastrophes seen on the big screen since The Towering Inferno and The Poseidon Adventure. Consider these ten prime examples: 1. TWISTER (Jan de Bont, 1996) Not only did Bill (Bill Paxton) and Jo Harding (Helen Hunt) save a broken marriage, Jo’s aunt’s dog survives the cyclone that devastates everything else, including Dr Jonas Miller (Cary Elwes). 2. THE MASK (Charles Russell, 1994) It’s a feat in itself just to survive Stanley Ipkiss (Jim Carrey) in this very loud and colourful comedy, but Milo the Dog does more than that: he wears the Mask, takes a dip in the bay to retrieve said item, and survives. Maybe not life-threatening stuff, but Carrey’s pres ence ups the ante considerably. 3. INDEPENDENCE DAY (Roland Emmerich, 1996) The nasty aliens may be blowing up the cities, sending fire balls down streets and through tunnels, but the resourceful stripper and son reach safety before being burnt to a crisp - and so does their retriever. 4. PARADISE ROAD (Bruce Beresford, 1997) In a film about survival and determination in a Japanese POW camp for women and children, it makes a bizarre sense that little pooch of Mrs Roberts (Elizabeth Spriggs) outlives her. If it had been a men’s POW camp, with the food rations they were getting, grilled pup would have definitely been an early camp menu item. But not to be in this film; the dog even survives a bullet in the neck. Ahh. 5. DAYLIGHT (Rob Cohen, 1996) Kit Latura (Sylvester Stallone) pulls a handful of people through this underpass disaster and, at one stage, it seems that the nervous pooch, a pointer, meets his maker underwater. But just as his mistress gives up and dies in her husband’s arms, back he bounces for the final reel. 6. DANTE’S PEAK (Roger Donaldson, 1997) This \ time around, it’s grandma’s dog that runs off when the volcano erupts, and turns up stranded on a rock in the middle of a lava flow. ‘Volcanologist’ Harry Dalton (Pierce Brosnan) risks the lives of Rachel Wando (Linda Hamilton) and her children - not to mention the tyres

of his je e p -fo r a drive-by rescue of the hot dog. Granny, by this stage, has died from acid burns, but the kids are happy that the dog’s alive. 7. MARS ATTACKS! (Tim Burton, 1997) At last! Not only do most of the human cast get zapped by the malicious Martians, but the little terrier becomes a victim of the invaders’ experiments burdened with the head of Nathalie Lake (Sarah Jessica Parker). 8. VOLCANO (Mick Jackson, 1997) Not one but two dog gies make it through to the end of this flic. Early one morning in LA, molten lava bursts its way through the Tar Pits, and makes its way down streets and through houses. People are running in panic and, in the middle of the chaos, a cry of “My puppy’s in there!” is heard. Sure enough, there’s the little terrier standing on the doorstep of a house consumed by lava. It goes back for its favourite bone, and makes a running leap through the dogflap into the arms of its owner. A big round of applause, please. The second dog to survive is the mutt belonging to Mike Roark (Tommy Lee Jones) who, for some reason, just turns up at the end after the town’s cooled off. 9. THE LOST WORLD: JURASSIC PARK (Steven Spielberg, 1997) There’s a dog, a boxer, chained to his doghouse in someone’s backyard, down town San Diego. He catches the town-trampling T-Rex’s eye, and you hope, perversely, that this mutt won’t get away. And he doesn’t. The hungry dinosaur stops and snacks on the boxer, but T-Rex doesn’t like the kennel chaser. And a classic example: 10. THE COURAGE OF LASSIE (Fred Wilcox, 1946) Surely, this is the ultimate in cinematic dog survival scenarios. Lassie is on trial for his life after biting sundry people. He’s even in the dock in court, and it looks like the death sentence for the heroic hound, until last minute evidence comes to light: after tremendous acts of bravery saving soldiers in the trenches during WW2, Lassie’s suffering shellshock and is not quite him self. He is acquitted, returns to Kathie Merrick’s (Elizabeth Taylor) arms, and lives to make more films.

DEALING FAIRLY WITH FILMS

n May, a report titled “Finding a Balance: Toward Fair Trading in Australia”, was presented by the House of Representatives Standing Committee on Industry Science and Technology. One of the matters

C I N E M A P A P E R S • A UGUST 1997

Assetbuilder the flexible line of credit for Home Owners

You only pay interest on the funds you use ■ Turn your home equity into a tax-efficient line of credit ■ Costs less than overdrafts. ■ Convenient and portable.You may never need a loan again ■ Visit your nearest branch or call 131 575

/ Invest in property / Improve your home / Invest in shares

Bank of Melbourne cuts the cost of banking Head Office: 52 Collins Street, Melbourne. 3000

Bank 46944

New loans only. Conditions, fees and charges apply. Full details available on application.

bits

examined was complaints made by small independent film distributors and exhibitors of refusals to deal from the major cinema chains. Allegations of unfair conduct in relation to ‘blockbuster’ films were noted, and it was claimed that major chains were all but ignoring indepen dent cinemas in favour of their own screens. Independent cinemas have taken this grievance to the Australian Competition and Consumer Commis sion (ACCC), alleging misuse of market power. According to the report, the ACCC has appointed an industry consultant to examine such competition issues. As yet, nothing has been reported, and no recommendations of action have been made by the ACCC.

ONANEW TRAK he Melbourne cinema, The Trak, has lived in the shadows cast by the Longford and the Palace cinema at Como fora couple of years now. Bought by Palace early last year, it has been re-invented as a repertory and special event cinema. It’s combining exclusive, first release films with special screenings of Warner Bros Films classics, such as The Wild Bunch (Sam Peckinpah, 1969), Big Wednesday Oohn Milius, 1978), Deliverance (john Boorman, 1972), and Bonnie & Clyde (Arthur Penn, 1967). The cinema is also featur ing a series of lunchtime matinees for group bookings, special screenings of secondary school text films, Sunday

gramme advised upon by film buff Paul Harris.

He also urged everyone to “contact the Attorney-General by phone or fax to let him know that the work of these

SHINING ON CEDARS

writers is valued and essential to our lives as Australians”. For more debate on the moral rights issue, see Ian Collie’s article in this issue.

cott Hicks, director of Shine, will direct his first American feature,

a film adaptation of David Guterson’s novel, Snow Falling on Cedars, for Uni versal Pictures. Produced by Kathleen Kennedy, Frank Marshall, Harry Ufland and Ronald Bass, it begins production in the American fall from a screenplay adapted by Bass.

MAKING A REEL LOUD NOISE s part of the LOUD Festival, Australia’s first national media festival of youth culture and the arts, the ABC, the AFC and state film bodies are commissioning a series of four, half-hour documentaries made by filmmakers 25 years old or younger. Applications closed at the end of May 1997, and the selected projects are set to go into production in August, to be finished in time for the Festival, which will run throughout January 1998.

SCREEN AUSTRALIA

hree of Australia’s major film and

video collections will be working to create a new body, Screen Australia. Film Australia, the National Film & Sound Archive and Cinemedia will be incorporating their collections in Screen Australia, eventually making it possible to access their audio-visual collections from anywhere in the country. The organizations are currently conducting feasibility studies, looking at all access possibilities and issues. Due to start in August 1997 is a post-graduate programme in audiovi sual management, to be offered on the Internet via a partnership between the NFSA and the University of New South Wales.

AUTHORSHIP RIGHTS

uring the winter sitting of Federal Parliament this year, AttorneyGeneral Daryl Williams introduced the Copyright Amendment Bill into the House of Representatives. This bill intends to give moral rights to Aus tralian film and television producers and directors, but not to writers. Effec tively, this means that producers and directors can call themselves authors of the works. Writer Ian David, while delivering the Ian McPherson Lecture at the 1997 Sydney Film Festival, called for the film and television industry to respect their

IT'S A WRITER-MEETS-DIRECTOR STORY new way for screenwriters and directors to meet is now in oper ation. The Script Dating Service, a joint venture between The Australian Writ ers’ Guild (AWG) and the Australian Screen Directors’ Association (ASDA) and sponsored by Optus Vision’s Movie Network, was launched in June. AWG members can submit synopses to the AWG board, which then makes them available for ASDA members to read. If directors like what they read, a “date” can be arranged and new working relationships formed. Confidentiality and copyright ownership are assured for all writers who submit their synopses, and all submissions will be kept in a regularlyupdated register for three years.

NEWATLAB LAB he Atlab Group of companies has announced a new motionpicture release-print-only laboratory in Sydney. The existing laboratory will be available for television commercials, short films, television drama, docu mentary and feature films.

NATIONAL STUDENT FILM AND VIDEO FESTIVAL he National Student Film and Video Festival is calling for entries for this year’s competition. Entrants must be enrolled tertiary students (AFTRS students are excluded) and financial members of their student union or equivalent. Prizes are awarded in various categories, and range from cash to products and services.

T he Astor Theatre in St Kilda, Melbourne, is a Cinema with Style. The Astor has a soft spot in the heart of many a Melburnian film buff. Best-known for

■

its repertory double features, with classic films on Sunday evenings, its grand art deco interiors have been lovingly maintained. It has been the home of both the Melbourne International Film festival and the St Kilda Film Festival.

PO BOX 2221 FITZROY MDC VIC 3065 email: cp@parkhouse.com.au

TH E B R O S G R IM M . . . NOT D e a r E d it o r ,

It may have already been brought to your attention, but if not here goes. The article in the June edition regard ing film restoration (“Restoration”, Cinema Papers, no. 117, p. 18) was quite interesting. However, the title page that featured 70mm blow-ups of what was labelled The Wonderful World of the Brothers Grimm was in actual fact blow-up frames from another film which appears to be Vanessa Redgrave in Camelot. The Brothers Grimm was a Cin erama presentation featuring the three-camera process and shown by three interlocked/synchronized pro jectors. It was something to behold; I know, I saw it! Fond memories of childhood and having a pristine copy of the souvenir book (hardcover) that explains the process, etc., makes it like it was yesterday. The only other film shot in the true Cinerama process that was an actual storyline was How the West Was Won. There was no 70mm version. The 35mm scope had the join lines. interestingly, the recent video release of The Brothers Grimm starts off in the Cinerama process, and looks magnificent on a widescreen television, then resorts to Pan an’ Scan. Yuk! But at least it does con tain the play-ins before and at intermission. The print, though quite viewable, shows some very bad deterioration throughout, and somewhere, locked away, the negative is probably worse. Will this and other, or all, films be lost forever? Amazingly with video releases in widescreen of such films as Okla homa!, we get the original version in all its glory that most likely has not seen the light of day since first release, like Lawrence of Arabia. With the advent of Digital Video Disc, hopefully these films will find an everlasting life and will look just as good for hundreds of years to come, thanks to people like Robert A. Harris and James C. Katz who care and surely love movies. Yours sincerely, Alan Richard Bond

T h e E d it o r n o t e s :

The mistake, for which Cinema Papers apologizes, was made in-house and not by Harris or Katz.

C I N E M A P A P E R S • A UGU S T 1997

Frameworks, first in non-linear in Australia, has once again taken the initiative in film editing. We are the first facility providing a dedicated non-linear assistant’s room for syncing rushes which allows for true 24FPS cutting, providing frame accurate edl’s, cut lists and change lists for feature films. This method of post for 24FPS film provides a one to one relationship with picture time code, film key code numbers and sound time code.

This method provides simple and frame accurate output of cut lists, change lists, picture and sound edl’s directly from the Avid. This avoids the need for trace back edl’s for sound post production and conversion between 24FPS and 25FPS for cut lists.

For fu rth e r details, and a m ore com plete explanation of the d iffe re n t

(

)

post produ ction methods, please contact Stephen F. Smith at Frameworks.

“ Knowledge, Experience, Service”

Frameworks Edit Pty. Ltd. Suite 4,239 Pacific Hwy, North Sydney, NSW 2060 Tel : 02 9955-7300 Fax : 02 9954-0175 Email : framewks@ozemail.com.au

bits Entries close 19 September, and entry forms and information are cur rently available from Student Unions on most campuses, or contact 1997 National Student Film and Video Festi val at the University of Sydney Union: (61.2) 9563 6161.

BFI CLASSICS TOURING AUSTRALIA selection often films from the British Film Institute’s Classic Film Collection is touring the country, presented by the Australian Film Insti tute. Film titles include: A Matter of Life and Death (Michael Powell and Emeric Pressburger, 1946); Black Narcissus (Michael Powell and Emeric Pressburger, 1947); Rancho Notorious (Fritz Lang, 1952); Great Expectations (David Lean, 1946); Oliver Twist (David Lean, 1948); In Cold Blood (Richard Brooks, 1967); Hud (Martin Ritt, 1962); Compulsion (Richard Fleischer, 1959); Blood on the Moon (Robert Wise, 1948); The Set-Up (Robert Wise, 1949) The season has already screened in Sydney and Melbourne and will be travelling to Adelaide, Perth, Brisbane and Hobart.

APPOINTMENTS he FFC has announced the appointment of Catriona Hughes as Chief Executive Officer of the Corpo ration for the next two years. Hughes was involved in setting up the FFC in 1988 and has served as Business Manager, Investment Man ager and Senior Investment Manager. Hughes replaces John Morris, who did not renew his contract. Peter Beilby, Investment Manager for FFC, has announced his intentions to return to film production after three years in the FFC’s Melbourne office. Beilby’s feature film credits include That Eye, the Sky Qohn Ruane, 1995) and Bushfire Moon (George Miller, 1987), and television credits which include Gillies and Company and Boys From the Bush. He was also a partner with Fred Schepisi in Entertainment Media, and is one of the co-founders of Cinema Papers.

O b it u a r y b y K y m SaatA o vitti

GRAEME ANTHONY JACKSON Graeme Anthony Jackson, Animator, Born 10 October 1947, died 14 June 1997 It was a sad day for the Australian animation fraternity recently as the nation lost one of its best character animators and multimedia artists with the passing of Graeme Jackson. Born and raised in Elwood, Victo ria, Graeme’s break came in the mid-’6os, when the Swinburne Insti tute started recruiting students for the newly-formed film and television course under Brian Robinson. Graeme, who was then studying graphic design and illustration, made the switch and never looked back. His graduate film, an ingenious mock doc umentary about his father’s false teeth business, was strong enough to earn him a place with the thenunknown Fred Schepisi at The Film House as an editor, but he quickly rose to prominence as a young whizzkid advertizing director. But, by 1972, he had “given up” on Australia and headed to London, via India and Nepal, to study animation. His first attempts to break into the animation profession were not auspi cious. He was required to create a voluptuous rubber doll singing “I’m thirsty” in German before a backdrop touting the virtues of Coca-Cola. This led to a position as an assistant animator on the Jackson 5 television series (there were two other Jacksons in the studio and Graeme became Jackson eight), and then went on to direct numerous animated ads for French television, picking up a Grand Prix award at the prestigious Cannes adver tising awards for “le Bébé”. He spent a year working alongside the great British cartoonist, Gerald Scarfe, as a sequence director for the back projection component of “Wel come to the Machine”, Pink Floyd’s 1975 world tour, establishing tech niques used in The Wall, but managing to avoid work on that production. During this period, Graeme worked alongside animators Oscar Grillo and John Challis, and was rated in the top dozen character animators in the world. Possibly the highlight for Graeme was working with acclaimed British animator Bob Godfrey, direct ing Instant Sex and working on the Rhubarb series, which was aimed at children but ended up being watched by 30-year-old hippies. Graeme spent four years at the Godfrey studios and was instrumental in securing the 1975 Academy award for Best Animation for the studio, with his contribution towards the film Great.

He finally took off on a sabbatical around Europe, studying the largescale oil paintings of the masters and supporting himself by buskingwith a bouzouki. In 1979, the atmosphere of home must have been too much for him and he decided to move back to Australia. For the next 17 years, Graeme earned his living as a freelance character ani mator, consultant and designer, working predominantly on television advertisements. He was an intensely ethical man and always chose and con sidered his work with great care. Memorable characters that Graeme animated from this period were the

Tasmanian Tiger, for the Tasmanian tourist bureau, and the Patons brake man, the helpful little chap with the big feet, who lived inside tyres helping families to avoid automobile accidents. Graeme also animated music video clips for some of Australia’s most suc cessful bands including “The Power and the Passion” for Midnight Oil, “Solid Rock” for the Goanna Band and, later on, “Chocolate Cake” for Crowded House, in which he designed, constructed and animated a swarm of articulated insects, a Liberace-style, piano-playing praying mantis and a fat dancing beetle. Graeme had a lifelong association with the Swinburne Film and Televi sion School. He was always on hand to contribute with his wealth of expertise. He would have made a fabulous teacher but was always much too busy with his own artistic pursuits and obsessions. Nevertheless, he always found time to turn up at the end-ofyear screenings to see what sort of material the current batch of gradu ates were dreaming up, and he was always happy to provide character voices, help with editing decisions or storylines, and give constructive criti cism to the students.

in accruing money for its own sake. Financial success, a mortgage, the beach house ... all the signs and trap pings of the successful professional meant nothingto him. He seemed content to spend most of his time alone, working for up to sixteen hours a day exploring the cre ative processes of painting, drawing, cartooning, sculpture, ceramics, play ing guitar, piano, bouzouki and flute, composing, editing, writing, and designing and building miniature articulated puppets. Graeme’s final years saw a slow but steady decline in his health. He seemed depressed, but not surprised at the state of things: the culture of economic rationalism, the social injustices, the clamouring for suc cess at all costs, and society’s disgust at the poor, the weak and the down-trodden. His recent experiences working on an inept, animated children’s television show left him saddened, and, although fascinated by the nasty in-house politics at the studio, he often complained about the poor quality of animation being churned o u t-th e “sweat-shop” mentality, he called it. Intellectually, he remained as active and as lucid as ever. Profes sionally, he worked on the award-winning Target ads, the Coco Flakes Kookaburra (a classic piece of jackomation), edited the film Puppenhead, which opened the New York Film Festival, and designed and animated the special effects and animation for the short feature, Otherzone. He had recently immersed himself in computer animation and, within months of familiarizing himself with the software, had designed an ingenious lip-synch system for com puter-generated puppets. Graeme Jackson passed away peacefully at his home, which also served as his studio, amongst friends and surrounded by a lifetime of intense artistic exploration. Although survived by no children, he leaves behind a treasure trove of sculpted angels, pixies, nudes, a dancing kookaburra, scores of pup pets, a talking Tasmanian tiger, a little man with big feet who lived inside car tyres, another character obsessed with canned sex, a dancing beetle, his pet dog ‘Ginger’, and a swag of bereaved friends and colleagues.

Graeme was a fiercely independent, private individual. His professional

Kym Sansovini is a cartoonist,

jobs were few and far between out of choice. He was utterly disinterested

animator and filmmaker, and was a close friend of Graeme Jackson

C I N E M A P A P E R S • A U GU S T 1997

Subscribe now, receive Cinema Papers every month and save up to 20% off newsstand price, offer ends 1 S eptember 1997.

1i 21 uZ \>>

11 issues at 10% Off! $68.8( ) (normally $76.45) 22 issues at 15% Off! $129.9 iS

(normally $152.90)

33 issues at 20% Off! $183.45

(normally$229.35)

R e n e w a l?

B a c k issues: $6.00 e a c h Issue Nos required:

Total no. of issues:

Total Cost$

Name.........................................................................

Enclosed is my cheque for $ ...........................................

Title...........................................................................

or please debit my

Company...................................................................

Card No................................................................................ ...

Address ....................................................................

Expiry Date................................................................ ................

DBankcard

DMastercard

DVisacard

Country....................................................Post Code Tel (H)........................................ (W)........................

Sig nature ........................................... ................ ...... ................

Cheques should be made payable to MTV Publishing Limited and mailed to PO Box 2221 Fitzroy MDC Australia 3065. All overseas orders should be accompanied by Bank Drafts in Australian Dollars Only. Please allow 4-6 weeks for processing. Phone or fax Cinema Papers for all overseas rates.

T racks A ustralia So u n d Pr o d u c tio n Pty Ltd 46 A lbany Street , C rows N est NSW 2065 T el : (02) 9906 2960 Fa x : (02) 9906 4128

light notes

Being There Chris Fitchett, chief executive officer of the Commercial Television Production Fund and writer-director of Btood Money (1980), recalls ten seminal movie-gomg experiences. The first film I remember seeing was about leprechauns in a Hollywood version of Ireland (I think it was Darby O’Gill and the Little People1). When death, personified as a headless coach driver in a black cloak, came down from the night skies, I nearly wet myself. On the way home, I was actually sick. And, if I ever undergo therapy by regressing to relive my original traumatic experi ence, it won’t be my own birth; it will be witnessing this particular scene.

Witnessing is the wrong word. Because when you’re young you feel as though you’re actu ally part of the scene, rather than observing it. And so it was with A Hard Day’s Night (Richard Lester, 1964) at a theatre in Burke Road, Camberwell. Outside, a quiet Saturday afternoon in the early 1960s; inside, a theatre full of screaming teenage girls. It was as though The Beatles were actually on stage, rather than projected on the screen. And every time they played a song, the audience on screen and in the theatre merged into one and went out of their brains with hysteria. My brother and I were outnum bered by females on a ratio of about 498 to 2, and thirty years later I was to have a similar experience when I found myself the lone male in a full house for Howto Make An American Quilt (Jocelyn Moorhouse, 1996), although the audience this time was more subdued.

Most teenage boys growing up in the 1960s knew that ‘art films’ really meant lots of sex and

nudity. One day I was in Collins Street shopping for Christmas presents for my family when I saw this poster for a Brigitte Bardot film, which promised that it was true to this genre. I looked around to make sure that no one I knew just happened to be following me, then snuck down the steps and into what was probably The Australia Twin ... to experience the weirdest film ever.

d'après le roman d'ALBERTO MORAAJA avec TECHNICOLOR

JACK PALANCE

m mc

T ransc ò pe1

MICHEL PICCOLI GEORGES - GEORGIA M OLL et FRITZ LANG /C s Dìrecmtr de la Photographie RAOUL COUTARDDEIJIRIIE {Éditions Hortensia^ Di reelcor de Production 'PHILIPPE DUS5ART M w iq w de

Many years later, grappling with film theory and trying to work out the difference between a sign and a signi fier, I discovered that this particular film was actually Le Mépris (Contempt, 1963) by Jean-Luc Godard. A film about a filmmaker’s contempt for the com mercial exploitation of cinema which featured lingering pans over Brigitte Bardot’s naked body in order to lure people to pay money to see it. Mmmm ... A Man and A Woman (Un Homme et Une Femme, Claude Lelouch, 1966). My very first date. Saturday afternoon in the city. On the way home in the train, she reached across and held my hand. The perfect date movie!

end of the movie, the projectionist had put on the last reel of Franco Zeffirelli’s Romeo and Juliet (1968) by mistake! Whether this was deliberate or an acci The day after seeing Easy Rider dent, no one really knows. But no one (Dennis Hopper, 1969), I played complained. And, in due course, Romeo football for a pretty good team in a very important match. The coach died, Juliet died, and the end credits rolled up on the screen, followed by a urged us to go out and “kill the oppo return to the previously-playing concert sition”, but I spent the first half film - which, by now, everyone in the wandering around the forward line audience could only vaguely remember. singing, “All they wanted was to be One thing I’m sure of, it was either Pink free ... and that’s the way it turned Floyd or Emerson, Lake 81 Palmer! out to be!”, and staring off at a point beyond space itself. Same theatre. Same era. Proba The 1970s. Sitting in the Trak bly exactly the same audience. Cinema at a late night screening The film: 2001: A Space Odyssey of a concert film, I seemed to be (1968). Most people who claim to have the only one in the audience to notice seen God during the film say it was that, during a reel change towards the during the famous ‘stargate’ sequence (The worst date movie ever made is Mike Nichols’ Carnal Knowledge, 1971)

C I N E M A P A P E R S • A UGUST 1997

at the end. But I was an aspiring film maker at the time and as a result I saw God much earlier. And His name was Stanley! And it still intrigues me that the letters of the seriously-maladjusted computer are all one up the alphabet from IBM. And the fact that he goes mad and tries to kill the astronauts because the poor buggers got a message planted in his unconscious by the people who created him ... The poster said it all. The ultimate trip. (Urban myth has it that there was a screening of 2001 at about the same time at the Melbourne University Union Theatre where the last reel went missing. The projectionist turned on the lights, went to the front of the audience, and then proceeded to explain what happened at the end!) Everyone who turned up to the premiere screening of Nagisa Oshima’s In The Realm of the

Senses {Ai No Corrida, 1976), at the Palais Cinema in St Kilda during the Melbourne Film Festival, knew that C I N E M A P A P E R S • A UGUST 1997

there was a scene where the male character has his manhood taken away from him. Unlike John Wayne Bobbit twenty years later, this guy was dead when it happened. But it was still extraordinarily disturbing- especially when a woman somewhere in the dark started moaning in pain and scream ing. it sent a chill through the audience which was truly eerie and which I’ll never forget.

Heavenly Creatures (Peter Jackson, 1995). The Venice Film Festival. The most perfect pro

jection and sound quality you could ever imagine. And absolutely huge on the screen. I literally sat there with my mouth open. Shortly after this screening, I found myself crawling across a wet road with smashed legs, trying desperately to reach the safety of the footpath after being mowed down by a Polish man on an Italian motorbike. Mistaking me for Woody Allen, the gendarmes rushed to my aid and called an ambulance manned by two Roberto Benignis and I was whisked away to a hospital where a doctor who looked like Marcello Mastroianni awaited my arrival in casualty. And on that same fateful night Ian Pringle was arrested in New York in an incident related to art and Geoffrey Wright allegedly threw a glass of wine over David Stratton. Miscellaneous scariest moments. During the graveyard scene in The Omen (Richard Donner, 1976) in a pitch-dark cinema, a couple of rows behind me and John Ruane, a real whacker yelled out at the top of his

voice with a blood-curdling scream, “Aarghhhh!” Now, it was either at this exact moment, or during the scene where Carrie’s hand comes out other own grave, that I turned to John, and I’m not kidding, his hair was standing on end! And because of Play Misty For Me (Clint Eastwood, 1971), and the scene in Sisters (Brian de Palma, 1973) where the bad twin stabs her boyfriend in the groin, I have always worn pyjamas to bed. But I have never been more fright ened than during the horrible scene in Looking For Mr Goodbar (Richard Brooks, 1977), as Diane Keaton is getting killed and the strobe lighting effect is threatening to thrust the audi ence into a mass attack of epilepsy, when a hailstorm hit the roof of The Esquire, accompanied by deafening cracks of thunder. Which, now I come to think of it, is exactly what happened during the locust attack in Exorcist 2: The Heretic (John Boorman, 1977) at The Rapallo. Or was it The Forum ... © 1 Robert Stevenson, 1959.

lo s t a n d fo u n d

Apostasy

by Helen Grace

N THE “LEGIONS of the Lost, Forgotten, Underrated and Neglected” films, one would have to include virtually all Aus tralian films of a certain period, especially the ones which have images of naked women (aesthetic suicide after 1976), ones which are in any way romantic (as opposed to sentimental), ones which do not have the sounds of magpies, and ones which do not have “good taste, respectability and safety” - the aesthetic style of ‘AFC genre’ films.1 To the list of films already writ ten about in the series, I’d want to add Apostasy, Exits (Paul Davies, short, 1980), Sunshine City (Albie Thoms, 1973), Against the Grain: More Meat than Wheat (Tim Burns, 1981)... I could go on, but then this would become a mere listing of titles, which is the problem of so much ofthe writing on these films, and is perhaps why we do not see so many of them any more. And so, a choice must be made ... okay... Apostasy, because it is uglier and messier than, say Exits, which deals with the same disbelief/loss of faith, or Against the Grain, which chooses the romantic fantasy of ultraLeftism as a means of side-stepping the emptiness which Apostasy confronts. At the heart of this lies an abandon

ment of faith -th e meaning of Apos t a s y - brought about both by the spatial dislocation ofthe characters as well as by the temporal moment of generalized dislocation caused by the events of November 1975. We see the same kind of mood in some recent Chinese cinema, post-1989 (such as Wang Xiaoshuai’s The Days). The analogy with Tiananmen Square doesn’t quite work, of course. Nothing is quite the same here, where there are more scaled-down versions of world-historical happenings, but, if

APOSTASY Directed by Zbigniew Friedrich. Producer: Don McLennan. Executive producers: David Thomas, Stewart Hornsey, Virginia Brook. Scriptwriter: Zbigniew Friedrich. Director of photography: Zbigniew Friedrich. Sound recordist: Lioyd Carrick. Editor: Zbigniew Friedrich. Music: Joe Creighton, Ross Hannaford, Isabelle Parrar, Eric Gradman. Cast: Rod M cNicol (The M an), Juliet Backsai (The Woman), Phil M otherwell (Madman on the Street), Alan M oney (Old Man in Cafe), Paul Cox (Pho tographer), Ross Skiffington (M agician), Irene Barberis (Woman at the Table), Richard Doctors (Concertina Player), J. J. Jannu (Wood Sculptor). Ukiyo Films. Produced with the assistance of the Australian Film Commission. 16mm. 108 mins. 1979.

desire to regenerate a faith lost irrevo cably at that moment and a desire to regenerate an Australia which had dis appeared even before then. The film begins with a hold-up. A crazed Madman on the Street (Phil Motherwell) accosts the apostate, The

The Motherwell performance is bril liantly volatile, its explosive energy providing a tense counterpoint to the physical restraint ofthe rest ofthe film. A whole chapter might be written on the brilliant volatility of Motherwell’s performance style in this film and else where in a whole book on the seriously-neglected topic of Australian actors and acting. After this, nothing, in a sense, really happens in Apostasy. The Woman (Juliet Backsai), a model, comes to a house to be photographed by The Man, and, if Antonioni had used fewer exterior shots, Blowup (1966) would have looked like a more frivolous version of this. Well, okay, not quite. The rest ofthe ‘action’ takes place in a room, sometimes filmed in colour, sometimes in black and white. A relation ship develops, one which is sustained by a degree of perversity, a reciprocal emo tional cruelty all the more compelling for its banality. Days pass, 44

The film's depiction ofthe psychological intensity of exile has parallels with the deep political disillusion which followed November 1975; an act of apostasy becomes an appropriate - and prescient - interpretation ofthe subsequent impossibility of commitment. we are unable to acknowledge the sig nificance of those events and their effects upon us, we will also be inca pable of recognizing the importance of artistic responses to them. Of course, there have been responses, like the tasteful, respectable, safe mini-series, The Dismissal (1982) and The True Believers (1987), both made possible by November 1975, because ofthe

Man (Rod McNicol), asking him if he believes in Krishna, Buddha, Jesus Christ. A negative answer in each case provokes Madman into taking The Man as a hostage, following him through suburban streets, a market and a church, while haranguing him with conspiracy theory about the origin of Christianity (“the biggest business venture in history”).

