17 May 2012

Just not a movie that really does anything for me.

This movie doesn't do much of anything for me. It seems disjointed and hard to understand but does have some good spots. Some may like the Outback scenery, it's too heat blasted for me. I did like various bits of the scenery and of the story but the viewer has to sit through what I guess is supposed to be an art film, too many disjointed bits. Jenny Agutter's swimming hole scene seemed like an excuse for nudity, it did nothing for the story line unlike the dream sequence at the end where all three ramblers swim nude. If that was meant to give a sense of freedom from the stresses of the modern day world it did a much better job. As for sticking to the book, I haven't read it but I'm not surprised that so little of the story is used, that is so common in movie making.

17 May 2012

Ab Original

There is a subtlety in this film that many people miss. Incredibly some give it a single star. By reflecting the way the father ended up at the beginning of the picture, the death of the native boy in the tree explains much that went before. Including a parallel passion for the girl. This explains her stolid attitude toward her Dad, his crazy behavior, and his immolation. Guilt overpowered the man. Passion the native boy. There is some innocent nudity toward the end. Well worth it.

16 May 2012

There is nothing wrong with the DVD

Scollay@aol.com's DVD (see the review on this page) must be a faulty copy and should be exchanged for another one. My copy looks gorgeous and the sound is just like in most other '70s movies.

Polaris_DiB

15 May 2012

A world full of danger and empty of humanity

This movie, simply put, is definitely a product of the 70s.It details, roughly, the story of a young girl and her brother who,after a disturbing and tragic event of which I will not spoil, findthemselves alone in Australian wilderness, having to survive againstall the relative dangers that come with being in such a predicament.The movie, however full of natural dangers, however, does not focus somuch upon the survivalism or even will to live so much as upon acoming-of-age involving a very dangerous and empty world.What makes it really distinct is not only said disregard for thecivilities of survival-based exposition and important dialog, but thestructuring of the film around three general editing devices that pullout a self-consciously artistic sense of malaise: jump cuts, graphicmatches, and montage editing. Several times the movie jumps ideas,locales, movements, pacing, shots, with seemingly very little reason,but which is usually just begging to be analyzed and commented upon.This style of exposition is never anybody's favorite, and it's probablyfor that reason that this film isn't the most well-known film outthere.Now of course the film seems to have this strong anti-human tendency,or even a strong anti-nature tendency, but neither of those readingsreally seem to pull through. All there is in the film is what is,dangerous landscapes and abandoned buildings. This fits completely withthe coming-of-age malaise, the ever-present danger and the feeling ofcomplete abandonment, but trying to fit in some sort of anti-human,anti-nature reading into this film is largely missing the point becauseit's not really taking into account the point of view of theprotagonist, the young girl. Can one honestly say she wasn't asintimidated by the nature aspects as by the human? Whatever the case,it is marked mostly by that deranged 70s artistic feel that is morefamously felt in such works as Easy Rider and Taxi Driver, which meansit's definitely not one of those things that sits well or can even bedigested in one sitting.--PolarisDiB

ptb-8

11 May 2012

genuine screen art

See WALKABOUT and let yourself drift into what I consider genuine filmart. This film is so painfully beautiful I thought I was going to faintwhilst watching. It is also genuinely erotic and frightening....andquietly unnerving. Jenny Agutter is rightfully acclaimed for hermesmerizing performance (and we are rewarded with an exquisite nudescene at the end). Gulpilil aged about 16 in the film is bothmysterious and bewitching and gives a major performance of simplisticwonder. This is both heartbreaking and extraordinary......and a realAustralian experience, which may explain why international commentsmight be perplexed. A great film companion piece of the other end ofthe outback spectrum is the brutal male drama WAKE IN FRIGHT also knownas OUTBACK. Seek both and then add THE TRACKER and RABBIT PROOF FENCEto get a real grip on Australian existence. Gulpilil is in 3 of thesemasterpieces and he is rightly lauded in each of them. Today he stilllives under a tree in the outback having just completed thebreathtaking TEN CANOES.

