AICN-DOWNUNDER: The Hobbit, The Water Horse, Mr Magorium, stupid film credits

Just a minute - just a minute. Now, hold on, Mr. Potter. You're right when you say my father was no businessman. I know that. Why he ever started this cheap, penny-ante Building and Loan, I'll never know. But neither you nor anyone else can say anything against his character, because his whole life was - why, in the twenty-five years since he and Uncle Billy started this thing, he never once thought of himself. Isn't that right, Uncle Billy? He didn't save enough money to send Harry to school, let alone me. But he did help a few people get out of your slums, Mr. Potter, and what's wrong with that? Why - here, you're all businessmen here. Doesn't it make them better citizens? Doesn't it make them better customers? You - you said - what'd you say a minute ago? They had to wait and save their money before they even ought to think of a decent home. Wait? Wait for what? Until their children grow up and leave them? Until they're so old and broken down that they... Do you know how long it takes a working man to save five thousand dollars? Just remember this, Mr. Potter, that this rabble you're talking about... they do most of the working and paying and living and dying in this community. Well, is it too much to have them work and pay and live and die in a couple of decent rooms and a bath? Anyway, my father didn't think so. People were human beings to him. But to you, a warped, frustrated old man, they're cattle. Well, in my book he died a much richer man than you'll ever be.

AICN-DOWNUNDER

INTO THE WILD is, internet ads inform me, "Screenplay and directed by Sean Penn". Surely if that sentence had been screenplay by Sean Penn, he'd have used the correct English.

The phrase is the step-child of "Written and directed by", a powerful credit used to affirm absolute auteurship. Naturally, if a film is based on an existing work, as INTO THE WILD is, the writer is not just the "writer", but the "guy/gal who wrote the screenplay". The authorship is split up, and for good reason.

The problem is that the phrase "Screenplay and directed by" makes absolutely no sense. "Screenplay by" makes sense on its own, as does "Directed by". Screenplay is a noun; directed is a verb.

No wonder the damn writers are striking.

Merry Christmas.

NEWS

Not much of this about, naturally. The big news? THE HOBBIT is getting made. If the newsfeed isn't quite reaching the rock you're living under, it's going to be two films, Peter Jackson and Fran Walsh are Executive Producing but PJ is not directing, and though it's just a rumour at this stage, the smart money for directing seems to be on Sam Raimi. My personal uninformed inkling? Before RINGS, PJ was not known as a blockbuster director. I think they're going to go with someone largely unknown; Neill Blomkamp, Jonathan King, David Slade, or someone of that ilk. That's my Christmas prediction for all of you.

Two of my favourite Australian performers are Josh Lawson and Ed Kavalee. They're not household names, but they've got some of the best comic timing of anyone in the country, and whenever I see their names attached to anything, I make it a point to watch it. When I found out they were both appearing in a movie about a giant squid, I suddenly had a new film on my Most Anticipated list. The suddenly-frustrating wait to see the finished film (it's still being made) is tempered somewhat by a pretty nifty website where they've got wepisode production diaries, downloads, and more. Check it out at: www.squidmovie.com

AWARDS, FESTIVALS AND SCREENINGS

AUSTRALIAN FILM INSTITUTE AWARDS

The telecast was an... interesting affair. If you watched the AFIs, do some talkbacking below, I want to hear what the general consensus was. Love it? Hate it? Indifferentiate it? Anyway, Best Film went to ROMULUS, MY FATHER, Best Direction went to Tony Ayres for THE HOME SONG STORIES as did best screenplay, Eric Bana picked up Best Lead Actor for ROMULUS and Joan Chen won for HOME SONG. You'd be forgiven for thinking there were no other films up for anything, as these two pretty much dominated, but there were a few nods for NOISE and CLUBLAND. Best Documentary went to FORBIDDEN LIE$, Best Short Animation went to THE GIRL WHO SWALLOWED BEES, and Best Short went to SPIKE UP.

REVIEWS

I've caught nearly all of the upcoming releases (JUNO, DARJEELING, NO COUNTRY, THERE WILL BE BLOOD), but because most of what I've seen has been all kinds of awesome, I'm just going to hold off on them until I do my best of list in about a week. Mind you, I don't know exactly where any of these will fall, or if there'll be on there at all, but I suspect there'll be places for all of them. In the meantime, here's some stuff that isn't going to make the list...

