Long Weekend

Dir: Colin Eggleston

1978

*****

Few films have stayed with me after watching quite the way Colin Eggleston’s Long Weekend has. The story concerns a couple, Peter (John Hargreaves) and Marcia (Briony Behets), who, along with their dog, go for a weekend camping trip by the coast. The pair show incredible disrespect for nature, especially Peter, such as polluting, killing a dugong (often referred to as a sea cow), throwing lit cigarette butts in dry bush, and spraying insecticide, among other transgressions. As tensions between the couple escalate, nature is not pleased with their environmental wrongdoing and starts to strike back, first by an eagle and possum attacking Peter, and then through more insidious means. While the couple are the audience’s protagonists, you don’t necessarily warm to them, you don’t want harm to come to them but you could feel that they deserve what is coming to them. However, it is the idea that somehow the environment surrounding us is capable of harming us that really chills one to the bone. The clever thing about Long Weekend however, is that it is never clear whether the environment is attacking them, or if it is delusion or pure coincidence. It’s about the creepiest film I can think of. The script was the first feature script written by Everett De Roche, an experienced Australian TV writer. He was inspired by a trip he took on an Easter weekend to an isolated beach in New South Wales. “I started Long Weekend as a way to avoid the TV-cop-show doldrums while still convincing myself I was “working”. Long Weekend was a unique project because I began with no outline, no notes or research, very little idea as to where the story was going, and absolutely zero knowledge of screenplays. I simply started at page 1, scene 1, and made it up as I went. I had only a vague plan to write a kind of environmental horror story. My premise was that Mother Earth has her own auto-immune system, so when humans start behaving like cancer cells, she attacks. I also wanted to avoid a JAWS-like critter film. I wanted the Long Weekend beasties to all be benign-looking and not overtly aggressive.” De Roche wrote the script in ten days. He showed it to Colin Eggleston, who had worked with him at Crawfords, and Eggleston decided to make the movie. Funds were obtained from Film Victoria and the Australian Film Commission and shooting took place in March–April 1977 in Melbourne and near Bega in south-east New South Wales. The ending was originally different according to De Roche: “I wrote an enormously complicated sequence for near the end where the animals give Peter a second chance. They want him to wise up, and he is at the point of doing so when he hears a truck in the distance. He dashes off to the highway, and the animals decide there is no hope. Poetically, they leave it to another man to kill him. However his scene was too difficult to shoot because it involved animals and was wisely cut. It is, in my opinion, one of the greatest Australian films ever made but it wasn’t a huge success down under. However, it tied with Invasion of the Body Snatchers to win the Antennae II Award at the Avoriaz Fantastic Film Festival, won the Special Jury Award at 1978's Paris Film Festival and won Best Film, Prize of the International Critics' Jury for director Eggleston and Best Actor for Hargreaves. Indeed, when the film was screened at the Cannes Film Festival, producer Richard Brennen noticed a man get up and leave the screening after only ten minutes of the film. In anger and curiosity, he followed the man out to ask him why he was leaving. It turned out the gentleman was a film distributor for South America and was going to buy the rights to the film after seeing only minutes of it. In total four foreign distributors bought rights to release the picture during the screening. Long Weekend is pretty unique and something rather special. It is one of Ozploitation’s greatest achievements as well as being a genuinely dramatic thriller. The last twenty minutes or so are free of dialogue and are pretty much silent. No direct explanation, only hints, are given as to why the mysterious events within nature occur, continuing the tradition in this sub-genre of films of which Alfred Hitchcock's The Birds is considered the first and lead example. It’s an eerie nightmare that takes place in most people’s idea of paradise, a conflicting story of conflict that shows the true horror behind the idea of karma. The combination of Eggleston’s direction and Everett De Roche’s script conjures the secret recipe that so many horror film makers try and capture but so very few manage, that of controlled dread. There is no other film like it, a horror masterpiece that is untouchable.

