I saw a film of this Tim Winton book tonight by John Ruane.
This director has made Death in Brunswick in 1991 and Dead Letter Office in 1998. Both are quirky films.
That Eye, the Sky (1994) does not appear to have been widely reviewed, even though it is a part of an Australian national cinema. That puzzles me. Is there a concern for an Australian national cinema? Or has that fallen away as nostalgia in the new media age? Has film gone out of fashion?
What does that say about our film or screen culture? Do we have an informed critical edge concerned with Australian cinema? Is there a space for a critical film culture that engages with our public culture? What has happened to critical writing with its cultural commentary function in Australia?
I canot seem to find anything on the critically looking at--questioning--the reviewing of films. Was not this kind of reviewing a going concern in the 1980s with Meaghan Morris and Adrian Martin looking at the Australian film revivial? That is my memory. Did they not mark out a genuinely critical space?
Has everything now given way to the commercialism and standard business practice embodied in the global Fox Studios in Sydney?
I know I'm being crude here. But something is troubling me with film culture in Australia, and I cannot quite put my finger on it.
That Eye, the Sky as a film explores family problems that lead to breakdown, violence as a result and then renewal. The father of two children has a car accident and ends up in a coma. His son is traumatised, his daughter gives in to anger and his wife gives up on him. A mysterious stranger turns up, and helps them deal with what has happened. Its a healing process.
It links eroticism and religion as aspects of our inner experience. It also links the erotic impulses and death. The focus is on the inner life. This inner experiences is related to eroticism and religion in that instinct and raw animality is transformed by the transcending aspect of inner experience.
This is the world of Bataille
Posted by Gary Sauer-Thompson at April 19, 2004 11:59 PM | TrackBackHi Gary,
This is no comment, just a hello to let you know, that I am reading Junkfor Code from time to time and always enjoying it; your links brings me to places I would newer have found if not for theme and your own writing is always clever and interesting.
Steen
Interesting film in terms of simulacra and representation. It is a piece of magic realism which is thoroughly unconvincing - and word of mouth worked against it.
Some people would argue that Australians don't do magic realism, and I can't think of a successful example. Fistful of Flies, for instance, was a dud.
It's not that we don't have the money - Like Water for Chocolate is an ace Mexican example of a good one.
Posted by: David Tiley on April 20, 2004 09:15 PMDavid,
I'm not sure that 'magic realism' is appropriate.
Is there not a theological language in this film with a concern with human salvation from the hell of a destructive and brutal mode of life?
Posted by: Gary Sauer-Thompson on April 22, 2004 01:11 AM