The Book of Revelation

Many questions arise about the making of this film. The first of which is: Why make a film that plays out as little more than an awkward female fantasy? It's one thing to leave an audience with issues to discuss about a film's intent, it's something entirely different to go into the process of writing a script which fails to adequately address real human issues before they are rendered on the screen.

Why the outrageously melodramatic and often comical soundtrack? Why the excessive and frequently clunky dialogue? Why is the lead character's girlfriend one of the hooded abductors? What purpose is there to turning the lead character's freedom from abduction into a joke by having him complete his "mission"? (This is a classic Little Aussie Film moment. Resort to quirky comedy at the most inappropriate moment.) Why so many scenes where absolutely nothing happens? (This accounts for approximately 15 minutes of the film, which is at least 30 minutes too long.) Why, if a man is imprisoned for so many days, does he not endeavor to make a serious attempt at escape?

The Director, who co-wrote the script, has failed on many counts to deliver a satisfactory story.

Dave Garver, Australia.

This is a film that comes along every once in a while, and you have no idea if you like it or not. After attending the world premiere as part of the Melbourne International Film Festival, I left the cinema feeling numb and in a desperate state of trying to figure out how I felt about the film. I am still no more enlightened, and this is a credit to Ana, who challenges and questions her audience as much as she does her characters.

The film will not please all. It contains full-on nudity and sex scenes, but in the end I felt that they were all appropriate and relevant to the story. In addition, if you are after a well-rounded thriller with a clear beginning, middle and end, you will probably be disappointed.

What this film is, though, is a stunning portrait of a man who is broken down and humiliated, whose life is thrown into disarray for the pleasure of others. Ana has created a stark, honest film, and Tom Long brings an incredibly withheld brevity and aura to the role. His emotions are so internalized and conflicting that the finale to the film seems all the more real.

I applaud Ana for taking the Australian film industry somewhere it has never been before and will likely not go again for some time. See this film and make your own mind up.

Book of Revelations starts very well. Daniel, an egomaniac dancer is kidnapped, abused and sexually raped by three masked women.

After that, nothing else really happens. There is some hint of rediscovery but the movie gives nor explanation nor a real ending. Daniel reactions after the abuse are very basic. He quits dancing, has sex with every women around and finally starting a relation with very simple and common woman.

I have seen a good share of art-house movies but this has something missing in it.

The main leads are fine; but some characters does not seems to be completely defined.

This is not your typical Australian movie, despite its government funding. It could have come from a European art-house director and its location in Melbourne seems incidental (I think the original book by Rupert Thomson was set in Amsterdam). It is also not a movie for the nervous – at times it is very tense indeed and the cutting and soundtrack seem designed to keep the audience on edge. As Daniel the male dancer abducted and sexually abused by three hooded women, Tom Long gives an intense, if slightly monolithic, performance. Daniel's lines give him little scope for expressing his feelings, it is only in dance that he can do that, and the rest of the time he acts rather than thinks. On the other hand his physical appearance dominates the film – we are seeing essentially his view of things.

The abuse scenes were not as bad as I had feared, and were relatively short. They were pornographic, I think, only to people like the hooded women. And here's the problem. A handsome heterosexual man captured by three young women and forced to have sex with them? No wonder the cops laugh when Daniel tries to tell them what happened. What is it about Daniel that moves them to do this? He was not chosen at random. He's a fit accomplished young male dancer, someone of physical beauty and grace. Why do these women need to humiliate and degrade him? No doubt the director Ana Kokkinos wants us to ask this question but we are not provided with many clues towards an answer. All we are told by the hooded ones is that "it is for our pleasure". Well, if they are sadists, I suppose it makes sense but I don't think it tells us anything about relationships between men and women generally.

