This message has been deleted.
-
hobbesnblue — 17 years ago(August 19, 2008 10:20 AM)
Perhaps they have good taste? Go back to your Michael Bay films, Son.
He gave you perfectly legitimate reasons for disliking the film it's not like he said it was "yucky and boring." Why would you feel the need to insult his tastes just because he disagrees with you? Roger Ebert is not god, and every viewer is entitled to his/her own opinion. "Walkabout" has its definite merits, IMO, but I'm not going to be putting it on my mental "Top 10" or even "Top 50" movie lists anytime soon. -
Benedict_Cumberbatch — 17 years ago(September 27, 2008 07:09 PM)
I think "Walkabout" is a masterpiece and Luc Roeg gave one of the most adorably natural child performances I've ever seen. Agutter was pretty good, too.
"I did cramps the way Meryl Streep did accents" - Calliope (Middlesex) -
Merrida — 17 years ago(October 28, 2008 11:28 PM)
I've never even seen this movie and only "know about it" by watching Coupling (the original Brittish version). Not having seen it I still would not diss it, on reference alone. But why on earth should it be defended at all costs?
Sic vis pacem para bellum.
-
allen-conway-1 — 16 years ago(August 11, 2009 12:31 PM)
This is a pretentious film by a pretentious director proclaiming that he has something to say. I don't think he has. As such I don't think there is anything to defend. Except, perhaps, for some nice camera work, some cute animals, and a cute girl. Just as well Roeg has disappeared without trace.
-
saxman418 — 9 years ago(January 07, 2017 06:59 PM)
"Just as well Roeg has disappeared without trace." What planet are you on? Nic Roeg is a highly acclaimed director and cinematographer. http://www.imdb.com/board/20001676/?ref_=nmawd_awd_nm
IMO his masterpiece is 'Don't Look Now'.
Blowin the changes! -
filmfancritic — 16 years ago(November 04, 2009 04:11 AM)
Yes it is beautiful on many levels
As a work of "art"
As a work of "humanity"
As a "meditation" on ones place within nature
And chiefly as a stark contrast beween the natural environment and the brutal urban landscape.
Other great meditative and beautiful works of art made in the 70's were:- Stalker (Tarkovsky)
- Zerkalo, aka Mirror (Tarkovsky)
- The Man who Fell to Earth (also Roeg)
- Picnic at Hanging Rock (Weir)
- Barry Lyndon (Kubrick)
-
King-Grim — 16 years ago(November 25, 2009 10:30 AM)
There is absolutely nothing to dislike about this movie.
What about the genuine animal slaughter? It intrigues me that people attack Cannibal Holocaust for this, but disregard it (pretty much the same amount) in Walkabout on the basis that the former is an exploitation movie, while the latter is an art film
(for the record, being a carnivore, I'm not opposed to it in eiher film as in both the animals were eaten afterward)
Latest film seen:
Up
(2009) 10/10 -
GuyOnTheLeft — 12 years ago(May 18, 2013 05:03 AM)
There are some visual and auditory choices that I found hamfisted and "on the nose". Quick zooms accompanied by blaring music, juxtaposition of the aboriginal boy killing the kangaroo with shots of an urban butcher. I much prefer The Man Who Fell to Earth.
For a more successful film of this type, I recommend Kurosawa's Dersu Uzala.
See a list of my favourite films here: http://www.flickchart.com/slackerinc -
lazarillo — 12 years ago(November 27, 2013 06:17 PM)
That's interesting I think a lot of later Roeg movies were very overwrought. "The Man Who Fell to Earth", I liked, but it is a prime offender in that department. I think almost everything he does in this movie works.
As for who you need to "defend" this movie from, well, there seem to be a few people who feel great shame because Jenny Agutter swimming naked gives them a boner and they want to take it out on the movie (or the fact that's it's rated PG), but other than that. . .? -
chaserslo — 12 years ago(September 25, 2013 04:18 PM)
I completely agree with people saying it was pretentious. It sounded really interesting on paper and I'm pretty sure I would enjoy the novel more, but what I watched was an unconvincing and pretentious excuse for an adventure film. Don't get me wrong, I really enjoy different, experimental films, but this was certainly not my cup of tea. I understand that symbolism is usually a huge part in this type of films, but so is the story, at least for me. And I just couldn't buy for one second that these two kids were stranded in the wilderness. It would make sense for the little boy to act the way he did, but for the girl? I don't think so. She just acted like nothing happened, although her father just committed a suicide out of nowhere, not really worrying about the food or at least showing signs of exhaustion. I'm sure the director told them to act this way and all, but in my opinion Jenny's performance wasn't any good anyway.
And don't even get me started on that suicide scene, which was a mess from start to finish. The father apparently loses it and starts shooting to scare the kids away (at least that is my explanation, otherwise he could've easily just killed them). After that he simply blows the car up (so the kids couldn't get away, just in case the girl knew how to drive) and kills himself. But what is the point of this? What kind of person would do something like that? I mean, is this perhaps explained in the novel (does this even happen in the book?), because it doesn't make any sense to me.
I am not saying the film is bad or unwatchable, I just think it doesn't deserve the praise it gets. I must admit it has some really beautiful shots of Australian wilderness, but that is about it as far as I'm concerned.
Call me stupid or anything, but I will take Into the Wild (even though I know it's a much different film in many aspects) over this any day. -
Petronius Arbiter II — 12 years ago(October 07, 2013 08:58 PM)
Comparing this film to "Into the Wild" is way too much of an apples-to-oranges proposition to make any sense.
And I strongly advise dropping the word "pretentious" from your vocabulary, at least when applied to reviews of movies, music, art, etc. It's utterly meaningless in this context: if "Walkabout" is "pretentious," then what, pray tell, is it pretending to be?
"I don't deduce, I observe."