ShootingShark

11 May 2012

Captivating Dream-Like Fable Of Lost Children In The Australian Outback

When their father goes crazy and tries to kill them, a teenage girl andher young brother get lost in the Australian Outback. They arebefriended by an Aborigine boy who is on a walkabout, his quest foradulthood in the wilds of nature. Can they get back home ?This is probably my favourite of Roeg's many fine films (a toss-up withThe Witches) and like so much of his work is visually dazzling,thematically fascinating and a completely unique movie. The story is sosparse as to be almost non-existent; what matters is the landscape andthe unusual relationships between the white kids and the native, whocan't speak each other's languages and don't understand each other'scultures. Although they are separated by these immense barriers, theybecome friends through the simplest and most basic requirements oflife; food, shelter, leisure, purpose. The film alternately shows theirhappiness together and reinforces the differences of their backgrounds- all the white people we encounter are either living meaningless ratrace lives, exploiting others or killing animals for no reason. Like afew other films (Badlands, Southern Comfort, much of Werner Herzog'swork), the setting is really the fourth character in the movie, full ofamazing vistas of sand, rocky canyons and lush groves filled withplants and animals - echidnas, cockatoos, wallabies, scorpions,frill-necked lizards, a wombat which snuffles at the children whilethey are sleeping. The landscapes are hypnotic and dazzling, giving themovie an unreal, dreamy quality which somehow makes is seem morenaturalistic, almost a documentary. The three actors - although whatthey're doing almost transcends acting - are all terrific; Agutter ishauntingly beautiful, perhaps the best representation of repressedsexual awakening in cinema, whilst Gulpilil is charismatic and iconic(and is in several other great films). Whilst credited as Lucien John,the boy is really Roeg's son, and oddly it's him who really bridges thecharacters and holds the story together - in what other big studiomovie does one eight-year-old boy speak two-thirds of the dialogue ?Featuring a rich John Barry score, this is extremely well directed andphotographed by Roeg (his first solo effort) - a rich, moving andbeautiful film. Based on a book by James Vance Marshall and shot inamazing locations all over the magical land of Oz.

11 May 2012

very dissapointed

This review is from: Walkabout (DVD) The seller seemed to fail to let me know that it is a Region 2 disk, therefore I can't even play it. False advertisement.

11 May 2012

Confused?

I watched this film on the Independent Film Channel maybe 10 years ago. My recollection of it is that it is an excellent film. I came here to purchase this film and "Rabbit-Proof Fence" (also excellent) on dvd. I read various reviews rated from 5 to 1 stars and am now wondering if this film on dvd is the same one I watched so long ago. Has it been reformated? Have scenes been deleated or added? I read that some ppl who recalled it as an excellent film were somewhat disappointed after the passage of time. Is this due to a change in the format of the film? I recall the storyline and Australian scenery as awesome. Can someone tell me if the dvd release has changed the film, somewhat like the changes made to the dvd of "Amadeus"? (glad I recorded that movie on vhs!)Thanks...

05 May 2012

Moody, pessimistic and surreal -- with much food for thought

Originally released in 1971, this film is characterized by great cinematography of the Australian outback and the rather strange story of a lost English teenage girl and her little brother who are helped to survive by a 16-year old Australian Aboriginal boy on his "walkabout", a coming-of-age survival ritual. The girl, played by Jenny Agutter, is steeped in the ways of civilization and always distrustful of the aboriginal boy, played by David Gulpilil. The younger boy, played by Luc Roeg, is the son of the director, Nicolas Roeg, and does a fine job of bridging the gap between the two older teenagers as he learns some basic hunting skills and finds ways to communicate with the older boy. The story is a little too artsy for my taste and raises just too many unanswered questions. Why did the children's father drive them out on the desert and start shooting at them? Why did he commit suicide? Why were there some strange scenes about scientists and a weather balloon? Why did the girl never cease her upper class manners even when faced with starvation and fatigue? Even though there are scenes showing the children washing their flannel school uniforms, how did they keep their clothes in such good condition? And why was the film so horribly pessimistic? There's food for thought here though between the ways of life of the materialistic city dweller, which is contrasted by the natural way of the world. However, neither of these ways of life comes out the winner, especially because there is no understanding between them. No one is spared the director's harsh camera lens, which focuses a lot on the animals. We get the feeling survival means destroying other living things. And it is the same with humans. The film is moody, pessimistic and surreal - not my favorite kind of movie. Its message is hazy and unfocussed. And yet its haunting quality will linger with me for a long time. I can't say I enjoyed this video. Rather I was disturbed by it. And I would have liked more clarity. I do recommend it though for film buffs and art lovers. But be prepared for a confusing film with no easy answers.