Even so, the whole thing is pretty well done, and we do get a very clear picture of the devastating impact abuse of this nature can have on a person. The revelation, I suppose, is Daniel's loss of both innocence and self-regard. Ana Kokkinos proved in "Head On" that she can mix atmosphere and action though this film is quieter overall. Tom Long gets good support from Greta Scacchi, never better, as his dancing mistress, and Colin Friels gives a quiet and convincing portrait of an understanding policeman ( a very rare beast). As Daniel's girlfriend, Anna Torv's performance is curiously flat – her character is underwritten and her impassive good looks convey little but emptiness. Deborah Mailman also puts in a good performance in a small role as the girl who helps Daniel recover from his ordeal. But the portentous (or is it pretentious) atmosphere dissolves to a banal ending, almost on the same level as a "Twisted Tale" (a Channel 9 TV series of mordant but slight stories) – the motivation for a routine assault is explained.

The screening I saw was sparsely attended and I don't think this film will do well, which is a pity. Ana Kokkinos is a talented filmmaker and it would be interesting to see what she could do with more mainstream material. Art-house Street can be a bit of a cul-de-sac.

You'd be forgiven if you thought that this movie was nothing more than the final chapter of the biblical text. Although itself based on a novel, this is a far cry from doomsday, though for the lead character, his life has been made a living hell for the sheer psychological and physical torture he goes through even after his unfortunate ordeal. And it does provoke some thought into the issues it put on screen, though it doesn't provide any answers, which I suppose in a real world equivalent, it's likely to remain under wraps too, for the shame.

There are many movies out there which deal with and center around the topic of rape. But this would probably mark the first time I've watched a movie where the male lead gets set upon by a gang of three masked females, who for the protection of their identity, prefer to keep their kinky sexual exploits from perhaps each other as well. In fact, their dressing is so well designed, that they have openings for their eyes, and a flap to expose their mouths for the purpose of providing pleasure. And being clothed for the most parts, it prevents the victim from trying to identify any tell-tale signs like tattoos, birthmarks or moles.

Tom Long (no offence, but what a name, really) plays Daniel, a renowned dance practitioner under the tutelage of Isabel (Greta Scacchi). To Isable, Daniel is her star, and she fiercely guards her protégé, up until he decided to go around a corner and buy a packet of cigarettes for his fiancé, that he gets kidnapped, and the production has to rely on a stand-in. Daniel of course returns, but returns as a changed man. Meek, irritable, and with a feeling that he's lost his skills. He becomes obsessed, and we slowly learn why - he's become a victim of a gang rape by an all female trio, who in their own words, just want to see him perform a dance for them privately, failing which the punishment is... rape.

To justify its R21 rating, we're given a full blown account for Daniel's inexplicable disappearance from the normal world he's used to, and now find himself chained to a dark basement like an animal, responding to the whims and fancies of his captors as they take turns to deal with him up his rear. And to a hunky, muscular guy, I suppose this would be a breaking down of resistance, as the power play between the captors and the captive turn psychological, and at times blurring the lines whether Daniel is actually enjoying his current situation.

Wait a minute, who in the right mind would enjoy being in such a situation? Here's where the crux of some of the issues are. Can a man be raped (obviously if against his wishes, yes), and what's with the stigma of having such a stain? Is it hard to imagine the kind of reaction for a guy to make a report and say "Excuse me Mr officer, but I've been raped for days repeatedly by three women wearing masks"? While we can easily understand and sympathize with female victims, could we say and feel the same for a male one, especially one who potentially has the propensity to fight back? Hard to fathom of course, which speaks volumes when the screening I'm in had its fair share of walkouts from amongst the full house audience.

But in a tale of two halves, the other showcases Daniel's struggle to try and rebuild a normal life, but again, with such a traumatizing event that he experienced, it does turn some screws loose, as he begins to suspect and mistrust, just like female victims would, all women whom he encounters and who in his estimates, fit the bill of his kidnappers, for reasons none other than vengeance. I thought the second half was more engaging than its earlier portion as it boiled down to an individual struggle, and with an ending that spoke volumes for the things left unsaid. Not an easy movie to sit through given its pace and storyline, but you do get plenty of discussion topics when you emerge from the theatre.