C I N E M A P A P E R S • A UGUST 1997

D edicateci D ig ita l R e n d e rin g W H EN Y O U C R E A T E V IR T U A L W O R LD S IN S O F T IM A G E , W H Y LET A LITTLE T H IN G LIK E TIM E G E T IN Y O U R W A Y ?

c u t t in g ed ge c o m p u te r is e d re n d e rin g fa r m w it h d e d ic a te d IS D N lines f o r d e d ic a te d re n d e rin g D D R R

o ffe rs :

a b s o lu te s e c u r ity and c o n f id e n t ia lit y speed and c o s t e ffe c tiv e n e s s p ro fe s s io n a l h a n d lin g and c re a tiv e f l e x i b i l i t y can read all f o r m a t s 2 4 h o u r service , 3 6 5 days a y e a r c o n t a c t C h r is t y D ena o r N ig e l R o b e rts o n a t D D R 4 2 9 sw an s t r e e t r ic h m o n d v ic to r ia 3 1 2 1 a u s tr a lia

te l: 61 3 9 4 2 9 5 2 8 0

fa x : 61 3 9 4 2 9 3 3 0 0

e m a il: d d r@ d d r.c o m .a u

issues

Whose rights are they anyway? by Ian Collie N 3 APRIL 1997, the Danish High Court ruled that the panning and scanning of Jggg9g|| Sydney Pollack’s CinemavB H B l J S W $SB Scope classic, Three Days of the Condor (1975), by Danish Television was a mutilation and distortion of the original film and was therefore a violation of Pollack’s moral rights. According to Pollack, the noted director of such films as They Shoot Horses, Don’t They? (1969), Toot sie (1982) and Out of Africa (1985), the panning and scanning process, in which as much as 50 percent of each frame of the film is excised to make it fit the box like dimensions of a television screen, loses vital information in the film. Discrepancies between dia logue and image begin to occur and the general aesthetics of the film is affected. Condor, a political thriller about a US intelligence officer who knows too much, fills each frame with information that creates paranoia and further heightens suspense. The sus pense element is dissipated in the panned-andscanned version. The Court dismissed the defendan t’s argument that the film is a “commercial commodity [...] and must adapt to other standards than those of the first-run movie house”. It held that the significant cropping of the original was not neces sary to broadcast the work on television, pointing out other options such as the letterbox format which had been approved by Pollack. Despite the Court’s strongly-worded judgement, the case, brought by the Association of Danish Direc tors on Pollack’s behalf, eventually failed on the basis that Pollack had signed a director’s service contract that included a waiver clause giving the producer a wide discretion to edit ancillary releases of the film. This, the Court held, included the right to pan-scan the film. In the Condor case, contractual rights over ruled moral rights. And this is the essential issue for Australian film practitioners and government policy makers to grasp on the eve of the introduction of moral rights into the Australian legal system. Whose

Art has always compromised itself with commerce. But there are limits - in particular where a work is released into the market place which misleads consumers into thinking that the altered work is the actual work or that it has been endorsed by the director. rights should prevail when there is a head-on colli sion between economic rights and creative rights, between art and commerce ? It is a problem as old as Methuselah ... well, Michelangelo anyway. The difficult issue of balancing artists’ moral rights with the legal rights of producers and investors was one amongst a number of topics discussed, with vary

ing degrees of success, at the Fourth Artists Rights Symposium held in Los Angeles in April. The Sympo sium was hosted by the Artists Rights Foundation, the moral rights watchdog for the US film industry. The mission of the Foundation is to educate the pub lic about the importance of protecting films from post-release alterations that are damaging to both the film and the director’s reputation. Those who have put their names to being Foundation Trustees, Benefactors, Founders, Distinguished Members and other categories of patronage is a veritable who’s who of Hollywood: Martin Scorsese, Steven Spiel berg, George Lucas, Tom Cruise, Milos Forman, Robin Williams, Harrison Ford, Mel Gibson and so on. The first session of the Symposium focused on the new communication technologies, such as the Internet, and the problems associated with protect ing the integrity of an author’s work when the potential for alteration, because of its digital format, is rela tively simple. Numerous commentators have forecast the death of copyright and painted an apocalyptic picture of intellectual property pirates running rampant in cyberspace. Maybe. But as the panel of speakers concurred, we are still some way off at really knowing the full nature and scope of services on the Net for audio-visual content and, importantly, whether the Net will be a viable distribution source for films. Rob Hummel, a director of anima tion technology at Dream Works SKG, felt the problem of unauthorized copy ing and digital manipulation was already present. With a Hi-8 camcord video recorder, films that have just been theatrically released can be recorded and released illegally on video. He said that Disney was reluc tant to release The Lion King (Roger Alters, Rob Minkoff, 1994) on new plat forms like DVD because of the ease of copying and altering. Hummel argues that with the growth of encryption tech niques and coding, we are likely to see less, not more, instances of unautho rized copying and digital manipulation than we now see. The general theme of the Symposium was marketing or misrepresentation, and this was the crux of the other sessions that focused on the main outlets for film: cinema and tele vision. Milos Forman recounted how The People vs Larry Flynt (1996) was distributed to Lebanon with some cuts for what the local censors considered objec tionable scenes. The cuts not only upset the narrative flow but made the film incomprehensible. He said this was in contrast to the usual cuts for language and nudity for his films to be broadcast on network televi sion, which he says he can tolerate as long as it doesn’t change the integrity of the film. What upset him most with the Lebanese distribu tion was the studio’s compliance with the local authorities without consulting him.

Alan Parker expressed similar sentiments. He referred to two instances. His film Evita (1996) was cut down from its original length of 2 hours and 40 min utes to 2 hours for airline viewing. Further, it was panned-scanned to fit the smaller screens of inflight viewing. Thirty-six shots from Clear and Present Dan ger (Phillip Noyce, 1994) were reused in the Paramount television series JAG without the consultation of the film’s director, Phillip Noyce. In response to the comment by Jack Valenti, the chairman and CEO of the Motion Picture Association of America (noted by one toady on the panel as “a great American”), that film is too expensive a medium to be able to accommodate moral rights with all of its

uncertainties, Parker countered that film also brings in $5.5 billion of revenue for the studios. The studios, he said, have a duty to be the guardians of the art produced. They must be prepared to occasionally compromise commercial deals for the sake of the integrity of the film. Parker argues that if a film is materially altered, the producer has a duty to prop erly label these changes on the film so that the audience is fully informed, otherwise the film is a mis representation of the original version. The labelling must be clear, not hidden in the end credits, and specifically list those alterations that were made against the wishes of the director. Professor Alan Dershowitz, the noted jurist and C I N E M A P A P E R S • A UGUST 1997

that of the producer, and further contracts only bind the contracting parties. It is a fundamental principle of law: the privity of contract. He cites the case of Turner Entertainment announcing its intention to colorize Citizen Kane (Orson Welles, 1941). The direc tor’s contract was originally between Orson Welles and RKO Pictures before Turner acquired the vast libraries of MGM, RKO and Warner Brothers classics. In theory, Turner was not bound by the terms of the original contract. (Turner did eventually back down on Citizen Kane, although he went ahead with other classics like It’s a Wonderful Life and CasablancaT) Interestingly, Dershowitz favours the fairly-limited remedy of rectification by way of labelling if a direc

work or that it has been endorsed by the director. Dershowitz distinguishes between the adaptation of Hugo’s classic Les Misérables to make a musical, where there is no audience confusion that they are two separate works, and the broadcast on Italian television of a colorized version of The Seventh Cross (Fred Zinnemann, 1944), which is being passed off as the original. (The latter example is currently the subject of a moral rights action by the estate of the late Zinnemann.) To prevent consumer confusion of what is an origi nal work and what is an unauthorized alteration, we need legislative protection. Dershowitz argues that we cannot rely on contract law because generally the director is in a much weaker bargaining position to

tor’s rights are infringed. The remedies available under the moral rights laws in Europe, the UK, New Zealand and Canada permit an artist to sue for damages or an injunction. Dershowitz’s focus is on the effect the altered film has on the consumer, analogous to our trade practice laws, rather than on the harm it causes the director’s reputation. Dershowitz’s support of the “soft option” may also be tempered by the fact that the likelihood of the USA’s adopting the European model is unlikely - at least for the near future. One impassioned speaker talked about the “inter twined set of unbreakable threads” between the USA and France, and, occasional snide comments about French films aside, there was general agreement from

lawyer for such clients as Claus von Billow, Michael Milken, 0 . J. Simpson, Mike Tyson, and Patty Hearst, agreed with Parker’s recommendation about specific labelling for tampered or altered films. Dershowitz sensibly cautioned about discussing moral rights in absolute terms. Art, he said, is a continuum. We have always borrowed or adapted from other mediums and other artists. There have always been editors, publishers and censors who will make changes to reflect the marketplace. Art has always compromised itself with commerce. But there are limits - in particular where a work is released into the marketplace which misleads con sumers into thinking that the altered work is the actual

C I N E M A P A P E R S • A UGUST 1997

those who attended. However, these types of confer ences do tend to attract the converted. From the studio’s perspective, moral rights smells very French indeed. The Continental droit d’auteur system stresses the primacy of artists rights over eco nomic rights in certain situations. In essence, this means that if a producer, distributor or broadcaster significantly alters or distorts a film so as to prejudice a director’s honour or reputation, or fails to properly attribute the director, he or she may have a moral rights action that could override any rights of copy right ownership of the producer or other third party. The introduction of moral rights legislation to pro tect film in the USA appears to be a distant dream at this stage. Despite the star-studded line-up of the Artists Rights Foundation, backed by the industrial muscle of the Directors’ Guild of America and the Writers’ Guild of America, the studio system still holds too much politi cal clout in Washington. (As another speaker noted, Jack Valenti is not only a great Ameri can but also probably the best political lobbyist in the country.) The despair by the creative community at the slow pace of reform was epitomized in an exchange between Milos Forman and Senator Orrin Hatch during a luncheon break at the Symposium. Forman walked up to the microphone and after the initial pleasantries - “Hi, Milos. Love ya films” - asked Senator Hatch when the USA was going to adhere to the Berne Convention and protect moral rights. Hatch talked up the subject without giving any commitment. A deflated Forman replied: “But Senator, you have been saying the same thing to me for the past ten years and still there is no change.” “Oh, don’t you worry, Milos. We are on the case”, smiled an avuncular Hatch. At best, a compromise is likely to result, such as the correct labelling remedy favoured by commentators like Professor Dershowitz. Like labelling on tobacco, cinema and television, audiences would be advised that the film has been altered against the wishes of the director. And, like tobacco companies, the studios could continue to release their product onto the marketplace subject to appropriate labelling. Despite the slow progress, there was one positive sign. Rob Hummel mentioned that the Dream Works SKG standard con tract with directors included a clause that expressly acknowledged the directors’ moral rights of attribu tion and integrity in contrast to the reactionary practice of seeking blanket waivers of directors’ moral rights. It’s an initiative that should be applauded and hopefully one of which Australian producers and investors will take serious note. © NB: Ian Collie gratefully acknowledges the Australian Film Commission for assistance to attend the Artists Rights Symposium in Los Angeles. 1 It’s a Wonderful Life (Frank Capra, 1946) and Casablanca (Michael Curtiz, 1942).

The Doy Mr Volenti come to town. n M arch 1973, the Australian film m aking community set upon Jack Valenti, then head of the M otion Pictures Producers’ Association of America, when he visited Sydney. Valenti came to town to talk to Senator D oug M cC lelland about the Labor G overnm ent’s m ooted levy on box-office earnings, which, it was proposed, w ould be used to help fund local p ro duction. The film community, which at that time alm ost filled a Sydney street corner, m ade certain that both Valenti and a governm ent claiming to support a viable local film industry heard its views on US dom ination of the Australian box-office. Were you there? R eaders able to identify the unnam ed suspects pictured on these pages are asked to contact Cinema Papers.

1. Haydn Keenan; 2. Max Hensser.

Michael Edols

Photos : © I an Stocks 1. Geoff Burton; 2. John Morris; 3. Graham Chase.

C I N E M A P A P E R S • A UGUST 1997

1. Grahame Bond; 2. Kate Fitzpatrick.

1. Bruce Petty; 2. Tim Reid; 3. Dick Mason.

Ben Mendelsohn has « m m % & J already been work ing as an actor for fifteen years. In that time, he has worked on fif teen features, numerous shorts, countless television pro grammes and a swag of live theatre. After a childhood of travelling around the world with his father, a medical researcher, the young Mendelsohn was kicked out of boarding school in the USA and returned home to Melbourne to live with his grandmother. He took up acting at school, “initially so there was less academic work I had to do”. He admits that he ended up making himself quite noticed, becoming involved in school plays and amateur theatre. This was followed by two years of soaps for Crawfords, including Special Squad, Flying Doc tors and The Henderson Kids. In 1987, he landed the breakthrough part of the rebellious Trevor in John Duigan’s The Year My Voice Broke. Mendelsohn begins by recalling his early acting influences. Mendelsohn: I was doing a series called Prime Time with Nina Landis, an actress I had great respect for because she seemed to have a very different approach to anyone else. I mean, she was far more serious, which doesn’t always win great admiration serious actors in that sort of situation are often scorned - but she came up with interesting work all the time. She pointed me in the direction of this book called Respect for Acting by Uta Hagen, one ofthe adherents of what is known as “the method”. My favourite actor of that time was without doubt Robert De Niro. I was an absolute Taxi Driver fanatic at the ages of 15,16 and 1 7 .1 watched it well over 50 times, memorized it, knew all the lines, all that shit. So I was quite interested in this [method] idea. It was a really good thing, because it took acting from ‘muck around’, which is the more commonlyperceived notion of it, into something with a history, and something that actually served a function. It also introduced the notion that, if it is an art or craft, then the practitioner has an onus to take it seriously. I could not claim to be ofthe method school, but it certainly influenced my ability to intellectually approach something and go a little bit deeper in reflectiveness, in emotions, which you have a limited, but somewhat heroic, ability to do as teenagers. That is very much part of teenage life anyway - that real interest in your feelings. You get caught up in all those big notions of truth and all that.

I’m pretty instinctive, too. It depends on the job and the people. Sometimes I won’t even read the whole script; I just go and do it. I have been, for peri ods of my life, just a working actor. The romance and heady love of it is not there all the time. Sometimes, it’s just getting through it, remembering your lines and not falling over the furniture. What is always important is the feeling it leaves in the person who is watch ing, because that’s what it’s about. It’s not an exercise for actors to feel more or less fulfilled. It is not therapy. It’s about people watching. If people are getting ripped off, then it is time to look at what you’re doing. Performers should ultimately serve what’s written, to the point where you might not even notice the perfor mance. Get out of the way and let the story be told, which is not always an easy thing to do as an actor. For that reason, it helps to be able to try and keep your own levels of criticism down to a minimum, to be flexible enough to just go with what someone else is suggesting. This is not really the way things are once you become an established actor. It often becomes a case of your having a certain power to bend things. Now that can be good, but it can also work against things as a whole. I often prefer to be in a situation where I feel like I’m working for a director in mak ing the film. Sometimes it’s not that way at all, it is quite different, but in an ideal world that’s what I like. A re

y o u l o o k in g to h e a d o v e r s e a s

TO FURTHER YOUR CAREER?

It’s a funny notion, this deeplyentrenched view that you need to head overseas to ‘further’ your career. I’d love it if it didn’t come to that, but it’s probably something I will have to do. I have agents overseas, and I’ve done bits and bobs at times in Britain, but,

and it seems to me to be a bit of an inverse equation. You do all that and go very, very bright - to use this star anal ogy - but it has a very short life span. My feeling is that it’s better to keep plugging away and concentrate on the work, because I’d really like to work for a longtime. I really like what I do, and I

It’s much more creative, pound for pound. That’s largely due to what is happening in the studio systems in the United States. In a lot of ways, the 1980s were the most repulsive decade for studio pictures. I’m talking about the formulaic, double-ending stuff, with villains that never die. It’s a real pity

I think it’s a matter of vigilance for every industry, person and performer to not end up imitating themselves. Nothing that isn’t true to itself ulti mately ends up making the grade. I love it when we get it right. And to be a part of that is really nice. It’s important to remember that P. j. Hogan

ffss# in order to be really valid here, you have to do something over there. So for that reason I’ll have to go. W o u l d n ’t

y o u s a y y o u w e r e ‘v a l id ’

HERE ANYWAY?

It can feel that way to people who are very aware of the industry, but I don’t think many of the general public knows me at all. That might be my fantasy, but it’s the way it appears to me. I try not to do too much magazine stuff, weeklies and all that, which makes a big difference. If you do all that stuff, you get very well known. But I don’t look like a lot of those people,

don’t like to augment that with a lot of publicity. I think I’ll stay in Australia and do another job or two, and then go over seas, because I’d hate to end up having to wait tables over there, which is a real scenario. Although I might be known here, I’d be very surprised if anyone over there knew anything about me. It would be a lot like starting over, and that is scary, but doubtless I’ll have to go and have a look. How DO YOU THINK THE AUSTRALIAN FILM INDUSTRY COMPARES WITH OVERSEAS?

that so many films ended up going through the studio prism, hitting that same formula time and time again. That’s probably why the indies ended up being so successful. Australia tends to get stuck in its own sort of conservatism, as well. There was almost a camp conservatism that invaded a couple of years back. In some ways, that’s what really killed Billy’s Holiday [Richard Wherrett, 1995]. That could have been an immensely-successful film, but as soon as people saw those colourful cos tumes, they went, “No!”

had done a number of jobs which hadn’t stuck out as being notable. Everyone at one time or another finds that thing which just goes off. We don’t have that many auteurs here, and what auteurs we do have we don’t keep them working. I’ve been in the Australian film industry a long time, and I can’t figure out how it works. I don’t know who does understand the way it works, but it does. In some ways, it’s a ludicrously-easy system to work in, and sometimes it’s ludicrously difficult. C I N E M A P A P E R S • AUGUST 1997

T k e Still P o in t B a r b a r a B o y d -A n d e rA o n , 1 9 8 5

J only had a small involvement. It was a Blackrock-type set-up, where this girl goes to this beach-side community. She’s deaf, has scorn heaped upon her and ends up falling in love with the leader of the gang. It was very much a film about her dealing with deafness, prejudice and all that stuff. It was a shambles in a lot of ways in its making, and it’s not very notable.

film by Tass-Parker, who’d done Mal colm, which I really liked. So, I felt quite uneasy a lot of the time - with that role and with what I was doing. It was long, long hours.

R etu rn H o m e R o y A r g a li, 1 9 9 0

We didn’t expect anyone to take any notice. We went over there [Adelaide], where we were very relaxed and just let

Warner Bros film. It was Tom Selleck shooting his third or fourth unsuccess ful picture in a row, and there was an air of stress there. Simon Wincer just pulled in everyone who had anything going for them, like Laura San Giacomo and Alan Rickman, two of the greatest, noticeable character actors of that time. It was weird being around that whole, big environment. There was lots of money and it was very much a pyramid. I had a ball because we were out in Alice, and I was this little kid running around with all these grown-ups. I was still young enough to get away with every thing. It was a great shoot.

other wall, no matter what.” He’d throw us together and see what happened. That was fun. S p o tA w o o d M a r k jo ffc , 1 9 9 2

By this stage, I’d done so much in so lit tle time that I began to feel really uneasy

N irv a n a S tr e e t M u rd e r T k e Y e a r My V o ic e B r o k e

A Ic k A iV c IliA , 1 9 9 1

J o h n D n ig a n ,1 9 8 7

Nirvana Street Murder is another of my favourite shoots, just because it was a shoestring budget situation. I used to really love low-budget shoots because that’s when you feel like you are actively an important part of it. In things like Quigley, the machine and the apparatus

Like the film itself, which has a golden hue around it, I have very lovely memo ries. It was a beautiful time. I was really let off the leash. John Duigan basically said, “Okay, off you go.” Before this, I’d done three or four solid years of soap. I was in my fifth year of

television work, and that is a very differ ent format. So when I started getting all that serious [method] stuff, I started applying it. It was a really potent time for that. The effects were really good. In looking back, some of the work in that is really good. I really loved Noah [Taylor] and Loene [Carmen]. John knew what he was doing and Geoff [Burton], the cinematogra pher, was at the height of what he was doing at that time. Everyone just seemed to click and come together. It was a pretty relaxed, easy shoot. Noth ing seemed to go terribly wrong. I have great memories.

T k e B ig S t e a l N a d ia T o a a , 1 9 9 0

The Big Steal was a hard shoot. I didn’t really think I belonged as the lead in a C I N E M A P A P E R S • A UGUST 1997

it happen. It ended up being a real gem. For me, Return Home is really on the money, with scenes like Steve [Frankie J. Holden] and his brother Noel [Dennis Coard] driving home after seeing their dad, talking about having to punch him, to beat him down, before he’d let them go. They managed to achieve such a richness. Ray [Argali] wrote that stuff and it has a lyrical quality to it. I’ve never seen a suburban situation played out so evenhandedly and easily. Mandy [Walker] shot it, with all those big spaces, making it look really normal, which isn’t an easy thing to do. Mandy is a fantastic DOP. Maybe she isn’t under-rated anymore, but she certainly was for a longtime. Ray was so great on that, too. He just let us go and do what we were doing.

Q uigley S im o n W in c e * * , 1 9 9 1

Quigley was the first time I ever went to the circus. It was a big $30 million

are so huge that you don’t often feel like you’re fitting in. If you’re doing one of the smaller parts, it’s very hard to feel any sense of having a part to play in it. Nirvana Street Murder was a really great shoot because it was so cheap, and Aleksi had such intensity and energy, and quite an objective way of looking at things. It was the first time a director had spoken to me about the way I performed. I began to have some real input in the style and way we did things. Sugges tions can be really dangerous, but in this case I think it worked out all right. Aleksi would give Mark [Little] and I separate, conflicting directions, classic stuff like “Your objective is to get to the other wall, no matter what” and “Your objec tive is to make sure he doesn’t get to the

with the whole acting thing. I started to feel not good about doing this much work back to back, especially as this sto ryline had similarities with The Big Steal: young boy wants girl, young boy doesn’t know howto get girl. The only really positive thing about Spotswood was Anthony Hopkins, who imparted some very good advice about acting. It was also very reassuring to see some body like Anthony Hopkins do dud takes. I didn’t feel very good about doing Spotswood, but a lot of people really loved it.

M ap o f H ie H aitian H e a rt V in c e n t W a r d , 1 9 9 3

I enjoyed that film, because it started to give me a sense of the whole world, and it was an exotic shoot. Map of the Human Heart was the great epic that should have been. They had problems with the second half of the story. I think the first half is just beauti ful, especially that stuff with the little kid. As is so often the case, little kids

can steal shows out from under you. It’s really important to get out of the way and let them do it, and not get worried about it. They are almost always much more compelling. That was one of the funniest shoots I’ve been on, because it went horribly over budget. We had the completion guarantor on the set the whole time. They would call time at 6pm, and that was it - bang, shut, finished, fine. The only time they weren’t allowed to stop was when we had film rolling through the camera. So, there would be this almighty panic at about 5.45, and peo ple would start running all over the place to try and get these last set-ups done. Come one minute to six, they would bring out the biggest mag they had, load it in and, with 15 seconds remaining, Vincent would scream, “Now! Now!” The guarantor couldn’t shut it down until this mag had gone through for ten min utes or whatever, in which time the weirdest things would happen. Actors would be running, and Vincent would grab you and go, “Get in there!” The cam era would be rolling and you wouldn’t know what the fuck you were doing. On the last day I had to work, we were shooting in a hydraulic plane. Vincent came in at the end of the day and it was the same thing: lock the mag in, drop it in, shoot. He grabbed me and said, “Turn around.” I had six layers of wool coats on and was strapped into this box, with wires moving around and smoke everywhere. I couldn’t get my head mask on, I couldn’t move, I was getting claustrophobic, I couldn’t breathe. It was terrifying. Vincent grabbed me, and turned my back, and it went Crack! It killed my back, really fucking hurt it. The film cam era was poking in here, and people were saying, “Get your fucking hand out!” I was going, “What am I supposed to do?” Vincent nearly had a crew revolt on his hands. It was just a fucking horror shoot, and it really fucked my back badly. That was Map of the Human Heart.

S o y a L ittle P r a y e r

Richard L o w a u tc iH 19941 I only did one scene. I’ve never seen the film and I don’t know what it’s like. But

the last shot of the film where the kid comes in and walks through this florist.

were considerably different from the stuff beforehand. It’s always troubling

The girl comes in, says “Oh, I’ve got a baby”, and off they go. They were cran ing and tracking at the same time, and doing take after take. That was all that

for an actor to feel tike he is just doing the same job over and over again. You

out in time. It would depend on which job you’re doing, and people would decide you are either typecast as a sweet young boy, as a rebel, a very angry young man, or a criminal. So far I’ve been typecast as four differ

one was.

Sires«* folm Dwigan f 1994 I’d seen Duigan, had dinner with him and said, “What are you up to?” He said, “I’m doing this.” “Oh, where's the job?” “There’s nothing there for you.” “Come off it.” “There’s only these farm characters, farming sort of people, and they have just tittle tiny parts.” “Come on let’s do some.” So, John Poison and I did that. That was a bizarre shoot, where Elle Macpherson, Kate Fischer and Portia de Rossi take on the world. Hugh Grant, of course, was there. It was a very charged little number. Very strange to see all these people on their first film. John and I were there for a week or two, and we have been very close, top 5 percent type of friends, but for some reason we fought the whole fucking time. It was a very sexually-charged set, with all those beautiful women around. It was just a fun, silly shoot.

ent characters; but they are just little thorns in the side along the way. David Wenham and myself. I had done it at Belvoir Street originally, and I’d done Map of the Human Heart [which Cosi playwright Louis Nowra also wrote]. I started to realty get into Louis’ stuff. Everyone on that film more or less knew each other and there was a pretty good feet about that film. I loved work ing with Barry again. There was just something special about that film.

Id io t B o x David C aeAar, 1997 Idiot Box was great fun, It was just a return to your no-holds-barred ocker joie de vivre. Again, it was David Caesar just taking the leash off the doggie and let

McfioASirin G eoffreyW right, 1995 I’m sure Pret-a-Porter [Robert Altman, 1995] must have had the same feeling: “We’re going to make one of the great films of the world here.” This had the follow-up-film curse. Metal Skin was a really shitty shoot. It was night shoots in Melbourne, in a particularly-bitter winter. There were terrible pro duction problems. Geoffrey was carrying alt this expectation and basi cally trying to do a $6 million film with $2 million. Then, of course, there was that epic amount of time in post-production, in which I’m still not clear what happened. Out of that came a very interesting film, which people on both sides of the fence feel very strongly about. Some absolutely love Metal Skin, white others absolutely loathe it. Some find it very, very interesting and love to talk about the style and stuff like that. I remember feeling when I first watched it that it was an incredibly-intense thing. I remember going “Whoah” at the end, and being glad to be out of there.

that was one of the great pains-in-thearse days I’ve ever worked. We did something like 40 takes. It was a oneshot day; the whole day, one shot with big long tracks and huge dollies. It was

go through a couple of years of doing this, and your most notable jobs stick

COAI M ark jo ffe , 1996 Cosi was one of those films where we had all done the play - Barry [Otto],

ting him go for a run. I really enjoy being able to run around and put my own energy onto something. Kev was very much the case in point.

T rite L o v e oH d C h a o * StavroA AndoML* Eftttymiowy 1997 Again it was a troubled shoot. In a lot of ways, my reactions to films are very much about the shooting experience, rather than about the piece itself. These films now make sense to me: Return Home, The Big Steal and The Year My Voice Broke. Eight to ten years on, when I watch them again, they’re now more or less just films. So I don’t expect to be able to really appreciate this one from a film point of view for a while yet. I’ve liked in the past few years being able to do different things. From about 1993, I’ve had a chance to do films which

Am y NadiaToAA, 1997 Amy, which I’ve just finished, was a great fi lm to work on. One of the exciting things, because of the script, was that I had to walk a thin line with my perfor mance in order for it to work. We go into singing territory here. Musical the atre is one thing, but this isn’t a musical per se, which makes it a very interesting venture. What I really liked about the role, and I haven’t seen it so I might be shooting myself in the foot here, was that it’s one of those characters who facilitates someone who’s in a bad spot [the young girt Amy, who is not communicating with her mother] to start coming out. I felt that if it were not handled delicately, you’d end up finding it very silly, very saccharine. So I attempted to keep Robert as dry as was possible, without it being silly, or being mechanistically dry. I wanted to approach it that way and see what happened. Robert changed quite a bit along the way. He was written as this long and dark-haired romantic guitar player, a great looking Latin singer across the road, and he is not that! I think the first week of the rehearsals had gone by and Alana De Roma [Amy] and I had to do this quite emotional scene one night. We did the first couple of rehearsals and then it was, “Okay, we’re shooting it.” We did one take, it was all right, and Nadia went over and whispered something in Alana’s ear. We did this other take, and it was quite incredible. Something just happened inside her and this scream came out of this little girl. I’ll never forget it; it’s one of those heavily-imprinted times, such an outpouring of emotion. It was a really amazing moment to be around. She’s supposed to break down and cry at one point. 1 wasn’t intending to, but I just stood there and all these tears started going down my face. I don’t think it’s in shot or anything, but it was just amazing. From then on, Alana just blossomed. © C I N E M A P A P E R S • A U GU S T 1997

CIN EM A PA P E R S â&#x20AC;¢ AUGUST 1 ? | 7

Lindsay Amos talks to Gregor llicholas about debut feature, B ro k e n .

Eddie (Julian Arahanga) and Nina (Aleksandra Vujcic).

