Outward-looking Australian cinema

Over the last twenty years or so, Australian cinema's international relations in production and policy have expanded and become more complex, while those with Hollywood have been transformed. The boundaries of the national cinema stretch much further than the national territory. Australian production and postproduction companies work in Australia with international partners or on international projects. In this article I will trace some of the material and discursive entailments of this new international turn to explore how dynamic and shifting relations between the local/national and the international have transformed the ways in which we might think about what constitutes Australian cinema, and to illustrate how relations of commonality and continuity with the international called up in the new arrangements challenge the dominant articulation in policy of difference from 'other kinds of filmmaking' as the basis of Australian cinema. I draw on Deb Verhoeven's work on simultaneously national and international films and filmmakers, and adapt Doreen Massey's concept of 'outwardlookingness' to consider Australian cinema's international aspects.

A silver bullet for Australian cinema? Genre movies and the audience debate

There has been a renaissance in Australian genre cinema in recent years. Indeed, not since the 1980s have Australian genre movies across action, adventure, horror, and science-fiction among others, experienced such prominence within production, policy discourse, and industry debate. Genre movies, typically associated with commercial filmmaking and entertainment, have been identified as a strategy to improve the box-office performance of Australian feature films and to attract larger audiences. Much of this conversation has revolved around the question of whether or not genre can deliver on these high expectations and transform the unpredictable local film industry into a popular and profitable commercial production sector. However, this debate for the most part has been disconnected from analysis of Australia’s genre movie heritage in terms of their position within Australian cinema and their reception with domestic audiences, and how this correlates to contemporary trends. As this chapter argues, genre production is not a silver bullet which will single handedly improve the Australian feature film industry’s commercial performance. Genre movies have occupied, and continue to occupy, a difficult position within Australian cinema and face numerous challenges in terms of reception with national audiences, limited production scale and enterprise structures, and ongoing tensions between culture and commerce.

Introduction : Australian cinema

Introduction to the Australian section of the first Intellect Directory of World Cinema: Australia and New Zealand. Discusses the history of Australian cinema in terms of genre and genre criticism.

From Aussiewood Movies to Guerrilla Filmmaking: Independent Filmmaking and Contemporary Australian Cinema

Independent filmmaking within the context of Australian cinema is a multifaceted subject. In comparison to the United States, where production can be characterised as bifurcated between major studio production and so-called “indie” or independent production without the backing of the majors, since the 1970s and until recently the vast majority of Australian feature film production has been independent filmmaking. Like most so-called national cinemas, most Australian movies are supported by both direct and indirect public subvention administered by state and federal government funding bodies, and it could be argued that filmmakers are, to a certain degree, “dependent” on official mandates. As this chapter demonstrates national production slates are subjected to budget restraints and cut-backs, official cultural policies (for example pursuing international co-productions and local content quotas) and shifts in policy directions among others. Therefore, within the context of Australian cinema, feature film production operating outside the public funding system could be understood as “independent”. However, as is the case for most English-language national cinemas, independence has long been defined in terms of autonomy from Hollywood, and – as alluded to above – as Australia becomes more dependent upon international inputs into production, higher budget movies are becoming less independent from Hollywood. As such, this chapter argues that independence in Australian cinema can be viewed as having two poles: independence from direct government funding and independence from Hollywood studios. With a specific focus on industry and policy contexts, this chapter explores key issues that constitute independence for Australian cinema. In so doing it examines the production characteristics of four primary domains of contemporary independent filmmaking in Australia, namely: “Aussiewood” production; government-backed low-to-mid budget production; co-productions; and guerrilla filmmaking.

Settings, subjects and stories: Creating Australian cinema

The story of Australian cinema is often told as one of brave and often futile struggle by passionate and talented filmmakers to tell Australian stories against the backdrop of an industry dominated locally as well as globally by Hollywood and its agents. In theses narratives international interests are often cast as the villains in the valiant struggle for national filmic self-expression. But such a focus on the national aspects of Australian cinema elides the depth of the international aspect of Australian cinema. A legend has grown around the last decade of the nineteenth century as a time of intense artistic and political activity when a national sensibility welled in writing, poetry and painting. Film too played a part in creating and sharing a vision of a nation, but from the earliest days film also linked Australia to the world.

Towards an understanding of Australian genre cinema and entertainment : beyond the limitations of ‘Ozploitation’ discourse

While Australian cinema has produced popular movie genres since the 1970s, including action/adventure, road movies, crime, and horror movies, genre cinema has occupied a precarious position within a subsidised national cinema and has been largely written out of film history. In recent years the documentary Not Quite Hollywood (2008) has brought Australia’s genre movie heritage from the 1970s and 1980s back to the attention of cinephiles, critics and cult audiences worldwide. Since its release, the term ‘Ozploitation’ has become synonymous with Australian genre movies. In the absence of discussion about genre cinema within film studies, Ozploitation (and ‘paracinema’ as a theoretical lens) has emerged as a critical framework to fill this void as a de facto approach to genre and a conceptual framework for understanding Australian genres movies. However, although the Ozploitation brand has been extremely successful in raising the awareness of local genre flicks, Ozploitation discourse poses problems for film studies, and its utility is limited for the study of Australian genre movies. This paper argues that Ozploitation limits analysis of genre movies to the narrow confines of exploitation or trash cinema and obscures more important discussion of how Australian cinema engages with popular movies genres, the idea of Australian filmmaking as entertainment, and the dynamics of commercial filmmaking practises more generally.

