Cubussoli Very very predictable, including the post credit scene !!!

LouHomey From my favorite movies..

Console best movie i've ever seen.

Doomtomylo a film so unique, intoxicating and bizarre that it not only demands another viewing, but is also forgivable as a satirical comedy where the jokes eventually take the back seat.

doubleddoubled Though to some it may start out as ridiculous, but some of us who used to go to every John Wayne movie may see of the style John Ford. It didn't start trying to impress the viewer with strong language and it made easier to take in. I thought the director did a good job.

eric262003 Sure the making of "Australia" may sound like a personal project to Aussie born director Baz Luhrmann, but once the smoke clears, the film has more bark than bite. In other words it may have the adulation of the critics (including an Oscar nomination), but all that hype surmounts to a big pile of nothing.Whether it be the appalling performances, the tedious ironies to the plot, and plenty of political correct references rubbed in our faces, "Australia" is a big, bloated epic drama that wants to give us something to reflect upon, but sadly comes up short. For a film that runs 2 hours and 45 minutes, it feels like it takes an eternity for it to be over. Luhrmann's efforts were to offer us an epic adventure, instead all we get is an overlong picture show. His shifts from intense drama to subtle comedy all gets intertwined together by a monotone insomnia induced narrative. From the first five minutes, "Australia" looks doomed from the starts, but instead of progressing, it wallows in there the whole time.The worst habit that Luhrmann does in this film is that he pushes his audience into thinking this film is charged in emotion, but in reality it's all very stoic in its delivery. He wants us to embrace us the warmth that this movie has along with composer David Hirschfelder as the swooning violins will grant us that feel-good comfort. When there's the feeling of victory, the horn section is at full blast. There's even some awkward camera work as we see a character choking even before the camera focuses on them. With all the long scenes, there is never any kind of connections. It's too whimsical and outrageous to be taken seriously as what's expected of us. By way of contrast, too serious to be regarded as a comedy and just plays it way to safe to garner any kind of magical credit to it.The fantasy side to this tale stems from an Aboriginal witch doctor who acts like a spiritual guide towards the principal characters located towards a nearby mountain. The most surreal element is that he's always omnipresent. No matter where the characters travel, he's never far behind. When in times of danger or precarious situation, he's around to cast an appropriate spell. When the cattle goes loose or the villains start shooting, surely the old shaman will make his presence known. It ends up becoming an enigma and soon this movies loses its touch.The action emanates from the Northern part of the land from down under in the early days of second world war. Nicole Kidman stars as Lady Sarah Ashley, a posh Englishwoman who has inherited a cattle ranch in the Australian outback. Kidman embraces all the essential clichés we have seen numerous times in many period piece films. She's self-absorbed, snotty, walks like a stick stuffed up her ass and has little care for anything that's regarded lower class. She's a poster child for satire and to have this character as the leading character makes me question what Kidman was thinking when she agreed to this role.Although this is where she called home, Kidman never looked so lost. And the worse case scenario is that Luhrmann just sit back and lets her be that way. Normally, Kidman is a bombshell in the films she's in, but here she's quite unattractive, even if she's blessed with royalty. Whether it be her appalling demeanour, her unappealing hairstyle or her disheveled clothing. Why did Luhrmann leaving her in this pile of spunk? Why couldn't he help her fix up her character a bit.What makes it more puzzling is that he knew he was pairing her with fellow Aussie in Hugh Jackman who never looked better as an Aussie cowboy named Dover. Sure the actresses get a feeling of awe from the audience, but Jackman is the rare breed of male performers getting the awe from the crowd. His looks, appeal and charisma likely leaves his fans breathless, like the second coming of Jesus, if such an event should happen.The principal action scenes of "Australia" is Sarah in her new role as cattle owner struggles to move the herd across the country, but can't do it. She hires the experienced rancher Dover who hates her at first because that's how all relationships in movies start off. Joining them on the escapade is a mixed-Aboriginal boy named Nullah (Brandon Walters) who serves as our narrator, even though he doesn't have the knack for it. Or these are the voices from the witch doctor who happens to be his grandfather.Though I may be ranting a bit here, it's not a complete abomination. The technical aspects are quite impressive. The scenery is very picturesque. The visionary aspect is the best quality of the film. Luhrmann has the idea of creating "Australia" as a vibrant, colourful, frolicking country, but all that visual beauty wears out its welcome. The Aboriginals are looked upon as noble founders of this land and are not looked at as savages like many films before this. However, they're portrayed way too sympathetic almost to the point of them being treated like victims. And sure Luhrmann can give us the physical beauty of Australia, but never do we feel the beauty of this country.In the end "Australia" is a very sad film. The artistic merit, the performances, and the story all had potential to be really good, but in the end it leads us into feeling cheated and unfulfilled and uninspired.

