Visitors Review

wslgeo (2012-05-24 06:37)

Memorable movie

This film kind of reminds me of how a lot of movies were made back inabout 1970. The abrupt cuts to parallel situations, the back to natureliving in the wild themes. Speaking of cuts, they probably would nothave killed the animal for a movie these days. The movie suggests thatour industrial society is killing us inside and that we are unable toget back to our natural state. The 6 year old boy can learn tocommunicate with the Aborigine but the 14 year old girl with theimmaculately pressed skirt and never-greasy hair, cannot because she iscontaminated by the industrial culture. The rusty mine equipment onceagain reminds us of the decay of our rotting culture. I wish somesolutions or answers were presented.

Tophee (2012-05-23 18:06)

The Australian outback comes alive.

Superb cinematography, the Australian outback comes alive in this film ofself discovery and regret. Agutter plays the English girl brilliantly,incapable of comprehending anybody or anything that doesn't conform to hermiddle-class values and upbringing. Roeg is also excellent as her brother,adapting to each and every change in circumstance as only children can. Ihave watched this movie many times, and always get something new from it.Highly recommended to anyone, although parents might want to watch it beforeletting their kids see it.

Neil Welch (2012-05-23 12:31)

Superb multi-layered film

I watched at the cinema Walkabout when it first came out. I am nearlythe same age as jenny Agutter and in 1971, when we were both 19, therewas very little nudity to be found in provincial England: I confessthat my main motivation for going to see Walkabout was because I hadread that Ms Agutter would be displaying all in it (as, indeed, shedid). However, even as a rather callow and unworldly youth, I managedto perceive that there was rather more to this film than simply MsAgutter's youthful nakedness.It has taken further viewings over the years, as I have become a littleless shallow, to appreciate more of the depths within this movie.The stark beauty of Australia, the brilliant performances from thethree young principals, the simplicity and complexity of the story, theunderlying thematic complexities and, ultimately the multiple tragediesof the outcome - all I knew back then was that I had watched somethingspecial, and even now I am finding out more reasons why it was sospecial.

rlcsljo (2012-05-23 05:22)

What's this talk about "Walkabout"

In the late sixties and early seventies there was an unusual kind ofexcitement when you went to the movies. It probably had not happened sincemovies were first invented and has not happened since in commercialtheatrical releases. This was the feeling of "I don't know what is going tohappen next"! What happened one day was completely unexpected when Ifirst saw the opening of "Walkabout". The introduction gave almost no clueas to what was to come next, but it was visually and aurally fascinating. The rapidity in which the plot shifted gears made you more sympathetic tothe plight of our main characters. The sudden appearance of the Aborigineboy in the nick of time and his taking them under his wing. Then surprisesof all surprises--our heroine does many nude scenes. Then her final look ofyearning at the end suddenly explains it all. All the while Roeg is doing atravelogue of the Australian outback. This movie is pure genius frombeginning to end. A must for any movie collection.

sunsix (2012-05-22 17:16)

INNOCENCE

Goodness gracious it's amazing how many reviewers missed the most obviousaspect of the film. This tale is about innocence and it approaches thatfrommany different angles. As for Roeg practicing camera tricks-maybe todaythese are tricks but at the time the style was a pioneering method oftelling and showing psychological elements, wasted on todays audiences.Roegpresents innocence in juxtaposition with the hardness and neuroses ofsociety, not as WHITEMAN BAD but as society, modern society makes us veryneurotic by taking away our innocence. Roeg makes an brilliant point andstylizes a mostly nonverbal experience by letting us journey with childrenall on the cusp of some new stage of growth. This movie is a smallmasterpiece!!

jjh6519 (2012-05-22 01:25)

One to Watch Again and Again

Many years ago, I saw this movie in the theater. I was pleasantly surprisedto see it offered in widescreen as a video.This starts out in an urban setting, and ends in an urban setting, butsandwiched in between is a fascinating tale, with minimal dialogue,excellent photography and first-rate performances from the main threecharacters, all young. In many ways, this is a "return to Eden" or "what ifwe could live out our basic desires and dreams?" story. There are painfulmoments, as there is meant to be, as well as moments that allow us to seeinside the souls of the white girl and the Aborigine boy. The sexualtension is primarily implied, and to a great degree in the mind of the younglady -- a kind of racial statement. But for the prudish, be alerted: Thismovie has nudity involving a teenaged girl. But as Judith Crist said in herreview, "The nudity is tastefully handled. Parents and children shouldwatch this together and have a discussion." Most of all, we are given asight of the Australian outback as the Aborigines have known it forcenturies. It is beautiful and primitive in its imagery.

