Creature del cielo

Perhaps the premier concern of modern filmmakers is locating somewhere in the film exactly where the film-making process is. This is often incorrectly called irony, self-reference or the odd construction of reflexivity. I call it 'folding' and it seems to be everywhere and often in rich and engaging forms. Moreover, it seem to be a central concern of the Australian performing arts community. I imagine it can be traced back to a single person in the seventies on Bennelong Point.

So much of what we have gotten from this tradition has enriched us all, not the least of which are the actresses who master folded acting. That's where we get a portrayal of a character and another simultaneous portrayal of an actor portraying that character. Sometimes the 'character' in these two portrayals isn't quite the same. Three mainstream film actresses today can do this. Two are Australian, and one is Kate.

This is her first film, and it is no surprise at all that the filmmaker has chosen to build a structure that is a representation and is about representation. The original, true story is about two girls, enwrapped in mutual fantasy, probably enhanced by the flush of sex, whose fantastic adventures get out of hand. From this, Jackson reshapes it all. It is now a film about films. Now the girls' fantasy world is a Camelot driven by forces in film. They write. They sculpt characters, based on film characters. Those film characters come 'alive' and form a world in which the girls live in parallel with the real world. So far so good.

But Jackson goes further. Some of the film prototypes are simple characters: Mario Lanza-like. Simple glamour with no pretense or irony. But there is the amazing Orson Welles also. Orson is not pretty, he is not direct, he is a folded prototype himself. The two worlds conflict, and that conflict is reflected in each world. In the Borovnian ('borrow'-nian) world, this is a conflict between two clay figures: the Welles and the Lanza, the winner getting to bed and impregnate both princesses. In the 'real' world, the conflict carries over to the two houses, and even within Juliet's house between the bookish metaphysical father and the sexy 'psychologist- but touchy-feely' mother.

Welles was the one who reinvented the ordinary flat world of film into a melange of folding techniques. The film world since the late forties has been a combination of struggles and syntheses between the forth world of Welles and the simple dramatic stage of Griffith.

Even the very young Kate surfs and exploits these levels with aplomb. Even as a teenager she gives us messages from each of these folds - not at precisely the same time as Julianne would later, but strongly nonetheless.

Ted's Evaluation -- 3 of 4: Worth watching.

Lesbian murderers ? I'm sort of guessing that I might not like this movie very much . No doubt we'll be seeing some polemical do gooder film maker with zero talent making a movie where anyone who gets murdered by the gay girls probably asked for it because they were a rabid homophobe

That was my abstract opinion of HEAVENLY CREATURES when it was released to some critical acclaim ten years ago , with much of the acclaim going to writer/director Peter Jackson whose previous gory horror comedies I'd enjoyed . Yeah the guy was talented I remember thinking , but in a liberal climate we'd no doubt be hearing a myriad of excuses via the film for the girls crime and it was this attitude that stopped me from watching the movie until it was broadcast on BBC 2 tonight

I was fooling myself if I thought Jackson was going to make a bad movie . This is another piece of heart melting , intelligent movie making from the Kiwi genius and I'm sorry for doubting Jackson for a moment . What Jackson has done has made a movie where it's difficult to think of the two protagonists as " lesbian lovers " , Pauline Reiper and Juliet Hulme are two teenagers who love each other full stop and the screenplay doesn't once make any excuses for anything that happens , we're not supposed to feel disgusted by their relationship , we're not supposed to feel that they are victims in any way and we're not supposed to feel that a conservative , homophobic society is to blame for what happened . Jackson deserves much credit for making an amoral movie without an agenda , it's up to the free thinking audience to make up their own minds on the case. Take for example the murder of Mrs Rieper who kindly takes the girls to a tea house then for a walk in the countryside . It's difficult not to notice that if she'd been an uncaring cruel dragon with absolutely no conscience the girls wouldn't have had an opportunity to murder the woman .

It's also a movie that captures the spirit of being a teenager in love . When for whatever reason you have to say goodbye to your first love it's the end of the world . You'll do anything to stop it happening - ANYTHING - and you won't forgive anyone who caused it to happen . Fantasy sequences similar to the ones shown here are also a staple diet of the teenage mind and if you disagree with me you're either being dishonest or you're under twelve years of age . Believe me this movie reminded me , perhaps a little too much , of my own teenage angst

Jackson also deserves credit for his casting Melanie Lynskey and ( A then totally unknown ) Kate Winslet as Pauline and Juliet . Neither of them can be described as strikingly attractive and you do have to worry who we would have got instead if this was a Hollywood production , but they play the star crossed lovers with absolute conviction , as indeed do the rest of the cast

HEAVENLY CREATURES is beautiful , haunting , thoughtful and incisive . With the exception of Martin Scorsese I rate Peter Jackson as the world's greatest living film maker and HEAVENLY CREATURES is the first movie that showed the true greatness Jackson is capable of

I understand why teenage girls would like this movie--the thrilling rush of new found deep friendship tied together with nascent sexuality and all that comes with it...the defying of the confines of the world around them...the incredible power of unfettered creativity and self-delusional belief...

