Book review - "Congo" by Michael Crichton (1980)

 Fast paced, exciting, silly: talking gorillas, killer gorillas, great stuff. There's a mercenary role for Sean Connery, a hard tough talking woman, a nerdy guy, some porters to be killed. Plenty of science gobbledygook. Entertaining.

Movie review - "Wild Geese II" (1985) * (warning: spoilers)

 What happened on this movie? Did they not understand what made the first work?

The first had really interesting characters - doomed men, with no future, looking for a cause, men out of shape.

This is mostly about Scott Glenn as a gloomy mercenary from Lebannon. Edward Fox plays Richard Burton's brother from the first one. Why didn't they use someone with a bit more life? Like Oliver Reed, Peter O'Toole? Maybe they tried. Fox is just pompous. 

There's a throwback to the first film in a training montage. But it's super short. Then a training sergeant yells at a former IRA man then just kills him. Whose dumb idea was that?

The story feels so repetitive. Scott Glenn gets hauled into a car. Then Barbara Carrera. Then Glenn again. 

Why didn't they lean into them being mercenaries?  

Random plots like Carrera and Glenn falling in love, and a network paying for it, and Carrera's brother helping, and there's a double agent (actually that's not bad), and the Russian foisting an IRA man on them, and the IRA giving Fox LSD. And it ends with Hess (Laurence Olivier) deciding to go back. 

No stakes - no reason to bust him out. 

Just shit. 

Interesting to see Laurence Olivier as if he's going to die, Ingrid Pitt as a hooker working for the Russians and Patruck Stewart. Nice views of Germany. 

Movie review - "Battle Beyond the Stars" (1980) **** (re-watching)

 Rousing score. Excellent script. Big heart. The other New World space flixs didn't have this heart. Richard Thomas' nerdiness is well used. Darlene F is adorable. Robert Vaughan is touching - great resentful death. All the mercenaries die so it has even more kick than The Magnificent Seven.

Just a great fast paced well written film.

Movie review - "The Last Valley" (1971) **1/2

 Bid budget flop from ABC Pictures which essentially ended James Clavell's movie career - did he have any other chances, I wonder? I can see why it didn't do well although there is much to admire. It looks like a dream, gorgeous photography and Austrian locations, it's about the Thirty Years War so has lots of novelty, there's star power in the form of Michael Caine and Omar Sharif, it tries to handle some complexity of the time (Protestants, vs Catholics). The acting is very strong - Caine is excellent, Sharif good and Michael Gouthard brilliant as a nasty mercenary. It's a smart epic. It has theme. Interesting support characters. Beautiful John Barry score.

And yet...

It's confusing. The basic concept is simple - peaceful valley tries to avoid war.  Mercenaries come to valley. Try to hide out. War ensues. But Clavell - while writing complex support characters - can't quite nail the basic story. He doesn't really dramatise the mercenaries falling under the spell of the valley in the way say The Magnificent Seven did. For instance, the Caine romance with Florinda Bolkan is desultory. I think Sharif should have been at the valley to start off with. It's confusing to have him strolling through the waste lands and discover it at the same time as Caine does. Making Sharif more part of the valley would've been easier.

And the people in the valley aren't very nice. Nigel Davenport's village headman gives up his wife and waits to turn on Sharif once Caine leaves. There's a religious nutter priest who burns a woman at the stake.

I think American audiences were turned off by the foreign-ness of it despite Caine and Sharif. I know everyone was fake Russina in Zhivago but it would've been easier just to have Caine play a British mercenary captain. The accent is distracting. i mean good on him for putting in thought but the merc could've come from anywhere. 

The film didn't need to cost as much as it did. The battles are appreciated and the townsfolk dancing... but you just need a village, a valley, and wreckage. They could've done it cheaper. I think it would've been a better movie. Like, did we need that final siege battle outside the valley?

It's got a downer ending, Caine dies. Bolkan is burnt to death. Sharif gives up his woman. The valley is no good.

I appreciate this. Can understand people loving it.

Movie review - "Dogs of War" (1980) **

 This was in development for a few years - Don Siegel was going to do it, then Michael Cimino, then Norman Jewison. So it went through a lot of permutations.

Some of this is fine. It's stylishly shot by Jack Cardiff. The Belize locations impress. I don't buy American mercenaries in Africa but quite liked Tom Berenger's work as a slightly unhinged one.It is a decent cast.

