The Goddess of 1967

Like too many arthouse movies 'The Goddess of 1967' seems to think that some excellent cinematography is enough to carry a superficial script full of stereotypical characters. It isn't. Apart from a handful of memorable visual images I can think of nothing positive to say about this movie. One again, a non-Australian shows a group of ugly Australian cliches against a background of a beautiful but harsh landscape. Personally I'm sick of this outdated, narrow view which in no way represents the diversity and richness of contemporary Australian life. To add further to the shallowness and predictability of this movie the Japanese car buff played by newcomer Rikiya Kurokawa is so poorly developed and pointless that he may as well wear a t-shirt saying "silly Asian character" and leave it at that. The inexplicably touted Rose Byrne's "fiesty blind girl with a dark past" has slightly more depth, but only just. The "odd couple" with a "culture clash" on a "quirky road trip" where they "find themselves" - c'mon! Haven't we seen this kind of lazy scenario too many times before already? This is third rate film school stuff with nothing new or original to say despite its pretensions. Give this one a miss unless you love cars as much as "Boy" does. There's no other reason to sit through this dull, mediocre arthouse bore.

Directionless japanese internet thief goes to Australia to buy a Goddess (a Citroen 2CV) and meets a blind women. They travel through Australia together and flashbacks into the women's history reveal a terrifying yet simple story about her childhood, including sexual abuse and religious fanatism. While being displayed in beautiful pictures using very interesting camera technique, I experienced the movie as an overly long trip into the world of simply insane people. Too much suffering without one useful comment was too much for me. The absurd end spoiled all the sympathy I had for the movie while I watched it, leaving me with the question: "What the hell did Clara Law want to express/tell/explain with this movie?" I didn't enjoy searching for the answer at all.

Oi! How can I say how I felt about this film using actual words. This is a description that requires a lot of hand gestures.

It moves in such a way that you are carried along with the action, not separated from the action by this big "movie". It has a fly on the wall feeling to it, and it all fits together. Each scene, well each shot really, fits perfectly jigsawed in with those surrounding it. Very polished and precise. It seems to just naturally happen, not forced. Even the frequent use of flashbacks came off as natural and easy.

Very beautiful to look at. Warm colors and textures. Very sweet, real romance.

Humanity peeled down to most raw and simple. I was pulled by the shirt-collar through each path of the story. I really couldn't have stopped watching it even if I had wanted to (which I didn't). Very controlled, purposeful tension.

Beautiful.

In movies - road movies especially - we are looking for change in the characters, the relationships and possibly the balance between two themes. In the Goddess we see Deidre become more whole, at a physical level by wanting and experiencing tender lovemaking. And debatably in the end as her search to confront her dad/granddad is fulfilled - death and his death in particular no longer an obsession. What of the male character though? Although very well played and amusing - what journey does he really undertake? Has he learned to drive with his eyes closed? Learned to love a being without scales?

And in looking for themes that may be juxtaposed or in tension with each other - yes there is Megacity Vs Outback, there is beauty vs ugliness, black holes vs religion, responsibility for yourself vs the excuse of horrid childhood - but for me somehow they were a bit fitted in, if any one stands out - perhaps it is travelling with a purpose vs with your eyes closed, and the frightning thing of travelling with a purpose (to buy the car or kill your dad) turns out to be: What then? What do you do next? Perhaps being able to travel with your eyes closed is a better skill after all.

Not many people have seen this film. Those who have seen it, will either hate it or love it. I loved it.

The movie starts with a computer screen that says: I want to buy GOD.

The Prologue doesn't have any human voices. The world the director shows of Japan is obvious. A world of Japanese high-tech. Everywhere there are machines, nobody lives without it. Even as they communicate. As well as the running is been done on a machine.

Clara Law has a very interesting and personal view which shows us her own interesting personality that she is. Because of that movie I can't let go of that.

She succeeds in showing us her own vision of The Goddess of 1967 because she stays consequent by creating a contemporary and postmodern feeling. A feeling she got from her own environment. Born in Macau, studied English literature in Hong Kong. Afterwards Film in London and lives with her husband in Australia.

What Clara Law tries to explain in her movie is sort of autobiographic, it is obvious that she reflects this on the two protagonists. Both characters living in two completely different countries and cultures. Clara Law doesn't work this movie out in a shallow kind of way. She does it within a own creative way and lets the characters explore each other

One character JM appears to be having everything he wants. Financial that is. He is so wealthy he believes he can buy god. Therefore he wants to buy this is beautifully car called the CITROEN DS from 1967. The GODdess. For JM this means freedom. Free of all the big luxury, being unhooked of all the machines.

The other character is BG. A girl who has been blind for all her life. Because of a suddenly death of the dealer of the car, BG will lead JM the way to the real owner of the car. Or so she says.

Once they are on the road with the car, you can follow the mental way of both characters. On the road the flashbacks follow and the viewer learns the pain and history of the characters and why the are what they are.

Neither silent or moving. Neither perceivable or imperceptible Neither nothing or everything. A state of mystery, paradox, ambiguity That is what I tried to capture in this film. CLARA LAW

Thank you Clara Law.....