The Cars That Ate Paris

Dir: Peter Weir

1974

*****

Peter Weir is a great director but he is always going to be remembered for his hits such as Dead Poets Society, The Truman Show and Witness. I like Witness to be fair but I would argue that the other two are not his greatest achievements. It’s his early films that I love, obviously Picnic at Hanging Rock and Gallipoli are classics but his debut The Cars That Ate Paris is a Ozploitation/Carsploitation masterpiece. If you were to ask me seriously which of his films I like best I’d have to say either The Year of Living Dangerously or The Mosquito Coast but I would argue that The Cars That Ate Paris his his most culturally significant and the king of cult films. It was made during a fascinating time in Australian cinema when many crazy film makers were risking life and limb in making the most outrageous films they could. The Cars That Ate Paris is a sort of horror comedy, full of satire and in the Midnight Movie/Exploitation vein. The film begins with an urban couple driving through the countryside in what looks like an advertisement. This was a parody of a commercial aired on Australian television at the time of the film's original release. It didn’t make much sense to me when I first saw it and it seems many other viewers took it as blatant product placement for Coke and Alpine cigarettes. At the time it was made, movies in Australia were often preceded by ads for cigarettes and such, so by putting this before the opening credits, Weir was fooling the viewers into thinking this was yet another ad but as the story took shape, it was a clear lure into false preconceptions. I liked its quirkiness when I didn’t understand it, I like it still now I have context and it shows the film’s playful nature – important to remember in some later scenes. The ‘advertisement’ scene comes to a striking halt with a fatal accident. It soon becomes clear that the rural Australian town of Paris, where the couple were approaching, arranges fatal accidents to visitors driving through. Townspeople collect items from the luggage of the deceased passengers whilst survivors are taken to the local hospital where they are given lobotomies with power tools and kept as "veggies" for medical experiments by the earnest town surgeon. The young men of the town salvage and modify the wrecked vehicles into a variety of strange-looking cars designed for destruction – most famously a Volkswagen Beatle covered in spikes (keep your eyes pealed for it in the Mad Max movies). Arthur Waldo (Terry Camilleri Napoleon in the brilliant Bill & Ted's Excellent Adventure) and his older brother George drive though Paris with their caravan where they meet with an accident that kills George outright. Arthur is spared and looked after by the Mayor of Paris, Len Kelly (John Meillon – Walter from the Crocodile Dundee films), who invites Arthur to stay in his home as one of his family; his two young daughters have been "adopted" after being orphaned in motor accidents in the town. Arthur unsuccessfully attempts to leave Paris but due to a previous incident where he was exonerated of manslaughter for running over an elderly pedestrian, he has lost his confidence in driving and there does not seem to be any public transport. Mayor Len gives Arthur a job at the local hospital as a medical orderly. Beneath the idyllic rural paradise of Paris is a festering feud between the young men of the town who live for their modified vehicles that they terrorise the town with and the older generation. When one of the hoons damages the Mayor's property and breaks a statue of an Aborigine the older men of the town burn the guilty driver's car as he is held down. The Mayor appoints Arthur the town Parking Inspector complete with brassard and Army bush jacket that further irritates the young men. The situation reaches its boiling point the night of the town's annual Pioneers Ball which is a fancy dress and costume party. What was planned to be a "car gymkhana" by the young men turns into an assault on the town where both sides attack each other killing several of the residents. Arthur regains his driving confidence when he repeatedly drives the Mayor's car into his former hospital orderly supervisor who is one of the hoons. The film closes with Arthur, and the town's other residents, leaving Paris in the night. The title of the film isn’t as misleading as it may first appear but I’m sure many a person has watched – and not watched because of it. The Cars That Ate Paris brought Carsploitation to Oz – indeed, Australia created the sub-genre, nurtured it and made it what it is. Without The Cars That Ate Paris there’d be no Stone, The F.J. Holden, In Search of Anna, Summer City, Back roads, The Road Warrior, Midnite Spares, Running on Empty, Dead End Drive-In or any of the Mad Max movies. As well as the great John Meillon and Terry Camilleri it stars personal favorites Chris Haywood (Man of Flowers), Bruce Spence (Mad Max 2) and Max Phipps (The Return of Captain Invincible). It’s a one of a kind, one of many brilliant Australian underground films of the 70s that I adore. As I said, king of cult.