Christopher Walken is all wrong as Cat Shannon, who was so vivid in the book. The character really should have been European and if they wanted to make American they should've gone with someone who was a believable soldier.

The piece has been distorted into a star vehicle. So we don't have anything about Sir James Marsden coming across the platinum and getting him secret, or using henchmen to organise the coup. I mean I know that could've been minimised but it would've been a great support star-ry role for an elder actor

Zangaro is different here - in the book it had hardly any Europeans here it's full of them, the officials speak English, there's a documentary crew. There's Colin Blakely as a world weary documentary filmmaker and a black woman who shows him around and offers up all this information about the country.

For whatever reasons the writers cut out exciting subplots - like a mercenary trying to kill Shannon, or Marsden having henchmen, or Shannon sleeping with Marsden's daughter, or the Russians finding out about the platinum deposit, or there being a KGB agent at the base, or the Russians sending a tanker to the country. Shannon is made dumber - instead of the book where he's super smart, tracking the mystery person who hires him to do a job, seducing the head man's daughter, arranging a massive double cross, doing a lot of research - here he's dumb, whining about being asked to go to Africa, not knowing anything, having to ask a lot of questions in Africa (I know exposition has to be conveyed but couldn't there be a cleverer way of showing him doing it?)

Instead there's dumb subplot about Walken wanting to get back with Jobeth Williams who's got an alcoholic dad or something (this feels like an impro'd Actors Studio exercise) and another dumb one about an African who shows Walken around and he likes her then gasp he finds out she's sleeping with the dictator. I mean, my golly.

This film was produced by smart people who made dumb decisions.

Movie review - "Cuba" (1979) ***1/2

 Richard Lester's riff on Casablanca is great fun, for the most part, because he's got a basic solid situation and can flesh it out with observations and colour.

Sean Connery is a British mercenary who rocks into Havana around 1958 to help take out Castro and runs into old flame Brooke Adams (back in the day he was 30 she was 15... jeez) who is married not to a nice dude but to a dodgy factory owner (Chris Sarandon). There's a strand of jailbait attraction in some Lester films -in Robin and Marian Ian Holm's king had a 12 year old bride.

Hector Elizondo with hair is a local officer assigned to Connery by General Martin Balsam. Brooke Adams is gorgeous - she had a moment in the sun, Adams, this came out around the time of Days of Heaven and Invasion of the Body Snatchers. Apparenty Ann Margret wanted to play the female lead but they went with Adams who was more believably Cuban - not a bad idea.

At heart this is a ensemble movie where the pleasure is in the subplots: Jack Weston as a salesman, Denholm Elliot as a shifty British ops, the two CIA men trying to balance budgets, the young revolutionary, his sister who works in a factory, the dancer at a club, Walter Gotell's factory owner, Hector Elizondo's young officer, Martin Balsam's corrupt detective, the sports games, the TV blaring.

The star driven center sometimes sits uneasily, in part because Sean Connery really is just another character - he's drifted along by events (he arrives to take out Castro, gets ambushed, but doesn't do much heroic; he roots Adams but she's not that into him).  When the film focuses more on them it goes out of whack and the action stuff at the end (with Connery and Weston driving a tank) doesn't quite work.

But it's a film full of rich atmosphere and is stimulating to watch. All the actors are fabulous.

Book review - "Katanga 1960-63: Mercenaries, Spies and the African Nation that Waged War on the World (2015) by Christopher Othen

 Excellent book on the history of Katangan succession. Touches on the 1964 Simba crisis and 1967 rebellion. Lots of people to keep track of. Harrowing reading. Maybe some more analysis would've been handy but I guess the author was more into a presentation of facts. Some fascinating characters.

Book review - Smith#2 - "Dark of the Sun" by Wilbur Smith

The film version of this was remarkably faithful to the book - of course changes were made, notably in term of tone, but the guts of it are in Smith's novel: Bruce Curry, mercenary, on a mission to retrieve some hostages and diamond in the war torn Congo; they head out on a train with a crew including the black Ruffo, the cowardly Belgian Andre, the drunken doctor and a brutish soldier; the airplane attack; the shooting of two kids by the brutish soldier; arriving at the town; staying overnight; the doctor going to help a pregnant mother; General Moses and his troops arriving; the train almost getting away but one carriage rolling back, including the diamonds; Andre being tortured; rescuing the diamonds and some trucks; a final escape; the brutish soldier taking off and being killed.

