There is only one redeeming quality of this drab, boring, ridiculous film, and that is its time. If "Uncivilised" had been made thirty, or even just five or ten years later, it would be the sort of movie that causes people to hammer a huge railway spike through it so as never to poison anyone ever again. But because it is such an early, low-budget and (horror of horrors) Australian film, it deserves a chance.
*** SPOILERS ***
It tells the classical tale of a woman who travels to meet a wild white man who is chief of a tribe of Aborigines. In the spirit of the King Kong and Tarzan stories, she is to use her sexuality to win him over, and in the process, write an article about him for some capitalist city newspaper. No problems with the plot so far. Then we see the emergence of a strange Aboriginal witch doctor and a very stereotypical Afghan villain who actually turns out to be a missing British police officer working under cover. Bet you didn't see that one coming, eh? And couple that stupid plot twist with a bunch of embarrassingly out-of-place songs from Mara, the wild white man, and the worst possible over-the-top acting and you have one fair dud of a film.
*** END SPOILERS ***
The acting itself is like an uncomfortable transition from silent to mono, it's as though the overacting characteristic of silent films is copied here, only the actors haven't quite managed to pair that with actually speaking words yet. Besides that, I've never been much of a fan of Australian acting with the exception of a few rare gems we've produced, and this is just a very early rustic and tacky version of that already poor quality.
I studied this film for a university English course. God knows why. One important reason was the fact that this film was made by Australian director Charles Chauvel in order to try and crack into the big western film markets. I'm not quite sure what strategy he was trying to use but it evidently didn't work. In fact, the rumour is that even Chauvel himself was appalled at what a crummy film he'd made.
I'd love to recommend this film but it's very hard. Watch it only if you're interested in the history of world cinema or want a good laugh at the expense of others' dignity.
* out of *****
*** SPOILERS ***
It tells the classical tale of a woman who travels to meet a wild white man who is chief of a tribe of Aborigines. In the spirit of the King Kong and Tarzan stories, she is to use her sexuality to win him over, and in the process, write an article about him for some capitalist city newspaper. No problems with the plot so far. Then we see the emergence of a strange Aboriginal witch doctor and a very stereotypical Afghan villain who actually turns out to be a missing British police officer working under cover. Bet you didn't see that one coming, eh? And couple that stupid plot twist with a bunch of embarrassingly out-of-place songs from Mara, the wild white man, and the worst possible over-the-top acting and you have one fair dud of a film.
*** END SPOILERS ***
The acting itself is like an uncomfortable transition from silent to mono, it's as though the overacting characteristic of silent films is copied here, only the actors haven't quite managed to pair that with actually speaking words yet. Besides that, I've never been much of a fan of Australian acting with the exception of a few rare gems we've produced, and this is just a very early rustic and tacky version of that already poor quality.
I studied this film for a university English course. God knows why. One important reason was the fact that this film was made by Australian director Charles Chauvel in order to try and crack into the big western film markets. I'm not quite sure what strategy he was trying to use but it evidently didn't work. In fact, the rumour is that even Chauvel himself was appalled at what a crummy film he'd made.
I'd love to recommend this film but it's very hard. Watch it only if you're interested in the history of world cinema or want a good laugh at the expense of others' dignity.
* out of *****