Not Quite Hollywood: The Wild, Untold Story of Ozploitation!

Dir: Mark Hartley

2008

*****

Of all of cinema's different styles, I think it is fair to say that exploitation has the most sub-genres. Most people have heard of Sexploitation and Blaxploitation and connoisseurs of the b-movie will know their Nazisploitation from their Nunsploitation and will enjoy the odd Chambara and the occasional Giallo but not that many people outside of Australia are (or at least weren't) aware of Ozploitation. Ozploitation was all of the above but were made in Australia and are about as Australian as you can get. Mad Max is probably the most famous one but many people won't know of the association. Mark Hartley grew up in the 70's and 80's and was fanatical about the b-movies his country was then producing but when he tried to look into the history of Australian film many years later, he found a huge gap were these films should have been. The film establishment of Oz weren't proud of these film and they were overlooked and dismissed as worthless, talentless pieces of smutty garbage. To be fair, some of the films are indeed smutty but none of them are worthless, talentless or garbage. Hartley then began what would be five long years of meticulous research into the sub-genre and wrote the screenplay for a feature length documentary. Absolutely no one was interested, so as a last-ditch attempt on getting it made (and because he had heard that he was a fan after he had dedicated Kill Bill to Brian Trenchard-Smith - one of the more prolific directors of the genre) he sent 100 pages of the script to Quentin Tarantino. Tarantino replied the next day and with his help he finally got the film made five years later, after more research and around 250 hours’ worth of interviews from pretty much everyone involved in the genre that was still alive, including Tarantino, Brian Trenchard-Smith, Jamie Lee Curtis, Dennis Hopper, George Lazenby, George Miller, Barry Humphries, Stacy Keach and John Seale. Hartley's brilliant and rather comprehensive documentary acknowledges the great mainstream films that Australia was producing but also acts as a historically accurate document and rather loving tribute. He breaks the film into four chapters, starting with the Australian new-wave and then concentrating in the three sub-genres of exploitation that Ozploitation excelled at; the action film, the horror and the sex romp. The most important element to get right in this kind of documentary is the editing. Just interweaving interview with film footage isn't enough, the film needs a fluidity in its structure and the structure needs to follow a certain route, whether it be chronological or by theme or person etc and Hartley manages it brilliantly. He really does explain the evolution of what was a fast growing industry and he explores much of what was happening behind the screen rather than just churn out old footage and talk about it. He talks about the safety of the pictures too and asks direct questions of the directors of films that crew members were seriously hurt making and discusses the tragic deaths of other crew members that changed the rules and regulations of how films were made globally. It's as exciting as it is informative and it opened my eyes to many great films that I would have otherwise overlooked, it's absolutely brilliant.

Howling III: The Marsupials
Dir: Philippe Mora
1987
*****
I'm probably the only person in the world who actually likes the third installment of the Howling franchise; Howling III: The Marsupials, let alone love it. Philippe Mora's Howling II was awful, so it seems he decided to go back to his Ozploitation roots and said to hell with it, Howling III is going to be a spoof and the Werewolves are going to be Wereroos instead. Genius. When the film is trying to be funny its funny, when it's trying to be serious it's hilarious. Highlights included Wareroos dressed as nuns, the birth of a baby Wareroo and Dame Edna Everage (seriously) camping it up in the last few minutes. Unintentionally brilliant, so bad it's good but with tongue firmly in cheek. This is the sort of bad 80's horror film I adore and one that deserves far more credit than it has received. If you think it's a bad film then you clearly haven't seen the seventh Howling film; Howling: New Moon Rising.