There are lots of differences but nothing huge - this is set during the Baluba Rebellion not the Simba ones; the brutish soldier is a cockney here, not a German; Andre is gay here, sent in Belgium after his affair with a married man was revealed; they pick up the girl at the destination, not along the way; Ruffy isn't killed, the final pursuit is prompted by raping the girl; there's no subplot about the savagery of Curry and him going nuts; the final fight is a more cat and mouse stalk than a rampaging orgy of violence.

I think the film made decent changes - turning the villain into a German, making it the Simba period, making Andrea a "local", adding the time lock (so it isn't Curry making a mistake). In the book we never find out what happened to the doctor and there's  a few action scenes after the retrieval of the diamonds including a truck crashing into the water and a few more attacks from the locals. Ruffo being killed packs more of a wallop than Claire being raped.

The novel surprised me in some ways - even the most horrible villain (the cockney, General Moses) are given at least a page to explain why they are why they are (horrible parents, brutal treatment from the Belgians). It also has Curry reflecting on his busted marriage and why it went wrong - saying mean and cruel things when he should have been kinder; this is written with a sensitivity from Smith that wasn't present in his later novels - I assume he was thinking of his early marriages, and was still raw and sensitive from them having ended.

Very exciting action - some terrifying stuff like Andre meeting General Moses (Smith always had some sympathy for gay characters in his novels but they generally died horribly).

Movie review - "Tripoli" (1950) ***

From the late 1940s Pine-Thomas increased their budgets to tackle the challenge of television - they would have bigger stars and often colour, although they remained action tales.

This one's a period piece about the Barbary War, which enjoyed a post war vogue in Hollywood. John Payne is plays a character based on the real life bloke who raised the American flag above the Arabs. Payne does sturdy work as the hero - I always liked him as an actor. He's matched with Maureen O'Hara, who actually has a character to play - a woman who has wound up living with an Arab prince and is trying to marry him for money. She's got some good banter with maid Connie Gilchrist and Payne, even if there is that taming-of-the-spitfire stuff with slight rape-y overtones.

The film was directed by Will Price, O'Haras husband who she slagged off in her memoirs as being a drunken, spongeing closeted gay. But he does a decent job - or the Pine Thomas team was just super smooth.

There's enjoyable colour and production values and a support cast including Phil Terry and Alan Napier. Most of all there's Howard da Silva as a local mercenary, engaging and unscrupulous and hugely likeable - it's one of his best performances. Unpretentious and the slightly novel setting is of interest.

Movie review - "Mercenary for Justice" (2007) **1/2

A perk of Steven Seagal films - odd people occasionally pop up in them. This one has villains that include Luke Goss (from Bros) and Robert Guenver Smith (from a lot of Spike Lee movies) and an ally played by Michael Kenneth Williams who was in Boardwalk Empire.

But then this had a decent budget, I think. It certainly looks fantastic with high production value, snazzy cinematography and location filming in South Africa.

There's some enjoyably tough dialogue and a strong cast - not just the names I mentioned but other less familiar people. Seagal is ideal as a mercenary, the film has a strong cynical tone which suits it and I really liked how women had prominent roles - they take part in the action and everything, notably a blonde mercenary and Seagal's sidekick played by Jacqueline Lord.

The main problem I had with this was the plot which was very confusing - Seagal led a team of mercenaries who think they're fighting for good but actually they're doing it to make money for members of the CIA, and some of his team are good and some are bad, and some family friends are kidnapped to make him to bad, and the bad members of his team kidnap some French diplomats. Then there's storylines about robbing a bank, and busting the son of a billionaire out of prison.

I had a lot of trouble following it. Basically Seagal has this little gang - himself, Lord and Williams - and they go around saving the day. But it was too messy, really.

Still, a decent enough DTV Seagal movie.

Movie review - "The Woman Hunt" (1972) **

John Ashley helped Roger Corman made The Big Doll House in the Philippines for New World Pictures, then New World financed some Ashley productions of which this was the last. It's a riff on The Most Dangerous Game - well, kind of. The plot has some white women kidnapped by vicious Eddie Garcia, but there's no official hunting because the women escape.

Ashley plays a mercenary who helps kidnap the women... but then he changes his mind and helps them escape. This kind of feels like a cheat because in the best of these films the women would get themselves out of trouble.

