Comments on: Australia Film Review (2008) – An Enjoyable Imperfect Romantic Adventure https://www.silverpetticoatreview.com/australia-film-review/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=australia-film-review Romance That Entertains And Inspires Tue, 02 Apr 2024 22:27:38 +0000 hourly 1 By: Catherine https://www.silverpetticoatreview.com/australia-film-review/#comment-5315 Sun, 01 Oct 2017 19:15:00 +0000 https://www.silverpetticoatreview.com/?p=41944#comment-5315 In reply to Trish Lavis Brown.

It is certainly one of those films that some will dislike and others will enjoy despite its imperfections. That you and your family find value in the comedy it offers and continue to watch it for laughs is certainly one way to enjoy it! 😉

]]>
By: Trish Lavis Brown https://www.silverpetticoatreview.com/australia-film-review/#comment-5313 Sun, 01 Oct 2017 11:40:00 +0000 https://www.silverpetticoatreview.com/?p=41944#comment-5313 Has no one noticed the glaring dreadfulness of the name of the hero? ‘Drover’ is an occupation, not a name. Nowhere in the country would a drover be called ‘Drover’! He’d be called ‘Bluey’ or ‘Slim’ or ‘Lofty’ or ‘Davo’, not ‘Drover’!

Then there was Nicole Kidman’s botoxically immobile face, which was barely able to grimace at intervals. When she smiled at the poor little aboriginal kid, I thought she was going to EAT him (and I think he did too)!

Then there was the way that Drover drove the cattle (ie. incessantly and nearly always at top velocity across the outback and the screen). That’s not the way you drive cattle. You wreck the meat that way. No, you drive them slowly and take care of their progress.

Then, there was the glaringly awful treatment of the aboriginal kid. Has any Australian ever heard the term ‘creamy’? No, I thought not. That’s not what mixed-race children are called. I won’t use the actual term, but it would have been far more appropriate and far less grating in a real movie. When the kid set out to ‘sing you home’, I nearly vomited. What an awful, patronising image to use in a completely unreal and unpalatable context! It made aboriginal culture look like something directly out of Enid Blyton. Yech!

Let’s not kid each other: we all knew exactly what the outcome would be from the moment the plot line was revealed. I’m not fussed on Nic Kidman as an actress, especially now she’s lost the use of her face, but Hugh Jackman tried. And failed. Blame the script.

This movie is one my family and I watch for comic relief: it’s so awful, it becomes hilarious! Sorry, but it really was that bad. 🙁

]]>
By: jessied44 https://www.silverpetticoatreview.com/australia-film-review/#comment-5043 Mon, 07 Aug 2017 18:02:00 +0000 https://www.silverpetticoatreview.com/?p=41944#comment-5043 In reply to Catherine.

That is always my feeling. A similar book “A Town Like Alice” in much the same era (pre and post WW II) was turned into a mini series starring Bryan Brown but didn’t really tackle the aboriginal condition. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0081949/ … Australia is truly too big a story not to be multiple movies or a miniseries.

]]>
By: Catherine https://www.silverpetticoatreview.com/australia-film-review/#comment-5042 Mon, 07 Aug 2017 15:10:00 +0000 https://www.silverpetticoatreview.com/?p=41944#comment-5042 In reply to jessied44.

Love/Hate is a perfect description. It’s so imperfect as to grate yet I still can’t help but watch it. Every time I do, I wish Luhrmann focused on just one or two aspects of the history at that time. Yet, the history of the time period he choose, that specific period, is so entwined, it’s hard to separate. Then I think perhaps if he just moved it back a few years…further away from WWII but that still doesn’t resolve the sheer scope of the story he is trying to tell. I can’t help but think how wonderful this story would have been as a mini-series.

]]>
By: jessied44 https://www.silverpetticoatreview.com/australia-film-review/#comment-5041 Mon, 07 Aug 2017 14:30:00 +0000 https://www.silverpetticoatreview.com/?p=41944#comment-5041 This is my favorite Love/Hate film. I absolutely adore it except about once every 20 minutes when I want to throw a brick through the screen. On the good side Luhrmann had a cast most directors would crawl over broken glass to get. They are wonderful. He was dealing with a virtually unknown period between two wars in Australia so lots of new material. He had the clash of at least 4 cultures (descendants of early settlers, convicts, new comers, and aboriginal) for built in conflict. A lead character so iconic that Banjo Patterson was trying to climb out of the grave to write just one more poem, and a country of visual magnificence that it practically leaps off the screen to french kiss you. How do you mess that up? You try to squeeze in an insane amount of history into too small a space. I mean the “Drover’s Boys” get one whole sentence of dialogue. You mess up the technical so that lighting is off, match move is off, drop in from other films off and places where it looks as if it is edited with an axe. The to top it off you take one of the most important dialogue elements (Wizard of Oz) and use the 1955 TV black/white version instead of the 1939 sepia toned version. Even with all that, this is a film I watch at least once a year, because how can you not love something this beautiful even if truly flawed.

]]>