billhawkinswork
I have read the book that the film is based on and although the film is very different from the book i think that standing alone this film is beautiful and well worth watching. Out of any film i am aware of it accurately depicts share house life in Australia with excellent dialogue and some really great performances. This film covers a niche that is rarely seen in movies yet such an important social factor in the lives of young Australians, and it does it well. A humorous and kind heart ed social critique of fringe dwelling Australia. I really love this film and anytime i watch it i am reminded of the crazy lifeforms i have lived with in the biggest holes on earth. The soundtrack is excellent as well which is always a bonus. The book made me wet myself laughing but the movie adds more heart and i can definitely recommend it especially (but not limited) to those who have lived in Australian share houses.
gedwards2
I've read up lots of background to this film .. John Birmingham, the novel, the stage play .. I guess the stage play must have been good, it ran for a long time in Aus. You can't really have a stage play with slow, dreary action and dialogue, but you sure can in a film.I've lived in share houses & flats in Aus and London and they were fun, with lots of great people and parties around at other people's flats, weekly tennis bookings, nights out at the pub (like The Lord Dudley in Sydney) etc. I can't recognise the dreary, hopeless, filthy dirty world portrayed here, but then I didn;t live in houses full of druggies either.This film drags from start to finish. Nothing believable happens. The lines are sloooow, with lingering shots of pained faces. There are a few comic moments, but they're deliberatley cut off to go back to the painful dragging. It's like a documentary of a series of squats lived in by unemployed drop-outs, shot in slow motion.Film have to be sharp and fast, with quick witty dialogue for me. Enough said.
deconstructionist
A movie that comes across as one "written" as though it was discovered only in mid-production that dialogue is important to a film. Interestingly, if one turns off the sound and just watches "Felafel" it is mildly engaging. The cinematography is fine and the film has a cool "look" but the dialogue is just so bloody awful it makes one laugh for all the wrong reasons. As there is really no plot beyond quirky loser moves around meeting even quirkier losers the movie is really just as easy to follow without any sound.The only conceivable reason to endure the dialogue is some fairly decent music in the soundtrack but it would be better just to get hold of the songs because while strong they really don't seem to have any particular relationship to the movie either.
hopoate
Take a book that everyone loves, rip the guts out of it and stick in a load of pretentious dross that is suffocating the Australian film industry, leaving in only the most superficial aspects of the book itself.It could have been so much more, the film looks great and the cast, as with most Australian films, is fantastic. It's typical that the script lets down the whole operation with each department that made up the screenwriter's Arts degree getting a nod so big it almost knocks over the set. Any subtle elements of the book are discarded, making it easy to tell which scenes are from the book (crazy, zany, whacky) and which scenes are added (grave, weighty, dripping with irony). It's condescending, self-indulgent, lazy and a complete wa*k.John Birmingham is one of the few Australian writers who can bridge the gap between rollicking larrikin and insightful observer. It's obviously alot harder than it seems.
AD
