Tag Archives: megan walford

“You Chick’s Are Bent!” – A Definitive Sequence in ‘Puberty Blues’

18 May

Sequence Analysis:

 Puberty Blues (Bruce Beresford, 1981):  1:16:48 – 1:20:56 (Final Chapter of the Film)

Sequence being analysed can be seen in the above video ~ 4:06 – 8:16

Puberty Blues (Beresford, 1981), based on the 1979 novel of the same name by Gabrielle Carey and Kathy Lette, tells a coming-of-age story of two teenage girls, Debbie (Nell Schofield) and Sue (Jad Capelja), as they attempt to improve their social status by integrating themselves with the Greenhills Surfie Gang and navigate their way through adolescence in 1970s Cronulla, Sydney. In Bruce Beresford’s words, “It was a sort of insight into the way of life of those kids” (Beresford, 2001). The film depicts life in the Australian surf culture of the early 1970s as being frequently less than fulfilling for girls (Speed, 2004a, p. 57). There is an emphasis on stereotypical gender roles and surf culture rituals with female characters continuously being subjected to sexist stereotyping, limiting their roles to ‘top chick’, ‘moll’ and ‘dickhead’. The kitsch appeal of the film’s mise-en-scene has become a significant attraction, given the currency of 1980s revivalism in popular culture (Speed, 2004b, p.168).

At the end of the film Debbie and Sue discover themselves through their experiences and will no longer do what is expected of them. They break from practices of conformity and defy traditional customs of surfing subculture by purchasing a surfboard and surfing in front of the Greenhills surfie gang. The final sequence which depicts the girls triumph at surfing, and the changing attitudes of the Greenhills gang, is the one I have chosen to analyse. Some commentators have labeled this sequence as “the defining moment in the film” (Capp, 2011). The following response will provide a shot-by-shot analysis of filmic techniques, describing how meaning is produced in this pivotal sequence.  

The sequence fades in to an establishing long shot of a bright sunny day on a beach-front street in Cronulla, Sydney. The camera follows the two protagonists Debbie and Sue, at eye-level as they exit a surf shop carrying their newly purchased surfboard and cross the road to Cronulla Beach. This shot sets up the girls’ ultimate act of rebellion, yet still, at this point in the sequence, reinforces the gender stereotypes and norms of the urban surf sub-culture that dominate the film. Debbie and Sue jointly carry the board (a surfer would carry the board by themselves) and are bombarded with several verbal slurs from passing surfers (“You’re kidding, chick’s surfing?”) as they look to enter into the male domain of surfing. The girls have had enough of conforming to gender stereotypes (“it stinks”).

Shot 2 continues the reinforcement of the surfing culture hegemony and stereotypes. A long shot continues to track Debbie and Sue as they now walk along Cronulla beach with their new surfboard. In the unfocused background you can see surfers and male swimmers giving the girls odd looks, while in the focused foreground a group of girl’s stereotypically sunbaking on the sand comment on the oddity of the situation (“Cop these Chicks”). As the camera pans, following the girls, other surfers enter the foreground and continue the hostile taunts.

In shot 9 Beresford introduces a series of shot-reverse-shot, beginning with the Greenhills surfie gang in a low angle long shot, before cutting to a low angle long shot of Debbie and Sue leaving their belongings on the beach and getting ready to surf. The following shots continuously cut between the Greenhills gang and Debbie and Sue as they exchange verbal banter (“Chick’s don’t surf” – “Just you wait!”).

At first the protagonists fail at their act of rebellion. Sue, in shot 20, attempts to paddle out, slipping off the board numerous times, laughing at she does. In the ensuing shots, medium close ups of the Greenhills gang members, male and female, shows how ridiculous they think girls surfing is, laughing at Sue’s hopelessness on the surfboard.

A medium close up shot of two male Greenhills gang members as they approach the water for a better look in shot 25 is the beginning of a change in attitude. Although through their verbal slurs of “You are bent!”, they are reinforcing their dominance in surfing culture, their separation from the group, which can be seen out of focus in the background, is a sign that something is changing. In the next shot however, the two have returned to the gang.

Probably the most important scenes in the sequence begin with shot 28 when the first non-diegetic sound is introduced in the form of Split Enz “Nobody takes me seriously”. This song has powerful lyrics and accompanies just under two minutes of Debbie’s progress in surfing. Throughout Debbie’s attempts, the camera uses powerful reverse shots to cut back to medium close up shots of individual Greenhills gang members, monitoring their reaction. When Debbie first tries to catch a wave, medium close up shots of gang members reveal their embarrassment through their expressions, dialogue and laughter (“How embarrassing”). However, their opinions soon change.  