There are three main women, none of them particularly memorable: Pat Woodell (who was in a few of these movies), Charlene Jones (the black one) and Laurie Rose. The film badly needed someone with a bit more star power, like a Roberta Collins or a Pam Grier. Lisa Todd has the best role as the lecherous lesbian head of security for Garcia.

There's some nudity and lots of rape and uninspired action. None of the actors are on fire, except for Garcia. But then no one really has much of a character to play - I really struggled to tell the girls apart, and the men too.

I didn't enjoy this film. The handling felt too heavy or something. Jack Hill (who provided the original story) might have been a better choice as director than Eddie Romero - Hill had a lighter touch and more energy.  Scenes which should have been great like Pat Woodell sacrificing herself blowing away hunters before being killed herself, are just flat. There's also stupid bits like Laurie Rose and Ashley going for a frolicking swim when they're still in danger, and Garcia deciding to kill himself when he clearly should've been killed, and Todd going from bad ass sidekick to dopey girl.

Maybe it never would have worked with Ashley being the one who saves the girls. But its an unattractive, unexciting, poorly-made movie.

Book review - "Portugal's Guerrilla Wars in Africa: Lisbon's Three Wars in Angola, Mozambique and Portuguese Guinea 1961-74" by Al Venter

I got this because I didn't know much about Portugal's guerrilla wars in Africa. I've read bits about it - the occasional Portuguese veteran pops up in an action novel, in the battle of Rhodesia the fall of Portugal colonialism was a big deal.

Venter's spent a lot of time in Africa and knows the word. It's an interesting structured book - it feels as though it ambles a long a bit; it doesn't try to be a definitive account of the war or anything, which I admit frustrated me because I only wanted to read one book on this topic.

It's a depressing book because the wars went on for over a decade, and lots of people died (innocent locals more than Portuguese) and bankrupted Portugal, and resulted in dictatorships coming in. There was a lot to admire about the way Portugal ran their countries - the color bar didn't see to be as strong - but the countries weren't particularly well developed; they didn't leave much of an administrative or democratic legacy.

The three fields of war were very different. Mozambique was badly run - the general seems to have been an idiot, frustrating the Rhodesians.  Portuguese Guinea was tough and primitive and based in water. The war in Angola was actually won.

In hindsight the Portuguese were clearly over-stretched, fighting wars in three different areas. An interesting "what if"... what if they'd abandoned Portuguese Guinea and Mozambique and focused all there energies on Angola, which bordered South Africa? They might have held it. Still, I imagine the decision was too ruthless for the colonial office to take.

Movie review - "The Siege of Jadotville" (2016) *** (warning: spoilers)

Not a great movie but I love siege films and this gets points for sheer novelty, focusing on the adventures of Irish UN peacekeepers during the Congo Crisis of 1961. The film does an okay job of setting up the conflict - the Congo is torn by civil war, the democratically elected Lumumba is killed, Tshombe leads a pro mining company secession, the UN are called in to keep the peace in the form of Irish soldiers- who find themselves under attack.

There are two main problems with the story, both from history. First, no Irish died, so the film lacks emotional kick. There's no death bed scenes so vital for stakes in war films. There's wounded and people almost died and absolutely the commander gets credit for bringing his men back alive - but lack of a death makes things follow.

Secondly, the Irish surrendered, so the whole battle really was kind of pointless - sure they were brave and proved themselves men, but they didn't help anyone escape, or win the battle, or do anything that important. (I had the same problem with the Siege of Jerusalem film, Kingdom of Heaven.)

In dramatic terms, the film suffers from a lack of interesting characters and interpersonal conflict. Compare to say something like Zulu where you had so many clearly drawn people - driven Stanley Baker, toffy Michael Caine, anti-hero James Booth, bluff Nigel Greene. Here you've got decent, a little insecure Jamie Dorman, a French mercenary, Mark Strong as Connor Cruise O'Brien (not very flatteringly depicted), Emmanuelle Seigner as a white Congolese (who looks as though she's about to do something interesting but is really just there for a some exposition espousing a pro mining company line). I found it hard to tell apart the soldiers who weren't Dorman - there was a coward, a sergeant (I think), some guy with glasses.

It also hurts that the battle sequences - excellently filmed and directed, with impressive production value - tend to be repetitive: the enemy attack, are repelled, lots of gunfire... and repeat. It's a shame because the sequences are well done. And the political background is interesting. I did enjoy the film - it was just flawed.

