A Disappointing Continuation

It’s fine. It's literally the definition of a fine movie. You’ve seen it before, you know every beat and outcome before the characters even do. Only question is how much escapism you’re looking for.

A movie that not only functions as a solid scarefest but a razor-sharp satire.

Worth seeing just to witness how winsome it is.

I'm a white European-American female. The closest thing I have to compare to the Koori of Australia are Native Americans. In "The Last of the Mohicans", the male protagonist dies because he falls in love with a white female. In this movie, the Koori boy dies because he falls in love with a white female. I find this disturbing, on more levels than one. The girl in this movie doesn't understand the Koori boy is courting her, and that frightens her, and that dismays the boy. So far understandable. But you want me to believe that a Koori male of that caliber would kill himself because some white female doesn't want him? What a waste of a great character.

Quite splendid first directorial outing by Nicolas Roeg. Wonderfully shot, then he was on camera duty as well, and the direction is surprisingly assured. It couldn't have been easy working in the outback and with a young Jenny Agutter and even younger, Luc, his own little boy. The opening is enigmatic and never explained, we are simply left with the young pair making the best of things and trying to keep their school uniforms as neat as possible. There are wonderful exchanges between the two, Agutter maintaining the stiff upper lip and encouraging the youngster to keep going whilst he happily plays with his toys and occasionally makes insightful but worrying remarks that his older sister struggles to deal with as calmly as possible. The visuals are very impressive and if Roeg overdoes it slightly he can be forgiven particularly as they seem to reflect the early 70s date of the movie as much as his own penchant for artistic camera-work. Particularly poignant are the scenes with the 'black boy' and particularly his heartbreaking ritual dance towards the end. Can't not mention the very bold nude scenes from young Agutter and in particular the stylish and dreamlike swimming scenes.

Apparently I watched this movie with a distinct disadvantage: I wasn't stoned.I can come up with plenty of adjectives to explain my dislike for it: incoherent, random, plot less, exploitative, amateurish.I have questions too:How did the car get to what looks like outback Northern Territory or Western Australia from Sydney with the lunch still packed and fresh and the two children still dressed in pristine school uniforms.Why are the children dressed in pristine school uniforms when they've accompanied weird old' dad to the outback??Why are we okay with the child nudity and sexual content in this film? Is it because it's "art"? Or because it's a "classic"?Why is every single white person in it weird or sociopathic?Why do random characters like the weather research people appear for no other reason than to release a balloon?How did this movie attract funding?

After attempting to kill them and then subsequently committing suicide himself, a man leaves his two children stranded in the middle of the Australian outback. A chance meeting with an Aboriginal boy who is out on his walkabout initiation offers a chance of survival for these kids who are completely out of their depth in such an unforgiving environment.Walkabout was directed by famed cinematic innovator Nicolas Roeg. Along with films such as Picnic at Hanging Rock and Wake in Fright, it formed part of the cinematic movement that has since been described as the Australian New Wave. These were a collection of films made in Australia that explored aspects of the country that had hitherto not been dealt with cinematically. Walkabout is notable in several ways, both stylistically and thematically. It contrasts western urban civilisation with the primitive indigenous culture. The clash is most obvious between the city children and the Aboriginal boy. But despite the fact that the latter is unsubtitled the whole time and whose actions aren't always clearly understood, it's the city culture that is presented as insane. For instance, the opening voice exercises that the girl school work on seem quite bizarre, while several of the white characters we meet along the way act in ways that are at best strange and at others coldly callous. The film often contrasts the beauty of the natural world with the functional human habitations and the rotting junk they leave behind. The children connect to the Aborigine differently too, the young boy is able to communicate and relate to him in an instinctive way that the older girl cannot as she has already been too processed by her culture to the extent that she finds it much harder to connect. The implication is that the civilising effect takes us away from something pure, some kind of innocence the youngster has not as yet lost.As it is, the girl (Jenny Agutter) and the Aborigine boy (David Gulpilil) become a source of sexual fascination for one and other. But while there is palpable sexual tension, theirs is a doomed romantic attraction. The boy never understands that what the girl really seeks is to return to her home. The language barrier prevents communication beyond the basic but the boy clearly thinks his encounter with these white children must be simply part of his walkabout initiation; another part of becoming a man. Sadly, this leads him to engage in a tribal mating dance thinking it is the logical thing to do, which unsurprisingly freaks the girl out. The result is his suicide because he thinks he has failed the ultimate test, the tragic irony of course is that he has inadvertently carried out a great deed worthy of any man in saving these children from certain death. He seems oblivious to this just as he is unaware what the children really seek, illustrated brilliantly in the scene where he encounters a white girl near a settlement, the children never see her nor the white community, never knowing how close they are to what they seek.Walkabout is an adventure-drama that is very minimalist in most ways. It has nameless characters, a basic narrative and sparse dialogue. The scene where the father tries to kill his children is partly so effective because there has been absolutely no build up to it. The small cast all do excellent work but ultimately its director Roeg's film. This one-time cinematographer ensures that this is a movie that is visually incredible at all times. The Australian outback is the right shape to fit a widescreen frame beautifully and Roeg makes the most of this when he captures the landscape, plant and animal life in consistently interesting ways. His famed bold editing techniques are evident too with some juxtapositions of images that sometimes highlight themes and other times disturb. He also uses freeze frames to add to the beauty but which also adds to the strangeness. It's also one of those films with abundant nudity that never feels exploitative in any way but natural and important to the overall whole. In the final analysis, this is one of the most beautiful looking films you are likely to see and for that alone it's worth watching. It's one of those films that just gets better and better every time I see it.