Father Geek here with Latauro's regular weekly report from Downunder...

Uncommon beauty is commonly overlooked.

AICN-DOWNUNDER

I have a vague policy on not reporting on TV-related stuff. This is more of
a cinema-based column, designed to draw the attention of Aussies, Kiwis and
"Others" to locally-made films, as well as big budget films released (or
not, as the case may sometimes be) down here.

When it comes to "Doctor Who", though, I break the rules. Here's "The
Ferret":

Long-time Doctor Who fan, first-time traveler. Er.

Doctor Who is thankfully coming to Australia's ABC (their BBC equivalent)
sometime in May, and tease us as they will with short trailers these last
few weeks, they just won't give us an air-date.

However, after a little bit of URL-fiddling with their online TV guide that
normally only lets you see one day ahead, I can proudly, exclusively and
very excitedly announce that all us poor souls in Australia - especially
Brits like me that left the motherland for this sunnier country at the exact
wrong moment - that the first episode of new series of Doctor Who will air
at 7:30pm on Saturday the 21st March.

Link to the programme and air-date details are here:
http://www.abc.net.au/tv/guide/netw/200505/programs/ZY7775A001D21052005T193000.htm

and the rest of the days naturally inferior viewing is here:
http://www.abc.net.au/tv/guide/netw/200505/20050521.htm

Nice to see they've billed it as "must-see TV" (and I'm sure it is) and I
hope they don't butcher it the same way they did with Christopher
Eccleston's and Russell T Davis' "The Second Coming" last Sunday - which was
probably only shown to raise awareness of the new Doctor Who lead - cutting
it's running time from 144 minutes to 110!

if you use this, call me The Ferret!

I will. I will indeed.

NEWS

As reported on this site this week past, STAR WARS - EPISODE III: REVENGE OF
THE SITH has received an M rating in Australia, which is equivalent to PG13
in the US. To correct the eagre scooper's claim, those of you under the age
of 15 still can see the film, and you don't even need a guardian to buy you
a ticket. You will need a guardian, however, if you wish to pick up some
booze and cigs afterwards.

* Australian site Moviehole was, to my knowledge, the first to report on two
new additions to the cast of Geoffrey Wright's "Macbeth" knockoff, M. Lachy
Hulme (MATRIX REVOLUTIONS) and Victoria Hill (SIAM SUNSET) have jumped on
board alongside lead Sam Worthington (DIRTY DEEDS, SOMERSAULT). Hulme will
play Macduff and Hill will play Lady Macbeth. The film, which will soon
begin its Melbourne shoot, will apparently stick to the iambic pentameter
Shakespeare was so fond of, and not resort to some half-arsed trochaic
triameter.

* Remember that BLACK SHEEP film I mentioned last week? You have to check this
out: http://www.wetaworkshop.co.nz/projects/filmography/film/black_sheep
It's Weta Workshop's predproduction designs for the film, and they're both
funny and disturbing in equal parts. Click on the link, it's an absolute
pisser. Oh, and last week I apparently last week I said it was four million
people versus four million sheep. That should be FORTY million sheep. That
should raise the steaks! (If you want to use that as a tagline, Jonathon,
you're more than welcome.)

AWARD AND FESTIVALS

CANNES FILM FESTIVAL

Thanks in part to its successful entry into Cannes, Tony Krawtiz's
Australian short JEWBOY has sold its worldwide rights to Fortissimo Films,
so you may see it in your various territories yet.
http://www.wetaworkshop.co.nz/projects/filmography/film/black_sheep

BOX OFFICE

It's nice to the GUIDE take out top spot. I may not have flipped out over
the film, I may have been just a little disappointed by it, but I still wish
it every success, and I'm glad to see Australian filmgoers have knocked it
up to number one. So long, flabby Vin Diesel substitute!