MR MAGORIUM'S WONDER EMPORIUM

You can just imagine it: Zach Helm sitting in the theatre watching Tim Burton's CHARLIE AND THE CHOCOLATE FACTORY, slapping his head, and thinking "No, that's not how you do it! That's completely wrong! Fine, I'll do it myself!". MAGORIUM wears its primary (and possibly only) influence so obviously on its sleeve, you gotta wonder if there wasn't a team of lawyers waiting excitedly for the premiere.

The problem is, he doesn't quite get it right either. The film is trying to be so many things at once that it never really finds its voice. Is it a story about a kid who's trying to find a friend? Is it a story about a girl who's trying to follow her dreams? Is it a story of an uptight accountant learning how to have fun? Is it the story of a magical old man coming to the end of his life?

There's no problem with the film being about all these things, but these storylines convolute and step on each other's feet so much, it never really matches its intent. Take, for example, the story of the kid with no friends. Instead of discovering this magical place, when we meet him, he's already there. He's already had his origin story, and at this point there's really nowhere for him to travel. From the moment you hear his mother saying that he should find some friends, you realise you're simply going to have to wait until the final act when he suddenly realises the people in the shop were his friends all along!

With not nearly enough time for any of these stories to properly develop, we're left with a handful of fairly rushed and not overly engaging stories. The first one to go should have been Natalie Portman's character. Portman's great, but the story of a twenty-something trying to recapture her youthful dreams isn't something that really belongs in a kid's film.

The same could almost be said of Jason Bateman's character, but Bateman is so damn good, he renders any criticism irrelevant. It should be obvious by now that Bateman can do absolutely anything, and it's no exaggeration to say that films are better because he is in them. Putting Jason Bateman in your film is not casting; it's cheating.

I'm not going to jump on the bandwagon and criticise Dustin Hoffman's performance, because it's really good. If you didn't like Johnny Depp's Willie Wonka, you're not going to like Hoffman's Mr Magorium. That would be a shame, because this is exactly the sort of character that this sort of film needs. In fact, Hoffman creating such an engaging characterisation only serves to draw attention to the fact that the script doesn't quite work.

It's not a bad film, and the kids seemed to like much of it, but if my suspicion is correct and Zach Helm set out to make a film that would reach the heights of the original Gene Wilder WILLY WONKA, he's made a film that's about two thirds there. And that's a decent effort.

THE WATER HORSE: LEGEND OF THE DEEP

AICN-D reported on the making of this project quite a lot during its production, but I must admit that until I saw the film, I didn't really know what it was. Sure, I knew it had something to do with the Loch Ness Monster, and I knew it had something to do with New Zealand (behind the scenes, that is), but I only figured out it was a family film when I entered the cinema to see five hundred small children running up and down the aisles. Naturally, I couldn't shake the thought I always get in situations like this: wonder what would happen if they accidentally play EASTERN PROMISES instead...

Anyway, the film begins with Bran Cox, which is almost always a good sign. Almost. Brian Cox's scenes with the two awkwardly American tourists (the adverb is intentional; they are awkward in their Americanness) aren't particularly well-written, and feel unnecessary and tacked-on.

The flashbacks themselves (which comprise the majority of the movie) are fine, and there's a decent attempt made to give the characters and the story some complexity (but not so much as to overwhelm the fact that this film is for kids). The real standout -- and you know it must be a real standout, because I never say this about films -- is the special effects. It's rare that I'm ever truly impressed by FX work, but the work on the waterhose/loch ness monster itself is flawless. Weta has really stepped up with what I think is the best effects work I've seen since LORD OF THE RINGS.

It's not a work of utter genius, but I can easily see it being one of those films that, twenty years from now, is considered one of "those" films from the childhood of the population. A few scary moments for the kids, but worth taking them to if you have some. Or if you see some that are unattended. Either way, they'll dig the film.

NEXT WEEK

- Bob Dylan to play Heath Ledger in post-apocalyptic biopic I AM LEDGER

- Gary Oldman to appear in THE TERMINAL's direct-to-video sequel, NO COUNTRY FOR OLDMAN

- After using up every sport they could think of, producers of the AIR BUD series will next make their star golden retriever a 19th century oil magnate in THERE WILL BE BUD

Peace out,

Latauro
AICNDownunder@hotmail.com