Rose Capp (2011) sums up the Greenshills gang’s shift in attitudes quite well; “The boys’ hostile incredulity turns to grudging admiration while the girls shift rapidly from mortification…to bemusement and finally, a distinct distaff pride in Debbie’s success.” These changing attitudes are exemplified in their changing facial expressions.

After numerous attempts, Debbie finally manages to stand up on the surfboard and ride her first wave in shot 30. As the camera peds down from her face to her feet on the surfboard in a medium shot, the grin of Debbie’s face is priceless. The changing facial expressions of the gang members are also priceless. As Capp (2011) describes it the “female empowerment registered in the dawning comprehension on the faces of Debbie’s fellow surfie chicks is what makes this such a literally liberating moment.” The female gang members are at first mortified, then embarrassed, then curious and finally proud.

In shot 32, an eye-level long shot captures Debbie surfing the same wave as a male surfer, symbolizing her new found equality and independence from the constraints of the Greenhills surfie gang. The final shot in the sequence shows Debbie and Sue leaving the beach, with Debbie carrying the surfboard like other surfers do (in comparison to their joint carrying in shot 1), symbolising her defiance of conformity. As the sun sets behind the two protagonists, so does the traditions and contraints of male-dominated surfie subculture.

The sequence analysed above is key to the film Puberty Blues as it shows Debbie and Sue’s defiance of and independence from the male-dominated youth counter-culture of surfing. It also importantly shows a shift in the members of the Greenhills surfie gang’s attitudes to female’s right and ability to surf.

 ~~

By: Megan Walford, z3291268

Word Count: 991

~

References:

Beresford, B., 2001 [interview], in Malone, P., (eds.), Myth and Meaning: Australian Film directors in their own words, Currency Press, Strawberry Hills (NSW).

Capp, R., 2011, “Chick’s Don’t Surf: Puberty Blues (Bruce Beresford, 1981)”, in Senses of Cinema, issue 58 [online] <http://www.sensesofcinema.com/2011/58/chicks-don’t-surf-puberty-blues-bruce-beresford-1981/> Accessed 29th April 2011

Speed, L., 2004a, “You and Me Against the World: Revisting Puberty Blues”, in Metro Magazine: Media and Education Magazine, no. 140, 2004: p.54-59.

Speed, L., 2004b, “Puberty Blues [Book Review]”, in Metro Magazine: Media and Education Magazine, no. 144, Feb 2004: 168-169.

 

Filmography:

Puberty Blues (Bruce Beresford, 1981).

 (NOTE: Although not strictly important, screen caps of the movie will soon be incoporated into this blog post. At the time of posting my computer, unfortunately, was experiencing technical difficulties 😐 But we shall keep calm and carry on !)

Puberty Blues (Bruce Beresford, 1981) Trailer

Advertisements

War on the Fish’n’Chip Shop Floor

30 Mar

FILM REVIEW: Take Away (Marc Gracie, 2003)

‘serving up greed, revenge…and chips’

Take Away (Marc Gracie, 2003) is an Australian comedy, starring Vince Colosimo, Stephen Curry, Rose Byrne and Nathan Phillips. The plot centres on Tony Stilano (Colosimo) and Trev Spackneys (Curry), two bitter enemies who own and run rival fish and chips shops’ on the same quiet suburban Melbourne shopping strip. Tony, owner of ‘Tony’s Fish and Chippery’, is an Italian-Australian with high standards and a clean business practice. The complete opposite of Tony is Trev, owner of ‘Trev’s Fish and Chips’. He is a typical Australian character, the loveable bloke with a careless attitude and unprofessional work practice.

The two, fierce competitors, who have been trying to shut each other down since establishment, are forced, reluctantly, to work together when a multinational fast food chain, Burgies Burgers (laughably similar to McDonald’s), opens an outlet next to Tony’s, threatening both Tony and Trev’s take away businesses. The power of the Burgies chain is realised by Trev, when he states: ‘When that Burgies opens up down the street, this place is stuffed’. Nonetheless, Tony and Trev, backed by community support, do not give up and execute a ‘brilliant’ revenge plot against the Burgies outlet that is unexpected, slightly dramatic, and far-fetched, but completely likeable and hilarious at the same time. Overall, it is a light-hearted and heart-warmingly entertaining tale about the little guys, constantly battling their own differences, and taking on a big corporation.   