1. THE HITCHHIKER'S GUIDE TO THE GALAXY

2. XXX 2: THE NEXT LEVEL

3. THE INTERPRETER

4. IN GOOD COMPANY

5. THE AMITYVILLE HORROR

RELEASED THIS WEEK

John C. Reilly reprises his role as "actor" in a new film, National
Geographic makes the mistake of hiring the Ephrons to make a documentary
about Afghanistan, Orlando Bloom liberates Jerusalem once and for all,
Germany explores its Nazi past just in time for Mother's Day, Kevin Bacon
doesn't mind doing for the kids, and oh my God the pain the pain the pain of
it all.

CRIMINAL

LAND MINES - A LOVE STORY

KINGDOM OF HEAVEN

WALK ON WATER

THE WOODSMAN

YOU AND YOUR STUPID MATE

REVIEWS

If you're a regular reader of AICN-D, you might recall the furore over 9
SONGS, the English film containing unsimulated sex. It was initially refused
classification, but won an R18+ rating on appeal. I didn't hide my opinion
on the matter; I was all for the film's release. Well, it comes out next
week, and my review is below. So, was it worth all the trouble? Was it worth
classification? I can answer that now: yes. Whether the film is good or bad
isn't the issue; it's about freedom of speech and censorship. Whether the
film is good or bad *is* an issue if you're thinking of seeing it, so for a
discussion about that, scroll ever downwards (although you might want to
take a gander at the KINGDOM OF HEAVEN review first).

KINGDOM OF HEAVEN

I saw KINGDOM OF HEAVEN on Tuesday. Tuesday was an interesting day. Not only
were neck pains preventing me from turning my head too far in either
direction, but I also came down with a head cold. The head cold coincided
with the latest in a series of fairly severe headaches I've been having, and
that wouldn't be so bad if it weren't for the fact that during all this I
got food poisoning. I guess you could say it wasn't the greatest birthday
ever.

It's a miracle, then, that I can still remember the fifteen hours I spent in
a cinema before all of the above happened. I can tell you now that KINGDOM
OF HEAVEN pretty much lives up to GLADIATOR, and that only helps you out if
you know what I thought of GLADIATOR. So here it is. Like many, I thought
GLADIATOR had an interesting first half and a meandering second half. I've
spoken before about my opinion on the film's writer, John Logan, and his
middle-of-the-road scripts. He runs hot and cold in equal measure (his worst
moment was STAR TREK: NEMESIS, his best was THE AVIATOR), but after KINGDOM
I'm wondering if we should be so ready to forgive Ridley.

Sir Scott is as great as painting a palette as he is at being unable to spot
a bad script. And if you think that sentence didn't make sense, I got more
like that one. My first big problem? How thoroughly un-epic the latest spate
of epics have been. A friend pointed this out to me after GLADIATOR. While I
thought Ridley's direction had itself felt epic and grand, there was still
something missing, and I couldn't put my finger on it. It was noted that the
film took place over a few months, max. What happened to BEN HUR and THE TEN
COMMANDMENTS and LAWRENCE OF ARABIA and the years upon years that these
stories span? Hell, TROY already had the seven years built into its story,
and yet the writers still opted to cramming it down into a few weeks. For
some reason, modern epics choose a shorter time span and the stories suffer.
If only they chose a shorter running time, the audience wouldn't have to
suffer.

Really. This film could have been an hour shorter and not lost anything,
much like the overrated BLACK HAWK DOWN. Not to say it's a bad film. There's
nothing specifically wrong with it, other than there's nothing particularly
original or engaging about the story. The film - in addition to Ridley's
comments in the press - suggests that he just wanted to direct some sword
scenes and some sieges and cool shit like that. Those scenes are, mostly,
very cool. There's some great direction, beautiful cinematography,
phenomenal set design and flawless CGI. The whole exercise, however, feels
far too hollow, and the story lacks any sort of originality.

The biggest problem with the film seems to be the clunky way it seems to
push the oh-so-modern Christians and Jews and Muslims should all live
together in harmony. That's not a bad message in and of itself, but the
script really could have found a better way to say it that, oh, I don't
know, putting those words in the mouths of our main characters! Sheesh!