failedscreenwriter

05 May 2012

The Elegance of Ambiguity

I *finally* got to see this film all the way through. The photography isbeautiful and the story can be enjoyed on a most basic level, but whatstruck me about Walkabout was what it *didn't* say. Roeg wisely pulls hiscamera back and avoids graphic "suffering in the desert" details or theseparate story of the search. The subtlety emphasizes that this film is anextended allegory. My favorite plot device: the children's only link to"civilization," a portable radio, is first heard playing the things amiddleclass English girl in Australia might listen to--music, lessons, etc. Asisolation sets in, it degenerates to a meaningless babble about economics,philosophy and civilization (the same announcer? a different one? is sheimagining her father's voice? We don't know). The film is aboutnon-communication throughout. The family is isolated before the fact. Theyoung tribesman can't comprehend the girl's non-understanding of hisculture. And the rather depressing ending shows us that the social andcultural isolation we all live in does not easily change.

Dave from Ottawa

04 May 2012

Welcome to the Outback

Before Mad Max and Crocodile Dundee, Australia's Outback receivedlittle cinematic attention apart from this film. The scenery isevocatively photographed and the unforgiving harshness of the land ison full display as two English kids in rather impractical schooluniforms try to make their across its dry and empty vastness. Anaboriginal teen befriends them and shows them how to get water and howAustralia's odd creatures are not just curiosities - they're food! Thestory plays out, however, as the story of English-Aborigine relationsin microcosm: the older child (Jenny Agutter) insists on speaking onlyEnglish, and takes advantage of the Aborigine's knowledge and skillswhile treating him as an inferior, almost a servant, and putting herown comfort ahead of everything. The drama plays out to a suitablytragic conclusion, as any story about British Colonial attitudesclashing with locals might be expected to do. Beautiful to look at andthink about, this is a rare and special movie experience.

04 May 2012

Not as Good as I Remembered It

I loved this movie when I saw it in college, but that was about 40 years ago. This time around, I did not care for it as much. The basic weakness in the movie is the lack of clarity in the boy's motivations and the ending.Spoilers...I felt confused about why the boy killed himself. Having also read the book, I know that he took his own life in the written story; it seems like the movie decided that was the best way to end as well. But while the book is very clear why the boy chose to die, the movie is not.I had previously assumed that the boy chose to end it because the girl rejected his romantic advances. But that did not seem so clear when I watched it this time.The boy becomes depressed the day before when he sees some white hunters killing buffalo. It's not really clear why this affected him so much. Was it the use of a rifle to do the killing? Why should that matter? After becoming depressed, the boy spends the night in an animal graveyard and awakens the next morning with his skin painted up as a skeleton. Then he returns to the where the children are camping and performs his dance.Most people seem to think this is a courtship dance, but, if so, it left me very confused. Do you do a courtship dance when you are depressed and disguised as a skeleton? It looked more like a death dance to me. Maybe it was his way of exhausting himself so that he would be able to die quickly by hanging in the tree.I also couldn't avoid wondering if a young aboriginal man would acutally have any interest in the white girl. Beauty is basically a set of cultural attitudes, and primitive cultures usually have strict traditions of kinship and other considerations when looking for a mate. Would a hunter/gatherer in a harsh wildnerness choose a mate who was completely helpless and unable to contribute to survival?Basically, this whole romance theme seemed out of place to me. The part that still worked for me was the contrast between the boy's basic good nature and generosity with the various civilized white people: the crazy dad, the perverse bunch of losers at the weather balloon station, and the watchman at the settlement where the children end up..."Don't touch that, don't touch anything. This is private property, it's all private property."Still a movie worth watching, but I no longer consider it a masterpiece.Chaz