Towards an understanding of Australian genre cinema and entertainment : beyond the limitations of ‘Ozploitation’ discourse

While Australian cinema has produced popular movie genres since the 1970s, including action/adventure, road movies, crime, and horror movies, genre cinema has occupied a precarious position within a subsidised national cinema and has been largely written out of film history. In recent years the documentary Not Quite Hollywood (2008) has brought Australia’s genre movie heritage from the 1970s and 1980s back to the attention of cinephiles, critics and cult audiences worldwide. Since its release, the term ‘Ozploitation’ has become synonymous with Australian genre movies. In the absence of discussion about genre cinema within film studies, Ozploitation (and ‘paracinema’ as a theoretical lens) has emerged as a critical framework to fill this void as a de facto approach to genre and a conceptual framework for understanding Australian genres movies. However, although the Ozploitation brand has been extremely successful in raising the awareness of local genre flicks, Ozploitation discourse poses problems for film studies, and its utility is limited for the study of Australian genre movies. This paper argues that Ozploitation limits analysis of genre movies to the narrow confines of exploitation or trash cinema and obscures more important discussion of how Australian cinema engages with popular movies genres, the idea of Australian filmmaking as entertainment, and the dynamics of commercial filmmaking practises more generally.

Australian International Cinema

The limited terms in which international production is currently discussed in Australia do not allow for serious consideration of the multiple and complex ways such production enables new connections with filmmakers and audiences around the world. The narrowness of the debate also prevents us from considering fully what that production entails for Australian cinema, what it means, who it speaks to, and how it could spark new conversations about the possibilities of filmmaking and storytelling in this country.

Australian horror movies

The Australian horror film is a fascinating specimen. While a tradition has antecedents in the silent era of cinema, and at times has produced popular and commercially successful titles, Australian horror films have existed among the shadows of Australian cinema. Within a national cinema funded by public subsidy to foster a sense of national identity, emphasizing ‘quality’ cultural films and refusing to recognize popular movie genres in attempt to differentiate itself from Hollywood, generic and low-culture horror films have been in opposition to these objectives. Consequently, horror movies have been heavily marginalized within public funding environments and mainstream film culture, and either ignored or despised by mainstream critics. The chapter provides a historical introduction to Australian horror cinema before reviewing a selection of recent Aussie horror titles, namely: Wolf Creek, Undead, Black Water, Dying Breed, Lost Things, Prey, Cut, Rogue and Storm Warning.

Australian cinema’s dark sun : the boom in Australian horror film production

There has been a boom in Australian horror movie production in recent years. Daybreakers (2010), Wolf Creek (2005), Rogue (2007), Undead (2003), Black Water (2008), and Storm Warning (2006) among others, have all experienced varying degrees of popularity, mainstream visibility, and cult success in worldwide horror markets. While Aussie horror’s renaissance is widely acknowledged in industry literature, there is limited research into the extent of the boom and the dynamics of production. Consequently, there are few explanations for why and how this surge has occurred. This paper argues that the recent growth in Australian horror films has been driven by intersecting international market forces, domestic financing factors, and technological change. In so doing, it identifies two distinct tiers of Australian horror film production: ‘mainstream’ and ‘underground’ production; though overlap between these two tiers results in ‘high-end indie’ films capable of cinema release. Each tier represents the high and low-ends of Australian horror film production, each with different financing, production, and distribution models.

Flagging spaces : exploring representations of ownership on the Australian beach

The Australian beach is a significant element of our national identity. Since the majority of the population lives on the coastlines of the continent, the beach (rather than the Bush) plays an important role to many Australians. Yet the beach can also be a complex setting because of the often complicated concepts of ownership that surround it. ‘Flagging Spaces’ examines the layers of complexity surrounding textual representations of ownership of the beach space. In particular, this paper explores the Indigenous representation on the beach moving through to the role of multiculturalism on the beach space in the wake of the 2005 Cronulla riots, using specific textual examples such as Sacred Cows (Heiss 1996), Australia (dir. Baz Luhrmann 2008), Heaven (dir. Tracey Moffatt 1997), Radiance (dir. Rachel Perkins 1998), Butterfly Song (Jenkins 2005), and Bra Boys (dir. Sonny Abberton 2006).

Must see TV : mapping an Australian mediasphere

Australian National Cinema and Australian Television Culture. These two books, magisterial accounts of Australian media cultures, are very different. The first analyses (according to its cover blurb) 'the distinct and diverse nature of Australian cinema'; the second offers 'a picture of Australian television'. The books share an author.2 Despite this, their objects of study are constituted very differently. The first is replete with examples of particular films, analyses of their representational strategies, and links to the social context of production. The second addresses almost no programs and those that are mentioned appear only in passing. There is no analysis of any particular television text. The difference between these books cannot be explained in terms of authorial fickleness: rather, it represents the different ways in which television and film have been constructed as objects of study. While film has a recognised canon and a tradition of close textual analysis, in the study of television the programs themselves have tended to vanish - as they do in Australian Television Culture. Most academic work on Australian television is not interested in its programs. Writers have tended to find other aspects more rewarding: industries, institutions, ownership, legislation, technology and production.3 Australian Television Culture is part of this tradition; and an example of how such work, done well, can be a useful contribution to understanding the medium.