Movies - "Australia", why ....

[J Miller]

I just finished watching the movie Australia. Not knowing the complete detailed history of the country I took it for entertainment only and enjoyed it.

Kind of like American westerns, nothing or very little factual about them, just an enjoyable couple hours of entertainment.

I've read comments from Australians on several forums and not one liked it. Some went to the extreme of apologizing for it.

My questions for our Australian members is simple: what is it about this movie that makes you dislike it so much?

Joe

[holahead]

My wife and just watched it this past Saturday night. I thought it was a good movie. My wife cried like a baby in parts of it. I too watched it as entertainment but felt like it was a good movie. Didn't they have some kind of apology at the beginning of the movie? I really like the little boy he was funny. Reminded me of my son.

[Travis Morgan]

I absolutely hated it.

[FWiedner]

It wasn't at all what I thought it would be.

I expected a documentary or a historical dramatization, but it seemed like a slapstick comedy. Then as the story developed, I realized it was a city-girl goes country and saves the ranch while other stuff happens movie.

Once I stopped expecting something from it, it was a pretty good movie.

[Travis Morgan]

There was some much CGI stuff and special effects that I just wanted to vomit.

[waz]

I'm fairly neutral towards it. I found it to be very cliched (if that's a word). It was more like a 3hr tourism ad with a couple of funnies thrown in.

I thought Brandon Walters was excellent and very nearly saved it single handedly.

We have a social condition here called the "tall poppy syndrome". Generally - if someone is too successful, we take great pleasure in knocking them down a peg or two. Personally, I try not to subscribe to this. For me it comes down to the attitude of the successful person. If they become arrogant, sure, perhaps they need a reality check. But if they remain humble in their success, more power to them.

Waz

[gak]

I liked it well enough also though the special effects (war and other scenes) were unfortunate and a distraction from what could have been a quality epic piece. I like Jackman and usually Kidman, but thought she in particular over (or under?) acted. Not equating the two otherwise, but similar disappointment to how I felt about Flags of Our Father--especially re the effects, though generally a huge Eastwood fan (directing and acting). Thought it was going to be the ultimate Iwo/war movie--the "Private Ryan of the Pacific"--and it wasn't quite (though I admit can't name another--no, not Sands Of...though a good yarn), though it was generally a good go. Not as bad effects as the Japanese Zero scenes from Pearl Harbor! Windtalkers was another missed opp' in this regard. I guess naval fleets, tens of thousands of fighting men and historic plane squadrons are hard to come by these days in Hollywood, thus the necessary--but obvious--use of computers. Speaking of WWII in the Pacific, Speilberg/Hanks "War in the Pacific" HBO series due out in March--supposedly to Ryan and Band of Brothers level. Hooray and long time coming! Think--and hope--Spielberg will avoid or minimize the computer-generted stuff somehow.
Didn't mean to hijack if I did.

[Pop Watts]

The hype that came before the movie was amazing. It was being billed as the great epic story of Australia 12 months before it was released. It was just a movie with a very thin plot, average acting and poor effects.

I hated the movie and went into more detail about that on a previous post.

Pop.

[Jacko]

I was doing my missus a favour when I bought her the DVD , sadly I thought it was one of the worst films I have ever seen , she enjoyed it though

I cringed the first time Drover said "Crikey" turned over the glass thus challenging all and sundry to the bar fight. I ran and hid every other time in the movie he repeated "Crikey", its overblown cliche and Hugh Jackman and Nicole Kidman knew it - The scene with Nicole Kidmans characters first night in the Aussie bush was predictable garbage - when Jackman flexed up and poured the bucket of water overhimself while still half dressed I got up and poored myself a stout Port. I knew what the rest of the movie was going to be like .

I doubt any of the actors other than David Gulipill and the young aboriginal lad put in any sort of effort into there parts . If they edited all the bad acting , cringe and cliche out of the movie you'd get an entertaining hour 20 minute movie.