01 May 2012

Highways of Happiness

Walkabout is a truly exceptional film. If possible seeing this on a theatre screen or at least a large plasma is ideal, as the heart of it is the awesome imagery of Australia's "Outback." It is in that expansive land, where nature and it's profound beauty and violence that two kids find themselves, abandoned by a father, a modern white man, finished with himself and life. Having brought his kids out into the wild, ostensibly for them to lunch and play while he peruses his geology paperwork, he also can't help stare at his daughter. This interfamily tension, the rigidity of urban life-captured in brick walls and symmetrical classroom alignments where the lifeless droning of school excercise (which poses an early juxta to the ancient chanting and John Barry's fabulous score) and stilted uniforms are what these kids know, but just as soon let go of in a journey through all-time. Without much questioning the girl and her younger brother survive, without very much fear, or doubt only to be saved when they do appear to be starved by a sixteen year old Aborigine on his rite-of-passage-into-manhood Walkabout. The allegorical and metaphorical nature of Walkabout is clear and infinite. Two worlds and civilizations have met, language easily gives way to gesture and sound, and love, the greatest unification of worlds, blossoms.But the divide between the pure ancient young man and the tough, staunch urban girl proves too great for her. Following a remarkable mating dance in which he paints himself and offers flowers, a gesture she dismisses, the bond is broken, and the tragedy of encroachment and progress is upon us. This is a definite masterpiece. A film worthy of school showings, be it elementary or graduate. Memory and reality. Peaceful yet violent. Meditative yet ominous. Warm yet jangling. As a gesture of awe, respect and sorrow at the Aboriginal experience it has few parellels. Perhaps Peter Weir's The Last Wave and Philip Noyce's Rabbit-Proof Fence (both of which feature David Gulpilil, who plays the Aborigine) can be it's companion.

01 May 2012

Non-anamorphic -- What an opportunity missed!

This is a movie that will haunt you forever and Criterion has to be congratulated for re-releasing the film after years of unavailability. What a real shame, though, that the DVD lacks an anamorphic widescreen version that would have been stunning on increasingly-commonplace widescreen monitors. Aside from that, I have no complaints about video quality.

28 April 2012

Roeg makes a mainstream art movie

Nicolas Roeg's career has been a rocky one, and recently his work seems to have been ignored. 'Walkabout' was probably his masterpiece, since the extraordinary outback locations fit his artistic approach to film making perfectly. This film does not have the gravity of 'Don't Look Now' but it still manages to linger in the mind and conveys layers of powerful messages through its young cast and simple storyline. See it on the biggest screen you can find.

NoGreenGus

28 April 2012

Beauty and Disappointment . . .

What a shame that Roeg has to revert to demonizing white, civilizedsociety in this beautifully filmed piece. From the very beginning, aswhen the evil white father shoots at the girl and boy, white people areshown to be callous and cruel. We see the white hunters viciouslykilling game with no explanation. We see the white, lascivious menogling the woman in the unexplained scene with the balloons. We see theuncaring, insensitive white executive at the end, and on and on.That being said, the film has a certain mysterious beauty and is highlyoriginal. The incredibly beautiful Jenny Agutter and the incrediblekindness of the Aborigine complement the scenic beauty. The music has ahaunting, mystical quality. It's very 70s in its attitude, which makesit even more appealing today. I'm glad I saw the film, and wouldrecommend it to any cineaste.