Gregor Nicholas' Broken English _

ZEALAND writer-director Gregor Nicholas’ first feature, Broken English, positively bristles with points of recognition not only for local audiences, or expa triate New Zealanders like myself. Like the best contemporary films from across the Tasman, it tears into the emotionally-flat surface (ignoring the spectacular physical landscape, a dominant element of many films such as Vigil, Bridge to Nowhere and The Piano1), using a cross-cultural love story to cast a critical eye on a complacent and self-satisfied people. Produced by Robin Scholes, and making no concessions to the Ameri can market (the celebrated actor Rade Serbedzija from the former Yugoslavia has a major role as Ivan), Broken English is international in the best sense. The film’s troubled lovers - the Maori Eddie and the Croatiaborn Nina - are played by Julian Arahanga from Once Were Warriors and newcomer Aleksandra Vujcic, whose sultry, defiant stare on the movie poster neatly encapsulates her character. But it is her ‘broken Eng lish’ narration over newsreel footage of the ruins of Vukovar - “I had shel ter of my mind which I carry with me wherever I go ... Everything around me was broken by the shrap C I N E M A P A P E R S • A UGU S T 1997

nels; it was great! It didn’t touch me” - which signals her arrival as a genuinely-original talent in an increasingly-crowded field. Broken English follows a trajec tory which begins as far back as Broken Barrier and continues through the New Zealand film renaissance in the early 1970s with Sleeping Dogs, Smash Palace, Queen City Rocker, Arriving Tuesday, Kingpin and Other Halves, right up to the more recent and more sophisticated Heavenly Creatures and Once Were W arriors?: With a background in television commercial production, Nicholas has made a string of (often music-dance related) short films: Drum/Sing, Hey Paris, Pacific, 3, 2, 1, Zero, Mouth Music, Danny andRaewyn and Rushes, which have screened in Aus tralia and at international festivals; However, it was Avondale Dogs (1994), a black-and-white evocation of Auckland in the ’60s, which announced Nicholas as a formidable talent. Forsaking mere nostalgia for a kind of transcendent sadness, Avon dale Dogs was quite simply the best short film from any source in its year of release, though its screenings in Australia have been scandalously few. Nicholas operates his production company, Flying Fish Productions, from a comfortable, compact head quarters located virtually in the shadow of Auckland’s annoyinglyasymmetrical harbour bridge, in a waterside suburb far removed (geo graphically) from the territory

explored in Broken English. He is cur rently organizing his next project, Mississippi Mud, set in the USA with Martin Scorsese asAxecutive producer and Barbara De Fina producing, f D i d t h e s u c c e s s o f A vondale D ogs HA VE A N Y B E A R IN G O N G E T T IN G BROKEN

English

u p a n d r u n n in g

Oh, absolutely! Internationally it was recognized and acclaimed, and people j in the United States, in particular, j became very interested in me. I mean, Steven Spielberg saw it. I was actually getting feature offers after the success of that film. But I wanted to make ' Broken English. \ I think what happened in the end was that through my relationship with Robin Scholes, who of course produced Warriors, we were perceived as a fairly promising double act-with the success of my short film on the | intemationaffilm festival circuit and 1 1 likewise the critical acclaim of I Warriors. Funnily enough, raising the % money was not complex; It seemed very straight-forward. Alan Finney from Roadshow hal read the script, seen my short film, was familiar with Robin’s work through Warriors and was very excited about the [Broken English] screenplay, and jumped in when we were going to the [New Zealand] Film Commission for b rad dotiori fiflance. It was a kind of faitlaccompli. lafgely to do with the kind of commitment Alan was showing that early on. | \

No, it was developed through develop ment loans from the Film Commission. It took a considerable time because I spent huge amounts of time with migrant people; I ended up meeting and talking with scores of Croatian and other migrants. I would record my con versations with them and have them transcribed. I had pages and pages, and I ended up assimilating some of those stories and even some of that dialogue directly from the transcript. When you hear some of the apparentlyludicrous lines out of the movie, like the Chinese woman, Clara [JingZhao], saying she “wants to make a small Kiwi”, that is straight out of the mouth [ of a migrant woman who was express| ingthat very ambition! I became very | aware of how the Asian and mainland | Chinese migrants, in particular, were ¡3 sacrificing their lives for the lives of ; their children. They were totally living a their lives for their children. T h a t ’ s a c h a r a c t e r is t ic o f C h in e s e M IG R A N T S E V E R Y W H E R E , OF C O U R S E .

YeS, but that intensity of commitment |s really unfamiliar to your average Kiwi, who is extremely complacent and expects things on a platter. I think that character has been bludgeoned fairly j heavily in the last decade or so, but nevertheless it’s still a national characf teristic and those people are very intimidating because of it. It sets up tensions in the community. The people | wjas meeting came here with nothing; some of them are highly educated, they work three shit jobs and within a Tewfripnths they have a car. They are getting enough money to put a deposit bn a.hokse, it’s quite an incredible achievement. T h e s e p o in t s w il l b e f a m il ia r t o A u s t r a l ia n s - a l l t h e c u r r e n t h o t T O P IC S O F IM M IG R A T IO N , M U L T 1 -C U L T U R A L IS M A N D Q U E S T IO N S O F ID E N T IT Y A N D F A M IL Y . IS IT T A K IN G IT T O O FAR TO S U G G E S T T H A T T H E C E N TR A L M A O R I CH A R A C TER , E D D IE , IS REALLY W A L K IN G in f r o m

Once We r e Wa rr io r s . I s

T H E S A M E D IS P O S S E S S E D , S H IF T L E S S

S O , TH E S C R IP T W A S C O M P L E T E D f 1

A N D U L T IM A T E L Y -P O W E R L E S S F IG U R E ?

I don’t see it like that. I wanted his

W IT H O U T A N Y F IN A N C IA L HELP?

I regard finding key locat ions like casting you have to find the best possible place where you can exploit the natural drama of the themes in the script, We searched all over Auckland.

Iva ri tfta ìl^ S lW e tlz jì^ and Darko (Martori Csokas)| B roken E n g lis h

character to be politically unaware; I wanted him to have a sort of naivete. In fact, I wanted both Eddie and Nina to have that sense of innocence that makes her conflict with her father, Ivan [Rade Serbedzija], more extreme, and puts them under greater pressure. He comes with this barrel-load of preju dices and they don’t have that in them; it’s not part of their character. So, Eddie’s a very different kind of Maori § character than the one Julian played in Warriors-, he’s not as alienated. I But

h e ’ s s t il l s e a r c h in g fo r h is

IDENTITY...

That’s true, but essentially the film is about how a sense of culture and indi vidual identity is born of a sense of family. A lot of the characters are dis possessed and I suppose in a certain way he’s one of them. Y our

a pp r o a c h to yo u r s t o r y and

STEREOTYPICAL. THE MOST NATIONALIS TIC PEOPLE ARE THE MIGRANTS. THE IMMIGRANT NlNA IS PROUD OF HER NEW Z ealan d

statu s, yet

E d d ie , t h e

T r u e N ew Z e a l a n d e r ,

one

s t il l h a s to

FIGHT FOR HIS POSITION.

I like the idea of all these characters in his orbit. He and his brother are the only true New Zealanders in the entire movie. Every other character is bounc ing around and speaking various forms of broken English. But Eddie doesn’t have a lot to say; he has a quiet presuence, I guess. AT ONE STAGE, NlNA’S ANGER GETS THE Ib e t t e r OF HER AND SHE RATHER CRU ELLY t e l l s C la r a

t h a t if s h e w a n t s to

STAY HERE SHE SH(M l D ASK EDDIE’S S PERMISSION FIRST.?

Which is the last thing he wants to hear! T he

p o w e r f u l o p e n in g n a r r a t io n

CHARACTERS IS IRONIC, WHICH NEATLY

WAS PARTLY WRITTEN BYALEKSANDRA

SIDESTEPS WHAT COULD HAVE BECOME

V u jc ic ?

It was co-written by myself and Ateksandra, and it reflects the things I like about the film. The casting, some of the key performances and some of the key themes are born of a huge amount of time put into the casting. Once I had found these people, in particular Aleksandra and Rade, they brought to the movie this huge sense of cultural authenticity. I would have been crazy to make the film without them. Croatian people have told me that there’s no one on the planet that could have played Ivan the way Rade did; he so embodies a cultural reality. What Aleksandra brought to it was not only that cultural authenticity but also a highly-individual world view. She’d been through these quite extreme situ ations and had lived through them with a strange sense of empowerment. She had this naivete and innocence, but also this worldliness and ‘fuck you’ attitude. It’s reflected in that

voiceover. It’s basically a true story of her experiences in Croatia before she came to New Zealand. T here

i s , o n c e a g a in , an ir o n ic t r e a t

m en t of

N in a ’ s

s it u a t io n w h e r e s h e

BECOMES A VIRTUAL PRISONER, LOCKED IN HER SAFE SUBURBAN HOUSE IN AUCK LAND WHILE HER FATHER AND BROTHER so rt out

E d d ie

im a g e o f

N in a

in t h e b a c k y a r d .

T he

l o o k in g o u t t h r o u g h

THE SLIT IN HER BOARDED-UP WINDOW MIRRORS HER SITUATION IN WAR-TORN C r o a t ia .

I regard finding key locations like cast ing; you have to find the best possible place where you can exploit the nat ural drama of the themes in the script. We searched all over Auckland. L o o k in g

f o r s o m e v e r y u n a t t r a c t iv e

LOCATIONS, LIKE THE HOUSE ADJACENT TO THE POWER PYLON!

Well, that house is actually archetypal; the Dalmatian people here call them Dali castles. They’re always brick, big solid C I N E M A P A P E R S • A U GU S T 1997

Ivan and NtgjgR B roken English.'

of the reasons I was attracted to telling this story. Because these subcultures within our mono-culture are very vibrant, passionate people and yet they’re not very visible to the rest of New Zealand. I think they have enclaves within the suburbs and up north in par ticular, and they’re probably our most passionate, intense, European commu nity. I was really attracted to that sensibility and wanted to create a story that challenged New Zealanders’ sensi bility. We’ve got to exorcize the whole emotional repression that goes on here! Y o u ’v e

m ade a good sta r t.

N in a

is a

REALLY SEXY CHARACTER, DEFINITELY WHAT WE REPRESSED NEW ZEALANDERS SEE AS EXOTIC SOPHISTICATION.

Well, that was the thing with the cast ing. We looked at about sixty young women. But

houses, generally in a lower middleclass neighbourhood. We wanted to give the house the impression of being fortress-like, so we built this big wall around it with big metal gates. I wanted to give the impression that Ivan had come all the way from the other side of the world and he had this fortress-like mentality; he wanted to protect his cul ture, protect his children. The production designer, Mike Kane, had a lot to do with that; he’s a very clever guy. A nd E d d ie ’ s

f la t w a s n e x t to t h e

RAILWAY LINE, ANOTHER TERRIFIC LOCATION.

That’s right. We wanted to break down the kind of image that not only interna tional audiences but local audiences have of New Zealand being a dream environment. We wanted something that was gritty, but not pushed over the top, like Warriors was. T h e r e ’s

no w a t e r v i s ib l e is t h e r e ,

UNTIL THE FILM MOVES BRIEFLY NORTH to t h e

Ba y

o f Is l a n d s ?

We wanted to really open the movie up there and make it a kind of intense encounter with nature. S ome

of yo u r sh o r t s w er e s h o t by

S tu a r t Dr y b u r g h ,

w h o h a s s in c e

m o v e d o n t o in t e r n a t io n a l a s s i g n m en ts. B r o k e n En g l is h w as a lso a

C I N E M A P A P E R S • A UGUST 1997

t h e y w o u l d n ’t h a v e a l l b e en

FIRST FEATURE FOR JOHN TOON, WHO DID A FINE JOB.

I tend to work in my commercial work with two or three DOPs: Stuart Dry burgh; Ian Paul, who shot Avondale Dogs; and John Toon. All three are ter rific and John brought a great passion to the film. He really believed in the story and loved the characters. We tried to have a fairly neutral style; we didn’t want to make it too extreme. I like the scene, for example, where Ivan comes to the rescue with his son Darko to tell Nina that she’s invited to the barbecue. We play that in a locked off medium-wide shot, where the actors come in and do their thing. It’s just great to watch them; you forget about the camera - there’s no camera move ment, there’s no zoom. A lot of that has to do with me trying to shoot it in a very low ratio, but on the other hand it has a kind of integrity, too, I think.

No, very few of them were. But what Aleksandra had was an unmistakeable comfort with sensuality. I’m afraid that’s not something in our make-up, but it’s a very attractive characteristic, I think.

YOU MENTIONED “PASSION” EARLIER.

Cou ld

T here

th e

w a s a w id e l y s y n d ic a t e d

y o u e x p l a in t h e m e a n in g of

Ma o r i

term , w h a k a p a p a !

INTERVIEW WITH JANE CAMPION IN THE

N in a

t r ie s to e x p l a in it .

p r e s s in Ja n u a r y w h e r e s h e s u g

g ested that

N ew Z e a l a n d e r s (e it h e r

in t e n t io n a l l y o r s u b c o n s c io u s l y ) r e p r e s s e d a n y p a s s io n .

yo u a g r e e ?

Absolutely! I think New Zealanders are a highly-repressed bunch. That’s also one

m a k e s fun o f it w h e n

Ev e n

E d d ie

Well, it’s probably the one Maori word that every New Zealander knows the meaning of. It’s really your family, your lineage, and how your lineage and your bloodline goes back, not just to

people but to the land that you’re from - not just the land, but quite literally the earth, the soil. It’s a very powerful concept and a fundamental one to the Maori. I wanted to use that in the movie as an essence of the family, and that’s what keeps Nina and Eddie together. They create their own. So E d d ie u s e s a t r e e a s a k in d of VERY OBVIOUS SYMBOL TO TRY AND EXPLAIN IT TO NlNA.

It is a very obvious symbol, but I really love the actual planting of the tree in that barren yard which hasn’t got a blade of grass in it. It’s quite interest ing; I thunk it works a lot better in an international context than a local one, because local audiences are a little more cynical of such an obvious use of a Maori idea, of a Maori image. But in the States, in Spain and all the coun tries I’ve seen the movie, there’s a very strong response to it. We had trial screenings in various cities like Toronto, where there are large migrant communities. There’s obviously this incredible universal thing where people just hooked in. It was a very familiar story, dealing with familiar local issues, but it was also exotic. New Zealanders seem amazed at the passionate madness of these Croatians. When we showed the movie to a trial audience in Sydney and Melbourne, it was really interesting. All of the young people were either children of Greek or Italian migrants, or they had fallen in love with someone of that background, and had been through this shit. But for an Australian audience, there was quite a correspondence to the movie and what was being explored. © 1 Vigil (Vincent Ward, 1984), Bridge to Nowhere (Ian Mune, 1986), The Piano

(Jane Campion, 1994). 2 Broken Barrier (John O’Shea and Roger Mirams, 1952), Sleeping Dogs (Roger Donaldson, 1977), Smash Palace (Roger Donaldson, 1981), Kingpin (Mike Walker, 1984), Other Halves (John Laing, 1984), Arriving Tuesday (Richard Riddiford, 1986), Queen City Rocker (Bruce Morrison, 1987), Heavenly Creatures (Peter Jackson,

1995), Once Were Warriors (Lee Tamahori, 1995).

N CELEBRATION of Cannes’ 50th International Festival du Film, an invitation was extended to all members of the 4,000 press attending the Festival to participate in a public debate, “La Rencontre du Cinquantième: le Cinéaste, le Cinéphile et la Critique” . French film critic Michel Ciment saw this encounter as an opportunity for directors, film lovers and critics to address the future of cinema, and question the rôle of the critic on the threshold of a new century. The connection between the filmmaker, the film lover and the critic is complex and ambigu ous, Ciment wrote prior to the event, foreseeing correctly that the encounter would be both fiesty and fruitful. For those able to find a place to sit or stand in the Palais’ Salon des Ambassadeurs, the colloquium was one of the highlights of the Festi val, fascinating for what it revealed about the participants and the subject. Chaired by Bernardo Bertolucci, those taking part were: past Palme d’Or winners Andrzej Wajda (Man o f Iron, 1981), Jerry Schatzberg Scarecrow, 1973), Mohamed Lakhdar Hamina (Chronique des Années de Braise, 1975) and Jane Campion (The Piano, 1993); directors with a long association with the Cannes Festival: Roman Polanski, Théo

Angelopoulos, Dennis Hopper and John Boorman; and film academics and critics Annette Insdorf (professor in film, USA), Derek Malcolm (The Guardian, UK), Michel Ciment (Positif, France) and Thierry Jousse (Cahiers du Cinéma, France). Also present were Tullio Kezich, David Kehr, Gerard Pagnon and Pascal Mengeau. Bertolucci opened the discussion, striking a nostalgic note. Bertolucci: Last night when I saw Wim Wenders’ The End of Violence, I realized once again that i still go to the cinema to learn. It is a mysterious and fascinating film. This learning how to make a film, which still isn’t really dear to me, keeps my interest in cinema alive. That is the way I invest my energies. I was asked to be present at the San Sebastian Festi val’s inauguration and, as I was looking at the monitor, waiting my turn, i saw some young people get up on the stage and throw tracts at the audience. They were from the Basque Terrorist Organization, the sons and daugh ters of people in prison. Then it was my turn to help with the ceremony. Throwing tracts at people: that is a political activity. “There is something marvellous going on in San Sebastian. This is the beginning of a Visconti film”, I said. Later, these young people complimented me for relaxing the tension in the audience. “But who is Visconti?”, they said to me. This loss of memory in the cinema worries me. Is cin

ema dead? People have said so, but I don’t believe it is. Cinema is undergoing a dramatic mutation. This has always been the case. In the past, silent movies gave way to speech. And, in the 1960s, there was another mutation, when French cinema grew up and began to ask: What is cinema? These are dramatic changes and, in the process, cin ema has lost its aura. Cinema used to be the only medium with images and sound. Now we are sur rounded by such things all the time. The world is full of televisions and computers. Cinema is no longerthe one. Cinema is lost. But it is not dead. It will become something different. I wonder about the young people like Tarantino. Will they laugh when they hear me say that cinema is disap pearing and changing? This colloquium is about filmmakers, film lovers and critics. Many directors feel the way that I do. But what about the critics? Are they in crisis, too? Critics were organically involved in cinema during the ’60s because cinema was part of the culture. I felt ‘French’ in Italian cinema. The critics were organi cally incorporated in what was happening. This has now gone. Where is filmmaking, the love of film and criticism heading? Jane Campion: The first film I had here was Sweetie [1989k, and I spent much of the Festival in tears. It was impossible for me to understand the full swing of what C I N E M A P A P E R S • A U G U S T 1997

was happening critically. Some were personal attacks, and 1 found this very confronting. I felt that if they don’t like your film, they hate you, too. You feel disarmed by it all. I’m willing to hear from critics who are prepared to go more fully into the subject, but most of what I read is just opinion. And everyone is a critic. I feel safer asking a friend, i find it hard to trust criticism in general. Derek Malcolm: As the first critic to reply, I must say that there are an awful lot of bad critics, but there are also an awful lot of bad films. And the two, I sometimes feel, deserve each other! But seriously, Bernardo, what many filmmakers do not understand now is the pressure put on critics by newspaper editors who would much rather you did a piece of gossip, got a photographer and interviewed the Spice Girls, or had a conversation with Michael Jackson, than go and write a review of a film. So, even if you are one of the few good critics around, you have terrible pressures upon you not to do the work that twenty years ago was yours by right, which was to be fair to young filmmakers, to praise older film makers if you like their work, and not be destructive of filmmaking in general. What they want now is the short, pithy review which says nothing but gives a star, or 1 to 5. They want any thing but serious analysis, because they say that young people don’t read film criticism, that all our advertising is directed towards young people, and we must give them

what they want, which is Hollywood, brave, dead Holly wood. And there is some truth in that. We have to fight it, and I can assure you, Bernardo, some of us are trying. But we have our hands tied securely behind our backs, and our pens in our mouths, sometimes. You must understand that we are actually with you, bad as we sometimes are, stupid as we some times are. But the pressures against any decent film analysis are appalling. Bertolucci: Since you have called me back, I’ll give you a fast answer. Before Jane Campion spoke, I was trying not to enter into this problem. Jane, you would not believe how many times I have had a movie in Cannes or Venice or wherever, and the same thing has hap pened to me. But in regard to what Derek Malcolm was saying about editors asking critics to do a ‘deep’ inter view with Michael Jackson, you must remember that film directors are also asked by the financiers to make the movies they want. This is more or less the same thing. They want us to make something that we don’t want to make, which does not interest us. Gerard Pagnon: Criticism used to be about cinema’s ideological wars. This was in the days of Godard, when criticism corresponded to the battles and wars being fought between the ‘new wave’, the ‘avant garde’, new English and American films, and political cinema. And the critics were able to follow us. They were organically

connected to cinema. It is difficult now for all of us, filmmakers and film lovers. Our times are fin de siècle, and there is talk about the end of cinema. In such an environment, are the critics still alongside the filmmak ers? More importantly, are the critics able to reflect what is going on? Michel Ciment: Derek is right to put criticism in an eco nomic context and, as Bernardo has pointed out, filmmakers are subject to the system, too. But neither cinema nor criticism is dead. Filmmakers such as Mike Leigh are followed and supported by critics. But the subject is topical. The past is no longer talked about. We are in an ‘amnesiac’ period in cinema, and our cul ture, too, doesn’t like thinking about the past. Rims will soon be judged by people who have never seen Truf faut. It is true some critics became filmmakers, but all were film lovers and had a rapport with the past. As a filmmaker, you cannot make changes, change the form of things, if you don’t know where you are from. John Boorman: This is a subject we could talk about all the time, and get nowhere. I think it is true as, Michel says, that we are in a period o f‘naive’ art. This applies not only to the younger filmmakers, but audiences, too We know this from the kind of books published on cin ema, where nothing much before Taxi Driver [Martin Scorsese, 1976] is known or of interest. When polls are held amongst movie-goers about the Ten Best Rims of

All Time, nothing figures in them before the 1970s. The Godfather [Francis Ford Cop pola, 1972] is maybe as far back as people go. So, there is this sense of amnesia. But are the critics to blame? I think one of the problems with critics is that because, as Derek says, there are so many bad films which critics are obliged to see, many of them, the ones who have to see everything, resent having to watch them. These critics, gradually over a period of time, begin to hate cinema generally, and somehow this infiltrates their work as a kind of deep agenda. They tend to watch and write about films as a chore and a pun ishment. You also have film directors who talk about the cinema being dead. If enough of us say that the cinema is dead, and the critics think so too, we might eventually be able to convince audiences never to go to the cinema again! I see things differently. I think the cinema is very vibrant. It is an essential part of the lives of millions of people throughout the world who go to the cinema regularly and experience sitting in a theatre with people. This is very important. Now it’s a cliché to say that we live in a post-literate age. Jane has said that she listens to what her friends say more than to the critics, and this is something that the people who make films, Hollywood in particular, recognizes. This is the ‘recommend’ factor. Peo ple go to the movies because of their friends’ recommendation, rather than because they have read reviews, or, what is more likely, the tiny quotes used to advertise what the critics have said about them. You have the situation where the critics are, as Derek says, forced to write shorter and shorter pieces about cinema, and from this is abstracted an even shorter piece which is then put into the advertisement. And the audience still doesn’t take any notice of it. Very often the people who read the critics read the review instead of going to the movies, and that’s why critical reviews are so comforting. You read a review, it all sounds so bad, and somehow you are exempted from going. Your critic has gone into this ghastly place, seen all these awful films, and you don’t have to do anything. I think a downwards spiral is operating. Now, can you say that great critics emerge when there is great cinema, or do great critics lift the cinema, elevate it? It’s a very difficult question. Roman Polanski: Is the cinema dead? Pagnol said it was thirty years ago. And people talked about the death of cinema when talkies came. The new is always said to have nothing to do with cinema. This is the way we respond to technology. What comes before is seen to be the only. The seventh art is undergoing great changes. But cin ema is not dead. Novelty is always shocking at first, but after a while you get used to it, and realize it can be used and appreciated. People say that cinema is suffering. But what is cinema? It is the big screen in colour, with good sound and images. Compare this with the little black-and-white tube with miniature loudspeakers. Soon though there will be screens that fill the room. Nonetheless, what is essential to cinema is what I see on the screen. And cinema is a shared experience before an anonymous audience, in front of the screen, whatever its size. It is the shared experience of a large audience, not two people sitting on a sofa with cans of beer. When tape recording became popular, people felt live music was threatened. But what about Woodstock? Hi-fi didn’t kill off the concept of concerts, with live perfor mances in front of huge crowds. Should we worry about cinema’s competitors, television, videos, etc.? No. In the past, there has always been a need for spectator sports, gladiators fighting in an arena, fairs and side shows. People have always wanted to get together and watch something that moves and excites them. We shouldn’t be too worried, really, about the health and life of the seventh art. Gerard Pagnon: There are plenty of people today who are informed about the cinema. Cinema has its fans, and they make up the audiences. It is unreasonable to expect all of them to be acquainted with the history of cinema. Annette Insdorf: Who needs the critics? Certainly blockbusters like Jurassic Park [Steven Spielberg, 1993] don’t need the critics. There is a dialogue between box-office takings and studio accounts. Independent cinema in the US needs critics, though, and so does foreign cinema. We need critics there, and even more we need dialogue between critics and filmmakers. But what are the critics, anyway? Sound bites on television? Thumbs up or down? Numbers? Two paragraphs on Wim Wenders’ film? Is that criticism? Today it is difficult to talk seriously about film. That is why I went to the university, so that I could enter creative dialogue about film with others. We ask questions like: Why is the camera here, and not there? In the US, and particularly at the universities, what is called criticism limits itself to theory, and it has little to do with the creative processes of the filmmaker. It has invented its own language, which comes from other disciplines, and there is a lack of love and a lack of passion there, which betrays both the filmmaker and the critic. C I N E M A P A P E R S • A UGU S T 1997

Thierry Jousse: I am not so pessimistic. As far as the spectator is concerned, access to films is greater today than ever before, through video cassettes, cable TV, cinema seasons. As far as quantity is concerned, there has never been such access. The old hierarchy is no longer there, that’s true. The old landmarks are gone, and new hierar chies need to be made. But i think we can trust young people to make them. We have been afraid of the death of cinema since the ’80s. We are in a stage of mutation, in transition, and looking inwards is not the answer. We must look outwards. Bertolucci: I am entirely in agreement with you. But when you talk about the possibil ities of curing the amnesia of the past, where even people like Malle are forgotten, let me tell you a little anecdote. It’s not too profound and rather comic. A great actor and veteran writer of the Italian theatre, Eduardi di Philippo, from Naples, one of the greatest writers of the 20th century, alonside Pirandello, received a phone call one day. Somebody said, “Hello, this is Italian television”, and he answered, “Just a minute, I’ll hand you over to the television set.” [Loud laughter and clapping.] I have to admit, unashamedly, that I am a victim of TV and video, and watch it a lot. But, nevertheless, there is a big difference between the two. Polanski: Nothing can take the place of big screenings. A critic alone with a notebook and a cigar doesn’t see the same film as a large audience in a theatre. Cinema is about a dark room where we go to dream with our eyes wide open, along with others who are sharing the same dream. Bertolucci: The cinematic experience and the electronic experience: how can we make a merger between these things? Tarantino and the young doyens: will they feel the same melancholy and nostalgia as the older generation? Only we will feel it. Polanski: It isn’t possible to have the same experience on your own as with an anony mous audience. The perfection of technology is not the most important thing. What we are seeing are cinema complexes being built, old cinemas knocked down and new cinemas constructed for young people who will queue for hours in the rain to see something that they could just as well see on television! Malcolm: What we are seeing are hundreds of cinemas being built to show the same films, and we get about ten films making about 80 percent of what the cinema makes every year. And there is less and less space for good filmmakers, despite the fact that there are more and more cinemas. That’s the problem! [Loud applause.] Polanski: Yes, this is a real problem and, furthermore, I tell you, even when I am talk ing about young people going to the cinema, it seems that the language which we knew before only from the trade papers, is from Variety, where everything is mea sured in bucks. You know, they say this film has made this amount of money. This language has become the common language. The young people are more interested, actually, in knowing the figures than knowing what the critics think about it. And in the magazines which circulate only as a guide, you open this page and they tell you how much money the film made last week. And most people open first to this page to decide which film they are going to see. Dennis Hopper: Well, there has been a lot discussed here. I have to go back to the ‘mutation’, to my own work. When I made Easy Rider[ 1969], there was no indepen dent filmmaking in the United States. That’s one thing. I had been going to see European films for years. My influences were all European, even though I had worked all my life in American films, very similar to what Bertolucci said about his early times. I guess you could say my next film, The Last Movie [1971], was a ‘mutation’ film, too, with ideas about the cinema which were French, by the way, looking back to the new realists, the Italian new realists. There was Godard, but actually Truffaut was my favourite, because Truffaut told a story and I had an emotional reaction to Truffaut. And when I have an emotional reac tion to something, I understand it. I made The Last Movie to say that you can fuck with film. You can make fun of the audience, you can suck them in and do whatever you want. You are playing with a very powerful thing, because we are creators dealing with life, whether that life is recorded on film or on video, or ends up inside a video. And we happen to tell stories. That’s a very important part of what we do and, if I tell a story that you don t under stand, then I’ve failed as a filmmaker unless I’ve told you and educated you in metaphors that you can understand. C I N E M A P A P E R S • A UGUST 1997

^ 45

I'M NOT AGAINST TV. COPPO WITH HiS COMPANY AND NEAR] HE HAD TO SELL HiS FiLMS

$75 MILLION WHICH ABSOLVED HIM OF HiS DEBTS. CmEU CAN T EXIST WITHOUT TV/ AND VICE VERSA ^ » ¡ S

A SYMBIOSIS BETWEEN THEM.

LO ST INNOCENCE P r o b iem a tizin g Cinema

EFO RE I started university, I spent the dreary afternoons of my summer job in K-Mart day dreaming about the lofty realms of erudition I was about to enter. I foresaw groups of men and women in post-lecture café forums, smok ing and discussing the pressing issues of the late twentieth century. There, in the rarefied smoke and coffee-rich air, we would w an gle over the social, moral and artistic questions raised in the novels and films, politics and philosophy we would be studying. If some kind soul had thrown me a copy of Tom O'Regan’s Australian National Cin ema, I might have been spared several long years wandering banshee-like through die corridors of academe, searching for Café El Dorado.