They could have expanded on so much in that film and set it up for a sequel . They missed opportunities in developing the bad guy's character , why the heck Hollywood always portrays Aussie badguy's like this twit I'll never know - they basically copied the baddie's character from "Quigly Downunder". They should have gone more into the Drover characters wife perhaps starting the movie shortly before her death

Not many folks, Aussie's included know that the Japanese dropped more bombs on Darwin on February 19th 1942 than on Pearl Harbour and over 300 people died. In fact the Japs bombed Darwin 60 odd more times. They could have given us more of a history lesson on the ensuing Military stuff up that left barely a soldier in and around Darwin immediately after the bombing , made more of a scene out of the Japs landing on the mission island , more on David Gulipill and the young boys journey and actually ensured Jackman and Kidman had a good script to work off - it was obvious they thought it was overblown cliche and a mis-infomercial

regards Jacko

PS The scene where the aboriginal fella shot the Roo from the truck cracked me up and the scenery was spectacular so it wasn't all bad .

[the telegraphist]

The movie was total garbage. Sanitising a nations supposed guilt towards the indegenous owners. The owners of which did nothing of this land. They are a dying race, unless they can salvage through whatever means their self respect and drive off the scourge of grog they are doomed. They have been thrown millions of taxpayers dollars, nothing changes, they still abuse the womenfolk and children, they deserve nothing but scorn, those that choose the traditional life are to be lauded and they survive and I will give to them willingly.

[gundownunder]

The movie was shot in the Kimberleys but most of the scenery was altered and looked nothing like the real thing.
Kidmans acting was about equal to a straw doll with a broom up its backside.
Back then no pub would have allowed a woman in the public bar let alone serving her booze, whether she was a drover or not.
The kid with his hand up to stop the cattle was about as believable as Crocodile dundee stopping a water buffalo.
The whole thing was cliched and unreal.
A bit like a poor mans attempt to make a movie like "Titanic" or "Pearl Harbor"

[Travis Morgan]

The kid with his hand up to stop the cattle was about as believable as Crocodile dundee stopping a water buffalo.
The whole thing was cliched and unreal.
A bit like a poor mans attempt to make a movie like "Titanic" or "Pearl Harbor"

Why in HELL would a person drive cattle up and over a Mesa anyway? And did anyone notice they were never driven UP the mesa? They just appeared there?

When Hugh Jackman started going all "Flashdance" with the bucket of water, I thought it was turning into a gay porno.

[Buck Elliott]

Looking at it as pure entertainment ............... It wasn't.

Not as bad as some -- not as good as it should have been.

We just have to accept the fact that HollyWierd does NOT make major motion pictures targeted at our particular demographic. They haven't since we were 17.

[Paladin]

Looking at it as pure entertainment ............... It wasn't.

Not as bad as some -- not as good as it should have been.

We just have to accept the fact that HollyWierd does NOT make major motion pictures targeted at our particular demographic. They haven't since we were 17.

+1, You should never forget Hollywood has no contact with reality.

[don Tomás]

A history lesson it wasn't. My wife enjoyed the movie, Nicole Kidman in those riding pants is what made the movie for me...

[Leverluver]

I don't think I've ever seen a Kidman movie that wasn't a chick flick. I get the most upset when a great opportunity was missed. This one missed just like "Pearl Harbor" missed. The thought of so much money going into making such a film and not come out with something is beyond disappointing.

[Borregos]

My wife enjoyed it

[Bruce Scott]

...I haven't seen it. Some friends thought it was great. As it turns out, the positive comments came from ex Brits and Kiwis

[gundownunder]

Hey Bruce, it is entertaining and well worth a look now that it's on Foxtel.

Travis Morgan, they are not mesas they are on. Over millions of years water has cut gorges into the landscape, just like the grand canyon. In the wet season millions of gallons of water roar through there. In the mornings and evenings when the sun hits the gorge walls they light up with some of the most vibrant colors you could ever see.

I actually like Hugh Jackman as an actor, with the right script he could have made the "drover" fantastic.

[Travis Morgan]

Call it whatever ya want, but they show it as a huge plateau; you may have some sort of degree in land features, but I know a plateau from a gorge.

[dirtcowboy]

A history lesson it wasn't. My wife enjoyed the movie, Nicole Kidman in those riding pants is what made the movie for me...

This is the correct answer!!!!!

[gundownunder]

Call it whatever ya want, but they show it as a huge plateau; you may have some sort of degree in land features, but I know a plateau from a gorge.