Orlando Bloom is fairly good in the lead role. There's nothing specifically
wrong with his acting, but he lacks a certain amount of screen presence.
It's not something he can really do much about, other than always ensure he
has a Mortensen or Depp to play off. It's nice to see Eva Green getting more
work, although her role is rather thankless. Jeremy Irons is usually better
than this, here living up to the moniker bestowed upon him by Chris Rock at
the Oscars this year.

The only thing I can really recommend about this film is the battle scenes.
I know a lot of people go to these things purely for those, and so they
might be satisfied with it. For the rest of you, stay home and dust off the
special edition of LAWRENCE OF ARABIA.

9 SONGS

Matt is in the Antarctic as part of his work, and reflects upon his
relationship with free-spirited 21-year-old Lisa. We don't know how long
it's been since they broke up, but it's obviously weighing heavily on his
mind. He doesn't linger on the cute or even significant moments of the
relationship; only on the moments that stick out his mind. Mostly, sex and
concerts.

It's a clever conceit, and works really well. I was surprised, watching it,
that no one had really captured the essence of memories on film. ETERNAL
SUNSHINE came close, but the surrealism of it (Carrey playing himself as a
five-year-old, teenager, etc) made it into something different. There's no
real plot to speak of, and not even a terrible amount of character
development. It really is just a collection of memories, and works as an
aesthetic, almost experimental film, rather than a straight narrative. I'd
say it has more in common with films like ELEPHANT or RUSSIAN ARK than
IRREVERSIBLE or ANATOMY OF HELL.

It's a good thing, then, that the film doesn't outstay its welcome. It runs
for about seventy minutes, which feels like the perfect time. There's no
vain attempt to fill out the running time (like, say, a thirty second title
card devoted to the assistant best boy, a la WALKING TALL). It's nice to see
a film taking the length of time it needs, and that time being unashamedly
short.

The live performances are really well captured. Of course, all they did was
stand in the crowd with DV cameras, but it's a much more honest depiction of
live performances than the usual close ups and "on stage" stuff we usually
get. The bands themselves work on many levels: aside from the fact that it's
always great to see the Dandy Warhols, the Von Bondies, Franz Ferdinand and
the like, they seem like the perfect bands with which to capture that "here
and now" feeling. Years later, we'll look back at this film and marvel at
what great music we had in 2004 (thankfully forgetting all the shite music
we have, which is the point to carefully choosing the more interesting acts
out there. The music does serve a point, though. With the possible exception
of smells, music evokes memories more potently than anything else, and every
musical recollection he has leads directly into a recollection of his
relationship with Lisa.

Those recollections almost exclusively revolve around sex. It's hard to
describe here - which, I suppose, is a credit to Winterbottom's masterful
use of his medium - but it works. If you think back to someone you had a
particularly intense physical relationship with, those moments seem to be
the ones you remember. Intense sex. Strange things she'd say. Arguments that
didn't seem to be about anything. Little snippets here and there that stick
out in your memory. That's all you're given in our protagonists'
relationship, and that's all that's needed. There's no cute story about how
they got together, no tragic reason why they fell apart, no last minute dash
to the airport. It's just a collection of memories of what we know to be a
very real relationship; we know because we're shown the actual, genuine
intimacy they shared, and the film is better for it.

NEXT WEEK

- Bernie Mac to star as Benjamin P. Ghandi in the New York-set remake of
Richard Attenborough's film, entitled GHAN'S THE MAN!

- Michael Keaton uses a crystal ball and a ouija board to find a
high-profile Australian director who's willing to cast him in something in
WHITE NOYCE

- Michael Winterbottom will direct and star as Henry II in his
beastiality-themed follow-up to NINE SONGS, entitled A LION IN WINTERBOTTOM

Peace out,

Latauro

AICNDownunder@hotmail.com