TTT

point for the intending cinema studies student to consider. Cinema studies is not actually about films but about the discourse of film studies. The films themselves are a sort of secondary, tangential refer ence point. For the more skilled and poetic virtuosos of film discourse, the films facilitate elabo rate puns and wordplay with titles and themes. But this is often the only thing that will distinguish one film study from another or, in fact, distinguish film study from any other form of academic study in the humanities. Otherwise, they will usually contain the same bag of goodies that all contemporary academic writing seems to contain these days - semantic

It is with a sympathetic pang for my own lost wranglings over terms like plurality, diversity, gen innocence that I now see lines of intending stu der, textuality and hierarchies of power. dents waiting to register for their courses. I O ’Regan states from the beginning that his pro recommend Tom O ’Regan’s new cinema text as ject is to ask, “How does Australian cinema an excellent, sobering primer for the intending function as a whole as a vehicle for social problem student with a head full of romantic views about solving?” If only Australian filmmakers were aware the intoxicating life of the mind at university. The of the task at hand they might have been more fetching cover depicting a glowering Jimmie from considerate and left out plots, characters and pic The Chant o f Jimmie Blacksmith (Fred Schepisi, turesque locations which simply complicate 1978) is a suitable omen for the dark, disillusion matters. Such frippery simply distracts us from the ing journey they are about to embark upon. It is also the only illustration in the book apart from a runic diagram of the Australian Cinema r1 1 i M atrix, a mystical space where “naturalizing, , ■ 1 1 ■à _ 1 socializing, discursivizing movements intersect” . O ’Regan’s book might catch the unwary off guard with its title, seeming to suggest that it might important educational, policy-making and cultural be about Australian films. Despite the fact that it criticism responsibilities of film. O ’Regan kindly cites 11 pages’ worth of films, there is little discus scrapes off all of the fancy pink icing and hands us sion of the content of any of these films other than a nice slice of dessicated sponge. the occasional brief plot summary. The film titles As Mick “ Crocodile” Dundee impressed with are used rather as an illustration of various theories his knife, O ’Regan wows us with his skill as an of the institutions, policies and politics that exponent of that most useful of contemporary aca surround the filmmaking industry in Australia. demic tools, the problematizer. The problematizer This is the first and perhaps most important is the Swiss Army Knife of the modern academic, not only useful for scraping off icing but also able to open up any simple word or idea like a can of worms. O ’Regan does the problematizer thing of ‘The Social’ by using it this time as a “vehicle for representing and intervening in Australian lifeways, politics and symbolic culture” . He

IS l

LiU IIN II 1

problematizes Nationhood, by considering how the European derived society, New World society, diasporic society and multi-cultural society are translated into film. He even pokes his problema tizer into sensitive region of the “gender cleavage” to discover that there are more women on one side of the camera than the other.

In the final chapter, O ’Regan gets to sink his teeth into the glacé cherry he has been saving up while whittling down the rest of the issues into crumbs with his problematizer. This chapter focuses squarely on film criticism itself, a gourmet delight of “ cultural criticism, cinephilic and histor ical discourses and the institutional networks that support them” . Finally, like little Jack Horner, he pulls out a plum and says, What a good boy am I, in a “brief self-reflexive examination of [his] own practice of problematizing” . O’Regan narrowly avoids swallowing his own tongue by seizing •

1II

0 N 1 L I Ci t II IIL ■ 1

E ■ H

hold of it with a pair of critical pincers (a handy attachment on the problematizer) and pulling out the shining revelation that “to all genuine questions there are a number of correct answers” . O ’Regan claims that his study of Australian cinema has been “ animated” by this concern for pluralism. Almost any other word might have been a more appropriate choice, but I suggest beginning with the synonyms for “vivisected” . Australian National Cinema is an in-depth, thoroughly-researched, proficient audit report on the concerns of contemporary academic inquiry. It is a superlative example, not of what cinema studies and most academic studies could be or need be, but what, with a few rare exceptions, they are: a monomanic obsession with terminological hair-splitting in which every film, book or idea is rendered meaningless, joyless, inoffensive and powerless. © A u s t r a l ia n Na t io n a l C in e m a

Tom O’Regan, Routledge, London, 1996,405pp. C I N E M A P A P E R S • A UGUST 1997

DAVID HIRSGHFELDER Shine Strictly Ballroom the Interview. STEVE LAW (ABC Electronic Composer of the Year) NICK GAVE / MICK HARVEY / BLIXA BARGELD: To Have and to Hold . OLLIE OLSEN STEVE KILBEY :The Church,Blackrock. YURI WORONTSCHAK: Full Frontal etc .CAMERON ALLAN. ROGER W HITE: Bandit Queen. BARRINGTON PHELOUNG.DAVID CHESWORTH/q a v E G R A N E Y . T R I C K Y . P O W D E R F I N G E R . T H E C R U E L S E A . T H E C A R D I G A N S . B E N L E E . D A V I D T H R U S S E L L . R E B E C C A 'S E M P IR E . N IC K C A V E A N D T H E B A D S E E D S .Y O U A M I . U 2 . B IL L L A S W E L L . E D K U E P P E R . P R I M U S . K I T A R O . C . A . A . M . A . B J O R K . E Q U A . K I S S . D I R T Y T H R E E . D . I . G . e t c

P R iS C l L L A .L O V E $ O T H E R C A T A S T R O P H E S .D A T IH G T H E E FI ElTlY. B L A C K R O C K . i D i O T B O X .S H i H E . e t c T h is is just a tiny selection of our catalogue, pi ease phone o r fax for a com plete hit list and w rite r and com p oser list. ROGER GRIe RSON/POLYGRa M MUSIC PUBLISHING b o x n MILLERS P t Sydn ey 2000 p h o n e (61.2)92070585 FAX (61-2)92520503

P u iijijrz im i H u s i e PuitoUtehifojj

Film Special Effects Film in >> Film out

F LA M E > URSA G O LD at

COMPLETEI

ost

Feature Film and Television series Post Production

12 T histle th w a ite St South M elbourne Victoria 3205 Australia Telephone 61 3 9699 4633 Facsimile 61 3 9699 3226

COMPLETE,

P o st

Talk to us about your next project A t AAV D ig ita l Pictures we’ re com m itted to p ro vid in g the most comprehensive television and feature film d ig ita l post p ro d u ctio n service in A ustralasia. We’ve established specialised systems to support the specific needs o f yo u r post p ro du ctio n team and o ur com m itm ent is evidenced by o ur lis t o f credits. T a lk to us about yo u r next program o r feature film p ro je c t and we’ll show you ju s t why we’ re A u s tra lia ’s leading program post p ro d u ctio n company.

A A V A u s t r a lia digital pictures Setting new standards in post production 180 Bank Street South Melbourne Victoria 3205 Telephone (03) 9251 1600 Fax (03) 9690 3734 Email: vservlces@aav.com.au

Contact: Pamela Hammond, Post Production Manager

Once were Croatians The Bosnian conflict has inspired several directors to examine the darker sides of human existence. Director Gregor Nicholas' Broken English examines the far-reaching effects in multi-cultural New Zealand

Mabo Memories Few people have a surname ivhich defines a conflict between morality and money, whose political stand so galvanizes those sensitive to indigenous land rights. Eddie Mabo is one, and Margaret Smith finds Trevor Graham’s film a fitting tribute

The Look, the Hook, the Book Michael Kitson delves into the murky world of film book merchandizing, and finds varied results in new takes on Blade Runner, The Godfather, Star Wars

and the man who didn’t get the lead in Jacques Demy’s Model Shop

Film THE WELL Directed

S amantha Lang . Producer :

S andra Levy . Executive producers : Maureen Barron , Noel Ferrier , Errol S ullivan . S criptw riter : Laura Jones , from the novel by Elizabeth Jolley . Director of photography : Mandy Walker . Editor : Dany Cooper . Production designer : Michael Ph ilips . Costume designer : Anna Bo rghesi. Music : S tephen Rae . Ca st : Pamela Rabe (Hester ), Miranda Otto (Katherine ), Paul Chubb (Harry Bird), Frank Wilson (Rod Borden ), G enevieve Lemon (Jen Borden ). Australian distributor : Globe . Australia . 1997. 35 mm. 102

m ins .

t ’s inappropriate to some degree to com pare any novel with its

screen adaptation, particularly to talk about the success of a film in term s of its fidelity to storyline when it’s often essential to alter a book’s narrative elem ents to craft a good film. But in the case of The W ell, the com parison pinpoints

exactly w h a t’s missing: revelations

principal

about character which are integral

charac

to the story’s them es. Their

ters and

absence, coupled w ith other ele

thus the

ments o f the film , d is e m p o w e rth e

story as a

story to the point w here it loses vir

w hole. Elizabeth Jol

tually all em otional im pact. The W e ll is replete w ith eerie atm os

ley’s novel about

phere and aesthetics, but has little

the relationship

to nourish an attachm ent to the

betw een Hester, an elderly rural spinster, and Katherine, a w ayward adolescent girl, is a wry, knowing parable about need and greed and diverse opposing forces. It’s a som ew hat bleak one, but Jolley tem pers her sharp obser vations of hum an frailty with trad em ark w arm th, and the story’s all the m ore affecting for this. M ore

Surviving Sarajevo Bertolucci may protest at Angelopoulos’ ugly-long takes'', the Greek director’s powerful and poetic of the dark sides o f the Bosnian conflict has impressed many. Jan Epstein is one.

im portantly, in the final act, Jolley

C I N E M A P A P E R S • AUGUST 1997

in r e v i e w Films

continued provides crucial insights into Hes ter’s journey via a train of thought triggered by a significant event. In doing so, she makes the novel’s point and clinches our understand ing. The film’s story begins at a country disco, where a middleaged rather than elderly Hester (Pamela Rabe) is blatantly out of place, standing unselfconsciously In her drab clothes, entranced as she watches Katherine (Miranda Otto) thrash about on the dance floor. We’re immediately aware of the Incongruity if not the basis of this relationship; also of its inten sity. As Katherine drives home, clowning and swerving, she acci dentally kills a man walking on the road; like the book, the film then moves into flashback to explain the women’s relationship up to that point and from there to the acci dent’s repercussions. Hester’s a socially- and sexu ally-repressed spinster (fitting the

archaic term’s every pejorative meaning) who takes in the farouche Katherine from an unspecified else where as something of a human toy and, after her irascible father’s death, indulges them both reck lessly. Katherine is an exuberant accomplice who teases out Hester’s every suppressed emotion, guile fully manipulating the older woman’s affections, sexual attrac tion and efforts to dominate her. Hester’s father’s colleague and financial minder, Harry Bird (Paul Chubb), looks on ruefully and tries to dissuade her from squandering her inheritance. But Hester’s obses sive need and desire for Katherine has unleashed a hitherto deeplyburied adolescent self which is overwhelming, and she smugly defies him. She and Katherine cocoon themselves in Hester’s farmhouse in a world of particularly sensuous and feminine pleasures - gar ments, fabrics, trinkets, perfumes, delicacies, music - hurtling without care towards certain poverty. Even tually, Hester acknowledges the need for some caution and sells the farmhouse to the neighbouring

Borden family, moving with Kather ine into a tiny cottage nearby. Then they continue as before until the accident, which imposes burdens of guilt, suspicion and desperation on their idyll after Hester dumps the victim’s body in the well out side their cottage. The act heightens every tension between them, pushing ultimately to a terri ble climax. The forces at play - and war within the mutual dependency and its innate battle of wills are obvious; chaos and order, age and youth,

feminine and masculine, isolation and companionship, wealth and poverty, profligacy and meanness, sexuality and enforced celibacy, control and abandon, affection and self-concern, internal and external life wrestle for control. The story carries themes about the folly of greed and unchecked passion and illustrates the cost of selfishness; but it also questions the dangers of suppressing self and desire in the name of propri ety, class or other constraints. We’re not entirely sure why either woman is what she is, but forced to consider the implications oftheir behaviour in the light of what we take for granted about Australian culture - as rendered through the ‘ordinary’ lives of the Bordens and others close by, in their happy acceptance of a ‘middle path’. While the narrative holds some tension, the film hammers every thematic point with a directorial mallet; and In place of Jolley’s wryness and sense of irony is a fashionable coldness and cynicism which is likely to leave audiences wondering why they went the distance. It’s hard not to think of Heavenly Creatures and what Peter Jackson might have made of a story like this - unfair, perhaps, as this is Lang’s first feature. But Heavenly Creatures is also a film about two women who shut them selves off from the world proper and commit a crime which brings them undone, and demonstrates the magic that can be brought to such an internalized story. That comparison coincidentally raises structural problems. Like The Well, Heavenly Creatures begins with the crime then recedes

to flashback and converges up to that climactic point. Only in Jack son’s film, we converge at climax near the end of the film and then to resolution very quickly, whereas in The Well we get back to the crime within roughly thirty minutes and then sit through another hour or more of consequences, and it’s quite jarring- it simply doesn’t work, and the story would be more cohesive if it started from the beginning of the women’s relation ship and simply worked forward to the accident and a much quicker aftermath. Although the film follows the novel by starting with the accident, the novel later proffers another cli max in Harry Bird’s death, and a more satisfying if less conclusive dénouement; it’s difficult to under stand why writer Laura Jones and Lang chose to omit this pivotal detail. You could be forgiven for assuming the crime’s up-front just to get you watching, because otherwise The Well doesn’t veer from a monotone line of action beyond a few melodramatic out bursts. This is partly because the characters are so dull and unfath omable, but it’s also due to the ponderous pace. There’s a slight edginess but it’s largely due to the visual mood rather than the way the story’s handled. Performances aren’t strong enough to counter these problems. Rabe commands attention but her work is highly mannered although arguably the character’s not layered sufficiently for a more complex approach. Otto puts in another perfectly-comfortable performance as Katherine but, again, has little to do except pout

C I N E M A P A P E R S • A UGU S T 1997

and prance. Ironically, secondary characters work better. Paul Chubb is at last given a character rather than a caricature, and brings understated strength to Harry Bird, as does Genevieve Lemon to Jen Borden. But as this is largely a two-hander, the dominant effect is a stilted, arch-theatrical tone, worst exemplified in the scenes where the women cavort around Hester’s piano in new silk lingerie, where Hester throws herself gasp ing against a rocky outcrop (a la Catherine in Wuthering Heights), devastated at Katherine’s plans to invite a friend to stay, and where we get a lingering, static close-up of the two in something of a headlock towards the height of their conflict. This tone overlays the story’s sexual tension with an excruciating coyness, more remi niscent of David Hamilton’s flimsy soft-porn of the 1970s than truly indicative of Hester’s desire. Mandy Walker’s cinematogra phy and Michael Philips’ production design are two stronger aspects. They convey an elegantly eerie mood, particularly to Hester’s farmhouse and the cottage, which convey much of the genteel decay of Hester’s material and psycholog ical state. They also render effec tive contrasts between Hester’s situation and the lives of the surround ing community -atthe disco, at the farmhouse after the Bordens move in, at a later dance-where the darkness and sense of enclosure around

Hester are at odds with the light and space of her neighbours’ activities. Treatment of the land scape as a metaphor for Hester’s state of mind, though, is way over done. Much as it’s refreshing to see a new perspective on rural Australia via a Bronte-ish palate of greys, blues and blue-greens rocks and steep hills rather than flat, arid expanses - the metaphor is laboured and could have been wrought with greater subtlety (fewer filters) and fewer shots. Music is damaging in this context, too - Hester’s classical choices repeatedly clashing with Kather ine’s thrash/grunge in order to emphasize irritatingly obvious disparities. What Lang achieves overall is not so much the heightened natu ralism of which she spoke in Cinema Papers earlier this year as a heavy-handed symbolism which simplifies rather than enriches the parable. Key elements which might have given the film sub stance and nuance are missing, and the result is a hollow venture which lacks narrative and thematic interest and - for all its claims to emotional intensity-feeling. © DIANE COOK

| 1 1

BROKEN ENGLISH Directed

Gregor Nicholas . Producer :

Robin S choles . Executive

producer :

T imothy White . S criptwriter : G regor Nicholas , Johanna Pigott , Jim S alter . 1 1 i

Director of photography : John T oon. Editor : David Coulson . Music : Murray Grindlay, Murray Mc Nabb . Designer : Michael Kane . Ca st : A leksandra V ujcic

(Nina), Julian Arahanga (Eddie), Rade

S erbedzija (Ivan), Marton Csokas (Darko),

Elizabeth Mavric (Vanya), Jing Zhao (Clara). Australian

distributor :

Roadshow . New Zealand. 1997. 35mm . 1

j 1 1 \ I

i J \ 1 i j I | \ i | 1

93 MINS.

ew Zealand has thrown up another tough contemporary film, with the release of Broken English from the producer of Once Were Warriors. At the beginning of the film, Nina (Aleksandra Vujcic), a beautiful, Croatian-born 20-year-old, witnesses the destruction of her homeland during the recent Bosnian War. In New Zealand, Nina then witnesses her family’s setting themselves up like a mini-Croatian nation in suburbia, her father, Ivan (Rade Serbedzija), like some kind of warlord caught in his own bravado of racism and xenophobia. Ivan has a passionate, obsessive love for his two daughters, Nina and Vanya (Elizabeth

Nina’s mother, Mira (Madeline McNamara), tries to stand up to him, but seeks refuge in her Roman Catholicism which brings even more wrath. Nina’s brother, Darko (Marton Csokas), is tike a clone of his father, but even more violent and reactionary. So, when Nina’s sister is found in a sexually-compromis ing position with a young man, it brings on a terrible outburst from the father and brother. Nina hears them and escapes for one reckless night. She goes on the town with Maori work colleague, Eddie (Julian Arahanga), in a truly wild and sexy romp of an evening that goes wrong when she doesn’t acknowledge that he could have pain in his past, too. And it’s here, in this scene, that the charismatic screen pres ence and acting ability of Julian Arahanga truly rescues the film. The speeches and heavy handed ness of the Croatian scenes dissolve to a more convincing drama and love story, especially as Eddie’s character brings some kind of real humourto the film that brings out Nina’s sexu-

Now we see the Croatian world from Eddie’s perspective. “Just how do all these misfits end up in New Zealand?”, he seems to be saying with each glance. Then another complication adds to Nina and Eddie’s chaotic world at the restaurant, when Asian waitress Clara fling Zhao) tries to help her illegal immigrant boyfriend, Wu (Yang Li), stay in New Zealand with an arranged marriage organized for $10,000 by the greedy, upwardly-mobile restaurant owner. Wu and Clara’s messy sex life and odd gentle humour adds extra ingredients to Broken English. So when these two lovers knock on Nina and Eddie’s door and ask to co-habit because Clara has agreed to marry Wu for the $10,000, we know we’re in for a bumpy ride. By now, Nina has somehow managed to leave home, despite her father’s aggressive acts to stop her. Naively, she takes Eddie and Wu and Clara back to her extended family’s party. When Eddie sees just how racist and reactionary Nina’s father is, he can’t believe her blind ness to the real values of the man. Ivan and his friends proceed to get Wu hopelessly drunk, and Nina’s family, with the excep tion of her mother, become

in r e v i e w Films

continued

MABO

LIFE OF AN ISLAND MAN Directed by T revor G raham . Co- producers : T revor G raham , Denise Haslem . Executive

subsumed in a terrible plot to sepa rate Nina and Eddie for ever. Broken English tries to do a lot in 90 minutes, and only succeeds partially, unlike Once Were War riors. Nina’s refusal to understand where her father is coming from is hard to believe when she has lived with him for at least twenty years. It’s only when Eddie steps into the film and brings with him the authenticity of his Maori heritage that more complex characters and story unfold. In the final fifteen minutes of the film, a real conflict between the immigrant and the indigenous people of New Zealand produces some powerful cinema, and Nina and Eddie’s journey takes on wider significance. Broken English is shot in a fast, pacy style, with none of the stylized footage of Once Were Warriors. It serves the film well, but stops short of making it extra ordinary. © MARGARET SMITH

producer :

S haron

Connolly. Editor : Denise Haslem . Director of photography : John Whitteron . S ound : Bronwyn Murphy . Australian D ISTR IB U TO R : FILM AU STRA LIA . AU STRA LIA. 1 9 9 7 . 16 M M -V ID E O . 8 7 M INS.

he standing ovation for Mabo: Life of an Island Man at the Syd ney Film Festival lasted more than five minutes at both screenings. Paul Byrnes, the Festival director, said it was the longest ovation he could remember at the SFF. Mabo is a feature documentary which is having a cinema release before its screening on ABC televi sion on 20 August. It tells the fantastic epic story of Eddie Mabo’s life and his struggle to have the Queensland Government and the High Court of Australia rec ognize his people’s ownership to their indigenous land on Murray Island in the Torres Strait. The struggle took over ten years of his life, and it was only after Eddie Mabo’s tragic death from cancer that the High Court upheld

I his claim that Murray Islanders held I I “native title” to their three islands. The documentary took over ! ten years to make and started i when the film’s co-producer was ; working at Film Australia. Denise | Haslem received a phone call from i Eddie Mabo’s family to attend his grave’s unveiling in Townsville and to record it on film or video. She approached documentary 1 director Trevor Graham because he knew the family well, from his previous documentary, Land Belong Islanders, which had . chronicled how the High Court had I come to its decision, and the tire1 less work of the Mabo family. \ Trevor Graham told the SFF audi: ence that the film “grew from our sense of the complexities of the \ man. When we went to the unveil ing and witnessed the grave’s desecration the next morning, we had a deep sense of what the doc umentary could be about.” Mabo: Life of an Island Man opens with wonderful archival film footage from the first docu mentary. Eddie Mabo is fishing, standing in an aqua sea with a \ bright blue sky overhead. We see i him at home with his family and the tremendous relationship he | inspired and the effect he had on so many people.

Some of this sequence is shot on Betacam SP, especially the interview with his wife, Bonita, when she sits in her kitchen and talks about how Eddie and she first met as teenagers in Townsville. Eddie Mabo was working there in the sugar fields, after he’d been asked by his elders to leave the island for a year for romancing a girl not meant for him. Bonita explains that Eddie Mabo had been born in 1936 on Murray Island, but his father had died when he was a young boy, so he’d been adopted by his uncle in the Torres Strait Islander way. But there were no official papers of his adoption. So, when Eddie Mabo wanted to return home from Townsville, he’d been shocked to discover that his entitlement to his land was now disputed by the Queensland Gov ernment. The island was crown land, not Murray Islander land, as he’d always believed. The second act of the docu mentary tells the story of the High Court struggle, and how Eddie Mabo and his family went about challenging the highest court in the land. The film reconstructs this per sonal and political history carefully, including interviews with Eddie and Bonita Mabo and their lawyers,

their daughters and son, and the famous visit to Murray Island of the High Court judges. In this sequence, the lawyers walk around the island with the guidance of the elders, and are shown how tradi tional people mark out their territories. In one amazing exchange, the judges in their black gowns actually party with the islanders, and stand around with grass hats and flowers on their heads. You know as you view this that history for white and black Australia will never quite be the same again. The third and last act of the film covers the more painful period of Eddie Mabo’s death and the shock of his loss to his family and friends. What has he left behind in a spiri tual sense and also to the larger nation? The documentary explores these issues carefully as we observe his family finally celebrat ing his life three years after his death, and then witnessing the ter rible racism in Townsville. When Eddie Mabo’s body is taken back to Murray Island for a safer traditional burial, and Trevor Graham inter views the Mabo relatives on the island, we realize that Eddie Mabo has finally come home. Editor and co-producer Denise Haslem says that when they were editing the film they realized that the three acts fell into “a Greek tragedy so easily, there was no other way to edit it”. She says they had a difficult time persuading the ABC that they couldn’t cut it down to 55 minutes, but they persisted and the film remains at feature length. “We always knew it was an important and powerful film”, says Haslem. Trevor Graham adds, “We wanted the film to be a model for other films that could be made on Wik, or other stories behind the struggle.” The audience at the SFF obvi ously agreed that it was a great film, and so does this reviewer. Afterwards, in the corridors the debate raged about cinéma vérité films versus larger essay films, and people seemed to agree that documentary filmmaking shouldn’t be prescriptive. Each film needs its own integrity and style, and that is something that Mabo: Life of an Island Man has with great distinc tion. Film Australia should be congratulated and supported for financing films like this. © MARGARET SMITH

C I N E M A P A P E R S • A U GU S T 1997

ULYSSES' GAZE Directed by T heo Angelopoulos . Producers : G iorgio S ilvagni, Eric Heumann, Dragan Ivanonic -H evi , Ivan Milovanovic . S criptw riter : T heo A ngelopoulos . Directors of photography : Yorgos Arvanitis , Andreas S inanos . Editor : Yannis T sitsopoulos . Music : Eleni Karaindrou . Ca st : Harvey Keitel (A), Maia Morgenstern (‘Ulysses ’ Wives ), Erland Josephson (S Film Library Curator), T hanassis V engos (Taxi Driver ), Yorgos Michalakopoulos (Iournalist Friend), Dora V olanaki (Old Woman). Australian DISTRIBUTOR: PALACE. Gr EECE-FrANCE-ITALY. 35 mm . 1995.176

mins .

hen Theo Angelopoulos’ Ulysses’ Gaze was pipped at the post by Emir Kusturica’s Under ground at the 1995 Cannes Festival, Angelopoulos stunned the Cannes Jury by the bad grace with which he received the runner-up prize of Grand Prix. Later, he set tongues wagging at the press con ference when he playfully or otherwise biffed Palme d’Or winner Kusturica over the head with his rolled-up certificate. Both films dealt with the war raging at that time in the former Yugoslavia, and Angelopoulos’ outrage that his film should take second place to Kus turica’s sprawling, untidy epic is perhaps the key to understanding why Ulysses’ Gaze is not the unqualified masterpiece that

Angelopoulos intended it to be. Using Homer as a reference point, Ulysses’ Gaze stars Harvey Keitel as A, a Greek filmmaker who returns to his native country after thirty-five years in America, for the screening of his latest film in Athens. The film is controversial, dividing the community and creat ing conflict in the streets. A is disappointed. He had hoped the return home would bring his wan derings to an end. Instead, A embarks on an epic journey in search of three lost reels of unde veloped film shot early in the century by two pioneering Balkan brothers. It leads him in the middle ofwinter, from Albania, Macedo nia, Bulgaria and Romania to war-torn Sarajevo. Ulysses’ Gaze is nearly three hours’ long; yet, despite taxing the stamina of its audience, the film impresses through the majesty and mysteriousness of its images. The most commanding is a dismantled statue of Lenin being transported on a barge down the Danube, its giant head raised to the sky and one arm pointing at nothing. This haunting scene, from the crane lift ing the decapitated head onto the boat, to the barge’s lengthy, real

C I N E M A P A P E R S • A UGUST 1997

time progress through the wintry landscape, past onlookers crossing themselves, is one of the grandest images in European cinema in recent years. Just as strange and compelling is the gathering in the street at night of those forces in support of A’s film, and those who oppose it, shown simply as flanks of solidly-resisting umbrellas and rushing candle-lights. There is much in Angelopoulos’ opus that is deeply affecting. Angelopoulos’ conceit is the con flation of A with himself and Homer, the artist as hero driven to recover his own lost vision as a filmmaker, and restore to his peo ple the memory of the Balkans as a ‘golden age’ without boundaries before it sank into repression and war. Lenin’s statue dismantled and reconstituted on the barge in par ody of himself is a powerful image of the egotism of both the artist and the political dictator, and redo lent of Shelley’s Ozymandias, whose triumph in time is reduced to sand. In another moving sequence, A meets his youthful mother on a train, and is trans ported to the past where he is reunited with his father, grandpar ents, uncles and aunts as they

dance dreamlike through succes sive New Year’s Eves -1945,1948, 1950, momentous years for A personalty, and for the Balkans. Nonetheless, Ulysses’ Gaze is also a distancing film, and as much as we marvel at the images there are times when it sinks beneath the weight of Angelopoulos’ classical pretensions. The idea of the artist as hero has a long pedigree, but for it to work completely Angelopoulos would have needed either to recon sider using Harvey Keitel as his alter ego, or severely vetted the script (co-written in English and Greek by Angelopoulos, Tonino Guerra and Petros Markaris). For the first hour of the film, Keitel seems hopelessly miscast. The pace of Ulysses’ Gaze is slow and ponderous, and the dialogue, pos turing and banal in its attempt to be weighty (“I used to dream this would be the end of my journey. Isn’t it strange - it’s always the way - my end is my becoming”), cuts across Keitel’s natural speech pat terns, which are nasal and quick. As a consequence, his delivery is stilted and unnatural, and adversely affects his scenes with Romanian actor Maia Morgenstern, who plays

his lover in several guises (an archivist in Albania, a woman whose husband is killed in the war, the daughter of the man who holds the key to the lost reels in Sarajevo). Only when Keitel settles into his role does the audience begin to have empathy for his character. The alienation caused by the film’s portentous language is com pounded by its obliqueness. A’s grief is intensely private, and it is only when he reaches war-ravaged Sarajevo that the nature of A’s quest is made clear. Scenes such as A scurrying along deserted streets, being led into the bowels of bombed-out buildings, and the people of Sarajevo emerging from their bunkers to walk about the city, shrouded in mist, have great immediacy. They link the inner life of the poet-filmmaker with politics and the world. The great Swedish actor Erland Josephson plays Ivo Levi, the custodian of A’s Holy Grail, and enlivens the film with naturalism and warmth. Despite its flaws, maybe even because of them, Ulysses’ Gaze is a hypnotic and unforgettable film, made more so by Eleni Karaindrou’s haunting score. © JAN EPSTEIN

r e v ie w Bookà by

M ic h a e l Kit s o n

mperfect Hero, the biography of Harrison Ford, begins, “Some of the most powerful individuals in the most potent industry on earth - from Sumner Redstone, the billionaire head of Viacom and Paramount Pictures, to Ted Turner, head of CNN, from Tom Cruise to Tom Hanks”. These luminaries, like the reader, are about to honour Harri son Ford, “the highest grossing film actor in history”. What author Garry Jenkins doesn’t tell us is that one-third of Ford’s 30-film career is produced by Paramount Pictures, that Para mount is owned by Viacom Inc, or that Viacom is the owner of Simon & Schuster, the publisher of Imper fect Hero. In fact, three of the four books reviewed are movie tie-ins for properties belonging to Para mount Pictures and are published by Simon and Schuster and, while I agree that all film books are mer chandizing, some are more worthy of your money than others.

EMPIRE BUILDING

THE REMARKABLE REAL LIFE STORY OF STAR WARS Garry Jenkins , S imon & S chuster , 1997, 304 PP, ILLUS., INDEX, RRP $29.95

teven Spielberg says of his friend, “George [Lucas] has a bank and its name is Star Wars.”