Idocamstuf (2012-05-17 13:49)

Wonderful to look at, but.....

This is the first Nicolas Roeg film I have seen, and I was only marginallyimpressed. The scenery is absolutely goergous, but the lack of diologueseemed to make it rather dull. I guess I just didnt take in the fullimpacton this viewing, I'll have to give it another viewing. For now, I give ita6.

penseur (2012-05-17 08:45)

A great visual experience

I saw this (director's cut version) for the first time on a screenmeasuring60 x 30 ft and it made a great impact - the only way to see a stronglyvisual film like this.Survival in the harsh but ruggedly beautiful Australian outback is theprincipal theme, not just humans in the environment, but men versuscreatures and creatures versus other creatures.The symbolism is often heavy and obvious while the imagery is oftensubtle.The 17 year old girl and younger brother are abandoned by their suicidalgeologist father. They are both dressed in school uniforms, clothingreflecting an alien culture and not very practical in the environment theyare in. At first the girl insists that they both maintain a smartappearance so as to give a favourable impression to others - but there isno-one around. She wears white stockings which emphasize her "whiteness"in contrast to the darkness of the native aboriginal they later encounter.There is also much subtle eroticism. At one point the girl tells herbrotherthey should eat salt - she puts some into her hands and cups them for herbrother to tongue. "It doesn't taste like salt" he says. In a later scenewhere the aboriginal is present she climbs and grasps the limbs of a treewith her legs and swings her lithe body around. However, she does notcomprehend the aboriginal's sexual desire for her. These small examplesdemonstrate that there is so much contained in this film it requiresseveralviewings to absorb it all.

yossarian100 (2012-05-15 10:21)

Good story but badly told.

I liked Walkabout a lot, but, having said that, I also think the film isfull of flaws. To understand what was happening, I found myself making agreat deal of assumptions.Warning - Spoilers follow:Ok, obviously the father went crazy, tried to kill his children, failed,then torched his car and put a bullet in his own head. Perhaps beginning thefilm so abruptly is good because it startles the audience, but why not spenda few more minutes setting up whatever problem the father had along with whyhe and the kids were in the middle of the outback dressed the way they werewith such an outlandish picnic lunch. A little more information from thedirector would have helped.If the director had a voyeuristic thing going with Jenny Agutter, why nottry to at least hide that a bit. I thought the constant upskirt camera angleand panties shots a bit much and although Jenny Agutter's nude scenes wereseriously sweet, they added nothing to the film. Perhaps they addedsomething to the director's experience. Plus, adding the nude swimming scenewith the girl, her brother, and the aboriginal boy at the end of the film,when it wasn't shown earlier, seemed out of place and explainednothing.Why were we introduced to the weather people? Did we have to meet them so wewould understand what a weather balloon was when the kids found itlater?I assume the aboriginal boy was doing a courting dance of some kind and whenit failed because the girl had no idea what he was doing or why, that's whythe kid hung himself in a tree. Unfortunately, I didn't pick up on the factthe boy was at all interested in her from the movie.I thought the rather abrupt end of their walkabout experience was out ofplace, too. They finally make it to a mostly abandoned mining town, meet arather strange guy, and then end up hanging around the abandoned miningequipment.....then we jump right to the epilogue?Is it just me or did alot of this film end up on the cutting room floor? Ican't believe someone would direct a movie this way onpurpose.Were all the Animal Planet shots really necessary? It gave me the impressionAustralia is swarming with critters.I liked the story. I just wish someone else had told it.

(2012-05-14 22:55)

Phenomenal ---- except for sound quality

If you regard nature as a transcendant realm that clearly trumps the fragmented, modern world, this film will move you. Visually, it is sumptuous, floating from normal perspectives of the three main characters, to extreme closeups of all manner of crawling creatures, to surrealistically vast panoramas, to jaw-dropping telephotos of sun rises. The performance of the little boy is so good in this film, it seems almost impossible that he was acting. The fluid athleticism of the aborigine also seemed to be entirely unscripted. The musical score itself is one of the most beautiful I have ever heard. There is, however, one significant deficiency with this DVD (Walkabout - Criterion Collection): the quality of the sound itself is poor. This is not too noticeable with environmental sounds, but if you are a purist regarding sound quality, this shortcoming becomes very noticeable with some of the dialogue, and especially with the music. The poor sound quality is perhaps most noticeable with the blended music and narration of the profoundly moving poem at the end of the film. I've seen this film in the theatre several times since it first came out in the early 1970's and the sound quality in that pre-DVD venue and format was, ironically, clearly superior to the sound quality of the DVD.

