The Witch of Kings Cross

Rosaleen Norton (1917-1979) flourished in Australia in the 1950s and 60s as a much-censored artist and alleged witch. This film attempts an occult mood with only partial success. The candles, interpretative dances on a small stage, and music choices are banal. But the dancer who depicts Norton does resemble her, and the photos and art works are of a much better quality than in Nevill Drury's biography. As in the book, there's little critical objectivity. Did Norton genuinely believe she travelled across astral planes to commune with Pan and Hecate, or was she generally playing up to the media? (There's a photo of her happily donning a pointed witch's hat for a photo op). And was her art any good? In book and film they look more like illustrations. Bottom line, however, is that Norton's story is fascinating, perhaps the more so because until quite recently it was little known outside Australia. Norton and one of her lovers, none other than the British classical conductor Sir Eugene Goossens, were the victims of almost Victorian (and I don't mean the Australian state) censorship. Goossens' career was destroyed and (not mentioned here) he was given no credit for conceiving the idea of Sydney Opera House. Norton's art was blacked out and burned and she was jailed. It's only right and proper that we should know more about this fearless bohemian. I'll be writing more about her soon on the brilliant blog The Reprobate.

No pun intended - it is unlike someone claiming that the press and others are doing a witch hunt on him a real witch hunt. Well when I say "real", I mean they really are out to get her. And while not as bad and maybe mad as in the middle ages ... it still is abhorent and despicable. Just because someone is missunderstood. And of course of female nature.

I did not know this was going to be a documentary - I actually thought this was going to be a future film - a film with a fictional story. It was or rather is not - and maybe better for it. There are probably way more stories like that and this would have made a great double bill with Noes movie Lux Eterna (though it is written in Latin or somehow different).

If you are interested this is a relatively short recount of an era not so long ago. In an industrial part of the world, where one would maybe not expect such a thing and dismissive behaviour to happen. Prejudices and all that - some things should change - not sure if I live long enough to see us evolve completely. One day though ...

Wow whoever heard of this one?

And more importantly, why was such a boring movie made about her?

This is supposed to be a documentary of some untalented satanist artist who was brought up on an obsenity charge back in the 1950's. Whaaa.

There are a smattering of interviews -- the majority which are with people way too young to have known her, so why should we take their word on anything?

The remaining handful who DID know her look like aging hippies still clinging to the free love generation, but looking foolish in the process.

I suppose there really isnt anything much more than some newspaper clips about this woman being arrested because there are barely any photos or film of her. Just some paintings that show a rudimentary talent. The images are crude, but the use of color is pretty nice.

That's about it. Hardly not enough to create some pumped up image of her. And do it in such a boring way.

Rosaleen Norton was a precocious young girl, revelling in thunderstorms and not scared of the dark. She was bent on becoming a visual artist, drawing and writing prolifically, as well as studying and collaborating with other artists.

She had an interest in the unconscious and understood the human psyche in the terms espoused by Carl Jung, including taking inspiration from dreams and myth, and exploring the collective and her personal shadow. The paintings and drawings are impressive and show a unique vision and talent. Full of sensuality, sexuality, almost surreal.

Upon arrival in Sydney for her first show, her work was met with police and mainstream press outrage, particularly at her depiction of nude women and mythical beings. The Catholic Church piled on too. She soon became notorious as the Witch of Kings Cross. She openly worshipped the twin deities Pan and Lilith and practiced trances and sex magic, inspired by the work of Aleister Crowley. Eventually the relentless scandals led to the downfall of her high society lover, Sir Eugene Goossens, conductor of the Sydney Symphony Orchestra. A court also even ordered the police to incinerate two of her paintings.

Her life and work are portrayed through a rich montage of elements including audacious recreations stylised drama (Rosaleen is played by actress Kate Elizabeth Laxton). The film weaves archival footage of Sydney & Melbourne in the 50s & 60s, modern dance performance and interviews with fellow travelers and art experts.

What emerges is a really great character; a fearless artist and an unapologetic liberated woman.

This is the fascinating portrait of a fearless woman outlaw butting up against conservative forces. Another brilliant and creative woman repressed in her time and her output neglected, Rosaleen Norton has been saved from obscurity by this thoroughly engaging and entertaining documentary.

I watched about 10 minutes before looking this up on IMDb. What the hell did I watch?

This was so corny and cheesy. Like watching a documentary on a fake supervillain in a comic book.

It was so desperate to look graceful yet edgy. Seriously, this was like a Disney or Nickelodeon show but for a supervillain. The "acting" was so awful. To be honest, I think these people really thought they were going to be winning an Oscar or something like that. So, they gave an over the top performance. I refuse to believe anyone is like this in real life. Ultimate cringe.

And what's with the people being interviewed? Was there a little boy wearing a red satin suit?

It's just so cliche of what people think goth and occult people act like.

Who even is this woman? How did this film get so many awards?

Are we supposed to take this seriously? Are they serious with their cringe? I'm genuinely confused.