Read + Write + Report
Home | Start a blog | About Orble | FAQ | Blogs | Writers | Paid | My Orble | Login
 
Reviews, previews and chuckling and snorting...

South Solitary

July 28th 2010 03:55
by Matt Shea
South Solitary Miranda Otto

The writer-director bug strikes again in South Solitary, a film that promises much in its first half but has ultimately delivered very little by the time the credits roll.

Shirley Barrett’s story of a 35-year-old spinster who ends up marooned on a desolate island with only a sullen and withdrawn assistant lighthouse keeper as company is beautifully mounted and crackles with an early humour, but some significant structural problems prevent it from ever being truly involving or convincing.

Miranda Otto plays Meredith, who arrives at the isolated lighthouse island of South Solitary in 1927 to assist her uncle Wadsworth (Barry Otto) in his newly appointed position as head lighthouse keeper. Meredith has never married, a fact she accepts with outward stoicism but inner embarrassment, and acts as her uncle’s faithful secretary despite his continual scorn and nonexistent affection.

On the island already are the roguish assistant keeper Harry Stanley (Rohan Nichol), his frosty wife Alma (Essie Davis), their three children, and also another assistant keeper, the withdrawn and fidgety Fleet (Marton Csokas). An awkward wallflower, Meredith struggles to find her place among these strangers, but when Stanley begins to show signs of being attracted to her it kicks off a series of events that will turn everyone’s lives upside down.

In its early scenes, South Solitary bubbles along in style, an engaging and well-chosen cast fitting into a pitch perfect representation of late 1920s Australia. There’s some fine technical work, courtesy of DOP Anna Howard and production designer Paul Heath, while Barrett’s script deftly sketches the key character points and relationships.

But everything comes to an ungodly halt at about the halfway point. The premise seems to suddenly change and the engagingly oddball nature of the early reels switches to a much more contemplative and claustrophobic second period.

It’s unclear as to what Barrett was trying to do with her screenplay: either she simply decided to switch things up or, more likely, the writer-director let her first act go on for far too long. The whole film seems to have a crisis of confidence, and while it throws the audience it also affects the character development, strong early work coming to naught as the arcs flatten out into nothing substantial at all. When South Solitary reaches some sort of point of climax, you’re beyond caring.




It’s a pity, because the film has plenty in its favour. Besides the technical achievements, the filmmakers managed to collect a fantastic cast. Barry Otto is terrific as Wadsworth and Nichol gets his tone just right as the slippery Stanley. Csokas should at this point need no introduction, the kiwi actor bringing all his intimidating charisma to bear on the role of the damaged Fleet. Miranda Otto too provides a nice reminder of her quality as a performer, although she can’t quite topple the flaws written into her character.

If South Solitary had seen a few more revisions at the scripting phase it could have been something truly special. Even a clever editing job might have saved the film. As it is, however, this is the work of yet another Australian filmmaker who’d do well to at least share the screenwriting duties with someone else.


I say: A film with plenty of technical craft on display but one that’s ultimately sunk by a wonky screenplay.

See it for: Csokas, who could pick his nose and still be fascinating to watch.


*This image is from South Solitary

179
Vote
Add To: del.icio.us Digg Furl Spurl.net StumbleUpon Yahoo


   
subscribe to this blog 


   

   


Comments
9 Comments. [ Add A Comment ]

Comment by Always Eighteen

July 29th 2010 03:12
Thanks for the review. I shall not be watching this!

Comment by David O'Connell

July 29th 2010 06:21
Great to see you back Matt! You went relatively easy on Barrett here, I think she deserves a rev for handing in such an overblown screenplay. And you know my view on how poor the characters are.


To be honest mate I've never been one to subscribe to the theory about well-placed, high-profile Australian critics artificially pumping local product to salvage some dignity at the box office but after watching At the Movies the other night I'm finally starting to change my tune. Mr. Stratton is one in particular whose had cynics pointing the finger at him in the past on many occasions and well, to be honest, his review of this film was the most laugh-out-loud garbage I've ever heard. I know our reactions to films are highly subjective and all that but seriously, calling this film " very special, and in its way, quite a daring one".

Who the hell is he kidding? I know his rejection of modern sensibilities in films such as Kick-Ass and others has been glaring this year but he's either totally lost touch with the modern world or he's greasing somebody's pole here.

Apologies for the rant BTW.

Comment by JohnDoe

August 2nd 2010 21:23
Hi Matt,

This one wasn't on my radar and doesn't sound like I need to rush and see it either.


Comment by Matt Shea

August 3rd 2010 00:10
Cheers Always Eighteen. I wouldn't go out of my way to see it, that's for sure.