    

The film surrounds a true Australian battle of the underdog, the little guy versus a global company, with comedy, a traitor and a potential romance thrown in. Yes, this ‘David and Goliath’-style plot has been at the centre of other Australian films, such as The Castle (Rob Sitch, 1997) (in which Stephen Curry also stars). However, Take Away is not unoriginal, but a unique film that stands alone in its comedic portrayal of the battle between local and global forces.

Although some believe Australians don’t do the comedy genre too well, I believe Take Away is ingenious. It is satirical in nature, sending up nearly everything in the film, from the stereotypical Aussie versus the multicultural Australian, to the fast food chain, Burgies.  As Australians, we know how to laugh at ourselves, and wouldn’t put it past ourselves to do something completely ridiculous to prove a point (i.e. the revenge plot).

What I found really worked for this film was its characterisation, especially of Tony and Trev, and the way it introduced these rivals to the audience. The relationship between Tony and Trev is one of competition. When Tony hires his cousin, Sonja (Rose Byrne), as a trainee manager, Trev hires a trainee manager as well, Dave (Nathan Phillips), from Joblink. Every time they meet they are trying to outdo each other, their constant banter (‘Bullshit’, ’Bullshit you!’) is hilarious and believable.

Competitors: Trev & Tony (Screen Shot)

Vince Colosimo and Stephen Curry, do a brilliant job at portraying Tony and Trev respectively. Colosimo, who shined as Frank in The Wog Boy (Aleksi Vellis, 2000), realistically portrays multicultural Tony. His accent gives away Tony’s ethnic background, but the words that come out of his mouth are full of Australian idioms (e.g. “Competition is so shit-house”).

Curry, as the typical Australian slacker Trev, is most famous (pre-Take Away) for his role as Dale Kerrigan in the Australian classic, The Castle (Sitch, 1997). Trev has been criticised for being an over exaggerated version of the Australia character. However, I find this is key to the narrative of juxtaposing Tony and Trev. Trev’s vocabulary is full of slang, (‘corker’, ‘bloody ripper’), which provides the audience with much amusement.

The opening scenes of Tony and Trev set up and emphasise their inherent differences, by revealing their contrasting morning routines. The scenes are truly brilliant.

Tony is depicted as a organised, well-groomed espresso-drinker. He listens to Anthony Robbins’ motivation tapes and prepares fresh, high quality food. He has a system for everything; ‘drink fridge can rotation’, ‘lemon wedge preparation’ and ‘serviette folding’, just to name a few .

Trev, however, wakes up under an iconic vegemite jar doona cover in a cluttered, messy room. He brushes his teeth with his finger, makes chips out of dirty potatoes and flings his used teabag at the ceiling, adding to the others already dangling above his head. He has a complete disregard for hygiene and safe-work practices.

As the two open up their respective fish and chip shops for the day, we see immaculate Tony in his simple black uniform, and in contrast, laid-back Trev in an Aerosmith band t-shirt, trackies and Dunlop runners. It epitomises how opposite the two are and helps cement the difficulty they would have joining forces to beat Burgies.

         

What I found most disappointing about the film was aspects of the cinematography. While majority of the film was shot well, I felt it lacked any real setting shots of the local area. The audience can tell its set in Melbourne (from the car number plates, and the barely visible “Alphington” suburb sign), but not with absolute assurance. I believe more setting shots in this film would have helped emphasise and develop the notion of ‘community’, that is an important, ever-present component of the narrative. Contrastingly, when Tony and Trev fly to Sydney to confront the Burgies CEO (John Howard), the setting shots are almost like tourism commercials, as the camera sweeps over the Sydney Harbour Bridge and Opera House in an aerial shot. This of course could be seen as the difference between the local, grass roots Melbourne community and the superficial, busy Sydney city. 

     

The film also provides great social commentary on the fast-food industry. The Burgies workplace is seen as a stressful environment, staffing children barely legally allowed to work (one front counter staffer looks about 10 years old). The fast food chain brainwashes children and adults alike with competitions, giveaways, toys and catchy advertising campaigns (sound familiar?).

Take Away pokes fun at almost everything represented in the film; stereotypical characters and the fast food industry. I believe Take Away is a feel good, easy entertainment film that most Australians can relate to.

Truly enjoyable.

Word Count: 985

By: Megan Walford, z3291268

ARTS2062, 2011 !

Filmography:

Take Away (Gracie, 2003)

The Castle (Sitch, 1997)

The Wog Boy (Vellis, 2000)

**All images are screen shots from the DVD, and are used for non-commerical, purely educational purposes**