Above average film w some issues.

I really wanted to like this film because of the fascinating story line of an Afghani woman and a rural Australian farmer. These really are two worlds that should not collide, and so the premise based on a collision of these two characters should make for a compelling narrative. However, when I walked out of the cinema I left with the feeling the film was satisfactory but nonetheless failed to deliver.

The chemistry between the two main actors was evident, and the powerful feature of the film was the beautiful silences between them. For aspiring screenwriters Peter Duncan and Mr. der Hulst prove that films light on dialogue make for fascinating stories, because we can evaluate the characters based on what they do, not on what they say. This is not an easy accomplishment in screenwriting, as the tendency is to write cheesy dialogue that suffocates story. Moreover, most actors seem to choose scripts heavy on dialogue with the hope it contains that one memorable line. Unfinished Sky is truly a story told in pictures.

The veracity of the story is believable, and no Australian should doubt the possibility that an almost an entire rural community could be complicit in the knowledge that certain “businesses” employ and exploit illegal immigrants, particularly females. Now, I think the most unbelievable aspect of the story was the community police officer and his relationship with the town and the main character John. He suddenly just seemed to show-up throughout the film, and I couldn’t help feel the Director was throwing him into the scenes for the purpose of maximizing dramatic value. It didn’t work, and Roy Billing is forced into overacting.

Flashbacks – another screenwriting vehicle that either works or doesn’t. I think there were other ways they could have structured the narrative, perhaps in a more chronological order, as opposed to inserting flashbacks throughout. Sadly, Unfinished Sky is a film that incorporates flashbacks to the detriment of my viewing experience. It slowed the action down; there were other ways to reveal insights about these characters.

My last critique was the blue sky as the chosen motif for the film. Personally, if the title of the film is Unfinished Sky then the film’s key motif should NOT be the same! Surely! The Director frequently portrayed John working on an “unfinished puzzle” depicting a blue sky. Then John and T. working together on the puzzle. I felt at times choking on metaphors; not an ideal cinematic experience. More subtlety is required.

Finally, one reviewer made this comment about the film “When we are steamed up about injustice, we cannot access the very fine-tuned emotions associated with love.” I whole-heartedly disagree with that. This line says a lot more about the individual viewer than it does the quality of the film.