Michelle-604 (2012-05-13 21:30)

A Land of Lost Content

The film to me signified loss, the loss of innocence, freedom and magicat the heart of the life of children. The film is truly beautiful andcontrasts between the cold concrete world of adults and Western societyagainst the natural world and spontaneity of the life of children.Housmans Poem "into my heart an air that chills from far yon countryblows" offers an insight into that lost world, the door may sometimesseem ajar but it is truly shut. The scene where Agutter's mind wandersoff as her husband talks to her in their flat and we see her mind's eyeremembering her time in the outback with her Auborigine rescuer and heryounger brother are truly heartbreaking as she realises that she cannever return to the land of lost content the happy highways where shewent but cannot come again

(2012-05-13 01:14)

Walkabout, the Movie, Corrupts Walkabout, the Book

As a middle school English teacher, I was delighted to finally find the movie that bears the same title as one of my favorite adolescent novels. To my disappointment, the movie is nothing like the book. The Book: Two children from South Carolina crash in the Northern Territory on their way to visit their Uncle Keith in Adelaide. Thirteen-year-old Mary drags her little brother to safety and then watches in horror as the pilot and navigator disintgrate when the plane explodes. Mary takes care of her eight-year-old brother, Peter, by wrapping a wound on his leg and giving him the only food they have which is a stick of candy. While the two search for food, a young aboriginal who is on the last leg of his "walkabout" (a rite of passage to prove his manhood) discovers the children. Mary is appalled that he is black and horrified that he is naked. The book is a wonderful opportunity to teach young people about acceptance and tolerance. While Mary has such compassion for Peter, she is shallow and petty in her assessment of the aboriginal. Peter, on the other hand, quickly becomes friends with the bush boy while Mary brings her cultural misgivings to the relationship and eventually causes the boy to die from mental euthanasia. It is only at the boy's death does Mary realize his goodness and her own bigotry. The children bury the boy who has taught them enough survival skills for the two of them to make it to the "valley-of-waters-down-under-the earth" where the children find plenty of food and water and ultimately an aboriginal family who shows the children how to get to a house. The reader knows the children will make it back home after enduring their own rite of passage. The Movie: In this horribly contrived movie, the children are taken on a picnic by their father who has inappropriate feelings for his daughter, Mary. The father commits suicide. The bush boy has designs on Mary, too, which is so far removed from the book as to suggest that the maker of the movie never read James Vance Marshall's novel. The camera zooms in the the crotches of trees for who knows what Freudian absurdity. The children are all conflicted by their relationships because the director seems to want to force some sort of sexual feelings between Mary and the bush boy. In the book, Mary is terrified that the bush boy might harm her even though Marshall makes it very clear that for the bush people there is a time and season for all things, and the bush boy would simply not be interested in a young girl. As a matter of fact, since aboriginals in this particular territory of Australia are all naked, the bush boy doesn't even know Mary is a "lubra," or young girl for most of the book because she is wearing clothing. More importantly, he doesn't care. He thinks the children are from some "freakish" backward tribe because of their total lack of survival skills, but he is kind to them, teaches them, and guides them. The point of the book is that the bush boy might seem to be less civilized than his white counterparts, but in fact is far more advanced in the treatment of his fellow beings than are the children; particularly Mary. The move is sick, twisted, and so disgusting that I have chosen to show A Far Off Place after I teach Walkabout because its namesake is nothing but an awful distortion of a beautiful book. I question how in the world anyone could enjoy such an awful film.

