The Cinema of the Four

Australia

If one were to base one’s entire estimation of the nation continent of Australia upon my great-grandfather’s involvement with expatriate Australians and the Englishmen who went fortuning-hunting there, the resulting view would contain very little of what is contained by Baz Luhrmann’s new move of that name.

Of course, Hugh Jackman and Nicole Kidman could not have figured in any of Sherlock Holmes’s cases – anachronism problems, you know. They do, however, blaze large on the screen, as does everything in the movie “Austrailia.” The director who created the visionary “Moulin Rouge” is now trying to come up with an Aussie “Gone With The Wind,” with very mixed results.

“Australia” is the sort of magnificent, big movie that was made for theater viewing. While it does have a few slow moments and some definite eccentricities, any mundane who seriously thinks “I’ll wait for video,” really should just skip it all together. This is a movie that will never play on a television set the way it was meant to be seen. It’s a very good-looking movie.

The story, which combines cowboys, World War II, and aborigines, would perhaps of done better with a shorter run-time. But there’s a lot to see in “Australia,” and one can easily understand the pain of leaving any of such visuals on the cutting room floor. One wonders what “Quigley Down Under” would have looked like, had Baz Luhrmann taken it on . . . probably something like “Australia.”

And in video rental world, “Quigley Down Under” and “Australia” will probably wind up making a good double bill.

What great-grandfather Sherlock might have said about the film:
“One of the most unscrupulous rascals that Australia has ever evolved - and for a young country it has turned out some very finished types.”