Garry Jenkins’ Empire Building: The Remarkable Real Life Story of Star Wars could be described as a history of‘Star Wars: The Bank’ from the birth of its creator, what led to Its creation, its popularity, the merchandizing, subsequent sequels and spin-offs, and, of course, the money. Empire Building is packed with detail, written in an accessible collage of quotes, and layered with the many strands and Influences that gave us the ever popular space opera. Lucas came from small-town USA. He grew up with television and got himself to the University of Southern California, where he studied film with scriptwriter John Milius, and the editor and sound designer Walter Murch. Lucas and Murch collaborated on THX1138. THX, before it became a sound system in cinemas, was a bleak hybrid of George Orwell’s 1984, the look of Kubrick’s 2001: A Space Odyssey and the Robot-hook from Robert Wise’s The Day the Earth Stood Still. THX was the first feature to be produced from the union of Lucas and Francis Ford Coppola at Zoetrope Studios. At Zoetrope, Lucas developed a story about kids drag-racing in the 1950s and another about the war in Vietnam. The man that supplied Lucas with an insider’s view of the Marine Corps in Vietnam was Gary Kurtz. Lucas says: “Kurtz may have been the only conscientious objector in the Marines to serve in Vietnam.” When Zoetrope folded, Coppola took the Vietnam script, now titled Apocalypse Now, while its inspiration, Gary ‘Colonel’ Kurtz, went on to produce Star Wars and The Empire Strikes Back for Lucas. “After THX”, says Lucas, “I was getting a lot of razz from Francis, who said that I was cold and weird and why didn’t I do something warm and human.”American Graffiti was the result. Hated by the head of Warner Bros, It opened without publicity and to poor audiences. Graffiti was a sleeper, making Lucas a millionaire and enabling him to independently finance his next work.

Star Wars is a heady cocktail of old Hollywood movies, Kurosawa epics, the mythological structure of Joseph Campbell and, most influential, the serial Flash Gordon - really, the seminal influence for the USC-educated ‘brat pack’. Lucas loved its “gaudy, medieval costumes and the flame-engined rockets, the corny dialogue and the cliff-hanging endings”. Lucas slipped a contract to Twentieth Century Fox that gave him exclusivity to the Star Wars

Mario Puzo and director Francis Ford Coppola have both stated that, when it came to Mafiosa traditions, they made it up as they went along. Ironically, the movie traditions of The Godfather have been established all over the world. Commemorating its twenty-fifth anniversary, The Godfather Legacy tells the tale of the movie and its sequels from its inception as a bestseller by novelist Mario Puzo, through its uphill battle in Holly

merchandizing, music and publish ing rights, in exchange for Fox’s option on the sequels. With the exception of Alan Ladd Jnr, nobody at the studios believed this “sci ence-movie was worth shit”. It is this contract, argues Jenkins, that has built the bank that is Star Wars. As a result, George Lucas is able to operate both within and Indepen dently of the Hollywood system. Star Wars and the Indiana Jones trilogies were all shot at Elstree studios or on locations far, far away from LA.

wood, extraordinary reception and, finally, passing comment on the sequels. Before it was published, Puzo’s novel was optioned by Paramount on the basis of its hook. Originally intended as a one-off, cheapiegangster-flick costing under one million dollars, The Godfather script, under director Francis Ford Coppola and producer Alan Ruddy, would blow out to US$14 million. Throughout pre-production, there were rumblings of discontent from the Italian-American commu nity. Words like “mafia”, “the mob” and “cosa nostra” had been excised by many newspapers in the late ’60s as political correct ness took hold. When it became known that Hollywood would perpetuate the ‘myths’ connecting Italian migrants with violent familybased crime, two things happened. Joe Colombo, the head of the Italian-American Civil Rights League, tried unsuccessfully to bring pressure to bear on the Hollywood system. When Joe

THE GODFATHER LEGACY THE UNTOLD STORY OF THE MAKING OF THE CLASSIC GODFATHER TRILOGY FEATURING NEVER-BEFORE PUBLISHED PRODUCTION STILLS.

Harlan Lebo , Fireside -S imon & S chuster , 1997, 284 pp , illus ., index , rrp $29.95 (pb)

T he Godfather trilogy is loved by Italians the world over, but it is also laughingly referred to as the ‘Schoolbook’, as it is supposed to teach expatriates the forgotten ways of their forefathers. Writer

found he couldn’t stop the ball from rolling, he approached pro ducer Alan Ruddy to cut certain scenes and those offensive words. Meanwhile, every Italian-American from Little Italy and every two-bit player who’d ever made a pizza turned up at Paramount Studios demanding an audition. In a more absurd moment, the FBI was to furnish Coppola with the informa tion gleaned from wiretaps that real mobsters believed the role of Don Corleone should go to Ernest Borgnlne. The role, of course, went to Brando and producer Al Ruddy placated the detractors as best he could. As filming got under way, Joe Colombo was executed in a mafia slaying on a crowded street cordoned with police officers. His killer was instantly slain by some body else and nobody claimed to have seen anything. As The Godfather shoot continued, there was a proliferation of retaliatory gangland slayings. Fearing for his life, Al Ruddy refused the honour and the lucrative guarantees for producing The Godfather II. He said he was lucky to get out alive. The Godfather Legacy is overly long, unadventurous and tends to wander. The writing is frequently repetitive and in need of an edit. The text is a cut-and-paste compi lation of some twenty books and mainstream articles, and the photos are compiled from the Paramount files. Three people were briefly interviewed: art direc tor Dean Tavoularis, make-up artist Dick Smith and producer Al Ruddy. Frankly, this is the least worthy of the books up for review, but, with Its glossy look and seri ous appearance, The Godfather Legacy will probably outsell its more erudite competition, Future Noir.

FUTURE NOIR

THE MAKING OF BLADE RUNNER Paul M. S ammon , Orion Media , 1996, 442 pp , illus ., rrp $ 24.95 (pb).

rom inception in Philip K. Dick’s Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep to the attachment of direc tor Ridley Scott, Future Noir maps the life of Blade Runner from cult novel and big-budget bomb to its status today as a revered cult classic. Author Paul Sammon describes himself as Blade Runner’s Boswell. Sammon was on the set and interviewing the cast and crew from day one. Dick’s pulp sci-fi novel medi-

C I N E M A P A P E R S • A U GU S T 1997

tates on what defines humans and humanity, and concludes that it is empa thy. In Los Angeles in 2019, human overcrowding has seen the extinction of all animal species other than humans. Pets are now genetically engineered machines. Part-Chandleresque detective, part-urban bounty hunter, Rick Deckard is a gun hired to ‘retire’ six replicants — or ‘more human than human’ androids. Enslaved in off-world colonies, these replicants have returned to earth to meet their maker, TyreII, in the pursuit of self-deter mination and extended lives. The Tyrell Corpora tion replicates life-like owls, snakes and humans, but there are also hybrids of the imagination, flesh and blood toys, even a unicorn. Sammon does not rely heavily on outside sources; he actually wit nessed the difficult shoot, where relations broke down between the English director, Ridley Scott, and his American crew, and between Scott and the producers, the studio, and Harrison Ford (who incidentally fell out with the leading lady, Sean Young).

Sammon is soft on his criticism of Scott, but one thing is for certain: Scott spent too much time as an art director, tweaking lights and fid dling with minute pieces of the set. Actors felt compromised and the crew were outraged. Scott also

changed his mind past deadlines and at great expense. Tension ran high, the budget blew out and part of the set was even nicknamed Rid ley’s Inferno. Scott arrogantly declared that unhappy sets pro duce the best films. Scott was ultimately fired by Tandem Productions, but after two weeks he was allowed to return to over see the intensive, post-production SPFX. When the budget blew out by $4 million, Scott forfeited his final cut. Hence, ten years later the notorious Director’s Cut with the special ending which, we find out from Paul Sammon, isn’t the director’s preferred cut. Sammon reveals that there are further scenes still not seen. True to Philip K. Dick’s paranoid visions, after Batty (Rutger Hauer) murders Tyrell (Joe Turkell), it is revealed that the real Tyrell is riddled with cancer and has been cryogenically mummified (like Walt Disney) and stored at the top of the Tyrell pyramid. Blade Runner’s dazzling pro duction design left many of its

C I N E M A P A P E R S • AUGUST 1997

audience asking precisely what happened? The ‘eye candy’ isn’t the only thing at fault. Sammon acknowledges the gaping plotholes and suggests that Blade Runner might even be “boring”. At the box-office it didn’t fare well with women which seems hardly surprising: Deckard (Harrison Ford) shoots two of them in the back and roughly shoves the love inter est around. After poor audience screenings, the much-maligned, hardboiled voiceover was added for exposition, and the ridiculous ride into the sunset, or ‘happy ending’, was appended from outtakes from The Shining. Fifteen years in the writing, Future Noiris obsessed with trivia, but even at 440 pages it is a sensi ble and readable book, at the end of which, like the author’s wife, you may never want to hear the words Blade Runner ever againat least until someone else brings it up.

HARRISON FORD IMPERFECT HERO

Garry Jenkins , S imon & S chuster , 1997,

404 PP, ILLUS., index , rrp $34.95

arrison Ford grew up in the mid-west, the son of an IrishCatholic father and a Russian

Jewess. While Ford’s father had a success ful and inventive career in advertis ing, Ford was a poor student who failed his philosophy degree. Before tak ing up acting in the student theatre, Ford believes he suffered clinical depression. He married his college sweetheart, Mary Marquandt, before taking off for Holly wood via Columbia Pictures as a contract player in the early 1960s. “I arrived in an industry that was completely fucked”, he says. To keep the wolf from the door, Ford taught himself carpentry and cabi net-making. From his beginnings in televi sion to ‘hippy’ bit parts, Ford scored his first big role in George Lucas’ Amerim c a n Graffiti. Lucas wasn’t in a hurry to re-hire him after his antics on set. Ford beat up Richard Dreyfuss and threw him two storeys into the pool, drank heavily, raced his car “up and down the strip, urinated in the hotel drinks machine and tried to set fire to Lucas’ room.” After fifteen years of struggle, Ford burst onto the screen with Star Wars. While success took his marriage, it also introduced him to Melissa Mathison, scriptwriter of E.T.: The Extra-Terrestrial and The Black Stallion. But Ford’s greatest success was conceived by Lucas and Spielberg (then in their thirties) while building sandcastles on the beach. Out of this, Harry Ford was asked to come and play Indiana Jones. Since his financial success, Ford has pursued serious roles, like John Book in Witness and Allie Fox in The Mosquito Coast. But he still gives his “physical acting” a workout in films like Clear and Present Danger and The Fugitive. Author Garry Jenkins conducted a single interview with Harrison Ford and Imperfect Hero is literally a collage, compiled from thou sands of previously published interviews by other journalists.

j ! ! j j 1 I ¡ I I I I ; i ; i I I ! !

Jenkins’ Empire Buildingt about the Star Wars series, has been released simultaneously with Imperfect Hero. To conserve time and effort, Jenkins has cut and pasted where the material overlaps. These overlaps are considerable and some readers may feel more than an irritating sense of déjà vu. While Jenkins reports that Paramount Pictures threatened to withdraw its advertising from the entertainment daily Variety, over its reporting of a controversy between that studio and the novelist Tom Clancy, don’t expect this to be a critical work from a journalist who must work in and for Hollywood.

B o o k v Received

CARLA'S SONG SCREENPLAY

Paul Laverty , Faber & Faber Ltd , London,

1997,131

pp ., rrp

S17.95

BLOOMSBURY FILM CLASSICS

_ _DIVA-THE _ _ _ _ _ _ _ORIGINAL _ _ _ _ _ _NOVEL ____ Delacorta, translated by Lowell Blair, Bloomsbury Publishing , London, 1997, 136 pp ., rrp S12.95 Originally published by S ummit Books , USA, 19 8 3 .

BLOOMSBURY FILM CLASSICS

;

PSYCHO-THE ORIGINAL NOVEL

Robert Bloch, Bloomsbury Publishing , London, 1997,153 pp ., rrp 514.95 Originally published in Great Britain ,

1960.

L FELLINI

, i

i !

(PAPERBACK) ---------------------------------------Charlotte Chandler, Bloomsbury Publishing , London , 1997,418 pp., $29.95

IN THE ZONE

THE TWILIGHT WORLD OF ROD SERLING

_______________________

Peter Wolfe, Bowling Green State University Popular Press, Ohio , 1997, 217PP., US$19.95

i i

!! 1 i

i ¡

THE LOST WORLD

THE SUCCESSOR TO JURASSIC PARK M ichael Crichton, Arrow Books Limited , London , 1996, 430pp ., $14.95

MOVIES ABOUT THE MOVIES

HOLLYWOOD REFLECTED Christopher Am es , University Press of Kentucky, Kentucky , USA, 1997, $27.95

legal ease

The distributor and censorship by Gabby Stein T A RECENT forum “Censorship: the Distributors’ Dilemma” hosted by the Sydney Film Festival, David Elaines (exDeputy Chief Censor) asked the mem bers of the panel a question: Are any ofyou goingto make a public submis sion concerning the fact that Said {Said o le Centoventi Giornate de Sodoma) is to be banned once more? The distinguished distributors looked obliquely at each other and then most muttered a hesitant negative. Yet again, the controversial Said has just been banned. There is outcry on many fronts, but should the distributors take part in such a debate? They are in the business of distributing films, not deciding which films should be classi fied in what way. Flowever, the classification that a film receives directly affects the commercial viability of a film. David Elaines pointed out the salient issue by his question to the panel: that is, how con cerned should distributors be about the integrity of the film versus the marketability of the film, and particularly the demands of the Office of Film and Literature Classification (“OFLC”)? In other words, how does the classification that a film receives affect the distrib utors? Richard Paten from Globe Distribution claims that he is not afraid of R-rated films, but the current climate of political conser vatism and censorship makes a distributor wary of buying a film in the first place. When Globe fought the decision of the OFLC to refuse classifi cation for Jim Jarmusch’s Dead Man, Paten challenged the decision holding that the “future credibility to the repu tation of all filmmakers around the world was at stake”. The OFLC wrote in its decision to refuse classification that the particular scene in question portrayed no essential narrative func tion and was seen to be indecent by current community standards. The decision of the board was eventually overturned, but Paten maintains that it is important to fight for the artistic integrity of the film and to not be too swayed as a distributor by the politi cal censorship forces at work.

Mike Selwyn from UIP claims that is it a misconception that every film has a pure and absolute state, and that the vast majority of commercial films are just that, commercial. In that way, every film has to make money and therefore in most countries films are released in many different versions around the world. Selwyn also com mented that is it extremely rare to edit a film; however, there are some anom

which is stated in Section 33 of the Classification (Publications, Films and Computer Games) Act 1995. This exemption allows a trailer to be screened before a feature is classified. This is for any trailer that is MA or below, and requires the distributor to submit information to the OFLC about the trailer and based on that informa tion, and the National Classification Code (the code)(these are the national

film to Pay TV in Australia, and this is what may make the fundamental dif ference to whether they buy the film or not. Linder the Broadcasting Services Act 1992, there is a ban on R-rated material allowed on broadcast sub scription services like movie channels, for example. The ban was conditional on the Australian Broadcasting Authority conducting research into the amount of people who were offended

alies in the Australian film industry that are troublesome. Trailers that advertize a film attract the same rating as the film in its entirety. For example, a film classified as R can not show a trailer even if the trailer would be rated PG if classified separately. A trailer is vital for the marketing of a film and in this way distributors have to be very aware of the potential clas sification that the film may receive. Selwyn remarks that it is very impor tant that a trailer be assessed on its own merits as a separate entity to the film as a whole, which would allow the distributor to market the film effec tively. An R-rated trailer can be screened, however, but only before an R-rated feature. There is, however, an exemption from such a restriction of classification

guidelines set up so that there is a uniform approach to classification within each state), the OFLC will decide whether it can be screened before the feature is classified. At the present time, the number of films that can use this exemption has recently been raised from thirty to sixty, and these are distributed among the vari ous film distributors throughout Australia. This exemption enables the distributor to expedite the lead time between the a US release and the release in Australia, which Joel Pearlman from Roadshow insisted is a vital marketing tool. Another glitch (or “absurdity” as Selwyn comments) for the commercial concerns of the distributor is that, although they can release R-rated films theatrically, they cannot sell a

by such material. It was shown that 82 percent of people did not find this material offensive; however, to the present date the law stands the same. The above ban refers to broadcast television and doesn’t apply to another category, narrow-class televi sion, which the Senate Select Committee on Community Standards Relevant to the Supply of Services Util ising Electronic Technologies (the Committee) headed by Brian Harradine see as a “loophole” in the screening of R-rated films. Both SBS and “Nightmoves” on Galaxy Pay TV are allowed to screen R-rated movies as the narrow-cast class implies a nar rower audience. For the distributor, however, the wider the audience (broadcast television), the greater the market potential is. It also should be C I N E M A P A P E R S • A UGUST 1997

Flame / ONYX Henry V8 Flash Harry SGI Network Alias / Wavefront Software Motion Control Studio

ü lf li

Design!* Animation • Computer Graphics • psual Effects integ^ed^fipTfpi'odu'aion and a%ital'posÌ£;proauction

Internet: design@gmd.com.au

legal ease

noted that the OFLC is used as an advisory body to Pay TV which adheres to the guidelines set out in the code. So, are distributors in Australia greatly affected by the need to edit films to keep in line with classifica tions requirements? Lyn Macarthy from Dendy detailed the situation she encountered when faced with the recommendation by the OFLC to cut Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer. The OFLC refused this film on the basis that some scenes showed “gratuitous and relished depictions of cruelty and sexual violence [...] which would be regarded by reasonable adult persons as indecent”. Macarthy argued with the OFLC but explained that it was not up to the distributor to chose where to cut; the choice lay in whether to cut or not. Macarthy gave an example of a situation where someone had tried to get a PG rating for a thirty-minute doc umentary about menstruation meant for twelve-year-old girls. The OFLC gave the piece a M15 rating, which meant the audience the film was intended for could not see it. There are films that have been edited in recent history. Take, for example, Disney’s The Hunchback of Notre Dame. The OFLC did not agree with the US classification that the scene when the animated lead stands in a ring of fire and claims that he will kill Esmerellda, the woman he loves, should receive a G rating. Joel Pearlman from Roadshow, however, takes the view that he is not afraid of an R-Rating. He sites films such as Pulp Fiction, Seven and Cape Fear as all being huge box-office hits. Pearlman does, however, point out that, since the 1992 introduction of the MA category, there has been a dramatic increase in the amount of films being classified in this way. David Haines commented that origi nally this category was established to differentiate no more than 20 per cent of films at the stronger end of M; however, now MA films account for 14 percent of all films. With the OFLC differentiating these films on the basis of course language and medium-level violence, distributors need to be aware of the reasons why such films are classified and in what way. It could be a case of one word that could be edited simply (as often can be the sit uation) that could change the whole rating of a film. The OFLC takes into account for example the intention of the language rather than the language its e lf- a subjective process maybe,

but one that the distributors are well aware of. A recent development is the rise in the OFLC classification fees which is of concern to some distributors. The increase is quite substantial, and it does not matter how wide a release a film has; all films are equally charged. The classification fee for a 95-minute feature which was $280 in 1993 was increased to $500 in 1996, and will be $1,055 in 1998. Lyn Macarthy recom mended that as the OFLC classification fees rise, there needs to be an exami nation of the most cost-effective means to classify. She suggests a sliding scale according to how many prints you make of the film and its intended audience. At present, she comments that the fees are hurting independents who cannot afford the high classification fees, nor afford to appeal. Richard Paten comments that as release costs in general escalate, the burden of classification costs present a problem to the smaller distributor. Joel Pearlman also adds that Roadshow is releasing a large volume of alternative cinema, and that in these cases the returns are extremely marginal and to be hit with additional charges, when there is only one or two prints, is certainly a consid eration when buying a film. Distributors are in the business of marketing films. Films are not purely commercial entities, however, and Joel Pearlman feels that they have an “obligation” to market the film. Both Selwyn and Pearlman hold that they are passionate about distrib uting such films as Shindler’s List which reach such a large audience. Nonetheless, it is necessary for the distributors to be perceived by their overseas offices that their films in Australia will be box-office hits. It is then important for the distributors to maintain a close and healthy rapport with the OFLC. With the conservative influences becoming louder in relation to censor ship issues, it will be interesting both to track the mood and standard of classification in Australia today and the response by the distributors here. Should distributors have a final say in what is to be cut? Should they fight for the artist’s right? If the bottom line is that distributors are wary of the potential rating when they buy a film, there may be an eerie residue that slips out and affects the freedom of filmmakers to say what they want to say in the way they want to say it. ©

12 lost and fo u n d

barely noticed, except for an occasional super, indicating a day of the week. Mon day ... Friday... Sunday... Tuesday. A television image of B. A. Santamaria’s Sunday-morning Point of View programme intervenes as The Woman reads an erotic passage from a story. The two characters talk, tell stories, read. They speak of their dislocation. (She: “I was born in Hungary ... Couple of months in a refugee camp and here I am in sunny Australia”). His origins are noted in photographs, in occasional references to Poland, in objects. An interview with Photographer (Paul Cox) underlines a sense of longing, gener ated by the experience of rejection. The film’s depiction of the psycho logical intensity of exile has parallels with the deep political disillusion which followed November 1975; an act of apostasy becomes an appropriate and prescient - interpretation of the subsequent impossibility of commit ment. The apostate has at least acted, has declared a commitment to being uncommitted. Meanwhile, beyond the room, in the performance of signs of commitment-demonstrations, banner waving - the socially committed have not yet realized that the changed polit ical climate has, for some time, rendered their acts pointless. The introspection shifts into a dif ferent register. A television image in the corner of the room erupts into the space of the non-narrative, taking it over. Whitlam is speaking on the steps of Parliament House. The action of the streets enters the room, but only ever as a tele-visual image. The Woman leaves the room to become involved on the streets, or, more particularly, in an idea of ‘cultural revolution’ at the Filmmakers’ Co-op; The Man stays behind, doing his own work. She returns, taunts him with his inaction; he responds by pointing out the use lessness of her commitment. For a long while it was hard to watch the film; its angst and romanti cism seemed misplaced-too European, perhaps. But now, the lack of sentiment is refreshing, the perfor mances seem much more nuanced and the economy of means much more cin ematic. In such a film, you can glimpse the possibilities of a much edgier, more nervous, richer cinema than the one we now have. © 1 Susan Dermody and Elizabeth Jacka, The Screening of Australia: Anatomy of a Film Industry, Vol 1, Currency Press, Sydney, 1987, p. 156.

G a m in g , S o o n

CINEMA PAPERS L

CO NFID ENTIAL S JA e f B a y j

F R A N K MOORHOUSE o n S x m p iw w tiiU f

C n e o f, ¿ w ia p e ’ó, jß e a d im f J iÌm

iD ix e c t a w .

TH EO

ANCELOPOULOS

AUSTRALIAN

F IL M

COMPOSERS S e t th e S h a n e

DIGITAL FUTURES 2 1 d t Q e n tw tty C in e m a

PLU S

S te ó iw a t S R e p m ti^ j \ re w & a n d O ìe u ie u fó , o f C o m e n t

$ iin iA , V id e a a n d fB o a ä p

STAYTUNED! C I N E M A P A P E R S • A UGU S T 1997

''¿j 31 Is Cinem a Dead? The ‘mutations’ that I’m seeing here in Cannes are those made by courageous young filmmakers who are talking about problems in the world, personal prob lems they have put on film. But sometimes they forget the audience, and I have trouble getting an emotional reaction, or caring. And this becomes a storyline that is under the story, and must be there. As far as the critics are concerned, they should be the translators and educators of these metaphors. It’s not the cinema that is dead; unfortunately, it’s the writ ing that is beginning to die. Maybe we need to find other ways, and maybe we are, by putting critics on television, and so on. But it’s very, very important that people see our films, because you’re not making them for a few people sitting there who are your friends and tell you how great they are. We’re making them hopefully for a vast audience, who will be educated and entertained by them, and made to think about existence and where we are in this miracle that we are in. Because we are in a miracle. We’re travelling at enormous speed through space. Everything here is a miracle, and we’re recording that miracle. There has always been fine art, and there has always been popular art, a painting that goes with your drapes and your couch and is comfortable to live with. And there will always be the dis tinction beween fine art and popular art. What needs to be done is to save the independent nationality of every coun try. This is very important because it is our way of understanding each other. Every nation must have a strong film industry, so that we can understand each other, and live in harmony and peace [applause]. I don’t think cinema is dead at all. It may be dying, but cinema is well, and alive. Theo Angelopoulos: I think we have talked enough about the death of the cinema. Let’s talk about the future of cinema. Cinema reflects life. Are we talk ing about the death of the world? Cinema will live as long as the world. The confusion is out there, and this is what we see on the screen. As long as the world exists, so will cinema. Jerry Schatzberg: It’s very difficult to be as articulate as my colleagues, espe cially since I have lost my voice. But Annette asked the question: Who needs the critics? Well, I need the critics, and all my colleagues probably wouldn’t be here if it wasn’t for the critics. C I N E M A P A P E R S • A U GU S T 1997

I think cinema is alive, I think it is changing, and I think we had better keep up with technology. I would like to. My father died about ten years ago, and I think if he came back today he probably wouldn’t be able to turn on the televi sion. Things are changing so rapidly. But we have to keep up with it. And we do need each other. We seem to be thinking of all the critics as one, but they are all different. There are different kinds of critics, just as there are different kinds of directors. We should all be making films for the people who enjoy the films that we make. Ciment: We should be optimistic. There are 30 journals with circulations of about 10,000, which are read by intelli gent people. But it is difficult to find a place to write in magazines with low cir culations. Film production is up everywhere, but what do we see in the cinemas? While the box office is high, according to attendances 90-95 percent of box-office takings go to US films, while only 5 percent of Europeans go to see European films. We should feel opti mistic that more films are being made, but pessimistic that no one is going to see them. Andrzej Wajda [reading a prepared response]: I think that to talk about the death of cinema on Cannes’ 50th birth day is not in keeping with its history. Cinema will continue to exist on two con ditions: that people continue to go to films; and that people will want to make them. Forty years ago, Cannes was very differ ent. Flow has it managed to live so long? Cannes then was situated between two mighty opponents, the US, which repre sented the Free World, and the Soviet Union. The remarkable thing about the Cannes Festival was that it dared to give awards to US films when the Left thought it was shameful. At that time, there were US warships in the harbour, and the crit ics were quick to write that the US won the awards through armed support. Cannes, however, refused to give in to this Left-wing criticism. Cannes has discovered many talents, amongst them Andrei Tarkovsky. The Festival’s strength is in daring to give awards to these new talents, and they have had an impact on criticism. But today it is also difficult. It is not just two opposing forces; money is involved.

touched by the Festival, and without it I wouldn’t be here.

through education. In my country, I believe that when a cineplex is built, out of 12 theatres, two should be set aside,

Mohamed Lakhdar Hamina: What is a critic, what is a film lover? These are important questions in times of techno logical change in the media and TV. Luc Besson has twice come to Cannes, and twice the Cannes critics have let him down. But the audience in France loves him. Critics are only important for neglected films. It is the audience which decides. Through money and organization, you find the same films in cinemas every where. I’m not against American films. Through the Marshall Plan, we knew that US cinema was going to conquer the world, and it has. Flollywood has taken over the best directors. As a result, small-scale cinema doesn’t exist any more. I was discovered not by Cannes alone, but through others, too. But soon critics will no longer exist. There is only room now for big films, with bigger and bigger budgets. Young people want this. Watching a film at home is not the same as viewing it in a cinema. Directors would be horrified at the way people watch our films. Film is the crucible for all our emotions. Watch ing alone, it’s like Robinson Crusoe on his island. I’m not against TV. Coppola had trou ble with his company and nearly went bankrupt. He had to sell his films to TV and got $75 million for the two The God father films, which absolved him of his debts. Cinema can’t exist without TV, and vice versa. There is a symbiosis between them. All I want is to get more money to make more films. I am an accident of his tory. I shouted and won prizes, but it was all accidental. Cinema isn’t dead and I will fight to make sure that it exists. We’ve been told today, confidentially, to vote for the Palme des Palmes [a spe cial 1997 Cannes award]. But who can you vote for? It’s subjective, but there were good films that were not on the list. Still, we were asked to choose, so we voted for Bergman. The critics must help us. The small cinemas have such a lot to say. Don’t support the big films who

one for independent cinema and one for foreign films, which we used to call ‘art films’. And with the right education and the right people talking about them, those cinemas could be filled and dents made in the blockbuster audiences. It would be like a museum where you have different things displayed. I think this is sound economically. If culture works, business works that’s all I know. I’m not a businessman. I’m just a poor guy who finds it real hard to get financing for movies. However, I fucking love them. [Applause.] Bertolucci: I’m very pleased that Marco Ferreri, whom I had a friendly chat with about the death of cinema, is still very much alive through the power of his ‘transgressions’ in the cinema, although he is physically gone.2 People talk a lot about cinema chang ing. Perhaps we are a little too optimistic about it. As far as the cinema that I like is concerned, and this is the cinema that most people seem to like, I would be more cautious. This is because of the increasing influence of Hollywood in my country, and the diminishing presence of local and European cinema. Angelopolous [to Bertolucci]: You accused me a long time ago, in a quite friendly way, of always making long sequences. Cinema exists, but it must take risks. It is very difficult to change. There is an evolution occuring in cinema, and it comes in stages. First there were silent films, then talkies, colour, etc. Yes, perhaps we are in a new stage now, a period of transition, which will lead us to another golden age of cinema. Bertolucci [to Angelopolous]: Twenty years ago I wrote an article about actors, and said that I thought you had reached a maximum with your continuous sequences. There is a personal thing between two directors. Let me just say that I am glad Ferreri succeeded in provoking his friends. Thank you all for coming. @

don’t need your help. David Kehr: We’re all on the same side. Thank God for Cannes.

I’m optimistic about cinema, and that Cannes will not always be squeezed between opposites. In those forty years,

Hopper: Business is very good right

I have come back to Cannes many times. My life, like that of others here, has been

becomes: How do you protect our indus try in various countries? I say it’s

now, and when you have business you have culture. Now the problem

1 Campion may be confused here. She first visited Cannes in 1986, when 2 Friends (tele-feature), Peel (short), A Girl’s Own Story (short) and Passionless Moments: Recorded in Sydney, Aus tralia, Sunday October 2nd (short, co-directed with Gerard Lee) were screened. 2 Ferreri died 9 May, three days into the Festival. See obituary in previous issue.

