f13.net

Summary: Set in Colonial Australia, an English lawman gives a criminal a proposition - either the criminal's elder brother is dead in 9 days, or his younger brother will swing. The film is about how that proposition effects all the characters involved in it as well as how absolutely insane the English were for ever trying to colonise central parts of Australia.

Written by Nick Cave, this film isn't the be-all and end-all it was proclaimed on release. But as a variant on the Western - and a nasty variant at that, with no real good guys and some very bad guys - it is certainly worth a look. Guy Pearce plays the middle brother, tasked with killing his older to save the younger, while Ray Winstone is the English policeman tasked with stamping order onto chaos that is early Australia. Some audiences hated David Wenham's English landowner, but personally I love that in what appears to be hell he's the only man who doesn't sweat because he's already that evil.

See as an antidote to "Baz Luhrman's Australia".

This is actually a really good flick. Trailer here:

http://www.imdb.com/video/screenplay/vi3589800217/

Great movie, I hadn't seen it for quite a while but this one thing always stuck in my head...

"I will civilize these lands"

mmm. Also, I remember hearing something to the tune of how Nick Cave was asked to write a few songs for a Western movie by director John Hillcoat. Who was then surprised when Cave returned with a complete soundtrack and a complete screenplay. Anyone know about this?

This movie has some really stark bits and some very solid acting. One of the best westerns since Eastwood threw in the duster, in my opinion.

Excellent flick.

Some great cinematography too.

The landscape is very much a character in the film (said the film wanker).

I probably would have liked this movie more if I hadn't seen it under the weight of expectations.

I really liked it.

I remember reading a commentary on it in one of the local papers (The Age or The Australian, can't remember which) that I really disagreed with. It was a complaint about the violence in the film, but I can't seem to find a quick google link for it.

Found it:

http://www.theage.com.au/news/film/evil-in-pictures/2005/11/03/1130823343005.html

Martin Flanagan is a complete hack.

That was a pretty bad review. Could have been a lot shorter too: "I didn't like this film because I want clean resolutions and niceness. Also it may not have been 100% historically accurate as far as I, a film reviewer who constantly writes himself into his reviews, can see."

It was a feature article, which is what pissed me off the most. The guy usually writes 'colour' sports articles, mostly on the AFL.  :awesome_for_real:

Loved the dialogues involving the bounty hunter. Found everything else horrendously boring.