Stone Bros

Director: Richard J. Frankland
Starring: Luke Carroll, Leon Burchill, David Page, Valentino Del Toro, and Peter Phelps
Distributor: Independent
Runtime: 92 mins. Reviewed in Nov 2011

| |

Rating notes: Strong drug use

It is not just the colourful characters who feature in this move. There are plenty of asides about cultural identity and race relations in Australia. The movie aims for comedy in the incidents it presents, and takes time out to pass critical comment on a variety of significant social issues, such as the discrimination experienced by Indigenous Australians from other Australians, and the inadequacy of Australia just saying that it is “sorry”. Richard Frankland, who directed the movie also wrote the screen play, and he aims intentionally to present a series of comic situations, many of which are farcical, but only some of which manage to find their intended target. Particularly successful are the scenes with the neurotic dog of Charlie’s ex-girlfriend which gives new meaning to the label “mean dog” (that likes to trampoline), and an Indigenous wedding that goes terribly wrong.

There are two main levels of meaning in the film. The first one is its exploration of Indigenous perceptions. Even at a humorous level, there is something to learn in this film about the practices, beliefs and everyday thinking of Indigenous Australia. The second level is more problematic. This is about drug-taking and reckless adventure that are geared for laughter generally. The film shows Indigenous Australians smoking marihuana in a fashion that is meant to have wide comic appeal. Non-indigenous people are meant to laugh with, and at, the film’s Indigenous characters. The case for reconciliation, that the movie obviously makes, comes at the cost of possible cultural compromise.

Not surprisingly, the film has found itself in the middle of a controversy about its classification. Those who made the film object strongly to the classification of the movie as one that advocates strong drug use; and they object to the film’s restriction to the adolescent market by its MA15+ rating. It is hard not to see the movie as one that, for the most part, shows Indigenous Australians very comfortable with drugs and enjoying their use. That is the case also for movies which show similar scenes for other cultures; drugs are a problem for all, but there is no special drug message in this movie, and there might have been. The right moral point about drug-taking is made at the end of the film, but the message (not to take drugs) comes too late; there has been too much fun along the way.

Despite some clumsiness in its production, however, there is a fresh, larrikin-like energy about this film that is original. The photography of outback Australia is excellent, and the tourism potential of the move is kept fortunately to a minimum. Despite its controversial elements, this is an unusual movie that is a significant first for its talented Director, and deserves to be seen.