H i

fl H :f l ■ ■ ¡¡H

■

■ i » » n § ? ■- V jjr a li f; i i l l I m m ■ ' r- ; I M

jf li «

wMÊÊk SSfrìItl 3R§^&C?I

t e c h n ic a lit ie s File

Edit

Mouie

1 Storyboard

% Send Movie Out

Viewer

Sound

File

Edit

Mouie

12:00 PM ©

Untitled Shot-2 ' Effects Fan Wpe fris Round Peel Push Random Blocks Sliding Boxes Spin fri SpinOut Remove ifriutw Shot i

Digital Editing Cutting costs on the post stage can be a big help. New low-priced, non-linear editing systems may go a long way in that direction. By Barrie Smith

Above left: Edit Movie. Three scenes on the timeline. Now to add some audio. Above: Effects. Inserting dissolves, wipes, etc., is a simple task. #

File

Edit

Mouie

p^lStoryboard ~

3 Edit Movie

4 SendMovieOut

Preparing title 1 o f f . -

o s t - p r o d u c t io n

COSTS on any film or video production can get out of hand, espe cially when insufficient attention is paid to the shape and form of the final cut. Far too often a week or two on an Avid, or worse - expensive remedial days online - is resorted to in order to fix structural and narrative problems that should have been sorted out in the early edit process. Inexpensive offline non-linear edit systems have been around for a while, enabling early, inexpensive assembly edits to be made - for client reassur ance or for sussing out the problems on a production. Most of these work fine. But they are hell to set up. There is virtually nothing on the market that comes from one company as a single solution. A PC from here, a video card from there and a package of unknown posting soft ware from God knows where! Avid and Apple got together to produce the Video Editing System, consisting of some pretty nifty soft-

MPEGi, which relies on interframe compression. VES’ Motion JPEG relies on intraframe compression, so occasion ally you see artefacts such as aliasing on straight lines, but for the most part the quality exceeds that of a VHS-toVHS dub. But we are ahead of ourselves. Pros have had Avid, but lower-ievel videomakers have had it tough, with the range of options running from the use of a replay and a record VCR to perform simple assembly edits right up to complex computer solutions requiring dedicated software, video in/output cards - and tons of mucking around.

Approach For the review, I used a Mac Performa 6400 200MHz tower unit, with 24MB of RAM, and a 2.4GB hard drive. The Avid Cinema software is supplied on CD, while the video card is pre-installed so you can edit “straight out of the box”. The two manuals are explicit and won’t frighten anyone. Inputs and outputs on the 6400

Avid and Apple got together to produce the Video Editing System, consisting of some pretty nifty software and a video capture card able to compress and decompress acceptable VHS-quality image and sound in real time. ware and a video capture card able to compress and decompress acceptable VHS-quality image and sound in real time. The codec used was Motion JPEG, because it allowed single frame edits to be accomplished - unlike C I N E M A P A P E R S • A UGUST 1997

are generous: camcorder and VCR video signals are taken into the Mac in composite form or S-video, while the audio (L+R) information enters via RCA inputs. Output the edited material to a VCR or TV and you have the choice of

é s é íé é s 8

1W Ê Ê Ê Ê Ê Ê Ê

Time Remaning: 3 min 58.sec ' (

<S) Previewfull-screen O Make-videotape "> O Save movie for¿¡J*:

The completed edit can be exported to a VHS/S-VHS VCR or as a QuickTime file orfor use on the Net.

RCA and S-video connectors. The working screen, while in the editing software, is about a quarter of your monitor’s real estate - or you can hook up a television and use that as well.

On the run Software up and running, and the onscreen display resembles a collec tion of filing cards, indicatingthe post stages you can pursue: Storyboard, Bring Video In, Edit Movie, Effects, Titles, Sound and Send Movie Out. There is a Storyboard mode, which encourages you to structure an editing order, complete with thumbnails and descriptive text of every scene. I side stepped this. First, I brought in the video. Having selected the video source (composite, S-video, etc.), I ran the VCR and the display appeared on screen, accompa nied by stereo audio. Pressing an onscreen Record but ton and the material was digitized in the Mac - in real time. The footage I had dubbed now appeared as an extended bar on a timeline. A thin pur-

ple strip beneath the video clip noted the presence of original sound. This can be deleted if unwanted. Below the camcorder timeline are three more: titles, narration, music/effects. Dubbing the original material as separate clips can probably save harddrive space and make the edit a little quicker. This approach makes good sense. Five minutes of video and sound will occupy 275MB of storage; that’s five minutes of original uncut material. Other material - music, voice, effects-demands extra hard-drive storage. A finally-edited, five-minute movie, with say 25 percent narration, a dash of sound effects and, let’s say, 50 percent incidental music, could get to 400-500MB.

Grab handles So, let’s do a cut. We probably have a number of separate clips on the time line. Clicking Play button will deliver a preview of the dubbed footage, with all the separate scenes smoothly run ning in sequence. If the separate clips adjoin each other, they will simply cut,

t e c h n ic a lit ie s

COREL LUMIERE ven further down the price scale is Corel’s entry into the post stakes, with its software Lumiere: a non-linear digital-video editing appli cation for Windows 95 and NT 4.0. It enables users to assemble clips from a variety of media sources, including video, audio and still images, and allows the creation o f‘movies’, which can then be used in multi-media pre sentations or output to video. Available for a suggested retail price of $129, Corel Lumiere offers the following features: • The ability to drag-and-drop media clips and transitions into a video project • Video and Audio controllers for trimming imported clips to a desired length • Motion controls that enable the user to scale, rotate, distort or move video clips along a prescribed path • Atitler window allows the user to create title screens that include both text and graphic elements • Transparency controls to superim pose images on top of each other. Using key types such as Chroma and Luminance, unwanted portions of a clip can be keyed out of the video to allow underlying tracks to show through • More than 60 transition effects such as Wipes, Dissolves, Splits and Zooms are provided • Over 60 video filters are available to provide sophisticated effects to video clips or still images. Minimum system requirements include a Pentium P90 (P120 or higher recommended), 16 MB of RAM (32 recommended), VGA monitor, double-speed CD-ROM drive (4X rec ommended), and a mouse. Users will require 72-114 MB of hard disk space, depending on configuration, and a video capture card is recommended. Distributors: Tech Pacific (61.2) 9697 8666.

clip to clip, on screen. Move one away from its neighbour and black will appear between. You can obvi ously move any clip to any position. Hey! You’re editing. Like to trim a scene’s head and foot? Select the clip and grab han dles appear at each end; push or pull one handle and you get a pre view as you move it. Stop on one frame and that’s your new edit point. Frame accurate. For my tests with the rig, I used some old SMPTE time-coded footage shot in PNG and had fun doing quick cuts with ease. Like to make a dissolve or a wipe? Move to the Effects mode and you can access a whole heap of effects to add polish. The Titling mode is a simple chore. Simply type in the text, select the font, size and position, and whether you want it to scroll in from the side, top, etc. The title will Avid Cinema ID. appear as a clip on the timeline and you can reposition it relative to the Q u a lit y main action video clip. Replaying the final VHS I was sur prised at the quality - as good as any Want music, effects and voice? You can record a live voice as you run VHS-to-VHS dub I’ve ever seen. On the final edit, drop in a slice of pre screen, there was evidence of some recorded narrative, cue in sound wobbly verticals and shaky horizon effects (a library of various effects is tals, while there was some sign of provided) or run background music edge fringe on contrasty subjects; pre (acquired from CD or an external tape sumably these are products of the compression process. recorder), as well as importing AIFF or (Mac) SND audio files. It’s unlikely you’re going to see Now you have an edited and audiomany pros or semi pros take up the augmented movie - on the computer. NEEDS Because you have assembled the vid Cinema can also save movie in RAM, and the computer has movies to videotape or as to deliver it to the monitor from this QuickTime files optimized for presen source, effects and titles demand mas tations, World Wide Web sites or sive amounts of processing power, so Internet exchange. the image stunts and halts when these The Apple Video System is bundled sections are encountered. with PowerPC processor-based Mac But go into Send Movie Out, models having a PCI expansion slot connect the Mac to a VCR and televi (such as the 5500 or 6400 series). sion, start the tape, then click Make Price is around $4700 (ex monitor). Videotape - and away it goes, dubbing The software/card Avid Cinema image and soundtracks in realtime. package (rrp$995) can be purchased The computer monitor will give you and installed in a Mac with built-in me, full-screen smoothlycomposite or S-video input and a PCI flowing view of the expansion slot (such as the 7500, process. 7600, or 8600 series), 24MB of RAM, And that’s your edit. Macintosh system software version Without any pain, I man 7.5.3 or later. aged to edit and title three fine cuts, totalling CASABLANCA 35 minutes of screen haring a Mac chip and not much time, in around four else is the impressive, dedicated hours all up. Mind you, Casablanca non-linear editing system adding titles doubles the from the German DraCo company. final stage as the com Looking like a home VCR - it even puter merges action with offers inputs for composite and Sthe title files.

system as a method for making release dubs for sale or client use. Even at the bottom end of the feeding chain, I don’t expect to see any wed ding video specialists running with it. If they do, shun their services! But as a way of mocking-up a quick cut for showing to client or producers, it’s the way to go! With a burnt-in time-coded VHS copy of rushes, it would be a great way to do a rough edit and deliver an EDLto a chagrined editor! video - the Casablanca digitizer uses Motion JPEG, then having edited, titled, added effects and audio, out puts the final edit in a choice of formats: composite, 5-video, plus (as an optional extra) digital Firewire. The device uses the Motorola MC 68040 chip, similar to that used in ear lier Macs and Amiga computers. In place of a computer monitor, Casablanca can output reference video to a normal screen for viewing while you edit. Audio is sampled at 16 bits/48KHz, and there is provision in the system for assembling and mixing three stereo signals. Casablanca uses removable SCSI II hard drives and for this reason is offered in three configurations. Unit with 2GB drive: $4,904. With 4GB drive: $6,008. With 9GB drive: $7,552. It is understood a Firewire out put will be available at an approximate $2,000 extra. Contact Metro Digital Broadcast: Tel: (61.2) 92118282. Fax: (61.2) 212 4473.

C I N E M A P A P E R S • AUGUST 1997

mi mmm I ;M | ÉiamÉa»T»TFvr3iaAssBÊSiSBisÊSÊsiâ^ii^

W Ê M à« & J « V m M iin

1 K

iiillBIÉIlHlWW

— » H !|:l i

ô t e r a i .... m w ^ à M m w m w m «

i i S

i M

—

Throw away your crayons. CHYRON’s LIBERTY® Digital Design Studio allows you to go beyond your boundaries. Instead of painting out of a box, the LIBERTY fam ily of tools offers a complete range of paint and animation solutions for Silicon Graphics® workstations. New version 5.5 software adds • Indigo2™ IMPACT™ Video Support • Real-Time Filter Processing

m Layering Mode ® Multi-Level Undo ^ Internet Creation Support S M

c o n G r a p h ic s

Computer System s

t e c h n ic a lit ie s

Domino Dominate? With two film/CGI systems already m Australia, it may be that yet another will pop up. In Melbourne, Perth, the Gold Coast? By Barrie Smith F YOU REALLY need to see bitter, bitchy, incisive and aggressive competition at work, take a glance at the com puter-graphics sector of the film industry; then direct your gaze at the ongoing war between Quantel’s Domino and Kodak’s Cineon - both superb examples of technology, and both contributing hugely to the advanced ‘look and feel’ of today’s film-originated product. Before Domino and Cineon, the tasks of film restoration, special effects and scene doctoring were extremely difficult tasks performed mainly in the laboratory. Now an exceptional mas tery over the film frame has emerged to the point that CGI operators are butting head to head with DOPs over author ship of its contents.

I took the opportunity to talk with David Scammell and Colin Ritchie on the state of play with Domino.

Hub It would appear to the interested, but casual, observerthat Cineon has strengths in prodding and pampering the data on the film frame (useful at the film input and output stages), while Domino has advantages at the

Repair work can extend from wire removal (in stunt work) through to scene element replacement. David Scammell quoted a recent example in Jerry MaGuire: In one of the scenes, there was a child actor who was actually written out for various reasons, but they didn’t want to shoot this scene again because it would mean getting all the major actors back into place. So a pot plant was repositioned conveniently in front of this detail. It saved production a lot of money. In some cities you will find companies

recording facility to do only the input and the output, there is a range of work stations that are available, so getting colour space right between the work stations and between that scanning and record ing bureau is tough. But there is software out there that can do that and people do write their own transform algorithms to do that. The Domino does it very elegantly. If you’re taking 35mm film, digitizing it, then putting it back to 35mm film, there are a number of ways of approaching it, and to come up with

offering a full bureau service for scan ning and recording, while other sites operate only the work station, using a service bureau for input and output. According to Scarnimeli, taking the digitized footage away from the scan ning bureau, manipulating it on various other computer platforms,

the one solution that is going to solve it for everybody is pretty impossible. Quantel tries to provide a solution that guarantees transparency. Quantel guarantees transparency, so long as people use its scanning and recording technology. Other companies endeav our to do the same thing, but Quantel claims none offers that kind of guaran tee and takes into account of colour space issues. Asking Scammell how successful is Domino in the market place elicits a long list of credits: Inde pendence Day, Donnie Brasco, The Winter Guest, Event Horizon, Speed 2,

Q&As Computer manipulation of the pho tographed motion-picture frame had to come, but it surprised many in the Australian production environment to learn almost simultaneously at Sydney SMPTE in 1995 that Australia’s first UKmade Quantel Domino system was to be installed at Sydney CGI house Ani mal Logic, while Atlab/Acme had ordered the USA-sourced Kodak Cineon with an investment of some where between $ 2 - 5 million apiece. The big question was: Could we sus tain two systems? By early 1997, it appeared that the answer could well be “No.” The Atlab/Acme-owned Cineon bureau is | Dfilm and, since late 1996, has been 1 hard at work on a monster effort on the film Dark City, while Animal Log middle stage (in computer manipula ic’s Domino has been mostly used for tion of the digitized image). Each has inhouse projects. its strengths. Quantel is a monumentallyThere are currently 54 Cineon resourceful company with a installations worldwide, matched by well-defined philosophy. Kodak bash 30 Domino systems (each of varying ers tend to flock to it, while operators levels of capability). A distinct hub of used to melding differing platforms in the latter can be found in Los Angeles, their CGI work reject Quantel’s closed architecture approach. But it is hard to avoid the English company’s solicitous and ongoing approach to their clients’ operational requirements. Recently, Quantel Sydney imported two experts from the UK and USA, as well as a Domino work station, to gee performing work ranging from “fix it” up the local industry on the power of jobs right through to major restoration Animal Logic’s system. A series of projects. Another cluster can be found tutorial seminars was held in Sydney in Europe. and Melbourne.

There are currently 54 Cineon installations worldwide, matched by 30 Domino systems (each of varying levels of capability). A distinct hub of the latter can be found in Los Angeles, performing work ranging from “fix it” jobs right through to major restoration projects.

then returning it to the bureau for film output can lead to problems. Scammell: When a production com pany or studio picks a scanning and

C I N E M A P A P E R S • AUGUST 1997

p g p Office ' 434 Clarendon S t, South Melbourne Victoria, Australia 3205 Tel: (03) 9699 3922 Fax: (03) 9696 2

16 Conyngham St., GiensidĂŠ South Australia 5065 Tel: (08) 338 2811 Fax: (08) 338 3090

82 Berwick St., Fortitude Valley Queensland, Australia 4006 Tel: (07) 3854 1919 Fax: (07) 3852 1814

The Finest Motion Picture Rental Equipment FILM MAKING & DIRECTING COURSE Expand your knowledge in producing, directing/ scripting, post producing and marketing your film.

Industry and Cultural Development New Players Fund Assistance is available to support projects related to screen culture activity in Australia which are not in receipt of regular funding from the AFC and fulfil the aims of the ICD program. Funding is for one off project activity only. Deadline: 31 July 1997.

Touring Exhibition Fund Assistance is available to support the touring exhibition of contextualised programs of film, video and multimedia within Australia which promote debate and critical analysis. Deadline: 31 July 1997.

ICD Multimedia Fund Funds are available for commentary, documentation and analysis of multimedia; exhibitions and festivals of multimedia work; industry seminars, award screenings and conferences as well as travel by cultural practitioners who contribute to debate on multimedia. Deadline: 31 July 1997. Guidelines are available from Lucy Hall, Industry and Cultural Development or the AFC web site: http://www.afc.gov.au. A FC Sydney Office, 150 William Street, Woolloomooloo NSW 2011. Tel: 02 9321 6444. Toll Free 1800 226615. Fax: 02 9357 3714. Email: l.hall@afc.gov.au

W hether you are a novice film m aker or have made a film before you w ill learn the w hole process in detail. M eet like-minded people and industry guest speakers.

10 week course starts Aug 2 For enquiries and free brochure Ph: (0 2 ) 9 3 6 8 -7 5 4 1 TAKING ENQUIRIES NOW FOR MELBOURNE AND PERTH COURSES

« Mission Impossible «* Com m ercials À phone: (Of) 5588 6770 M em ail: inf0@ p h p to n x o ^ P website? w w v.photomIccuuau fflm

address: RQ. Box 81 J ¿U&UlçuS sS Ê

t e c h n ic a lit ie s

Air Force 1, Mortal Combat, Sphere, Spaun , The Devil’s Own. He added that at the Cannes Film Festival there were 20 films that used Domino.

And commercials? Scammell declares that commercial directors and ad agencies are “looking to get better images onto cinema screens”, adding that, particularly in Europe, television commercials are gravitating towards cinema release with the demand for cinema resolution. A lot of video work is processed by Domino, used as a de luxe kine device. Scammell: Several of our customers making a lot of money just from doing that work. One of the bene fits of the Domino system is that our hardware provides a very good interpolation algorithm, to “ up res” as we call it. Quite a lot of companies have been using that for feature film work where budgets have been limited, or to do a spectacular effect - do it at video resolution, then bump it up. Scammell says there are those that “know Domino and love it”, but admits there are those who have not used it and are a little bit frightened by it. The company is trying to make filmmakers feel comfortable with what Domino will do for them and help them to realize it is only another tool in their arm ouryone to be used when appropriate. He adds, it is one that, “If you use it cor rectly, will give you good results and save you a lot of money, but, like any other tool, if you use it inappropriately you can come unstuck.” At this point, Cotin Ritchie con tributed his opinion that Domino is the only tool out there that actually bridges the conflict between creative and com mercial, adding that: The film companies are looking for the commercial aspect of visual effects. They want them done very quickly, and they want them done cost effectively. Domino deals with that, with its speed, but also deals

I think when Animal Logic first got the Domino System, it was very much a learning curve for both of us. At the time, neither of us were really sure of just how much work there was in Australia. 54

with the creative requirements of the people involved in the actual production. It gives you very good, cost effective and spectacular visual effects. In spite of this, there is still the percep tion that Domino has an “emergency room” kind of reputation, a machine that people will look to if they are in a bind. S hou ld

f il m m a k e r s w r it e

D o m in o

INTO THE SCRIPT?

Ritchie: There is a danger there, if you script visual effects in, it means you’re writing a picture for visual effects. There are people out there who use visual effects to prop up

the script and it would be much bet ter if screenwriters actually wrote the story and let the producers deal with how it is going to be made. Scammell: I think that maybe from the European perspective, it has happened a little quicker in that production and post companies seem to become more closely involved with the script-to-the-storyboard stage and have been able therefore to help the entire project through. I am thinking of people like Frame Store working on Pinoc chio, where they were very closely involved in that. There have been a number of other examples where it is the post-production house that became quite involved in the whole project and they have helped the

filmmaker to take it through. Ritchie felt this contrasted with LA where the companies tended to have an independent visual-effects supervi sor who takes the work to various houses to implement the work for him, rather than the houses getting very involved in the bidding up front. W hat

a r e t h e p e r c e iv e d d if f e r e n c e s

betw een

D o m in o

and

C in e o n ?

Scammell: Domino has the speed which translates to better productiv ity. There is a great misconception in the marketplace that speed equates with lower quality. That is not the case. We have done approx imately 50 side-by-side comparisons for filmmakers and customers and

proved it. The ultimate endorse ment for Domino has come from Disney, who are now undertaking all their restoration on Domino, and put in eight systems. Continuing, Scammell felt there was a difference In the ways of working: Operators with Cineon systems tend to use them in a very “work shop-orientated” environment of numerous systems and operators with skills in a particular area. The job gets broken up amongst all these people and reunited to achieve the final result. With Domino, you work very much with a skilled operator who does have knowledge of how to make the whole process look good. So he will carry everything through,

whether it is a piece of tracking work or a frame-by-frame retouch. Domino is actually setting a trend in LA in bringing the director to sit at the work station along with the cin ematographer. W hat

h a s h a p p e n e d to

v i s i b i l i t y in

D o m in o ’ s

A u s t r a l ia ?

Scammell: I think when Animal Logic first got the Domino System, it was very much a learning curve for both of us. At the time, neither of us were really sure of just how much work there was in Australia. I came last year to the SPAA Confer ence and was enormously struck at how much feature film work was going on in Australia and how much

awareness there was of how this new technology could impact that. What we’re seeing at the moment is Animal Logic really starting to understand what the business is down here and how to apply it. From Quantel’s perspective, what we see is a very brilliant market. We want to help them make sure the filmmakers really do understand the benefits of the system. A n o ther

s y s t e m for

A u s t r a l ia ?

Scammell: I see there is enough work for another system, but not necessarily in Sydney ... the Gold Coast, maybe Melbourne. When you look at the amount of digital film work that is being done in this region, you realize that there definitely is room. ® C I N E M A P A P E R S • A UGUST 1997

t e c h n ic a lit ie s

High light: high hopes Now available in Australia, a new lighting fixture lends a twist to the term 'highlight'. By Barrie Smith

■

SUPPOSE I could have opened this story with the old favourite: “What’s that, up in the sky? A balloon? A moon? A fireball?”

Or, just begin by saying Le Bal lon Lumière (or Balloon of Light) is another kooky French invention that, like the Citroën, will unnerve at first, but become totally accepted in the passage ottime. Bill Gray of Lunar Productions is handling this exceptional device in the Australian market. It is already highly successful overseas and Gray is con vinced of its eventual success in our film and television production spheres. It is a little unnerving to stand beneath its glow, as I did at a recent “show” night at Sammys in Artarmon, and, after a while, forget there was 16K ofHMI illumination beaming down from a height of 10m directly above me. This particular balloon was five metres in diameter and filled with $1,000 worth of helium, surrounding 4x4k lamps. Inside the warehouse was another “model”, a three metre balloon with a 6K Halogen inside. Made by the Airstars company, the Balloon has been used in a number of films: Mission Impossible in the UK, Titanic and Rough Riderla the USA, Enfant Lion and The Colony in France and The Well Jo e y, The Ripper and Murder Call in Australia. Naturally, in these cross-multime dia days, the lights will find many uses. Gray states there are three areas: exhibition and special events, which obviously go hand in hand with advertising, and the film and television lighting area. There are two different lines: one uses halogen bubbles at 3200K, the other employs HMI sources at 5500K. Each has its uses: HMI is ideal for out doors use, while halogen is mostly used indoors. As Gray says, It really depends on the purpose [...] sometimes we will use HM I if the customer requires it, but obvi ously the globes are a lot dearer and different things like burn time comes into it. The balloon material itself is interest ing, a cross between a mylar and kevlar fabric; flame resistant, it is spe cially made for Airstars. This is used up to five metres in diameter. Above that a nylon type of material is employed. Inside is suspended the lamp or lamps, hung from a spring mechanism which runs to the top of the balloon’s C I N E M A P A P E R S • A UGUST 1997

interior and tensioned to a lower spring which connects to an internal base plate. With such a daring concept, natu rally safety enters the picture. Gray: Inside the balloon there is a safety device. When the helium is heating up and obviously dispersing, there are release valves on the bot tom that release the helium. The spring on the top is hooked onto the lights and then it goes down to the bottom plate, where there is a microswitch. Once the helium gets to a certain point, obviously it can’t expand itself anymore and keep the balloon round, so it will switch itself

off, as a safety device. That tells you that you need more helium. Even when the helium is low, the bal loon will still fly, but as Gray explains, It gets to a point where safety comes in. I mean, if you’re having a pool party and we have a two-metre 4K halogen balloon up above the pool and your neighbour didn’t like you and decided to shoot it down, it wouldn’t be a pretty sight! So, the safety device moves in and cuts power. Also, if the balloon deflates in any way, all power is cut from the source.

The device can be positioned and sup ported in two ways. Tripods are used for balloons up to three metres in diameter, but, apart from that, it is tethered to the ground in a triangular formation, with six guy wires: three from the bottom and three from the top, all with bungees, depending on weather. On the larger balloons, there are three plates on the top; a guy wire can be attached to each. If conditions are calm, only three may be needed. Inside is the lamp itself and, depend ing on the balloon, the power lead runs straight down to the control box. Inside the top surface of the bal loon is a reflector, so no light is lost skywards. And a great amount of heat is generated inside, but according to Gray, “The helium keeps it quite c o o l-

you would be surprised.” When you open it up after you have finished on a night, the first little swash of helium that comes out is warm, the cold helium seems to shift to the top and the warm helium seems to be pushed out to the bottom. You get a little bit of warm helium coming out and then it goes cold again. Gray: Anything over the 2.5 metre in diameter is supphed with an electric winch in the road case. That winch cable is hooked onto support cables on the balloon and this is where we tie our three main supports.

The winch cable is used for hauling in the balloon. According to Gray, “the bigger ones have a lift of 8o-iookg”, adding “the winch is a useful tool basi cally to adjust the height and, by so doing, change the light levels.” Maxi mum tethered height is 50m. The biggest in the range is the Solar 780, which is only about a year to eighteen months old, even though Airstars began building the units eight years ago. But, as Gray says, “It proba bly took them five years to get everything right.” This unit can rise to 85m and withstand 8okm/hr winds. In terms of output, the Solar 500, equipped with 16K of HMI, can provide 2.5 - 3 foot/candle readings over an area of 70m from a height of 50m. I asked the man from Lunar what actually happens when I, as a produc tion manager, hire a unit? Gray replied: “We supply a technician, a balloon on site, helium, the whole lot. The techni cian brings the balloon and gets it up.” So, from the point of view of the cameraman, can you regard that guy as another best boy who puts the lamp up in the sky? Gray: Yes. But we would often work with the gaffer as well. I am plan ning our attack at the DOPs because, when the DOPs like it, then they say to the gaffer, ‘I want it.’ Pointing out the difference between Australian and overseas practices, Gray explains while overseas gaffers rent their equipment from a lighting warehouse to handle a job, in Aus tralia gaffers store their gear in the truck, ready for any eventuality. He concedes the arrival of the balloon could be seen as taking some of their business away. Gray: I think once the DOPs take it, then the gaffers will just follow suit. The way I see it, every gaffer should have one in the truck within the next couple of years! Can you put a rough figure on the hire of the thing? Gray: A rough figure - we run on a 4 day/7 day week or a 3 day/5 day week. So you get it for 7 days and pay for 4. Usually, the 5m balloon goes out for about $2,500 a night, plus the cost of helium. For the big one, the 16K, the helium costs about a grand and that would be for a week. After the initial fill, we can save that helium and run for a week basically with a small top-up every day. © Lunar Productions: Tel: (61.2) 9742 5058. Fax: (61.2) 9742 5069.

N ow with Henry V8 and Inferno on board, just watch Willy, Caro, M ark, Justin,, Geqff, Mike, Warren and Michelle turn your job into a flaming Bobby Dazzler. Por mĂ˛re information about our people or our machines phone us on 612 9439 6600;

â&#x2013;Ąmnicon http://www.omnicon.com.au

mmM

F u n d in g D ecisio n s

Features in Post-production

P rod u ction S u rv ey Features in Pre-production

Children's Television Drama Crocadoo

Documentaries For the Defence

The Page Brothers

Errands of Mercy

Sally Marshall is Not an Alien

Murder Call

Liâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;l Monsters

Animal Logic

Dreamtime Alice

Killer Jones

Liquid Bridge

Project 500

The Wiggles Movie

Features in Production Radiance The Thin Red Line

58 58

Short Films In Production

Aberration

Mirth

Amy

Princess

Babe 2

Television Projects In Production

Dead Letter Office

Family Crackers

Moby Dick

Greystoke II: Tarzan and Jane

One Way Ticket

Justice

Oscar and Lucinda

Out of the Blue

Pigeon

Redball

Sound of One Hand Clapping

production F F C Funding Decisions Documen lanes

Following a Board Meeting held in June 1997, the FFC has entered into contract negotiations with the producers of the following projects:

FOR THE DEFENCE (55

documentary )

E n ergee E n ter ta in m en t D: E dward T rost P: Lea M ilic EP: G erry T ravers Ws: G rant Fraser , K evin N emeth , J ohn Patterson , Ian M c Fadyen Pre-sale: N ine N etwork Dlst: Ravensburger , A ll A merican Fremantle, E nergree E ntertainment

ons ago, a crocodile civilization of immense learning and wisdom spanned the globe. It was a time of crocodile magic. But that was a long time ago. Today, the crocodiles of Crocadoo are a remnant of that great civilization. Developer Rufus B. Hardacre has built his own luxury hotel on Crocadoo land. The crocodiles are forced to live in half the area they had before, and they want their land back. With Crocadoo under threat from the ruthless Hardacre, it is up to four young ingenuous crocodiles to save their pristine wilderness and maintain the last vestiges of their ancient civilization with all the guile and cunning they can muster. The stage is set for an exciting fun-packed second series as both parties ceaselessly campaign for what they believe is right.

At the May Board meeting, the FFC Board also approved the following documentary:

D: Helen Gaynor P: T ony W right W: Helen Gaynor Pre-sale: ABC TV

Drama

CR0CAD00

ABC A ccord

D ecem ber F ilm s & S iren F ilm s

C h ild r e n s T e le v isio n

(26 X 30 MINUTE ANIMATED SERIES)

mins

core of the Bangarra Dance Theatre. Their story captures an Aboriginal dreaming of three spirits: a storyteller, a song man and a dancer who, through their collective art, build bridges within their own culture and between Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal people.

ERRANDS OF MERCY (55

o r the D efence observes criminal

defence work through the eyes of three practising lawyers. They have an exclusive clientele of alleged murderers, drug traffickers, rapists, child molesters and thieves. What is it that drives them to pursue a profession that may mean providing a defence for those they may not like or believe, to argue for leniency for those who have committed the most repugnant of crimes, and to accept verdicts and sentences they consider unjust? The film will be a dramatic interweaving of several stories that will shock, enrage, disappoint or vindicate.

THE PAGE BROTHERS (55

m in s )

D: M ichelle M ahrer Ps: Paul H umfrass, A anya W hitehead EP: K evin Lucas W: M ichelle Mahrer Pre-sale: ABC TV, BBC TV Dlst: RD S tudio

he Bangarra Dance Theatre, one of Australia's foremost dance companies, is already known across the world as one of the most exciting and vibrant exponents of contemporary dance theatre. The Page B ro th e rs looks at choreographer Stephen, composer David and dancer Russell Page, who together form the creative

m ins

A ccord

documentary )

MURDER CALL (2 HOUR PILOT FOR TV SERIES) Production Company: Hal M c E lroy S outhern S tar Created by: Hal M c E lroy and J ennifer R owe. Cast: Lucy B ell, P eter M ochrie

eveloped from the telemovie D eadline, written by Andrew Kelly. Two young detectives investigate the bizarre murder of an alien-costumed attendant at a big city amusement park. It proves to be the first in a series of horrible killings inspired by an innocent nursery rhyme.

