Beautiful Movie...


Great location scenery and costumes. Beautifully acted by the principals. Camera work way ahead of its time. Terrific Alfred Hitchcock direction. The plot well ehhh, could be better. But all in all an enjoyable 2 hours.

reply

The camerawork is superb at times. Considering UC was made decades before the Stedicam, this film is remarkable for the dolly and tracking shots. I loved the opening sequence.


------- __@
----- _`\<,_
---- (*)/ (*)------- ----__@
--------------------- _`\<,_
---- -----------------(*)/ (*)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~:*•.. ¤°.¸¸.•´¯`»nec spe,nec metu :*•.. ¤°.¸¸.•´¯`»

reply


One of the best films from Hitchcock.

reply

I think it's stunning to look at, the sets, the Technicolor, the gorgeous costumes.

But when I think of "Australia", I know there were rich people living in mansions there from early days, but when I think 'Australia' I can't help but think more of a 'wild west' setting of drovers, sheep farmers, a more...casual lifestyle. The settings and costumes are so elaborate, it would have looked more appropriate set in London, or Virginia, or Philadelphia than the more casual and rowdy setting of Australia. Stereotype, I know.

reply

lnoft97 says > But when I think of "Australia", I know there were rich people living in mansions there from early days, but when I think 'Australia' I can't help but think more of a 'wild west' setting of drovers, sheep farmers, a more...casual lifestyle. The settings and costumes are so elaborate, it would have looked more appropriate set in London, or Virginia, or Philadelphia than the more casual and rowdy setting of Australia. Stereotype, I know.
Having the movie set somewhere other than Australia would have defeated the whole point of the movie. The story wouldn't make any sense in London or the United States. In London, titles are important and those who have them enjoy certain privileges other do not. In the U.S., money is the determining factor for how someone lives. Titles mean absolutely nothing and people mixing is not as big an issue.

In Australia, they're still trying to figure it all out. According to the narrative, it's about sixty years since it was 'discovered'. Some people who were sent there as prisoners, like Flusky, have risen to prominence. They may still not be accepted by those in power but they have a certain amount of power themselves. He's a landowner, he's very wealthy and is married to a lady, someone out of his class.

The fact Australia was a penal colony factors into the movie. The way the social classes interact, mix, and behave with each other is another factor. Life is difficult for people who used to have servants waiting on them hand and foot. In the case of Milly, there is no way she could ever hope to have as much power as she does and try to displace a lady like Henrietta in English society.

In regards tot he clothing and lifestyle, those things are easily transported. A lot of the women in the Wild West in the U.S. brought along their fancy clothes and dressed as they would in the east even though there were no paves streets and a lot of dust. After a while, those things could be ordered and transported in or the cloth could be purchased and the outfits made there.

Suggesting the movie should have been set elsewhere shows you really didn't understand it and should probably watch it again when you get a chance. It does not take long for motivated people to organize communities and a society in whatever location they find themselves.

It's clear you didn't really understood the movie. It's about Australia; about the struggles and growing pains they faced in their attempt to establish their identity. It's about the people and what makes them uniquely different than their close 'cousins' in the U.K. How could a movie about Australia be better set somewhere else? You should watch it again when you get a chance.


Woman, man! That's the way it should be Tarzan. [Tarzan and his mate]

reply