What's amazing is that a jaded thirty-something man like myself would consider it to be his favorite film of all time. Peter Jackson shows a deftness in handling interpersonal characterizations and blending in amazing special effects in a way that seems so natural...so fluid...that you while you're awed by what you see, you're not so aware of the process that you're distracted. The oh-so-1993 effect of "morphing" is used better here than any other film (save, perhaps, Terminator 2--but in that movie, the morphing WAS the film...when here, it is merely one element.)

The direction is exemplary. The cinematography is awe inspiring. The script is sharp. The acting...down the line...is superb. Melanie Lynskey delivers a brave performance--giddy, childish, frightening, sexual, clouded... She's everything Christina Ricci pretends to be. Kate Winslet--hyper-bright and wonderful...her performance here reminds you that her "Titanic" performance was "sunk" (sorry!) by the extremely poor dialogue she was given. Her character's overly cheerful demeanor is a mask that covers her disappointment in her parents--but it's extended so far that it no longer seems like a mask...it seems to be a force of nature that drags Lynskey's Pauline along for a dangerous ride...a ride that Winslet's Juliet is in no position to control. There are crisp performances from all of the supporting cast as well.

Jackson should be listed with Gilliam and even Lynch when it comes to directors who can achieve a glorious, if dark, vision. The fact that Jackson's movies (save for "Meet the Feebles") are mainstream accessible--in ways that Lynch, especially, could barely consider (although "The Frighteners" was painfully overlooked by the US market)--makes me wish that he'd try his hand at more mainstream material.

Imagine what a Peter Jackson "Titanic" would have been like...and compare that to what a James Cameron "Heavenly Creatures" would have been like and you get my point.

I really liked this film. Like the overwhelming majority of people, I didn't know about the real crime behind the story of this film, where the friendship between two teenagers turns into a sexual and romantic obsession and leads the two young women to kill the mother of one of them, in hope that they can run away or stay together.

Directed by Peter Jackson, still a long way from dreaming that he would be as successful as "The Lord of the Rings", the film is excellent and does a great job in terms of recreating the events and psychology of the two central characters. Of course, according to what I've read, the facts are not entirely clear as to the nature of the relationship the two girls had, but it seems quite clear that, at the very least, there was a very strong obsession between them and a certain dissociation from reality. , through the creation of a fantasy alternative world that functioned as an escape. The film shows us this clearly and manages to maintain a certain ambiguity where it seems most necessary.

This was the debut film for young Kate Winslet and Melanie Lynksey. None of them seem exactly like newcomers or inexperienced in the cinematographic art, which can only be a revealing parameter of talent, and of the great qualities that both have revealed since then, most especially Winslet, who has dedicated more time to cinema and achieved a different level of recognition. In addition to them, we also have the excellent performances by Sarah Peirse, Clive Morrison and Diana Kent, in the role of three of the paternal figures.

Technically, the film doesn't have any major problems. The pace is ideal, there are no dead moments or situations that seem to be too much or to have been stilted, and the editing is very good and well executed. The cinematography is excellent, with great color and light, particularly in the fantasy scenes, where we enter the fantastic world that these young women created for themselves. The sets are good and, together with the costumes, recreate the period portrayed with verisimilitude. The filming locations are magnificent, very well selected and used. The soundtrack is equally good.

Based on a true story that took place in New Zealand in the mid-1950s, "Heavenly Creatures" is one of those films that seems tame at first glance, but is full of explosive devices. Co-writer/director Peter Jackson (of "The Lord of the Rings" fame) crafts a highly-disturbing motion picture about two teenaged girls (Melanie Lynsky and Kate Winslet, in the role that put her on the cinematic map) who have a highly potent relationship that is based on their love for literature and their love for a conjured-up fantasy world. Their intense friendship borders the line on a deep obsession as the two become inseparable. Their parents believe that lesbianism may be part of the partnership. Even though there are dream sequences and undertones aplenty to point to that, the girls' friendship does not go that way in real life. As others try to separate them for good, the girls come up with a devious plan to destroy who they feel is the major culprit (Lynskey's mother, played by Kirsti Ferry). The movie goes into a dark place and its somewhat sweet candy-coating tries to hide the fact that this was a truly major incident in a time and place where things like this just did not occur. Jackson was going for something like Peter Weir's equally disturbing "Picnic at Hanging Rock", but ends up creating a film that runs rings around that disappointing work. Jackson's smart direction just enhances a really intelligent Oscar-nominated screenplay. Kate Winslet does truly steal the show from Lynskey who was meant to be the real focal point of the production. A good film that would lead to even better works for the major players involved. 4 stars out of 5.