A nna m ax M edia D: S teve T homas P: P enny Robins W: S teve T homas Pre-sale: SBS rra n d s o f M e rc y examines the third largest emergency ambulance service in the world - The Metropolitan Ambulance Service - as its workers struggle with demands to meet Victorian State Government reforms, change work practices, improve productivity and restore public confidence in the Services lifesaving abilities.

In June 1997, the AFC announced three new projects under the CTPF as follows: SALLY MARSHALL IS NOT AN ALIEN (C hildren' s

feature film )

Production company: ClNAR Films (A ustralian/C anadian co- production) Co-Producer: T erry C haratsis Director: M ichael Pattinson Distributor: United I nternatinal P ictures

ased on the novel S a lly M a rs h a ll is n o t an A lie n by Amanda McKay

U'L MONSTERS

e y

EP Executive Producer P Producer Co-P Co-Producer AS Associate Producer LP Line Producer D Director SW Scriptwriter C Cast PC Principal Cast S E Story Editor WD Writer-director D IST Distributor

NOTE: Production Survey fonnv now adhere to a revivedformat. Cinema Papers regretv it cannot accept information received in a different format. Cinema Papers doev not accept revponvibility for the accuracy of any information vapplied by production companies. Thiv it particularly the cave when information changes but the production company makev no attempt to correct what hav already been vupplied.

(Four

part pilot series )

Production company: DECEMBER Films and B eyond P roductions Executive producer: K im Dalton Producers: T ony W right , S tuart M enzies Director: J ohn T homson P uppets created by R ichard M ucck Pre-sale: S even N etwork

live action puppet show featuring Vladimir Bloode, Medusilla Venimsky and Duncan Stein as part of a group of lovable children of classic monsters attending a spooky Gothic school.

Production Survey Features in Pre-Production ANIMAL LOGIC Production company: S ignature F ilms Production: LATE 1997-EARLY 1998 P rincipal C redits Director: P eter BUCKMASTER Executive producer: Frank M ay

THE BOYS Production company: ARENAFILM Distribution company: FOOTPRINT FILMS, G lobe F ilm C ompany Production: J uly 1997 ... P rincipal C redits Director: Rowan W oods Producers: Robert C onnolly, J ohn M aynaro Scriptwriter: STEPHEN SEWELL Based on the play titled: The B oys Written by: GORDON GRAHAM G overnment A gency Investment Development: AFC Production: SBS INDEPENDENT, P remium M ovie Partnership

HHB PORTADATTIM ECODE DAT

THE LOCATION DAT STANDARD FREECALL 1 8 0 0 675 16 8 C I N E M A P A P E R S â&#x20AC;˘ A UGU S T 1997

in p r o d u c tio r i Costume designer: J enny Campbell Editor: T ed Otton Composer: M aurice D 'A bruzo Sound designer: M aurice D 'A bruzo Sound recordist: B ob Clayton

ProductionSurvey continued M arketing International distributor: A xiom Films C ast D avid W enh am , T oni C ollette, Lynette C urran , J ohn P olson , J eanette C ronin , A n na L ise , A nthony Hayes he Boystells the story of Brett Sprague, a bad-seed brother who returns to his family home after several years in gaol. Things have changed while Brett has been away: his brother, Glen, has moved out; youngest brother Stevie's pregnant girlfriend now lives with the family; and his mother, Sandra, has taken on a new lover. On his first day back, Brett sets about restoring his own family order. In doing so, he reunites his brothers with horrific consequences.

DREAMTIME ALICE

P lanning and D evelopment Casting: A nnie M urtagh - M onks Extras casting: A nnie M urtagh - M onks Budgeted by: I an S penceley, S haron J ackson , M ichael B ond

C ast Cate B lanchett

Researchers: P hil A valo n , B rian W illiam s Script editors: B rian W illia m s , P hil A valon Casting: M aura Fay & A ssociates Casting consultant: A nn Fay Storyboard artist: K erri A insworth Shooting schedule by: D enis K iely Budgeted by: P hil A valon P roduction C rew

C amera C rew Camera operator: Laszlo B aranyai Camera type: ARRI On- set C rew 1st assistant director: Jo O 'S haunnessy Continuity: J an P iantoni Make-up: L esley Rouveray Special fx make-up: L esley Rouveray Hairdresser: LESLEY ROUVERAY Unit publicist: N atalie Cameron

FALLEN EIGHTS

P ost- production

Production Company: Clever R evolution P roductions Pre-production: M arch - J une 1997 Production: SEPTEMBER 1997 P rincipal C redits Director: K ristian I. CONNELLY Producers: Danny G insberg , K ristian I. C onnelly Executive producer: Kathleen H utson Line producer: N athan S tones Screenwriter: K ristian I. Connelly Production C rew

Film gauge: S uper 35 mm Screen ratio: CINEMASCOPE Shooting stock: EASTMAN COLOUR & B&W G overnment A gency Investment Production: S mile PRODUCTIONS, S how T im e , T he S outh A ustralian Film Corporation , S creenW est Marketing

C amera C rew Camera operator: M artin M cG rath On - set C rew Make-up: HILARY PEARCE Still photography: W arw ick G ibson Unit publicist: A nnie W right Runner: TONY FIELDS

C ast

PROJECT 500 Production company: S ignature Films Production: Late 1997-EARLY 1998

THE WIGGLES MOVIE

KILLER JONES

LIQUID BRIDGE

Production company: B ondfilm Pty Ltd Distribution company: T he G lobe Film C o Budget S2.2 MILLION Pre-production: J uly 1997 Production: A ugust 1997

Production company: A valon Films Pre-production: J uly 1997, FOR 7 WEEKS Production: S eptember 1997, FOR 7 WEEKS

Director: DEAN COVELL Producer: HlLTON Fatt Scriptwriter: G reg T ruman

P rincipal C redits Director: MICHAEL BONO Producer: JAN T yrell Co-producers: I an S penceley, S haron J ackson Executive producers: lAN SPENCELEY, M ichael B ond Associate producer: N icholas H ope

Director: P hil A valon Producer: P hil A valon Line producer: D enis K iely Associate producer: B rian W illiams Scriptwriter: PlM HENDRIX Based on the story titled: L iquid B ridge By: B rian W illiam s and P hil A valon Director of photography:MARTlN M cGrath Production designer: K erri A insworth

Cast S im o n B ossell, P am ela G idley

Rachael M a z a , D eborah M a il m a n , T risha M orton -T homas

Distribution company: T wentieth C entury Fox P rincipal Credits

S ynopsis

P rincipal credits Director: T errence M alick Producers: Grant H ill , Robert G eisler , J ohn R oberdeau Executive producer: G eorge Stevens J r. Line producer: G rant H ill Scriptwriter: T errence M alick Based on a novel titled: T he T hin Red L ine By J ames J ones Director of photography: J ohn T oll Editors: B ill W eber, L eslie J ones Production designer: J ack Fisk Costume designer: M argot W ilson Other C redits Production manager: VlCKl P0PPLEWELL 1st assistant director: S kip C osper Unit publicity: Fiona S earson , DDA C ast S ean P enn , Gary O ld m a n , N ick N olte, T im Roth

C ast M urray Cook , J eff Fatt , A nthony Field , G reg P age , T ony H arvey , L eanne A sh Â ley, Carolyn Ferrie , J oanne S am uel . S ynopsis he W iggles M o vie follows the band

and several of their special friends as they plan a surprise party for Dorothy the Dinosaur, who mistakenly believes the group has forgotten her birthday.

chiller film in the tradition of Trem ors. A woman on the run becomes trapped In a remote cabin with a local scientist during a blizzard

hree young Aboriginal women return home for their mother's funeral, and In the space of twentyfour hours, confront and exorcise the demons from their past.

S ynopsis

Marketing Sales agent: V ictor Film C o. Publicity: S ian Clement (02) 9450 3650

C ast

Production company: P hoenix P ictures -F ox 2000 Production: 23 J une -N ovember 1997, P ort D ouglas , Q ueensland Distribution company: T wentieth C entury Fox

N icholas H ope (J onathon J ones ), T ushka B ergen (J essica )

P rincipal C redits

NSWFTO, PMP

THE THIN RED LINE

P rincipal C redits

On - set crew 1st assistant director: J ohn M artin Unit publicity: Fiona S earson , DDA Government Agency Investment D evelopment : AFC, SBS I ndependent ,

M arketing

Director: PETER BUCKMASTER Executive producer: Frank M ay

odern-day sexual thriller set in the post-apocalypse.

On - set C rew 1st assistant director: CHRIS SHORT Special fx: D avid R iley , S u sanna M orphett , D aniel P erry.

Development: Film QUEENSLAND

n epic tale of a young sportsman's troubled journey to the top.

P roduction C rew Production supervisor: BRIDGET BOURKE Location manager: SCOTT DONALDSON

P roduction crew

G overnment A gency I nvestment

Marketing consultant: J.M .A . International sales agent: B eyond Films Publicity: A nnie W right , J ohn T hornhill Poster designers: JOHN THORNHILL, W arw ick G ibson

P rincipal C redits Director: T im B oxell Producer: Chris B rown NZ producer: T im S anders Co-producer: SCOTT L ew Scriptwriters: Darrin Oura, S cott Lew Director of photography: A llen G uilford Production designer: Grant M ajor

Production Manager: A lly H enville

P ost- production Post-production supervisor: Rose D ority - S pectrum Music performed by: VARIOUS ARTISTS Mixer: P hil H eywood Laboratory: MOVIELAB Film gauge: 35 m m

S ynopsis

Publicity: D anny G insberg S till C asting

P rincipal credits

Wardrobe supervisor: J enny Campbell

ones, a writer, is placed in a challenging exploration of the human predicament. When a body is found, Jones, the killer, is driven mad by what he has done, and realizes his only way out of trouble is to get deeper into it.

On- set C rew 1st assistant director: ASHLEY B ell M arketing

ABERRATION Production company: Grundy Films Production: 25/11/96 - 6/1/97 (Wellington and Queenstown, New Zealand)

W ardrobe

International sales agent: I n trafilm , R ome

Production supervisor: KATHLEEN HUTSON Production secretary: STEPHANIE S tones

RADIANCE Production company: ECLIPSE FILMS Production: JULY 7, FOR SIX WEEKS Director: Rachel P erkins Producers: N ed La n d e r , A ndy M yer Co-producer: J enny Day Scriptwriter: Louis N owra Based on the stage play titled: Radiance By: Louis N owra Director of photography: W arw ick T hornton Editor: JAMES BRADLEY Production designer: S arah S tollman Costume designer: T ess S chofield Composer: A listair J ones

Insurer: TONY GlBBS Completion guarantor: FACB Legal services: H art & S pira

P roduction C rew Location manager: T im B urns Production accountant: S haron J ackson Insurer: ACN Pty Ltd Completion guarantor: FACB, Rob FlSHER Legal services: J ohn P icton -W arlow & A ssociates Travel co-ordinator: J ohn the T ravel B roker

P rincipal credits Director: C herie N owlan Producers: CHERIE NOWLAN, Cate B lanchett Based on the book D reamtime A lice W ritten by: M andy S ayer

P lanning and D evelopment

Scriptwriter: MICHAEL BOND Director of photography: Laszlo B aranyai Production designer: H erbert P inter Editor: A ndrew T hompson Composer: J en A nderson Sound designer: J ames CuRRY Sound recordist: J ames Curry

Featured in Foot Production

Feature Filnu In Production

AMY Distribution company: B eyond Film s Ltd ( internatio nal ), V illage R oadshow Ltd (A ustralia and N ew Z ealand ) Production: 24/3-24/5/97 P rincipal C redits Director: NADIA TASS Producers: N ad ia T ass AND D avid Parker Co-producer: P hil J ones Based on the original screenplay titled: A my By: D avid P arker Director of photography: DAVID PARKER Production designer: J on D owding Costume Supervisor: C hristiana P litzeo Editor: B ill M urphy Composer: P hil J udd Sound designer: D ean Gawen Sound recordist: A ndrew Ramage P roduction C rew Production manager: Lesley P arker Production co-ordinator: T rish Foreman Producers' assistant: J ane H am ilto n Production secretary: Colette B irrell Location manager: N eil M cCart (S pider ) Unit manager: L eigh A m m itzbo ll Unit assistant: PETER BOEKEMAN Production runner: J onathon Rishworth Production accountant: N adeen K ingshott Insurer: T ony L eonard , AON B isk S ervices Completion guarantor: ADRIENNE READ Legal services: B ryce M enzies , R oth W arren

S ynopsis

Camera C rew

ased on Jones' sequel to From Here to Eternity, the film depicts an episode of military history in 1942 when the first division of the US Marine Corps attacked the beaches of Guadalcanal, where Japanese troops had dug in. The 'thin red line' represents the fine line between defeat and victory in the battle.

Camera operator: D avid W illiam son Focus puller: W arw ick Field Clapper-loader: J ude L ovatt Key grip: R ichard A llardice Grip: P eter S tockley Assistant grip: M arin J ohnson Gaffer: I an D ewhurst Best boy: L ex M artin 3rd electrics: MICHAEL HUGHES 4th electrics: CHRIS DEWHURST

HHB PORTADAT HEADPHONE MATRIX

RETRO FIT TO ANY PORTADAT FREECA LL 1 8 0 0 675 16 8 58

C I N E M A P A P E R S â&#x20AC;˘ A UGUST 1997

serious

M o s t o f th e best

But this is only th e

C o n ta c t Future

o f w h a t you see on

b e g in n in g . Let's

Reality. A ustralia

television, in

ta lk a b o u t th e

and N ew Zealand's

cinem as o r even on

fu tu re o f visual

leading d is trib u to r

th e w e b , in gam es

m edia creation.

o f Discreet Logic,

^6 |f t

ยง

and interactives has

A liasIW avefro nt,

been created w ith

U S A nim ation,

th e seriously h o t

Silicon Graphics

M e lb o u rn e (03) 9876 8355

com bo of

and M inerva MPEG

Sydney (02) 9906 5455

Discreet Logic

C om pressionist.

A u c k la n d (09) 294 9127

fu tu r e

reality

s o ftw a re w ith

Em ail in fo @ fu tu re .c o m .a u

S ilicon G raphics

w w w .fu tu re .c o m .a u

hardw are.

production Production Survey

Post- production

continued On - set Crew

BABE 2

1st assistant director: B ob D onaldson 2nd assistant director: CHRISTIAN ROBINSON 3rd assistant director: I ain P irret Director's assistant: C lea Frost Continuity: Jo WEEKS Video split operator: P ip WlNCER Boom operator: T ony D ickinson Make-up: A m a n d a Rowbottom Hairdresser: Z eljka S tanin Special fx supervisor: P eter S tubbs Stunts co-ordinator: Z ev Eletheriou Safety supervisor: T om Coltraine Unit nurse: T ed G reen Still photography: S kip W atkins Unit publicist: S arah Finney Caterer: J enny S tockley Caterer's assistant: T iffany M orris Tutor/chaperone: M aree G ray

Production company: K ennedy M iller

A rt Department Art director: H ugh B ateup Art department co-ordinator: C hristina N orman Set decorators: L isa T hompson , N ic B runner Set dresser: D aniel M a pp - M oroni Standby props: H arry Z ettel Art department assistant: J anie Parker Graphic artist: J ane M urphy Draftsperson: S teven W hiting

W ardrobe Costume assistant: B ernice D evereaux Standby wardrobe: M andy S edawie Costumier: A lison Fowler Assistant wardrobe: D enise P etrovic

Construction D epartment Scenic artist: J ohn Haratzis Construction manager: B rendan M ullen

DEAD LETTER OFFICE Production company: A rtist S ervices Film P roductions P ty Ltd Production: A pril - J une 1997

P rincipal Credits Director: JOHN RUANE Producers: D enise P atience , D eborah C ox Executive producers: S teve V izard , A ndrew K night Scriptwriter: D eborah C ox Director of photography: Ellery Ryan Production designer: C hris K ennedy Costume designer: K errie M azzocco Editor: D enise H aratzis Composer: Roger M ason Sound recordist: L loyd Carrick

P lanning

and

D evelopment

Researchers/script consultants: M elissa M ohr, R ichard L ow enstein , M ichael B rindley , J ohn Ruane Casting: Elly B radbury Latin extras casting: K ristin a D iaz

1roduction Crew Production manager: Ray H ennessy Production co-ordinator: Sand i R evelins Production secretary: J a n a B lair Location manager: S tephen B rett Unit manager: M ichael B arnes Production accountant: M andy Carter Accounts assistant: C urtis Q uelle Insurer: H. W . W ood A ustralia Pty Ltd Completion guarantor: FACB

P ost- production

Camera Crew Camera operator: R ob M urray Focus puller: T rish KEATING Clapper-loader: A ndrew J erram Gaffer: Ro ry T imoney Best boy: C hris S hanahan 3rd electrics: A dam Kercheval

International sales agent: B eyond F ilms L imited Domestic distributor: V illage Roadshow L imited Network Pre-sale: N ine N etwork

Cast Rachel G riffiths (T a n y a ), A lana D e Rom a (A m y ), B en M endelsohn (R obert ), N ick B arker (W ill ), K erry A rmstrong (S arah ), J eremy T rigatti (Z ac ), W illiam Z appa (B ill ), S ullivan S tapleton (W ayne ), T orquil N eilson (L uke ),M ary W ard (M rs M ullin s ), S usie P orter (A n ny )

my is an eight-year-old girl who can only hear music and communicates by singing.

Sound post-production: SOUNDFIRM Laboratory: C inevex Telecine transfers: AAV A ustralia Safety Report: N ew G eneration S tunts

Government A gency I nvestment Development: Film V ictoria , FFC Cast

[I\l0 DETAILS SUPPLIED.]

Post-production supervisor: D avid B irrell Assistant editor: D avid B irrell Editing assistant: ROCHELLE Oshlack Sound editor: P aul H untingford Foley artist: Paul H untingford Music supervisor: C hris G ough , M a n a M usic Laboratory: ClNEVEX Laboratory liaison: I an A nderson Cutting Rooms: N oisy P ictures Telecine: C omplete P ost Government A gency I nvestment Production: A ustralian Film Co m m is s io n : Commercial T elevision P roduction Fund

M arketing

Labourer: P eter S taunch Set painters: B en Resch , A ndrew S cott Brushhand: Rohan SCOTT

On - set Crew 1st assistant director: M onica P earce 2nd assistant director: M ir iam Ready 3rd assistant director: LlSA Ferri Boom operator: M alcolm H ughes Continuity: A nny B eresford Make-up: STEPHANIE Larm an Make-up assistant: Liz Harper Caterer: S weet S eduction Still photography: USA T homasetti Unit publicist: Fran Lanig an

A rt D epartment Art director: A llison P ye Art department co-ordinator: Lucy S parke Set decorator: G eorgina Campbell Standby props: D ean S ullivan Dresser: T ao W eis Draftsperson: S usan R ogers

W ardrobe Costume supervisor: K eryn R ibbands Costume standby: K elly Foreman

Construction D epartment Construction manager: B rendan M ullens Carpenters: S id H artley , C hris T im m s , Craig J acks

M iranda Otto (A lice ), G eorge D elH oyo (F rank ), G eorgina N aidu (M ary ), N icholas B ell (K evin ). S yd B risbane (P eter), J ane H all (H eather ), M ark W ilson (Y outh ), J illian O 'D owd (L izzy ), G uillerm ina U lloa (L ucia ), Franko M ilostnik (V incente ), V anessa Steele (C ar m e n ).

he Dead Letter Office is a place of small mysteries, hidden in the bowels of the Metropolitan Mail Centre. The letters and parcels lining its walls are wrongly addressed or mistakenly posted and most likely will never reach their destinations. This conglomeration of files and cupboards is also a sorting house for every kind of human frailty - letters of love lost, grief and longing - but this is the painful burden that Frank Lobez, officer-incharge, refuses to take up. That is, until Alice Walsh comes into his life and embroils him in her own misdirected quest for happiness.

FAMILY CRACKERS Distribution company: B eyond Film s , S harm ill Films Production: A pril 1997 ...

Principal Credits Director: DAVID SWANN Producer:CHRis W arner Scriptwriter: D avid S w an n

Government A gency I nvestment Production: A ustralian F ilm F inancing C orporation , Film V ictoria Marketing: B eyond Films

Synopsis

Cast

arzan a n d Ja n e centres on Tarzan's

post-Greystoke return to Africa to save his homeland from mercernaries trying to uncover the secret of the lost city of Opar.

JUSTICE Production company: W est C oast P ictures Distribution company: N ewvision Budget: $1.72 m Pre-production: 1/4-4/5/97 Production: 5/5-15/6/97 Post-production: 16/6- 12/9/97 Director: Ron E lliott Producer: B ob Roget Line producer: D ixie B etts Executive producer: Larry Hirsch Associate producers: Ryan Hodgson, Kelvin M unro, S tuart M c C racken Based on the original screenplay titled: J ustice By: B ob Roget Director of photography: ALEX M c P hee Production designer: C layton J auncey Costume Designer: Lisa Galea Editor: Lawrie S ilverstrin Sound recordist: S cott MONTGOMERY

Planning

and

D evelopment

GREYSTOKE II: TARZAN AND JANE Production company: VILLAGE ROADSHOW P ictures of A ustralia , D ieter G eissler Filmproduktion , G ermany Budget: $20 million Production: M arch 1997 ...

ased on the novel by Peter Carey, a story about fate, love, gambling and faith.

Production Crew

Principal Credits

Production manager: Dixie B etts Production co-ordinator: Liz J anney, J enni C ohen Location manager: T im B urns Production accountant: LlSA SMITH Insurer: HW W ood A ustralia Pty Ltd Completion guarantor: F irst A ustralian C ompletion C o.

Director: P hil A valon Producer: PHIL AVALON Executive producers: Hans P omeranz , P eter O 'N eill, K erry D unn Associate producers: J ulian S aggers , J ason G ooden Scriptwriter: P hil A valon Director of photography: L es Parrott Production designer: Cathy Finlay Costume designer: J enny Cam pbell Editor: M ike H oney

Camera Crew Camera operator: A lex M c P hee Focus puller: T orstein Dyrting Clapper-loader: S ean M eehan Camera assistant: David M c M illan Key grip: Barry Hansen Gaffer: T ed N ordsvan Best boy: C raig Irwin

On - set Crew

Synopsis

Cast Ralph Fiennes , Cate B lanchett .

Production company: AVALON FILMS Distribution company: N ew V ision Pre-production: 2/12/96... Production: 10/1 /97... Post-production: ... 31/5/97

1st assistant director: M ichael Faranda Continuity: J an P iantoni Make-up: Lesley R ouvray Hairdresser: Lesley Rouvray Stunts co-ordinator: P eter W est Safety officer: PETER WEST

comedy with a heart about a chaotic family Christmas that goes terribly wrong.

OSCAR AND LUCINDA Production company: M eridian Films Distribution company: Fox SEARCHLIGHT Production: S eptember -D ecember 1996 Budget: $16 MILLION Director: G illian A rmstrong Producers: T im W hite , R obin D alton Scriptwriter: Laura JONES Government Agency Investment: FFC

OUT OF THE BLUE

Script editor: S teve T urnbull Casting consultants: A nnie M urtaghM onks & A ssociates Extras casting: J enni C ohen Budgeted by: D ixie B etts

M arketing Cast

u s tice is an 'againstthe odds' story of hope and inspiration. Set against the background of the city slums, an alcoholic derelict is framed forthe murder of a female Internal Affairs officer. In order to prove his innocence, he must first fight and conquer his personal demons before he is able to challenge the legal system and, representing himself, discover the truth and bring the guilty to justice.

Principal Credits

International sales agent: B eyond Films W arren M itchell, Daniel K ellie, P eter Rawsthorn , S usan Lyons, M aggie King , T erry Gill, V alerie B ader, Chris Chapman

M arcus G raham (B obby L ew is ), K erry A rmstrong (A nnie M a r t in )

Planning

and

D evelopment

Script editor: G erard M aguire

Production Crew Production manager: B ill M arsden Locations: Harriet S cott Unit manager: T ony Fields Production runner: Ron H olbrow Production accountant: Ron R heuben Assistant production accountant: J ason G ooden Insurance: T ony G ibbs Legals: O 'N eill-O wens

A rt Department

Camera Crew

Art director: C layton J auncey Art department co-ordinator: D ebbie T aylor Art department runner: S am Hobbs Set dresser: Debbie T aylor Props buyer: B eth Garswood Standby props: K elvin S exton

Focus puller: Roger B oyle Clapper-loader: L es S neal Gaffer: S teve Carter

W ardrobe Wardrobe supervisor: Lisa Galea Standby wardrobe: CHRISTINE LYNCH Wardrobe assistant: A bby W ilson

Principal Credits

P ost- production (Film and/ or V ideo)

Director: Carl S chenke Co-producer: M ichael Lake Based on the characters created by: Edgar R ice B urroughs

Post-production supervisor: Lawrie S ilverstrin G overnment A gency Investment Production: S creen W est , FFC

Cast

M arketing

Casper van D ien (T a rz an ), J ane M arch (J a n e ), Steven W addington (R avens )

International sales agent/distributor: A ugust E ntertainment

On - set Crew 1st assistant director: CLINTON W hite Continuity: S tewart Ew ings Make-up: H ilary P earce Hairdresser: H ilary P earce Stunt co-ordinator: GRANT PAGE

Post- production Post-production supervisor: R ose Dority Soundtrack: Pacific R im Music co-ordination: PACIFIC R im Laboratory: M ovielab Post-production facility: S pectrum

Cast S imon W estaway (J ohnny A usten ), B ill H unter (C ee T ee), Rebecca R igg (M aylene )

HHB PORTA DAT & H H B DAT TAPE

YOUR PROFESSIONAL PARTNERS FREECALL 1 8 0 0 675 16 8 60

C I N E M A P A P E R S â&#x20AC;˘ A UGUST 1997

Back

SEETEAR-OUT

«F

UJJ

I T T

Â CruicLe to W k a t’s in Stock 3 1 H TO ORDER

| =Number 1 (January 1974) David Williamson, Ray Harryhausen, Peter Weir, Antony Ginnane, Gillian Armstrong, Ken G. Hall, The Cars th a t A te Paris Number 2 (April 1974) ¡• ‘¿Censorship, Frank Moorhouse, Nicolas Roeg, Sandy Harbutt, Film under Allende, Between the Wars, A lvin Purple Number 3 (July 1974) Richard Brennan, John Papadopolpus, Willis O'Brien, William Fnedkin, The True Story of Eskimo N e ll Number 4 (December 1974) Bill Shepherd, Cliff Green, Werner Herzog, Between Wars, Petersen> A Salute to the-.Great MacArthy Number 5 (March-April 1975) Albie Thoms on surf movies, Charles Chauvet filmography, Ross Wood, Byron Haskin, Brian Probyn, Inn o f the Dam ned Number 6 SOLD OUT, Number 7 SOLD OUT Number 8 (March-April 1976) Pat Lovell, Richard Zanuck, Sydney Pollack, Pier Paolo Pasolini, Phillip Adams, : Don McAlpme, Dopfs P arty Number 9 (June-July 1976) IWtos.Forman, Max Lemon, Miklos Jancso, Luchino Visconti, Caddie, The D evil's P layground Number 10 (Sept-Oct I 1976) Nagisa Oshima, Philippe Mora, Krzysztof Zanussi, Marco Ferreri, Marco Bellocchio, gay cinema Number 11 (January 1977) Emile De Antonio, Jill Robb, Samuel Z Arkoff, Roman Poianski,<Saul Bass The P icture S h o w M a n Number 12 f April 1977) Ken Loach, Tom Haydon, Donald Sutherland, Bert Deling, Piero Tosi, John Dankworth, ' John Scot D ays o f Hope, The Getting o f W isdom Number 13 (July 1977) Louis Malle, Paul Cox, John Power, Jeanine Seawell, Peter Sykes, Bernardo Bertolucci, In Search j. ) PM Noyce, Matt Carroll,: Erfc,Rohmer, Terry Jackman, John Huston, Luke's Kingdom, The Last W ave; B lue Fire Lady Number 15 (January rT978)Tom Cowan--THJTa ut, John Faulkner, Stephen W a lla c e . ^ 'T a v T a r o ^ ^ m i ^ ri Lankanfilm,The G hant o f Jim m ie Blacksm ith Number 16 (April-June 1978) Gunnel JpLWOTTom, John Duigan, Steven Spielberg, Tom Jeffrey, The A frica Project, Sw e D awn!. P atrick Number 1 7 (Aug-Sept 1978) Bill Bain, Isabelle Huppert. Brian May, Polish cinema, N ewsfront, The Night the P row ler Number 18 (Oct-Nov 1978) John Larnond; SoniaBorgyAlamÎFanner, Indian cinema, Dimboola, Cathy's Child Number 19 (Jan-Feb 1979) Antony Ginnane, Stanley Hawes, Jerem y Thomas, A ndrew Sams, sponsored cio ci7mentaries; #/ue }?n Number 20 (MarchrApriL 1979} Ken Cameron; Claude Lelouch, Jim Sharman, French film, M y B rilliant Career Number 21 (M ay-June 1979) Vietnam on Film th e : Cantril!s> French cmemayMatf M ax; Snapshot,-The Odd