Of course you know a plateau from a gorge

But I live a little closer to the north of Australia than you do and dont need

some sort of degree in land features

and you were not paying attention when I said,

The movie was shot in the Kimberleys but most of the scenery was altered and looked nothing like the real thing.

I've never seen the Grand Canyon except on tv or the movies, so can someone tell me if you would have to climb up onto a mesa in order to fall into the Grand Canyon?

You have a nice day Travis, and thanks for the pelosi canning, its always helpful to be reminded that there are people like you in the world

[aussie]

Australians tend to do that type of thing Joe. It was meant as entertainment, not a history lesson or documentary. But some Australians went to the length of apologising for it, even though they had no hand in the making of the movie. Maybe it was meant to make them seem more important than they really are. After all, it is only their opinion....who really cares. Me? I enjoyed it for what it was......entertainment. Loved the kid, thought he was great.
aussie.

[rafter-7]

Australia, It was alright kinda slow at times but it was worth the price of the rental fee..... Now the movie "Fargo" the Sundance film that won all the awards about 10 years ago was an embarresment/slap in the face to the whole upper mid west and we still have not lived it down!!! I invite you to rent it and see what a worthless movie is all about! two hours I'll never get back.

^
7

[Travis Morgan]

gundownunder,

No, you wouldn't have to climb a mesa to see the grand canyon. That wouldn't really make any sense, anyway; if you know what a canyon is. Or a Mesa.

[FWiedner]

Australia, It was alright kinda slow at times but it was worth the price of the rental fee..... Now the movie "Fargo" the Sundance film that won all the awards about 10 years ago was an embarresment/slap in the face to the whole upper mid west and we still have not lived it down!!! I invite you to rent it and see what a worthless movie is all about! two hours I'll never get back.

^
7

Granted, "Fargo" was a slow mover, but it did introduce a new utility for wood-chippers.

[Travis Morgan]

Australia, It was alright kinda slow at times but it was worth the price of the rental fee..... Now the movie "Fargo" the Sundance film that won all the awards about 10 years ago was an embarresment/slap in the face to the whole upper mid west and we still have not lived it down!!! I invite you to rent it and see what a worthless movie is all about! two hours I'll never get back.

^
7

Granted, "Fargo" was a slow mover, but it did introduce a new utility for wood-chippers.

That's one of those movies I hate, but I've watched it a hundred times!

[Lawyer Daggit]

The movie was too long, and because they accepted money from a tourist commission of one state or other, they went overboard on tourist shots.

As a bit of good clean entertainment, an 'Australian western' if you like, it was OK, but of this genre I preferred Crocodile Dundee.

[mescalero1]

gundownunder,
Yes,
It's a long steady climb to the rim of the canyon, then you see a canyon cut by a river.
It is not as spectacular as you may have been led to believe.

[rafter-7]

Australia, It was alright kinda slow at times but it was worth the price of the rental fee..... Now the movie "Fargo" the Sundance film that won all the awards about 10 years ago was an embarresment/slap in the face to the whole upper mid west and we still have not lived it down!!! I invite you to rent it and see what a worthless movie is all about! two hours I'll never get back.

^
7

Granted, "Fargo" was a slow mover, but it did introduce a new utility for wood-chippers.

That's one of those movies I hate, but I've watched it a hundred times!

Thier Norwiegian "Broke" was so phony and the acting protrayed us as inbisiles. Kinda like broke back mountain is to the cowboy way of life. I will NEVER watch that flick just due to princibles

^

[Travis Morgan]

.....and the acting protrayed us as inbisiles. Kinda like broke back mountain is to the cowboy way of life. I will NEVER watch that flick just due to princibles

^

"Imbeciles" and "Principles".

[Pathfinder09]

I really appreciate the comments from our friends "Down Under".

To me the movie was mediocure. Just like anything out of Hollywood ,it is all hype and bares very little resemblence of reality. Only once in a while does a stellar movie shine through.

As an example I'm a huge Clive Cussler fan and have read most of his books. I have personnal autographed copies. There have been very few movies based on his books. The latest one was Sahara. It was all hype, I waited a year until it finally came out. I stood in line the day it opened. It sucked. It beared very little resemblence to the book. In fact Clive Cussler sued the movie, because it was not the book he wrote. So there you are you buy your ticket and take your chances.