After much fanfare and hype, the latest film incarnation of the famed Aussie bush ranger legend hits the big screen and the result is somewhat of an average affair. On the one hand the production values, look of the film and admittedly the impressive cast all deliver the goods as expected.
On the other, Gregor
Jordan (who pulled off the quirky "Two Hands" with great effect)
disappoints with some ham-handed direction, woeful editing and
above all a tacky script which reeks with all the emptiness
of a typical failed Hollywood action blockbuster. If your looking
to find out the true story of the Kelly gang then this is NOT
the film to look at. A film like "The Cat's Meow" got the basics
of the shooting incident aboard W.R. Hearst's yacht correct
but came up with a whole lot of fictional and cinematic elements
to stretch it out into a movie - the same principle applies
here with certain incidents portrayed with a more or less realistic
fashion, however a load of other elements have been changed
to give the story a more epic movie quality.
Most notable of the changes is Kelly himself. Whilst Heath Ledger
admittedly impresses with the hefty role on his shoulders and
carries the young man's convictions with a solid level of credibility,
the character has become more of stereotype than anything else.
One of the great things about Ned was that he wasn't necessarily
good or bad - he was a real shades of grey style man with attributes
to admire and despise and yet Jordan's version portrays him
in a way that's clumsily designed to appeal to our sympathies
so that he becomes a 'period piece action hero' more than anything
else. Even less depth is invested in the other film's characters
from his sex obsessed two friends (Bloom & Edgerton) to his
two brothers.
Geoffrey Rush also disappoints with what is essentially a cameo
as Kelly's foil (aside from one lame Fugitive-esque speech,
the character has like three lines and five minutes of screen
time). Funnily enough its the women who steal this film with
Naomi Watts making a rather tacked on love interest role into
the best performance of the picture - giving her character beauty,
grace and charm and yet a rougher edge and cowardice that you
totally come to expect. She seems perfectly suited for period
pieces and I hope to see her in more in the future. Like wise
Rachel Griffiths has a quite fun cameo as a bank manager's wife
in a scene played purely for laughs.
As said before the production values are top notch - the constant
dirt, mud and grittiness of rural Australia in the late 1870's
is well portrayed and whilst its populated by charicatures rather
than people, the setting at least shows it for all the stark
beauty and rustic qualities that you'd expect rather than making
it cleaner and neater like most American westerns seem to do.
Cinematography is fine but I can't see why Jordan felt the need
to continually insert ubiquitous shots of Aussie flora and fauna
simply to remind people we are in the Australian bush - its
cheesy, dated and worst of all pandering.
Aforementioned Westerns at least have some action - even at
100 minutes this feels drawn out and whilst there's some good
scenes played for laughs more than anything else, the sole exciting
highlight is the famous last stand at Glenrowan even if history
has been changed greatly in an attempt to give the movie some
life. The so-so score never helps either thanks t a great opening
tune which is sadly played over and over to death.
Its funny,
in many ways the way I feel about this film is the way I feel
about "Rabbit Proof Fence" - on the one hand I admire the quality
that went into it and the story that has to be told, but with
more work the execution it could've been so much more. Much
like 'Rabbit' too, mainstream audiences will be quickly bored
by this and want something with more meat to it on both a visceral
and cerebral level. Big budgets and talented casts still can't
hide what is essentially very amateur filmmaking. Dull, dry
and unsatisfying.
