[Movie] Australia

Nov 26, 2008 21:11

YAYS:

  • Amazing location shots (though it turns out it was shot in, like, Wales and some other place that wasn't Australia. Well, and someplace in West Australia.) Really, really gorgeous shots.
  • Hugh Jackman is unreasonably hot.
  • Great cinematography, if you like the look of Baz's films. And I do.
  • Seriously, Jackman is all, "Back: *flex* Hair: *toss ( Read more... )

movie review

Leave a comment

(The comment has been removed)

vejiicakes November 29 2008, 22:04:59 UTC
I THINK AT LEAST HALF THIS MOVIE'S PROBLEMS MIGHT'VE BEEN SOLVED IF IT WERE TITLED WITH SOMETHING HAVING TO DO WITH THE ACTUAL CHARACTERS OR STORY. "PRIDE AND PREJUDICE" WASN'T CALLED "ENGLAND". "FAREWELL MY CONCUBINE" WASN'T CALLED "CHINA".

That's only, like, half of it though. "Just because it is, doesn't mean it should be." Okay, awesome! ...wait, you're just leaving it at that? D:

Also, LOL at all the OMG!AUSTRALIAN stuff Baz was throwing at the audience. I was surprised a dingo didn't eat someone's baby in the middle of this movie.

Reply

(The comment has been removed)

vejiicakes November 29 2008, 23:50:44 UTC
YOU GUYS DON'T EVEN HAVE BEEF-HERDERS/DROVERS/WHATEVER IN THE LAND DOWN UNDER? THAT'S SO SAD D:

Yeah, I was going to add something about that, but then realized I didn't know anything about Aboriginal culture aside from what I saw in "Rabbit Proof Fence" and that they don't like women to play their didgeridoos, so I kept my mouth shut. But even without that knowledge, the magic dude singing them through the desert lands? Yeah, whoa.

Reply

(The comment has been removed)

vejiicakes November 30 2008, 05:37:35 UTC
Thing is (at least as far as I could see) I don't think the film was trying to separate from its history, it just wasn't very GOOD about doing much more than offering token nods at historical aspects. Like, "Oh yeah, they separated half-caste children from their Aboriginal families in an effort to make the indigenous people extinct. Awful stuff. Hey, let's look at Kidman and Jackman make out!" And it's not as if it was WRONG that this movie was about the clichéd romance between the prissy English aristocrat and the rough-'n-tumble (basically) cowboy foremost, as if every film set in Australia during that time had to be about the oppression of the indigenous people. Just that, eh, it kind of felt like if they were going to feature the latter, they should've really concentrated their efforts there more conclusively since, as you mentioned: too raw.

I suppose a small upside is that some westerners probably still had NO idea about the Stolen Generations, and weren't likely to find out on their own because BAWWWW documentaries/ ( ... )

Reply

(The comment has been removed)

vejiicakes November 30 2008, 08:33:17 UTC
It could be that I'm overly influenced by the ads--pretty much all the commercials being showed on TV here was all about, "HEY IT'S JACKMAN AND KIDMAN AND THEY ARE ROMANTIC AND EPIC. And there's war in here somewhere. BUT MOSTLY EPIC ROMANCE. Also we will show you this small Aboriginal child but not actually say anything about him or his people or subplot AT ALL. Because this is an epic romance film. Yep."

I wouldn't have minded the last half of the movie if I understood, you know, what the whole point of it all was. Was the idea that our own little lives, even far away on our little ranches with the cow herding and whatever, can't escape the bigger issues affecting the world like war and political/social oppression? I don't.. guh, I don't even know.

I wouldn't say nobody outside has heard about it. But it wouldn't surprise me if a good amount of Americans haven't. (Hey, if some of 'em still think that the whole of Africa is a country.. you know..? -_-)

Reply


Leave a comment

Up