Just in case people don’t accuse us of being haters (like one clown did the other day), or at least focusing on the negative, here’s two more positive reviews for Baz Luhrmann’s “Australia.” This will teach people in the comments section to write off a film after two mixed reviews have been published (c’mon now, have some patience).
The Times Online U.K. gives it four stars. And the Herald Sun down under says it’s “a winner” a film “with a message, but… no shortage of thrills.”
“Australia features some of the most beautiful photography ever seen in an Australian film, from the Bungle Bungles in the Kimberley to the Northern Territory in the midst of the wet season. A love letter to the Australian landscape and our history, Australia has international blockbuster written all over it.”
Though maybe this was written by the tourism board… it’s almost too keen. 😉
Updates: We spoke too soon. The Aussie Age thinks it’s way too long. Call this the first semi-negative review, though they do say it’s “good, but no classic.” They have a lot of problems with it.
“At a mammoth 165 minutes it feels too much like a work-in-progress. There is a lot of narrative flab and longueurs in the first two hours and the film often has the pace of a steamroller with engine trouble.”
This is a good point too. “As for the visuals, the film is pretty — you cannot point a camera at the outback and not get something impressive — but there are only so many wide shots of the Aussie outback that the human mind can stand.”
This review, another from “The Australian” (Michael Bodey this time) is also mixed. Luhrmann’s three co-screenwriters haven’t managed to produce a cogent tale” and says the film is “intermittently brilliant, largely good but ultimately erratic.”