Ken Hanke (2012-05-11 10:52)

Roeg would go on to better films, but the basics of his approach are found in this landmark work of haunting beauty and ugliness.

healnghanz (2012-05-11 00:40)

seeing walkabout again after 35 years was amazing

what is life changing about this film is you get to experience the lifeof an aborigine in his natural environment. with no help from anythingexcept the land itself and thousands of years of culture behind him, hehunts lizards and kangaroos with handmade spears straightened by histeeth. he drinks water right out of the dirt with a straw stuck in themud. its amazing. and it changes you. you see as if for the first time,the power and the credibility of what the native aborigine represents.he doesn't need clothes, or money. he just needs to be a part of hisworld, which he is at total peace with. what could be more sane thanthat.juxtaposed against a father taking his children out for a picnic in thebush who cracks up and commits suicide, leaving his children stranded.in their innocence they actually do pretty well for themselves, comingupon an oasis, but it dries up the next day. thats when the aboriginearrives.the children see him as a life saver and even though they don't speakthe same language, the little boy in his desperation points to hismouth and says glug glug glug and the aborigine laughs hysterically andgoes back to the dried up oasis and starts sucking water out of theground with a straw, then gives them a drink.so begins the journey where the children learn the ways of theaborigine. but they are not aborigine. they are very Australian, atleast the girl is. eventually the aborigine brings them closer andcloser to civilization, which seems absolutely barbaric by comparison.the aborigine does not kill for sport, and he uses everything and takesnothing more than he needs. the Australians, kill for the enjoyment ofkilling. finally the aborigine sees a road and touches it with hisfoot, he sees a steer and tries to kill it but is almost run over bysome white hunters, who kill just to leave the animals rot.this vision of depravity so terribly affects the aborigine, sodevastates him that he goes almost mad. he returns back to the hut thathe brought the girl to, possibly out of his love for her, and he dancesa dance of desire for her. the girl gets scared and starts to hide fromhim in the shack. you get the real sense of houses containing shadowsthat cut people off from the direct experience of one another that theyhad when they were out in the wilderness under the stars.he dances and dances, but she ignores him, rebuffs his gentle advances.she falls asleep and the next day the boy finds that the aborigine isnot moving. he is up in a tree, apparently dead.the girl and boy make their way back to civilization, which ishorrifying. the movie abruptly ends with the girl older now thinkingback to the time she had in the wilderness.i am not giving this movie justice. just suffice to say it breaks yourheart. you feel the loss of the aborigine. the impact is tremendousbecause this is real. he lost so much. yet the world doesn't seem tocare. why in gods name cant we care about what we have done to thepeople who have given us the gift of showing us how to live in harmonywith nature. happy. without doubt. full of joy. we cannot improve onthis. man living in harmony with nature is perfection. what can we sayabout our own civilization, filled with suffering and people preyingupon each other. our world is hell compared with what the aborigine hasin his hands, or had. we made sure that our misery became his misery. as the earth is used up this movie is more and more relevant. but wehave become so crippled we cant even cry for what has gone, never toreturn. what a loss! Why don't we see it? the innocence is gone. wekilled it. we killed it. we killed it.

moonspinner55 (2012-05-06 17:21)

Staggering in its vision and scope, but not very emotional...

Cinematographer Nicolas Roeg turned first-time director here with ahighly visceral and thought-provoking film about two Australian citychildren stranded in the hot, dusty Outback. They meet a youngAborigine and hope he will lead them back to civilization. Lots ofartistic shots of insects and extreme closeups of fascinating reptileshave convinced people this must be a masterpiece (funny, RandalKleiser's "The Blue Lagoon" had similar shots, and no one praisesthat!). The story exposition is rather muffled, and the finale ispretentious, but Jenny Agutter certainly gives the film a boost (herbeauty is astonishing, especially in a memorable nude swimming scene).Overall, Roeg's position on these characters and their plight feelssomewhat indifferent; he's as aloof from them as he is from theaudience, and the viewer may walk away feeling they were abandoned aswell. **1/2 from ****

(2012-05-06 11:26)

