River Queen

Peter Thompson, on this morning's Sunday show, gave River Queen a very favorable review; the review's timing was perfect because last evening Diane and I watched this new Kiwi film and drove home with mixed feelings about what we had just seen.

Thompson's reviews are usually spot-on for us but in this instance we are still not sure. Yes, Vincent Ward's story was superb: huge amounts of recognizable human drama, multidimensional characters, a gigantic historical background and everything framed by New Zealand's natural beauty. Vincent's direction accentuated each of these elements; he made great use of the land's physical beauty as well as the beauty and uniqueness of the individual Maori people. This last comment will take on meaning with the watching of the film because certain Maori characteristics play a huge visual as well as plot role in the film-perhaps unexpectedly for some viewers more than others. Alun Bollinger's cinematography beautifully captures Ward's shot selection; it is impossible to leave the theater and not have been captivated by the physical beauty of the New Zealand landscape.

I think the question must be asked: If I thought the film was so good, why did I only give it a rating of eight? The answer goes to the heart of why Diane and I were both uncomfortable with this superficially great film and that lies in the script, the third leg of Vincent's stool. We both thought the script was overly choppy; there were too many small pieces of story stitched together. I thought the film was too jumpy and that resulted in my concentration moving too quickly from one scene to another. I suppose that is just a matter of cinematic taste particular to one person and should not be used to paint an entire film.

River Queen is definitely worth seeing. The subject matter alone is worth the effort, with excellent acting by all concerned and magnificent scenery beautifully captured in thee film. The film must indeed be judged highly.

I enjoyed 'River Queen' better on second viewing. First time through, I found the story-line a tad confusing and even long winded in places. Admittedly, I was also distracted wondering whether it was shot on the Whanganui (I grew up in and around Wanganui - the river has an 'h'; the city doesn't). At the end though, I was happy with the experience. Certainly happy enough to watch it again.

On second viewing, familiar with the story and characters and confident in the knowledge that I was indeed looking at the Whanganui, the pace seemed good. I thought the acting good and I loved the scenery (an ex-patriate's nostalgia perhaps?). I particularly appreciated the recreation of warfare in the New Zealand Wars.

Others have suggested that the movie was unduly biased towards the Maori. This surprises me as, pakeha though I am, the thought did not cross my mind on either viewing.

PS I recently found out that an ancestor of mine was in the Regiment depicted in the movie.

As the above suggests, I was ultimately unimpressed with this movie. It is lovely to look at, the scenery is lush, but the detail of the story, in particular the characters, are totally unbelievable. Films don't have to be believable, but films like this, with a political edge and social commentary do.

Similarly, I have no problem with commercialism as such, but once again, films like this shouldn't be making casting decisions purely based on box office draw. This is absolutely the case with Sutherland, who is frankly rubbish as Doyle. His accent was far from authentic, but he fell into the biggest trap of all, his accent IS his performance, and we end up with a caricature of Irishness with no personality outside of his nationality. I find it totally implausible that anyone involved thought he was the best man for the job. All in all, this is a clear case of commercial interest over quality and when you're trying to be The Mission, this kind of thing wrecks your chances of success.

Speaking of accents, there were a couple more problems, one being the striking modernity of Boy's accent which acted to dispel the feeling of being transported to another time. More surprising was Samantha Morton's much lauded Irish accent, which was variable to say the least. Her voice meandered between strong north and soft south, even in the voice-overs, where I would've expected any such discrepancies to be picked up.

However, these are minor gripes compared to the motivation and actions of Sarah. She never seems at home with the English, and almost instantly at home with her son and his tribe, the dilemma between the life she knew and the life she if offered just seems like a no-brainer. Perhaps a lot has been lost in editing, perhaps this was meant to be a three hour film or a mini series where these things could've been fleshed out, but I can only judge what I've seen.

Now the biggest problem, Sarah's (Morton) relationship with Doyle (Sutherland) is incomprehensible. The fact is that her affection for him is not conveyed in any way until her having to choose between him and her son, the conflict she goes through at this point was frankly ridiculous and killed the movie for me.

As you may have guessed. this movie didn't work at all for me, but it is top notch to look at, you really won't see anything more stunning in terms of scenery, there are some good performances and my wife liked it.

All Vincent Ward's movies have a heart, a visionary heart. It amazes me that he has managed to make as many movies as he has, as none of them have been block busters. They have all been personal and intense, and they have all added something to the world. None of them are just another genre type a,b or c movie.

I had heard conflicting reviews about this one, but given his previous films particularly Navigator and What Dreams May Come I just had to go. It really got under my skin, it's a historical drama, but dream, desire, and vision saturate the story, making it like no other.

Also being from Aotearoa and with Maori blood having been mixed into my veins, it was fantastic to see such a good film finally being made of that clash of cultures. How personal and close the wars were.

The landscape and the Wanganui River were filmed to perfection.

This movie haunts me. It's great to finally have another Vincent Ward movie. If only they released the other ones on DVD!

Boy did I enjoy River Queen. The scenery was stunning, the acting superb, the story brilliant, and the music was a hauntingly beautiful match to an incredible film. I always thought it would be great if a film was set during the Maori wars that was similar to Michael Mann's "The Last of the Mohicans". Well this it, with shades of Joffe's "The Mission" to boot.

River Queen grabs you and draws you into a world that you only learned about in history books. It does not take sides but portrays the beautiful and the ugly in both sides to the conflict. The chemistry between the main actors is powerful and moving and keeps the people of the story to the fore, stopping them from being engulfed by the powerful images of the war.

I always thought it would take our own Peter Jackson (should be Sir Peter) to make a film of this quality in New Zealand and about New Zealand. But I take my hat off to Vincent Ward. River Queen demonstrates that there is an amazing depth of movie making talent in this small country that time and again punches way above it's weight.