Mad Max: Fury Road
Dir: George Miller
2015
*****
George Miller has gone to (development) hell and back to get Mad Max back to the big screen, I for one am eternally grateful. First touted in 1998, Miller's forth Mad Max production has been plagued by problems starting in 2001 when the events of 9/11 saw the American dollar collapse against the Australian dollar and the budget balloon to unrealistic proportions. Leading man and original Max, Mel Gibson, had some quite high-profile negative problems that lead him away from the franchise and just when filming was about to start, War broke out and made it impossible to continue. Miller's other directing project, Happy Feet, came as a surprise to his fans but it seems it was a case of funding his true passion and with the money made, Fury Road, at last, became a reality. After 30 years and a cult following, Mad Max 4 had to be something special, something new but with that element that made the films popular in the first place in-tact. George Miller delivers. Everything that makes the first three films brilliant is present in this continuation of the story, it's not a reboot as such as the only thing that has changed is Max, who is now played by Tom Hardy. Fury Road is Mad Max, Road Warrior and Thunderdrome mixed together and on powerful steroids. The compassion of the first, the chase of the second and the sociological and tribal ideas of the third are the main elements of the 4th film but there is so much more it brings to the franchise. Miller brings back franchise favorite and villain from the original film, Hugh Keays-Byrne, which feels like a thank you for your patience for the fans. There are many things here and there for the hard-core fans, my favorite being a scene whereby Max gets shot through the hand with an arrow which was a nod to a now famous row over cuts the Motion Picture Association of America made to Mad Max: Road Warrior, where a scene involving a character pulling an arrow out of their arm nearly got the film banned. The development of tribalism, almost as a religion is also well handled and a vast improvement on Thunderdrome. I wondered whether a big budget would take the magic away from what was always a creative force done on a shoestring but that isn't at all the case, the effects are amazing, the costumes, make up and Cars are brilliant and CGI is used minimally and only when necessary, the stunts taking centre stage. It is a visual masterpiece, wonderfully inventive and takes the Max Max dystopian future to new realms but then it is no surprise really when you learn that Miller hired the brilliant Brendan McCarthy as co-writer. McCarthy's work is stunning and quite similar to Miller's style, I wonder if both have influenced each other in the past and I for one can think of no better partnership to get the franchise back on track. Tom Hardy, Charlize Theron, Hugh Keays-Byrne and Nicholas Hoult are great in the lead roles and a collection of Rock star offspring, negligee models, stunt men and Ozploitation veterans make up a fantastic supporting cast. It's old school, it's high-octane, it's the return of Ozploitation and a magnificent rebirth of a much loved franchise. It's brilliant.

Mad Max Beyond Thunderdome
Dir: George Miller
1985
***
For all intents and purposes, Mad Max Beyond Thunderdome was a difficult and unhappy experience for director George Miller and I think it shows somewhat in the final film. Having lost his friend, producer and co-creator of the Mad Max films, Byron Kennedy, who was killed in a helicopter accident before the third film started, his enthusiasm for the project waned and it very nearly didn't happen. Expectations were high and Mad Max 2: The Road Warrior was a tough act to follow. Instead of producing just another road movie, Miller decided to concentrate on what societies might exist in his futuristic universe and he was inspired by the films of Akira Kurosawa (his words, I don't see it myself) and Sci-fi novels of the time, Russell Hoban's Riddley Walker in particular. I believe he also went for the money, Mad Max Beyond Thunderdome loosing much of its rugged individuality in favour of a big Hollywood style production with a big name star (Tina Turner) and a questionable accompanying theme song (We don't need another hero). There is much to like about Thunderdome (and I do really like it) and it remains just as much of an influence on modern film as the first two films but it's not quite the Mad Max we'd grown to love and unfortunately it marked the end of a great series of films that could have probably continued for a few more films. Even more puzzling though was that Miller not only hung up his Mad Max hat but went onto directing Babe: Pig in the City and Happy Feet. Luckily Miller returned to the world of Max in 2015 after 30 years and it was well worth the wait.