Dave - yeah, I probably didn't loath this quite as much as you, but I did come away from it totally baffled. Baffled too by Stratton's comments on ATM last week - I had tears when they cut to Margaret looking at him like he was Jeff Goldblum out of The Fly. As a friend of mine said, Neil Marshall's best work is probably behind him, but I will be checking out Centurion almost because Dave disliked it so much.

Cheers JD - yeah, steer clear, and check out Dave's (O'Connell... not Stratton) review here if you in any way feel like I need some back-up.

Comment by Anonymous

August 16th 2010 17:26
what absolute bollox, all of you. this film is great. it's intriguing and suspenseful and extremely moving. what a pity it's not a bit more like 'kick ass'. @ o'connell just in case you hadn't noticed, it's a PERIOD FILM. so perhaps it's not required to adhere to your 'modern sensibilities'. in point of fact it's a study in the way historically people were compelled to communicate, and the fallout from this. to anyone who dislikes predictable formulaic hollywood crap, this film will be as a soul mate spotted in a multitude of morons. it's an intensely acted exploration of that suffering which makes solitary confinement the most dreaded punishment that exists in prisons other than guantanamo and its ilk.
the photography is euphoria-inducing, and the length of the film is a great asset. funny how one reviewer complained that the first half was too long, yet the supporting cast departed to fast. which was it- after a long slow first half, or a too-brief sojourn?? inconsistent criticisms and poorly thought-out ones. like the numbskull who thought that the development of passion for miranda's character by nichol's was unconvincing... THAT WAS THE POINT, dufus.
this film is very honest, psychologically flaying almost, not so easy to watch, and i think it's that that is the main sticking point. it's not the sort of film for people who are in the headspace where 'not on my radar' could possibly sound convincing. dig a lot deeper why don't you. and go and demolish some 3 act hollywood shite. why subject this beautiful film, a real labour of love, to your complacent, facile bullshit?

Comment by Mountain Fog

August 18th 2010 07:58
WOW! looks like "anon" got out on the wrong side of the projection box....

Actually, I have no personal opinion on the matter, as I have not seen it, but, I admit I find anon's command of caustic wit rather attractive.

However, anon, I do not agree that you can slag off two dedicated and intelligent reviewers just because they disagree with your own opinion, for it makes you appear a just a tad puerile and neurotic.

At the end of the day, if you have such strong opinions, why post as 'anonymous'? Or are you a regular and you usually correspond with these Orblers on friendly terms? If so, then show some gumption and post under your moniker.

That's all I have to say, pity, feeling like a good spat at the moment, just drove two and a half hours through traffic, after seeing a preview which did not live up to expectations.... sigh...

cheers

fog

Comment by David O'Connell

August 19th 2010 05:05
Fog, thanks for backing us up mate.

And "Anon", you gutless nameless wonder, many thanks for the biggest laugh I've had all week!

"this film will be as a soul mate spotted in a multitude of morons"
"euphoria-inducing"

Some gold there friend amongst your facile ranting, none of which can alter the fact that South Solitary is indeed a painfully mediocre, bordering on awful film - though, yes, undoubtedly a labour of love I have no doubt.

You must be related to somebody involved with the film, yes?


Comment by Mountain Fog

August 19th 2010 07:53
My pleasure Dave,
and I didn't think of that, I think you are right, it must be someone connected with the film!

Hmmm...makes me vewwwy tempted to review it myself... feel just in the mood to vent some bile! tee hee!!

cheers

fog

Comment by David O'Connell

August 20th 2010 02:48
Go for it fog, just the sort of film to see if you're in an especially foul mood! Would love to hear what you think of it.

Add A Comment

To create a fully formatted comment please click here.


CLICK HERE TO LOGIN | CLICK HERE TO REGISTER

Name or Orble Tag
Home Page (optional)
Comments
Bold Italic Underline Strikethrough Separator Left Center Right Separator Quote Insert Link Insert Email
Notify me of replies
Notify extra people about this comment
Is this a private comment?
List the Email Addresses or Orble Tags of the people you would like to be notified about this comment


One per line max of 30

List the Email Addresses or Orble Tags of the people you would like to be notified about this private comment thread. Only the people in this list will be able to see or reply to your comment.


One per line max of 30

Your Name
(for the email going out to the above list, it can be different to your Orble Tag)
Your Email Address
(optional)
(required for reply notification)
Submit
More Posts
1 Posts
14 Posts
10 Posts
1142 Posts dating from March 2006
Email Subscription
Receive e-mail notifications of new posts on this blog:
0

Matt Shea's Blogs

I have no other blogs :(
Moderated by Matt Shea
Copyright © 2006 2007 2008 On Topic Media PTY LTD. All Rights Reserved. Design by Vimu.com.
On Topic Media ZPages: Sydney |  Melbourne |  Brisbane |  London |  Birmingham |  Leeds     [ Advertise ] [ Contact Us ] [ Privacy Policy ]