Movie review - "Proof of Life" (2000) ***

Lots of good things about this movie - the location shooting the performance of Russell Crowe in the lead, the interesting "world" of kidnapping and ransom (remember the good old days when Latin America, not the Middle East, was the kidnapping capital of the world?), David Caruso's lively support performance.

Meg Ryan kind of wrecks it. She throws the movie off balance, not just with her uninspiring performance but also her sheer star quality. She's a good actor but feels too light weight and all wrong for what is basically the Ingrid Bergman in Casablanca role. You didn't need Meg Ryan you just needed someone attractive, who lusted after Crowe nobly, while the focus was on Crowe trying to get huer husband back.

Meg Ryan's casting pulls focus - you're drawn to her, which is actually a mistake dramatically because the character is so passive. All she does is lie to a politician - the rest of the time she makes cups of tea and hangs around Crowe.

The film flounders in some other spots it should be strong - like the opening sequence of Russell kicking arse (intercut with him talking about it thus robbing the piece of suspense) and the sequence of Morse being kidnapped. I also hate it how they got Morse to be tough and yell at his kidnappers BECAUSE HE'S AN AMERICAN - why didn't they just play it truthfully, in that you'd suck up and be nice.

So a flawed film. But like all movies written by Tony Gilroy, worth watching. Russell Crowe is very well cast and has a great last scene.

Script review - "A Safe Place" by John Sayles (1993)

I've got the feeling that the script I read was rewritten by hands other than Sayles - something about the style (lots of exclamation marks and excitable action descriptions as well as quoting "Art of War" and the script is clearly tailored for Dolph Lundgren) didn't feel solely his work. I could be wrong. But this draft felt very close to the final film, which was worked on by two other writers.

I enjoyed reading this script more than watching the film. Maybe I was in a more forgiving mood or something, but I liked the swiftness with which the characters were created (tough Nick, Aussie Ocker, the wise colonel, female merc Grace), and the logic of the story. I wish they'd found more for Loki the beautiful village girl to do i.e. that she'd been more involved in the fight.

Movie review - "Men in War" (1994) **1/2

A decent Dolph Lundgren actioner which benefits from a script by John Sayles but is actually a little dull. Dolph plays a mercenary recruited to help take over an island on behalf of a company who want to harvest the guano.

Some neat touches: beautiful location photography; a local who keeps playing up "wise native" cliches; a female mercenary (Catherine Bell); a hot love scene between a topless Dolph (he's topless for most of the film) and topless Charlotte Lewis; a strong cast (including Perry Lang and Kevin McTighe who have made several films with Sayles); an Aussie mercenary called "Ocker".

There are OK characterisations too among the various fighters. But it was a bit flat and not particularly well directed. There wasn't that much action - a lot at the end admittedly. Dolph is stiff.

Movie review - "The Time Guardian" (1988) *

How hot was Nikki Coghill back in the day? Pretty, likeable, with terrific legs and genuine acting ability - she should have become a bigger star than she did. Admittedly there was a period in the late 80s when she seemed to be everywhere in Australia, but pretty much everything she did was crap, including this endearingly appalling science fiction blockbuster.

The making of this film sounds as if it was turbulent and awful, as evocatively described by David Stratton in his book The Avocado Plantation. Everyone points fingers at everyone else, but it seems not too many people did a good job. For starters, Tom Burlinson is perhaps the most miscast action hero in Australian cinematic history. Chubby cheeked, boy next door Tom is meant to be a grizzled, hardened mercenary - Scott Glenn was apparently the actor they originally wanted - and it's simply beyond his capabilities. Every time he holds a gun or says a line you want to laugh. (I think normally Burlinson and Coghill would have made a good team but not there).

Carrie Fisher is in this and she also feels miscast, as Burlinson's nominal superior, who is injured. Dean Stockwell looks as though he fits in, as does Coghill and Tim Robertson as a cop. But Jim Holt over acts as another copper and the supporting actors who play Burlinson's fellow refugees are ridiculous.

There is a decent enough story at the core of this, underneath all the mess, but it is heavily buried with silly scenes, bad acting and a ridiculous finale. Poor Coghill.

Movie review - "Battle Beyond the Stars" (1981) ****

Enormously enjoyable science fiction film from New World - the most expensive they've ever made - which has perhaps the most likeable characters in a sci fi action film that I can think of off the top of my head. John Sayles wrote the script and he did a terrific job, helped by some good casting.