25 April 2012

Thank you again, Criterion

In Gus Van Sant's Elephant, we follow several teenagers around for half a day, with little or no dialogue, and with nothing to connect us to the characters. We watch a father drive his kid to school, drunk. We watch three girls vomit in the bathroom after eating lunch. We watch two teenagers shoot up the school, ala Columbine, all without any given reason. That film won the Golden Palm and Best Director awards at the Cannes Film Festival. Although I was not a fan of the film at all, in fact I was disgusted by it, I have learned to understand why Van Sant chose to shoot his film the way he did; little or not plot, and no back story for the characters, and little audience interaction with the characters. Walkabout is somewhat similar to the style that Van Sant used in Elephant, and reportadley also in his films Gerry and Last Days, but it was done over 30 years prior. Its a beautiful film, told quite simply, over the course of an unkwown number of days. We get to know the characters, but not through back story, or by seeing them in their daily lives. The only thing we know about either one of them (the 14 year old girl and her six or seven year old brother) is that they are English living in Australia, and both attend prep-school...and even this is an assumption based on their language and uniforms, not on anything the film really tells us. The story, as told in every review, is about how the two are mystreriously brought to the outback by their father, who then tries to kill them, and then kills himself. They are close to death as they wander through the desert, until a young Aborigine boy of 16 sees them and essentially rescues them.One reviewer complains that nothing happens. I disagree, plenty happens. Its random, as is nature, and nature is where these characters exist in this film. Not alot is explained to us, nor do I think we are supposed to figure alot out. We are supposed to watch, and see things as the characters see them. I loved the way the film juxtapozed the Aborigine with the civilized world. There is a harsh, yet amazing scene, where the Aborigine has killed a kangaroo and is cutting it up. The scene is intercut with scenes of a butcher hacking up meat in his butcher shop. Although it seems random at first, when viewed in the rest of the film, it fits in perfectly in the movie's method of comparing the similarites, despite the obvious differences, between the two cultures. As Roger Ebert pointed out in his The Great Movies II, communication is also a major subject of study in this film--meaning, there hardly is any. The boy is somehow able to get through to the Aborigine, but the girl maintains her distance, probably by choice. She was brought up upper-class, and no doubt that is the lifestyle she enjoys. The Aborigine is no better. He speaks his language throughout the film, as if the two English could understand him. It doens't matter to him that they can't. Neither side is innocent of close-mindedness in this respect.There is also a certain sexual under-tone in this film. Some reviewers regarded the nudity as non-sexual. For the most part, I'd agree. However, the scene that was orignally cut from this film and restored in the lated 90s, is highly sexual. While the Aborigine boy is out hunting, displaying his brutish masculinity, the girl is swimming naked in an oasis. The scene is not sexual as most American audiences know it. There is never a loving embrace between the two, and it hardly seems that she is at all attracted to him. Also, she does not watch him hunt. Yet to deny the sexual urges of either character throughout the film, displayed mostly in this scene (there is some evidence of it scattered througout, also) would mean that you've put up blinders. True, no sex occurs, but the girls beautiful body is fully displayed at the same time as the young-man's raw masculitnity. This is contrast to the nudity at the films very end, which is playful, but not in the least bit sexual. Its a fine line, and the film's director has walked in well, without losing his balance. This was a beautiful film, and I'd love to see it again. I urge the viewer not to expect much on story. There is a plot--the white kids want to get home and the Aborigine helps them find it--but that is not the key focus. The plot is the means to an end. That end being a study of cultural differences, done in a very intellegent, patient, and much more interesting way than I've ever seen.

lisamba

25 April 2012

Walkabout

I watched this movie almost 2 times and I still don't understand it.The movie was very good in filming wildlife but the script washorrible. Why did the father shot at the boy? Why did he kill himself?Why did the kids go the way they did? Why didn't the aborigine boy showthem the other people? Why did the aborigine boy die at the end? somany questions left as to what this movie was about. Seemed like theyjust want some nude bodies in the movie cause men are so horny! Thewildlife filming was really good beautiful scenery. I thought maybe thebeginning would tell me what the movie was trying to convey but it wasconfusing also. And the end was just as bad!

23 April 2012

on how life could be

Oh, yeah. I mean, have you -seen- this movie? That's all you can say afterwards: oh, yeah. Watch this movie. I want my kids to watch this movie (when I have kids). It's a sort of subliminal criticism of everything that's wrong w/our species and how unnecessary that wrongness is. Maybe I'm crazy, but I think it makes for a nice companion piece w/'Fight Club', 'The Magic Christian', and other cinematic indictments of social ills, although 'Walkabout' is much more down-to-earth in its approach than most films of that sort.

kevin c

22 April 2012

back to basics

Roeg is a vastly underrated director. Alongside 'Performance' and 'Don'tLook Now', this is also a very good film.The simplicity and beauty of aboriginal life, is contrasted with thewesternrigidity. The school uniforms remain nearly intact, despite the perilousposition the children find themselves in.A beautiful film, that will stick in the memory for a long whileafter.It has to be mentioned how stunning Agutter looks in this film. You'llneverbe able to watch 'The Railway Children' again.