Moody, pessimistic and surreal -- with much food for thought

Originally released in 1971, this film is characterized by great cinematography of the Australian outback and the rather strange story of a lost English teenage girl and her little brother who are helped to survive by a 16-year old Australian Aboriginal boy on his "walkabout", a coming-of-age survival ritual. The girl, played by Jenny Agutter, is steeped in the ways of civilization and always distrustful of the aboriginal boy, played by David Gulpilil. The younger boy, played by Luc Roeg, is the son of the director, Nicolas Roeg, and does a fine job of bridging the gap between the two older teenagers as he learns some basic hunting skills and finds ways to communicate with the older boy. The story is a little too artsy for my taste and raises just too many unanswered questions. Why did the children's father drive them out on the desert and start shooting at them? Why did he commit suicide? Why were there some strange scenes about scientists and a weather balloon? Why did the girl never cease her upper class manners even when faced with starvation and fatigue? Even though there are scenes showing the children washing their flannel school uniforms, how did they keep their clothes in such good condition? And why was the film so horribly pessimistic? There's food for thought here though between the ways of life of the materialistic city dweller, which is contrasted by the natural way of the world. However, neither of these ways of life comes out the winner, especially because there is no understanding between them. No one is spared the director's harsh camera lens, which focuses a lot on the animals. We get the feeling survival means destroying other living things. And it is the same with humans. The film is moody, pessimistic and surreal - not my favorite kind of movie. Its message is hazy and unfocussed. And yet its haunting quality will linger with me for a long time. I can't say I enjoyed this video. Rather I was disturbed by it. And I would have liked more clarity. I do recommend it though for film buffs and art lovers. But be prepared for a confusing film with no easy answers.

Cole Smithey (2012-05-06 16:46)

[VIDEO] "Walkabout" is a poetic film that incorporates a collective subconscious of humanist values.

usrule (2012-05-06 00:42)

??

***** SPOILER**** i must say without having read any of the comments onhere i wouldn't have understood this film one bit. none of it was inany order none of it made sense. the aborigine boy kept appearing anddisappearing. i had no clue who was who and why people kept dying orbeing introduced and then left!! i didn't even gather the aborigine boydied?!!! this film was the worst waste of however long it was that ihave ever seen!! i suggest you do not watch it. sometimes you need afilm to think about but this was too much! i am a major fan of classicfilms and books. yet this is terrible, it is an insult to call it a'real classic' i would never watch this film again! if anyone has anycomments to perhaps make it clearer to me then they would be verywelcome . i must agree that the scenery and camera shots were trulyamazing though unfortunately not enough to make the film on their own.oh yes and the music played did not fit any of the scenes it was playedwith. the radio tuning noises were tasteless and didn't do anything formy headache. i do not recommend this to anyone.

TimTamSam (2012-05-04 14:04)

Skip it.. just skip it!

Spoilers!After hearing so many good things about this movie, and also finding outthat just about every review I could find on it gave it glowing remarks,Ianticipated seeing the director's cut of this movie onDVD.I mean, what wasn't to like? Jenny Agutter (sic), a beautiful actressalsofrom Logan's Run & American Werewolf in London... David Gulpilil who youcansee in the US in Rabbit-Proof Fence.Unfortunately I came away very disappointed. Part of me could notappreciate the style that Roeg filmed it. It's one of those movies thatyouhear was groundbreaking at the time, but watching it 30 years later, youfeel it just didn't age well.I'll give it this.. the stars of the movie did a fine job, and as I readonce, it was almost like they were not acting..However...Watching the movie, there are many many many many cuts away from theprimaries, to see closeups of ants, slugs, bees, snakes, lizards,scorpions,etc.. etc.. etc.. After the 40th time, I actually said out loud "Okay..IGET IT! THEY ARE IN THE OUTBACK!!" As if all the sand, dirt andisolationDIDNT already give that away.What I found most odd was what the professional reviewers called the'sexualtension.' Let me start by saying Im no prude, nor am I always againstyourgratuitous nudity, but... the camera just seemed to love Jenny's crotch,and undies.. even before they came across the Aboriginal boy and the'tension'. At the watering hole, it made special point of watching herputher undies back on.Later you have several other nude scenes, including through the watercrotchscenes of Jenny as she just, for whatever reason, decides to take a nudeswim in a pond.. a scene where she is changing, or just sitting around anabandoned farm house topless when she finds out the aboriginal boy iswatching and quickly puts her top back on. To the end where the moviewhereshe flashes back to this time later in live when the three kids decidedtohave a nice nude swim together.Again, she's supposed to be like 15 years old. I felt like PeteTownshend,and that the cops were going to bust me for just watchingthis.

(2012-05-03 21:20)

Enter a new world

I remember watching this movie in college (1974), I'd never seen much of the outback, this movie transported me to a raw almost sinister enviroment, were death and life were always present. worth a viewing, you'll want to own it.Jenny Agutter: she also was a star in Logan's Run opposite Micheal York.David Gulpilil: this outback native should be familiar to all, from Crocodile Dundee. And bumbling Walley was the suicidal father in Walkabout. There is a lot of familiarity in the cast.