Mad Max 2: The Road Warrior
Dir: George Miller
1982
*****
George Miller's second Mad Max outing is more of what the audience loved about the first and then some. It was only towards the end of the first film that Max became 'Mad' and since the brilliant conclusion of the 1979 classic years have passed and a third world war has savaged the earth further. Law no longer exists and Mad finds himself a loner, searching only for oil (to fuel his Supercharged V8 pursuit special), food and water. The cars, the villains and even Max himself are all suped-up to the nines in this sequel that surpasses the original and cements the Mad Max films in the 'Cult classics' hall of fame. Dialoge is spars, instead it is all about the action in what has to be one of the greatest car chases of all time. The budget is bigger but not at the expense of creativity, far from it, the inclusion of Dean Semler as cinematographer and Norma Moriceau as costume designer help develop Miller's dystopian futuristic universe onto something both horrific but beautiful. Ozploitation, Carsploitation, Apocalypse, Action....Mad Max 2: The Road Warrior tops lists in many a genre and rightly so. It's full on frenzied excitement and the epitome of a cult classic.

Mad Max
Dir: George Miller
1979
*****
George Miller's original 1979 Mad Max is an Ozploitation classic. Set in a (not too distant) post-apocalyptic dystopian future, Mad Max is more a revenge film in the vein of the Spaghetti western rather than the typical vigilante movies of the era that were more concerned about neoconservatism vs. libertarianism than anything else. George Miller combines tribalism and anarchy, adds punk rock and muscle cars and sets it in the harsh Australian outback for what is a beautiful orchestra of chaos. The budget constraints are obvious but that only lead to more creativity in my opinion, the characters, car creations and stunts all being work of mad genius. The last scene, whereby Mel Gibson's Max hand-cuffs the villainous Toecutter (played by Ozploitation legend Hugh Keays-Byrne) to an oil leaking car rigged with a time release fuse and offers him a hacksaw and the option of either cutting through the cuffs (which will take 10 minutes) or his ankle (which will take 5) is now one of the most notorious conclusions of all time. It's ruff around the edges, ballsy as hell and quite magnificent.

Mad Dog Morgan
Dir: Philippe Mora
1976
****
Mad Dog Morgan is a Troma film? Really? Actually after the scene where a mans head get blown up it was no surprise but don't expect a Lloyd Kaufman style film, this is a very different kettle of fish (although it's every much Ozploitation). Not that it isn't a little mad though, Hopper makes sure of that with an intense and compulsive performance. He was battling a few demons in real life at the time and you can clearly see it on screen. I've never enjoyed a film so much that contains such bad acting - although none of it is from Hopper. It's a see it to believe it film, a one off and brilliant at that. It deserves its reputation, Philippe Mora makes great films but is often unfairly in Brian Trenchard-Smith's shadow.

Stunt Rock
Dir: Brian Trenchard-Smith
1980
****
The epitome of 'Cult film'. Stunt Rock is very honest in its title, it is a mixture of stunts and Rock. It's been titled as a "stuntsploitation" film but that is a genre I've never heard of and I'm a big fan of Exploitation films. It is however, one of the better Ozploitation films but then that goes almost without saying as it is written and directed by the one and only Brian Trenchard-Smith who I imagine is the first point of call for "stuntsploitation" if it does in fact exist. What can I say, it has to be seen to be believed, if you can find it, watch it. It's by no means a great film but I loved it and if you're in to that kind of thing, it is probably the ultimate stoner movie ever. Grant Page rocks!

Dead End Drive-In
Dir: Brian Trenchard-Smith
1986
**
Dead End Drive-In is set in a somewhat dystopian future in an apocalyptic - non-specific world. It's no 1984 though. The idea is that the Government are rounding up 'Punks' and keeping them in concentration camps which just so happen to be in Drive-Ins. Concentration camp is an exaggeration. They're just Drive-Ins and the 'Punks' don't really care what is going on. The film fails to understand what a 'Punk' really is. It makes no sense at all really, not that that is a problem with Brian Trenchard-Smith/Exploitation/Ozploitation films, it's just that there is a wasted opportunity here. Most Exploitation films have a good core idea, this idea is flawed from the very beginning. There are a few good car chases/crashed but not enough for a film that is supposed to be full of just that.