jaredpahl Australia is the kind of grand movie romance that defined classic Hollywood. It's got all the important ingredients: A pair of movie stars, exotic locales, and a heaping helping of melodrama. In the capable hands of Aussie director Baz Luhrmann, who knows a thing or two about movie love stories (Romeo + Juliet, Moulin Rouge), Australia had 'classic' written all over it. Maybe with expectations that high, Australia was bound to disappoint. In any case, Australia is certainly not all it can be.Much like Gone With the Wind, Titanic, or Out of Africa, Australia is a romantic epic that tells the story of an upperclass woman who falls for a dashing rogue. And that's not where the story similarities stop. Australia also takes place in a unique natural landscape and it's set against an important historical event. Australia is not just similar in story construction to these Hollywood classics, it is a direct variation on them. I don't hold that against Australia. The formula obviously works, and if you can put a worthwhile spin on it, I'm all in. Australia has a distinct Aussie flavor, and it's commentary on Australia's Stolen Generation is something we haven't seen in mainstream Hollywood. The cast is made up of just about every major Australian actor working, with welcome turns by David Wenham, Bill Hunter and Ray Barrett to highlight a few . Nicole Kidman and Hugh Jackman star, and they are exactly what they need to be. Kidman does her thing as the uptight English outsider, and Jackman was born to play the bushman with a heart of gold. There is almost nothing I can say against the structure of Australia. This exact story has been done before, and done very well.As much as I hate to admit it, because I really like him as a filmmaker, Australia's problems start and end with Luhrmann. I suppose he must have had a passion for telling this story. He is Australian, and I'm sure he felt an obligation to do justice to the country's history, specifically the Stolen Generation, but you can't really see that passion on the screen. This is a sloppy piece of work. For starters, Luhrmann never quite finds the right tone for the story. The introductory scenes are kind of playful and more than a little humorous, but as the film moves along, the melodrama begins to take hold. It gives the film a jittery back and forth feeling, as if competing ideas of what type of movie this should be were all thrown in together, elbowing each other for space. The bigger blunder from Luhrmann is the look of the movie. The Australian Outback is one of the most beautiful places on Earth. It doesn't take much to translate that beauty to the screen. And while there are, by sheer volume, plenty of breathtaking vistas on display in Australia, there are far too many ugly ones. Luhrmann relies heavily on sound stages and CGI backgrounds. Digital enhancement is, of course, not a dealbreaker in itself, but the CGI here is so bad, pervasive, and needless that it almost does spoil the rest of the film. There is absolutely no need for this much CGI in a romantic Hollywood epic, especially CGI that looks like a PlayStation 2 game. There is a long, pivotal, cattle driving scene in the middle of the film, and I didn't believe that environment for one second. This is a production that is calling out for old-fashioned filmmaking, and Luhrmann it seems, doesn't have that in him. At least not fully. He tries to have his cake and eat it too when it comes to balancing the art-house elements he's famous for and the traditional elements the material calls for. The result is a movie that is not artsy enough to separate itself from its obvious inspirations, And not traditional enough to stand alongside them.This is a movie stuck in, well, No Man's Land. Luhrmann wants Australia to be a grounded drama about Australian history but he also wants a magic realism tale about an aboriginal twilight. It is not impossible to do both, but Luhrmann only gives half his attention to each. I'm being hard on Australia only because I know it could have been great. The final product is not a bad movie. There is a surplus of ambition and conviction in both leading actors, Kidman and Jackman, and in Luhrmann as the director. This is a solid tale with enough admirable craftsmanship to get a pass from me, but given its potential, Australia is a major disappointment.64/100

Kimbie84 Okay, so I can't understand why there are so many bad reviews. So I had just gotten Fios, after Charter crapped the bed, and this movie was on. I didn't think I'd like it, but Hugh Jackman is in it, need I say more? Well, when I first watched it, I thought it was going to be a silly comedy; from the cover it was a romance so I'm like ooh, okay a romantic comedy. It turned to be something so much more. I loved how Nicole aka Sarah turned from a rich woman with her nose up in the air to more humble. And the spark between Nicole and Hugh...oh my....okay, so I'm a hopeless romantic and the war, my heart strings. When he thought she was dead and how devastated he was....I was just....my heart imploded. Clearly, this movie isn't for everyone, but I enjoyed it thoroughly. It didn't hurt that Hugh went back to his natural roots and the Australian accent....my ovaries exploded hahah it certainly seems this movie may have a larger female audience. But in all seriousness, I loved it.