Australia

Australia is a theatrical, affected overly sweet monstrosity that decides anew what it is about every half an hour. In order to hold itself together, it relies on the relationship of the central couple, which is, however, drier than Australian desert. I haven’t suffered like this in a theater for a long time and I can’t believe that this suffering was brought by the same Baz Luhrmann whose beautiful, emotional and complex Moulin Rouge! I love with all my heart. I’m giving this the second star only for the poetic story line with the little Aboriginal boy and the only really nice scene in the film, which is connected to him (stopping the cattle just before the abyss). Australia deserved its fate as a box-office bomb. (09/01/2009)

Even though I'm drunk (who would be surprised after so many drinks...), stars were popping up in front of my eyes during the film – three stars, no, I'll give it four... In the end, it turned out the way it did, because keeping me awake when I’m drunk means the movie wasn't boring after all. Yes, C2H5OH made me experience some scenes really intensely – I laughed more at some of the "absurdities", I was more "moved". I liked it mainly because it was about the mundane. About the sweet, dusty ordinariness that I’ve grown to like. I didn't wait for the movie to end; they got together pretty soon :-) I'm glad. Despite the length, I didn't feel like I necessarily needed to go to bed just yet, because I wondered what the ending would be like. And it didn't disappoint me. It's not a 100% happy ending, but I like it :-) sorry, when I suck a bit of nectar I tend to speak in tongues – and I'm still holding on here. See ya. (23/05/2009)

I'll be upfront and honest - I'm not at all surprised that Australia has such a low rating here and also that it has barely earned its own budget back. Why? Because you need a special and proper approach to this film. Admittedly, if the running time had been a third shorter, nothing would have happened. Maybe?! But for me, despite its 150 minutes, Australia is interesting and engaging. The setting in the Australian outback was a pretty good choice. The cinematographer did a great job and many times a lot of the scenes are just about the camera (and a pretty good one at that). The cast I thought was good and the characters fit the actors perfectly. And then, of course, there's the mix of different genres: a narrative romance between kangaroos against the backdrop of war and other dramas of life. Simply put, a long film, perhaps, but still something special and engaging that deserves the 5* from me. (15/07/2009)

A horrifying wannabe innovative mix of comedy and classic epic storytelling style. Luhrmann's obvious attempt to come up with something new, a new concept of an epic story, is shocking. At times, Australia appears to be an amateurish blend in terms of its plot, and without the beautiful scenery and captivating actors, it would be a complete horror. Two strong storylines clashing with each other, a ton of digital effects, an introductory half-hour of comedy, bad war sequences, and a final epic cliché. Once was enough for me. Luhrmann is an amateur who should watch Cold Mountain every other day. (28/02/2009)

In the first half, Luhrmann tells the story with gusto, passionately and fully applying his almost grotesque sense of humour (which I like and which his previous film, Moulin Rouge, was packed with), but when he arrives in Darwin midway through the film, he seems to wave a magic wand, and the narrative, full of life and the enchanting atmosphere of the Australian outback, becomes a game of playing with the audience's patience, where it's as if the filmmakers are trying to see what clichés and screenwriting gimmicks they can get away with. That cheesy ending is something that not even Danielle Steele, the queen of rosy books, would dare write. Still, I sense Luhrmann's sincere effort to pay homage to his beloved native Australia throughout the work, and so I can't entirely damn it. (08/03/2009)