Richard Thomas is likeable in his regular sappy way the boy next door who goes around whipping up the mercenary force; Robert Vaughan is touching as the incredibly rich assassin who is living lonely on a planet because he's on the run from everywhere (sure, it's a reprise of his Magnificent Seven work but he's even better here because of his age and the fact he's on his own on a planet); George Peppard is winning as a lonely smuggler from Earth (hooray) who likes Westerns and has a Confederate flag on his ship; Darlanne Fluegel is achingly pretty and most winning as the naive girl who has grown up without androids and whose father (Sam Jaffe, in a performance that is surely a nod to Lost Horizon) wants Thomas to breed with her (tough gig!); Sybil Danning is spectacular as the well-dowed Viking woman. I loved the other creatures in make up, too - the Nestor, who all share the same sensations; the little guys without ears; the lizard desperate for payback.

It's a tribute to Sayles that all these characters are conveyed so well so quickly. There's more too: Thomas' sister Julia Duffy (I was never quite sure what happened to her in the film after she got kidnapped) and mentor Jeff Corey, the voice of his space ship (who has a touching quasi-Alzheimers death scene), Marta Kristen as a leading woman on Thomas' planet, John Saxon as the megalomaniac villain. Every race has a different religion - it's a really clever, rich script.

There is plenty of action and cheesy special effects, which haven't aged too well, but it fairly spanks along - by minute eight Thomas is off on his mission. No wonder this film is so well loved.

Movie review - "Timbuktu" (1958) **1/2

I'm a sucker for movies about the French foreign legion and this one has the benefit of a great time period - 1940 in French North Africa, with the mother country fighting the Germans. There is so much potential here - the conflict between Vichy and Free French, the Axis country men who had infiltrated the Foreign legion, the relationship with the Allies... most of which is ignored. Still, what we have isn't bad, with mercenary gun runner Victor Mature getting involved in an Arab attempt to kick out the French while the Germans are on the march. There is a nationalistic Arab who is the baddie and an Uncle Tom goodie - but a French colonel (George Dolenz) who sends his wife (Yvonne de Carlo) to seduce Mature to their cause. Very French!

There's plenty of action, some hilariously American actors playing Arabs, a nifty torture scene involving a spider, some reasonably complexity, Mature sweating his way through his role, de Carlo feels wasted (Dolenz seems monumentally uninterested in her), studio forts. I quite enjoyed it, even if it wasn't in colour - I just wish they'd done more with the story because they could have. There is a great foreign legion movie to be made set in this time period.

Movie review - "The Naked Country" (1987) **1/2

This film gets points for actually having some aboriginal characters with a bit of guts - they are tough, don't take any crap, are smart and honourable and get to have a sex life... which differentiates them from many Australian films of the time, which depicted aboriginals as poor little victims. The film might have done better had it gone down more of a blaxploitation route, but it keeps hedging it's bets - you're never sure who the hero is. Is it tough John Stanton who feels the blacks are uncivilised but develops a grading respect for them? Is it Tommy Lewis, the aboriginal fighting for his land rights? Is it drunken Ivar Kants, who is supposed to have served in WW2, Malaya, Korea and Africa as a mercenary, and has an affair with Stanton's wife, Rebecca Gilling? Is it Gilling, who looks bored?

Indeed, I'm never sure exactly what sort of movie this is - a modern day Western? An adventure tale? An examination of land rights? There's a bit of everything, but not enough of anything. They could have gone trashy and exploitative - sex scenes, lots of action, nudity, etc. They could have gone thoughtful. What's here is okay, and reasonably entertaining - there is a decent amount of action - but it feels undercooked. For instance, Gilling's affair with Kants feels as though it comes out of nowhere and ends - and doesn't have much of a point to it.

This is set in the 1950s and feels like a movie made in that era. You could imagine it being shot by Rank starring Anthony Steel, or David Farrar, with it stories of settlers clashing with natives, and local police trying to keep the peace, and bored sexpot farmer's wife, and non aboriginal actress cast as an aboriginal. It feels like a mix of Dust in the Sun, Where No Vultures Fly, Nor the Moon by Night. It's a potboiler but lacks the real giddy pleasures of such films - at least as they were made in the 1980s. Still, it's not dull and there are some beautiful shots.