A ngry Shot, Franklin on H itchcock Number 22 (July-Aug 1979) Bruce Petty, Luciana Arrighi, Albie Thoms, Stax, A /is a ^ D ffth d a y rN u in b e ri3 "5 0 L 0 > 0 U T r'N um b er24'{D ecJan 1980) Brian Trenchard-Sm ith, Ian Holmes, Arthur Hiller, Jerzy Toeplitz, Brazilian cinema, Harlequin Number 25 (FeffnSlafch 1980) David Puttnam, Janet-Strickland, ' Everett de Roche, Peter Faiman, Chain Reaction, Stir Number 26 (A p ril-M a y 1980) Charles H. Joffe, Jerome Heilman, M alcolm SiT)tth>rAustraliamnationaiiS{RitJapaiTese-Crn''''r ema, Peter W eir, W ater Under the Bridge Number 27 (June-July 1980) Randal Kleiser, Peter Yeldham, Donald Richie, obituary o Hitchcock, NZfilm industry, Grendel Grend el Grendel Number 28 (Aug-Sept 1980) Bob Godfrey, Diane Kurys, Tim Burns, John O'Shea, Bruce Beresford, Bad Timing, Roadgamès- Number 29 (Oct-Nov 1Î80) Bob Ellis, Uri W indt, Edward W oodw ard, Lino Brocka, Stephen W allace, Philippine cinema, Cruising, The Last Outlaw Number 30 (Dec 1980-JamT981) Sam Fuller, ‘B reaker ' M o ra n t rethought, Richard Lester, Canada supplement, The Chain Reaction, Blood M oney Number 31 (M a rch -A p ril 1981) Bryan Brown, lookir on D ressed fo Kill, I h R Last Outlaw, Fatty Finn, Windows: lesbian as villain, the new generation Number 32 (M ay-June 1981) Judy David, David W illiam son, Richard Rush, 'mbume Cuban un | g Public Enemy NumDerÔs e, Thu A lternative Number 33 (June-July 1976) John Dulgan, the new tax concessions, Robert Altman, Tomas Gutierrez Alea, Edward Tox, LD OUT Number 36 (February 1982) Kevin Dobson, Brian Kearney, Sonia Hofmann, M ichael Rubbo, B low Out, B re a ke r*M o ra n t « ? W B a d y H e a fjT h e M ançfrorhS n o w y R iv e ^N u m b e i M JAprU 1982) Stephen MacLean, Jacki W eaver, Carlos Saura, Peter Ustinov, wom en in drama, M onkey Grip Num ber38; i (June 1982H àeof(B urrow gs, George M iller, Jam es Ivor, Phil Noyce, Joan Fontaine, Tony W illiam s, law and insurance, Far East Number 39 (August 1982) Helermvfinse, R itte h a rd M ason, A nja Breien, David M iliilkan, Derek Granger, Norwegian cinema, National Film Archive, We of the N ever Never Number 40 (October 1982) Henri S a r o | | | | I M ichae l R itchie, Padhne Kael, W endy Hughes, Ray B arrett, M y D uiner ivith Andre, The Return of Captain Invincible Number 41 (December 1982) Igor Auzins, Paul S ch ra d e % | P eterT am m er, Uliana Cavani, Colin Higgins, The Year o f Living Dangerously Number 42 (March 1983) M el Gibson, John W aters, Ian Pringle, Agnes Varda, c o p y rig h t,^ Strikebound, V ie M a n fro m S n o w y R iver Number 43 (May-June 1983} Sydney Pollack, Denny Lawrence, Graeme Clifford, The Dismissal, Sumner Locke E lliott's Careful He ! M ig h t H earY ou Number 44-45 (April 1984) David Stevens, Simon W incer, S ^ £ n Lambert, a personal history of Cinema Papers, Street Kids Number 46 (July 1984) Paul Cox, R t m s e lL M u lc à h ÿ ^ f m lÇ ^ ^ u ir T ï ï iÏ Ï 'Q l^ ® Je re m y Irons, Eureka StockadèjW j/aterfront, The Boy in the Bush, A Woman Suffers, Street Hero Number 47 (August 1984) R ichard Lovyeftitein, W im W enders, David Br adbury/Sophîa Turkiewiez, Hugh Hudson, Robbery Under Arm s Number 48 (Oct-Nov 1984) Ken Cameron, M ichael Pattinson, § B g g |fê ^ Yoram Gross, Bodyline, The Slim Dust\^M ov/e d u m b e r Alain Resnais, Brian McKenzie, Angela Punch M cGregor, Ennio M om cone, Jane ilw p io n , horror film s, N iel Lynne Number 50 (Feb-M a r c h l^ ^ IS te p h fe h ^ M la c ^ I a i l i l î g Ie, W alerian Borowczyk, Peter Schreck, Bill Conti, Brian M ay, The Last Bastion, p u ss Number 51 (May 1985) Lino Brocka, Harrison F o r d ,^ jp i Hazlehurst, Dusan Makavejev, Emoh Ruo, Winners, M orris W est's The Naked Country, M ad M ax Beyond Thunderdome, Robbery Under Arm s Number 52 (July 1985) Alan Parker, soap operas, TV news, film advertising, Don't Call M e Girlie, For Love Alone, Double Sculls Number 53 (September 1985) B^^Bi;çvihi-^lîe)E>j^b Roeg, Vincent W ard, Hector Crawford, Emir Kusturica, NZ film and TV, Return to Eden Number 54 (November 1985) Graeme Clifford, Bob W eis, John Boorm an,M enahem Golan, rocfcvideos, W ills and Burke, The Great Bookie Robbery, The Lancaster M ille r A ffa ir Number 55 (January 1986) James Stewart, Debbie Byrne,W ïa ii Thompson, Paul Verhoeven, Derek Meddmgs, tie-m m arketing, The Right Hand Man, Birdsville Number 56 (March 1986) Fred Schepisi, Dennis O'Rourke, Brian es. Dead-end Drive-in, The M ore Things Change .... Kangaroo, Tracy Number 57 SOLD OUT Number 58 (July 1986) W oody Allen, Rein hare Hauff, Orson W elles, th e Cinematheque Française, The Fringe Dwellers, Great Expectations: The Untold Story, The Last Frontier Number 59 (September 1986) Robert A lt m a ® |^ p |^ ^ ^ ^ p ||^ ^ |A g n e s Varda, the AFI Awards, The M overs Number 60 (November 1986) Australian television, Franco Zeffirelli, Nadia Tass, Bill Bennett, Dutch Cinema, m ovies by m icro ch ip ;)Otello Number 61 (January 1987) Alex Cox, Roman Polanski, Philippe M ora, M artin Arm inger, film in South Australia, Dogs in Space, violence, David Lynch, Cary Grant, ASSA conference, produc tion barometer, film finance, The Story of the Kelly Gang Number 63 (MayJWj'GllIfèrfArmsb'pirjgf^tony Ginnane, Chris Haywood, Elmore Leonard, Troy Kennedy M artin, The Sacrifice, Landslides, Pee W ee's Big Adventure, Jilte d NUmberti(Jtìfy-ÌSW) N j^ l^ â iJ ftp o p is |lo p p c r , Mel Gibson, Vladim ir Osherov, Brian Trenchard Smith, chartbusters, Insatiable Number 65 (September 1987) Angela Carter, k Jarman, Gerald L'Ecuyer, Gustav Hasford, AFI Aw ards, Poor M an's Orange Number 66 (November 1987) Australian screenw riters «cinefila and China, Jam es Bond: part 1, James Clayden, Video, De Laurentiis, New W orld, The Navigator, W ho's That Girl Number 67 (January 1988) John Duigan, James Bond: part 2, George M iller, Jim Jarm usch, Soviet cinema, wom en in film, 70mm, film m aking in Ghana, The Year M y Voice Broke. Send A Gorilla Number 68 (March 1988) M a r ^ A n s a ra ,C h a n n e l4,SÒ viét cinetna part 2, Jim M cBride, Glamour, Ghosts Of The Civil Dead, Feathers, Ocean, Ocean Number 69 (May 1988) Sex, death and fam ily films, Cannes<8 8ifilm C O fiipi0se^#\^ncent W ard, David Parker, Ian Bradley, Pleasure Domes Number 70 (November 1988) Film Australia, Gillian Armstrong, Fred Schepisi, W es Cre m & J o h n W aters. AluClark, Shame screenplay part 1 Number 71 (January 1989) Yahoo Serious, David Cronenberg, 1988 in retrospect, film sound, Last Temptation of C h ris t Pphp Brophy Number 72 (March 1989) Little Dorrit, Australian sci-fi movies, 1988 m ini-series, Aromarama, Celia, La dolce Vita, wom en and W esterns Number 73 (M ay 1989) Cannes '89, D e a f Calm, Franco Nero, Jane Campion, The Prisoner of St. Petersburg, Frank Pierson, Pay TV Number 74 (July 1989) The Delinquents, Australians in Hollywood, Chinese ¿cifrema, Philippe Mora, Yuri Sokol, Twins, Ghosts ... of the Civil Dead, Shame screenplay Number 75 (September 1989) Sally Bongers, the teen movie, animated, Edbn$;Lo$l Pet Sematary, M artin Scorsese and Paul Schrader, Ed Pressman Number 76 (November 1989) Simon W incer, Quigley Down Under, Kennedy M iller, Terry H a y c s p ^ lfÿ k o k Hilton, John Duigan, Flirting, Romero, Dennis Hopper, Frank Howson, Ron Cobb Number 77 (January 1990) John Farrow monograph, Blood Oath, Dennis W hitburn, Brian W illiam s, Don M cLennan, Breakaway, "C rocodile" Dundee overseas Number 78 (Marcii 1990) The Crossing, Ray Argali, Return Home, Peter Greenaway and The Cook ..., M ichel Ciment, Bangkok Hilton, B arlow and Chambers Number 79 SOLD OUT Number 80 (August 1990) Cannes report, Fred Schepisi career interview, Peter W eir and Greencard, Pauline Chan, Gus Van Sant and Drugstore Cowboy, German stories Number 8 1 (December 1990) Ian Pringle Isabelle Eberhardt, Jane Campion, An A ngel A t M y Table, M artin Scorsese and Goodfellas, Presumed Innocent Number 82 (M arch ì ffl& È lk G o d fa th e r Part III, Barbet Schroeder, Reversal of Fortune, Black Robe, Raymond Hollis Longford, B acksliding Number 83 (May 1991) Australia at Cannes, Gillian Armstrong, The Last Days at Chez Nous, The Silence of the Lambs, Flynn, Dead to the World, Anthony Hopkins, Spotswood Number 84 (August 1991) James Judgem ent Day, Dennis O'Rourke, Good Woman o f Bangkok, Susan Dermody, Breathing Under Water, Cannes report, FFC Number 85 '(N ove m ber 1991) JdcejynMsOorhouse, Proof, Blake Edwards, Switch, Collie Khouri: Thelma & Louise; independent exhibition and distribution, FFC part 2 Number 86 (January lÆ R O A!Môfape^Jfp>fbper, Tbe^JNostradamus Kid, Greenkeeping, Eightball, Kathryn Bigelow, HDTV and Super 16 Number 87 (March 1992) M ulti-cultu ra l cinema, Steven gyjpfeJbeqfc Woo*, George Negbând The Red Unknown, Richard Lowenstem, Say a Little Prayer, Jewish cinema Number 88 (May-June 1992) S trictly Ballroom , Hammers ' O ver th e Anvil, Daydream Believe , Wim W ender's Until The End of the W o r/c ^ a ty a iit Ray Number 89 (August 1992) Cannes '92, David Lynch, Vitali Kanievski, Gianni teen movies debate Number 9Q(Octobe^992) The Last Days o f Chez Nous, Ridley Scott: 1492, Stephen Elliott: Frauds, Giorgio ■ M#flgiajU^®8 otorafD ^^^^^^^^thm city in Australian Cinema, JohaiEpnkshheime^ Year of the Gun Number 91 (January 1993) Clint Eastwood and Unforgiverr, Raul ¿Ruiz, George Miller and Gross Misconduct, David Elfick's Love in Limjffli.' On the Beach, AusteflJia's first films: part 1 Number 92 (April 1993) Reckless Kelly, George M iller and Lorenzo's Od, Megan Simpson, AJepr'Thc Lover, wom en in filnvànd television, Australia's firstThins: part 2 Number 93 (May 1993) Jane Campion and The Piano, Laurie Mclnnes and Broken Highway, Traciy M offa tt and Bedevil, UgjihmrksandAuid/Australia's first pirns: part 3 Number 94 (August 1993) Cannes '94, Steve Buscemi and BeservoirDogs, Paul Cox, M id te T ÌJenkin 's The Heartbreak jj0d, 'Coming of Age' films, Australia's first f l m s part 4 Number 95 (October I993) Lynn-M arie M ilburn's M em ories & Dreams, Franklin on th p T i enee of previews, The Custodian^ documentarysupplement Tom^ZlibirtaurJofintHugheSi Australiat^^tfilms: part 5 Number 96 (December 1993) QueensiandJssij'o overview of film in Queensland, early Queensland cinema, Jason Donovan and Donald Crombie, Rough Diaitmnqs A ustralia's firs t films: part 6 Numberl^ropril 1994) 20th Anniversary doub [gassile with New Zealand supplement, ;Simon Wincer and Lightning Jack, Richard Franklin on la gving Am erica, A ustralia's first films: part 7 Number 99 (June 1994) K'zvsjrtof Kieslowski, Ken G. Hall Tribute, cinematography supplement Geoffrey Burton, Pauline Chan ano Jra p s , A ustralia's first films: Part 8 Number 100 (August 1994) Cjm ps '34/NSW supplement, Bernardo Bertp)ifdclWffl/e B uav^m g ^ ^ um o f Us. Spider & Rose, film and the digital w orld, A ustralia's first films: part 9 Number 10 1 ( 0 ctober \9M \Pm cillapQueem o f the Desert, V t toi lan supplement, P. J. Hogan and M uriel's Wedding, Ben Lewin and Lucky Break, A ustralia's first films: Part 9 Number }62 (December 1994} Once Vfere W arrioT^m hns we love, Back o f Beyond, Cecil HoH r , Lindsay Anderson, Body M elt, AFC supple ment, Spider & Rose, A ustralia's F u ^ f R f m ^ | a it Number 103%farch 1395) Little Women, Gillian Armstrong, Queensland supplement, Geoffrey Simnsen. Heavenly Creatures, Eternity, A ustralia's F irj^m lrJ llu fflb e ril6 É W u i» 4 9 9 5 )i0 a fm e S 'M a n ia , B illy's Holiday, A ngel Baby, Epsilon, T a c ffn T # p ^ s ï^ ,'R ic h a rd :F ® n k lîn |A u s tra lia 's First Films: Part 12 Number 105 (Aut r o t 1995) Mark Joffe's Cosi, Jacqueline McKenzie, Slawom ir Idziak, Cannes Review, Gau|hontRefr^>eciive',-Mariet^Hn, Dad & Dave Number 106 (October 1995) GeranfLèe and JohaMaynardort A//Aw Are Liars, Sam Neil, The Small M an, Under the Gun, j j p low budgebsemioar Number 107 (December 1995) George M iller and Chn3 Noopan talk aJoovtt B fbe, NewtrencjFin criticism , The rise of boutique cinema Number 108 (February 1996) Cpnìurìng JolW ('Hughes' W hat I Have W ritten, Cthulu, The l^p^lODAustralfaja F$jiÌ£, NlcoleltjdmanÎ i To Die For Number 109 (April 1996) Rachel Griffiths runs the gamut, Toni (follette and Cosi, Sundance Film Festival, M ichael To I^ Morals and theMutoscopeNumber ¡110 (June 1996) Rolf de Heer travels to Cannes, CI ara Law's ne w home. Shirley B a r r a i Love Serenade, Richard Franklin Numbe/311 (August 1996) Scott Hicks and^S/j/ne,rhe Three Chinas, Trusting Christopher Doylp Love and Other Catastrophes Number! 12 (October 1996) Lawrence Johnston's IMe, Return of the Mavericks, Queensland Supplement Part 1, Sighting the Unseen, Richard Lowpnstein Number 113 (December 1996) Peter Jackson's The Frinhtem rs , SPAA-AFf supplement, Lee Robinson, 'Sunday Too Far Away, H otel de Love, Cbildreniof.the Revolution Number \ W [February 1997) Baz Luhrm ann's W illiam SêWespeare'SiRomeo and Ju liet DÜSCundey.SfeAA: The Afterm ath, Idiot Box, Zone 39 Number 115 (April 1997) John Seale a': d The English Patient, N ew sfront, The C astkr )a t\ Baker,Robert Krasker Number 116 (May 1997) Cannes '97 Preview, Samantha Lang's,The Well, K issbr Kill, Philip Noyce and The Saint, °lÓ & r-eec/x>'no H eaven's Burning. Numbert1/(June 1ffl7) Robert A / H arris'and James Q . ^ & t o lk t o James SheHM g, Monica Pellizzari; Aleka dosen't live rarre anymore, The M an from t y iv Æ v -/'?.« » Kangaroo NumberllW (July 1997} Terry Rawlings; Frans Vahdenburg and Ken;§a|lowsrtpSv-budget independent filmmaking, Stephen M m is' Alive Tribe, SMPTE '97

C I N E M A P A P E R S • A UGUST 1997 m ÊSÈSSA

production Production Survey continued On - set Crew

Royal Commission into police corruption is announced. Three brothers from different walks in life and through pure circumstance collide with the underworld and authorities.

Boom operator: T im Cu m m in g s Make-up: S im on W ain Hairdresser: Kaye Rubi Choreographer: J ohn B rumpton Still photography: P eter B raig Unit publicist: K ing & A ssociates Catering: JANE STUART WALLACE

PIGEON Production company: SlLO Budget: L ess THAN $500,000 Production office: M elbourne Production: February -A pril 1997

P rincipal Credits Director: VINCENZO GALLO Producers: La v in ia Ra m p in o , R obin J olly Scriptwriter: VINCENZO GALLO Production designer: B renton A ngel

Other Credits Length: 90 MINS Gauge: D igital B etacam

Cast K ate Fischer , Garry H illberg , A nthony A rgino , T ony N ardella .

he story of a man undergoing a strange breakdown who wants to become a pigeon and the journalist sent to cover the story.

REDBALL Production company: G ray M alkin Films Pre-production: 6/1-6/2/97 Production: 6/2-31/3/97 Post-production: 16/5-1/9/97

Principal Credits Director: J on H ewitt Producers: M eredith K ing , P hillip Parslow Line producer: Fabienne N icholas Executive producer: J on H ewitt Associate producer: D aniel S charf Scriptwriter: J on H ewitt Director of photography: M ark P ugh Production designers: V anessa C erne, L isa Collins Editor: A lan WOODRUFF Composer: NEIL M c Grath Sound recordist: J ock H ealy

P u n n in g

and

D evelopment

Casting: PHILLIP PARSLOW Shooting schedule by: Fabienne N icholas Budgeted by: M eredith K ing

P roduction Crew Producer's assistant: L isa M ontague Unit manager: S ascha Iw anick Production assistant: S ascha Iw an ick Production accountants: B ob BLANCH, Ernie C himirri Production consultant: L indsay V an N iekerk Insurer: H o l u n d I nsurance B rokers Legal services: G reg SlTCH

A rt D epartment Art director: VANESSA Cerne Art department runner: JAMES ANDRIANAKIS Set dresser: C laudia Rowe Armourer: JOHN Fox Production design consultant: Ivan Rijavec

Post- production Assistant editor: C indy C larkson Editing assistant: B en F ord Sound editor: A ngie B lack Musical co-ordinator: David V odicks Music performed by: KlSMET. T he MEANIES, P hilippa N ihil, S:B ahn , T he Paradise M otel Mixer: N eil M cG rath Assistant music co-ordinator: K im P arker Mixed at: S oundworks A ustralia Film gauge: 35 m m Screen ratio: W idescreen 1:1.85 Shooting stock: DVC Kine transfers by: D Film (S ydney ) Off-line facilities: T he J oinery Soundtrack: Rubber R ecords

M arketing Marketing consultant: Fran Lanig an Publicity: KING & ASSOCIATES Poster designer: P remium A dvertising

Cast Belinda M cC lory D etective J ane ("J . J .” W ilson ), J ohn B rumpton (D etective Robert "R o bbie " W alsh ), Frank M agree (S enior D etective Chris H ill ), P eter D ocker (D etective J ames "L a m z " Fry), A nthea D avis (D etective T oni " T one " J ohnston ), N eil P igot (D etective D avid " B ing o " W right , D am ien R ichardson (D etective R ichard "R ix " D ixakos ), J ames Y oung (D etec tive M ax " M ax ie " M alleson ), Paulene T erry-B eitz (D r Rose Edw ards ), R obert M organ (S enior D etective M ike B row n ), D aniel W yle , Ray M onney

dark, contemporary police thriller about a few weeks in the lives of some used-up Melbourne detectives. Constructed as a series of snapshots of the Homicide, CIB, Vice and Drug squads, Redball is a gritty, hard-hitting, darkly comic descent into the tensions, abuses and psychoses inherent in frontline policework - and a resonant paean to a city haunted by corruption, police shootings and the murder of innocence.

Camera Crew

SOUND OF ONE HAND CLAPPING

Clapper-loader: B en Ford Camera assistant: B en Ford Key grip: G ary H allenan Gaffer: Gary Hallenan

Production company: A rtist S ervices Film P roduction P ty Ltd Production: 7/10-22/11/96 Post-production: D ec 1996-A ugust 1997

P rincipal Credits Director: R ichard F lanagan Producer: Rolf de H eer Executive producers: S teve V izard , A ndrew K nig ht , J ackie O 'S ullivan Line producer: D avid L ightfoot Scriptwriter: R ichard Flanagan Director of photography: M artin M cGrath Production designer: B ryce P errin Costume designer: A phrodite K ondos Editor: T a n ia N ehme Composer: C ezary S kubiszewski Sound recordist: J ames C urrie

Planning

D evelopment Script editor: DEBORAH Cox and

Casting: Elly B radbury

P roduction Crew Production manager: P erry Stapleton Production co-ordinator: M elissa M ohr Unit manager: M ichael B arnes Production accountant: S haron JACKSON

Camera Crew

Production: 2 8 /6 -4/7/97 Post-production: 7 /7 -1 /1 0 /9 7

P rincipal Credits Director: WADE K uhn Producer: B en STEENDYK Scriptwriter: W ade K uhn Director of photography: T ony O 'L oughlan Production designer: J anin e N utley Editor: T eena Economidis Sound designer: W ade K uhn Sound recordist: K ai M ohrholz

Planning

On - set Crew

and

Development

Script editor: T eena ECONOMIDIS Storyboard artist: W ade K uhn

Production Crew Production manager: B en STEENDYK Producer's assistant: B ernadette C order Unit manager: BERNADETTE CORDER

Camera Crew Camera operator: T ony O'L oughlan Focus puller: S hane Fletcher Clapper-loader: K risty M atherson Camera type: A riflex SR II

A rt Department Art director: JANINE NUTLEY Assistant art director: Carmen H annay

ONE WAY TICKET (tele - feature )

W ardrobe

LOVE IN AMBUSH (FORMERLY ANGKOR) (SEE ISSUE 112 ) KISS OR KILL (SEE ISSUE 1 15 ) ROAD TO NHILL (SEE ISSUE 110 )

Production company: G rundy T elevision Production: 15/2-22/3/97 Location: MELBOURNE AND ENVIRONS

Wardrobe assistant: JUNE R obertson

P ost- production

Robert M ullins (P resto ), S tephen Davis (S peckled J ohn )

HEAVEN'S BURNING (SEE ISSUE 113 )

Other Credits Make-up: P aul P attison Special effects: M others A rt, C reative W orkshop

Cast

Awaiting Release

Principal Credits Director: Franc Roddam Producer: S teve M c G lothen Co-producers: Franc Roddam , Kris N oble Executive producer: David P icker Based on the novel: M oby Dick ; OR, T he W hale By: H ermann M elville Director of photography: Dave CONNELL Production designer: L es B inns

G regory P eck (F ather M apple ), Patrick S tewart (A h ab ), H enry T homas (I sh m ael ), B ruce S pence , B ill H unter , H ugh K eays -B yrne , N orman Y e m m , S hane Fenney C onnor

K erry Fox, K ristoff Kaczmarek , M elita J urisic , Evelyn K rape , J acek K o m a n , S ergio T ell, Essie D a v is , J ane B orghesi

n emotionally-powerful story set against the central highlands of Tasmania. A woman's journey home to reconcile herself with her Slavinian father and their troubled past.

( m in i - series ) Production companies: T he N ine NETWORK, W hale P roductions Production: J une 1997, MELBOURNE Budget: $15 million

On - set Crew

Assistant editor: A ngela Connor Laboratory: ATLAB GOLD COAST Negative matching: N egT hink Film gauge: 16 m m Screen ratio: 4:3 Shooting stock:7245, 7248 V ision 320T (7277)

MOBY DICK

1st assistant director: B en STEENDYK Script assistant: T eena E conomidis Continuity: A ngela C onnor Still photography: Kathy Dora

Camera operator: M artin M c G rath Focus puller: Darryl W ood Key grip: B rett M c D owell Gaffer: D avid Parkinson Best boy: Greg Rawson 1st assistant director: K aren M onkhouse 2nd assistant director: M iriam R eady Continuity:CARMEL T orcasio Boom operator: M ichael B akaloff Make-up: S ue TAYLOR Unit publicist: K errie T heobold

Television Projects In Production

P rincipal Credits

Cast

Synopsis irth is a mythical legend about a travelling jester named Presto who, in a world without humour, unwittingly discovers the art of black comedy.

Director: Richard F ranklin Producer: Ian B radley Executive producers: A ndrew B rooke, K ris N oble Scriptwriters: M ichael B rindley , Karen A ltm ann Director of photography: E llery Ryan Editor: David P ulbrook Production designer: Paddy R eardon

P lanning

and

D evelopment

Casting: Maura Fay & Assoc

P roduction Crew Production supervisor: Em anuel M atsos

PRINCESS Principal

M arketing Publicity: SlAN CLEMENT

credits

Director: P eter H ardi Producers: P eter H a rd i , K enneth Copenhaver Screenwriter: K enneth C openhaver Director of photography: P eter Hardi Production designer: Ester Pakulov Editor: Peter H ardi Ca s t : K errie Friend

Cast P eter P helps , Rachel B lakeney , C hris Haywood

he story of a female prison officer: married, reliable, trusted. Yet she planned the most spectacular gaolbreak in Australia's criminal history -fo rth e love of a convicted murderer.

THANK GOD HE MET LIZZIE (SEE ISSUE 1 14 ) THE TRUTH ABOUT TARO

Short Films In Production MIRTH Production company: FREAKS ON A PEDESTAL P roductions Pre-production: 13/1-27/6/97

HHB PORTA DAT & H H B DAT TAPE

YOUR PROFESSIONAL PARTNERS FREECALL 1 8 0 0 675 16 8 A U D IO SOUND CENTRE 62

C I N E M A P A P E R S • A UGUST 1997

yüg^^oífan intiTitive editing y ^ g D u er 3 0 ,0 0 P or o f essior»a4“ertitors^wo rldvi/ideT' K g t t& ^ fe c k ) uoü p»ráke a proft ying to nake a nam e. ^

^ P > m te g ra tedT o n ipo sitirrf^nd titlin g ^ S e a m f^ p ^ p w c k T i r n e '“

ÉÉ^howcase cifiM BM !

’/ -

-’ , -V

, --i »í

-V -.' ■< ; HMMMMflgSH BS1 îSSêsSî’;Ív /:-v.?i

ÀVHS Avidis a regist^^tratfémàrk and MCXpress is a trademark of AvidTechnology/Inc: Macintosh is a registered trademark and QuickTime is a trademark of Apple Computer Ine. Windows and Windows NT are trademarks of Microsoft Corporation. ’ -

■

■*—1 * * * ‘-*z -

f r ì in ir f iìaiifflfff^r^

A panel of ten film reviewers hue rate cl a selection o f the latest releases on a scale of 0 to 10, the latter being the optimum rating (a bash means not seen).

he independent filmmaker Kevin Smith made a lot of friends with his first feature, Clerks (1995), and probably lost some of the same with his follow-up film, Mallrats (1996). But the Generation Xers, especially the boys, still loved his juvenile, male-centred humour. Again, two young men, Holden (Ben Affleck) and Banky Qason Lee), are the central characters, but they are taken out of their comfort zone when Holden falls in love with lesbian Alyssa Qoey Lauren Adams), and both men are confronted with scenarios previously unknown.

Chasing Amy moves out of lightweight comedy and into something a lot more substantial. One evening, when driving home, Alyssa gives Holden a painting to remember her by, and he declares his love for her. His speech is so honest and frank that Alyssa, usually so self-assured and articulate, is speechless, and their relationship is changed forever. More impressively, it shows a willingness and a maturity on the part of the filmmaker to truly explore male emotions, sexuality and social expectations - something rarely done in such a satisfying way. t h

C I N E M A P A P E R S â&#x20AC;˘ A U GU S T 1997

■ i

. m

I Adobe" A fter Effects^ The core of a professional, integrated solution. The leader in desktop compositing and 2 D animation. Sophisticated motion control for high-quality 2 D animation and advanced effects capabilities for exceptional time-varying special effects. High-resolution compositing controls for complex multi layer compositions with any number of effects per layer. Full bezier masking controls and motion paths and, in the Production Bundle, advanced motion controls, keying and distortion tools and motion math scripting. Tight integration with the Macintosh9and Windows9 versions ofAdobe Photoshopf Adobe lllustrator9and Adobe Premieref «

. Retain vector information fromAdobe Illustrator9with 6n-the-fly rasterisation; retain and individually manipulate image layers from Adobe Photoshop. Deliver every level of target content from AVI or QuickTime9 movies on the Internet or CD-ROM, to broadcast-quality output for video and film. Identical interface, feature set, functionality and workflow on the Macintosh and Windows 95/NT®versions. Standard Version or Production Bundle. Supports multi-threading on Windows NT and multiple processors on the Macintosh for enhanced performance. Supports lntel®MMX™ technology for faster performance. Cross-platform compatibility between the Macintosh and Windows 95/NT versions.

Adobe After Effects 3. 1, the most powerful desktop tool for digital compositing, 2D animation and special effects for Macintosh, is now available for Microsoft Windows 95 and Windows NT. Experience the power of Adobe After Effects 3.1. For a free demo CD and more information contact Adimex Pty Ltd on (02) 9332 4444 now. Adim ex P ty Ltd is the Australian distributor of Media 100, Adobe Premiere, Adobe After Effects, MFactory, Specular, Transoft, Terran Interactive and other professional digital video and multimedia toots. Adobe, the Adobe Logo, Adobe After Effects, Illustrator, Premiere, and Photoshop are trademarks of AdobeSystems incorporated. Macintosh and QuickTime are registered trademarks ofApple Computer, Inc. Microsoft, Windows and Windows NT are either trademarks or registered trademarks of Microsoft Corporation. Intel is a registered trademark, and MMX is a trademark of Intel Corp Ait other trademarks are die property of their respective owners.

...W ITH TW O NEW KODAK VISIO N FILMSTHAT CUT GRAIN LIKE NOTHING BEFORE. A daylight balanced, K odak Vision 2 5 0 D c o lo r negative film and K odak V ision 2 0 0 T c o lo r negative film balanced fo r tungsten light. B oth are m edium speed products w ith th e grain and sharpness o f much slo w er speed film s.

Kodak

C o lo rs reproduce accurately. Latitude is exceptional. A nd both film s in te rc u t beautifully w ith o th e r m em bers o f th e K odak family. E xplore y o u r im agination and capture y o u r vision, w ith th e gold standard in m o tio n pictu re c o lo r negative films. Kodak, Eastman, and Vision are trade marks.

C O L O R

N E G A T I V E

F I L M