Part 1: Film Information

Traps.

Interview

In the 99th issue of the Cinema Papers, Sue Adler conducted two separate interviews on the film Traps. The first interview was held with director Pauline Chan and producer Jim McElroy. The interview begins with Jim explaining his choice for selecting Chan as the director, and it follows with subsequent related matters that are related to pre production process, like the choice of venue. Most part of the interview center around Chan's background being an immigrant and an ethnic filmmaker. In the interview, Chan express her feeling about shooting the film in Vietnam, instead in Tuscany originally. Chan also explain how she draws parallel between the problematized characters in the film and the societal problem that existed in our society. Last but not least, Chan give a brief summary on how she felt being an ethnic filmmaker. In the second interview, Sue gets to meet up with Traps co-scriptwriter Robert Carter. During the interview, Robert gives a very brief account of the scriptwriting process.

I was very lucky to be allocated with a film that was made in the 1990s. It was easy for me to find some information from the Murdoch Library regarding this film. Generally, you can easily find some articles that are written on Australian film in the monthly edition of the Cinema Papers. Unfortunately, I could only find limited articles because Traps was not a popular film at its time of release. There were not much information that I can find from the Internet too.

Part 2: Critical Review of Film and its Literature

Introduction

Movies have developed to become the most popular and influential medium of culture in most countries. It was recorded that for the first half of the twentieth century-from 1896 to 1946, movies was the first modern mass media that rose to the surface of cultural consciousness in American society (Sklar: 1975). Before Thomas A. Edison perfected any motion picture apparatus, he predicted that motion picture would only be cater to wealthy families. Instead it turned out to be the other way, movie belong to the popular culture regardless anywhere in the world.

Critical Review

Traps is "based on characters" from Kate Grenville's novel, Dreamhouse. Director Pauline Chan, a Vietnamese national now resident in Australia, co-wrote the script with Robert Carter, who is an award writer of stories and novels. Originally the location of the book is in Tuscany, due to Pauline's nationality, they have change the location of the script to Vietnam in 1950s. Producer Jim McElroy believes that by changing the venue to Vietnam, Pauline will have more personal feeling toward the directing of the film in an interview printed in Cinema Papers (Adler: 1994). In the same interview, Pauline also feel that through the film she will be able to display a different political perspective of that era of Vietnam from those of American production. She feels that Traps is a more down to earth representation of the actual political situation.

Synopsis

Traps is about a married English couple who visit Vietnam in the early 1950s, when the Vietminh (a coalition of nationalist and a communist groups) was trying to free Vietnam from the French occupation. Micheal Duffield (Robert Reynolds) a journalist, who is the husband of a photographer Lousie Duffield (Saskia Reeves). In the film, Lousie was trying to liberate herself from the control of her husband. As what McElroy had said in the interview,

"Traps is a film immediately relevant to an audience because it is talking about the single most important relationship of your life, outside of family. The commitment to marriage is the biggest emotional commitment you make, and this film is examining the nature of that relationship with one couple, and the stress and strain that events can force on a marriage."(Adler: 1994)

In the film, Micheal makes weak pretence at objectivity and inevitably being a journalist by writing according to those who employed him - in this case Daniel (Sami Frey), a friend who is part of a French rubber consortium (Murray: 1994). During the trip and the stay in Daniel's mansion, we can witness scene where he and Lousie constantly challenging each other, which suggests that his marriage is on a troubled course. At the plantation, the Duffields try to find a balance between their needs as an individual and as partners in a union (Chan:1994). Being an audience, I can draw parallel between the film and its implication on the society social values. For example in the case of Duffields, where the problematised marriage is a common problems in our society.

Critics

Chan should be credited for some part of the film, where she managed to use the female casts to show her understanding towards the sensibility of a woman, especially in scenes when Lousie is alone with Viola Renouard (Jacqueline McKenzie), the daughter of the French plantation manager. Though Traps has some brilliant moment, personally I felt that the story show sign of imbalance as a whole. While watching the film, I can sense that there is a constant struggle in every cast: the struggle of freedom by Lousie from her husband; the struggle to be an objective journalist by Michael; the struggle of leaving his father in the hope of seeing the world by Viola; the struggle of freedom as a communist by Tuan; the struggle to maintain serenity and solitude of Daniel. Though the film was set in the a time of struggle, there should be some balance between the cast and the plot. I feel that there are not much connection between the cast and the story. The film is made up of individua l story that was acted and represented by individual cast. The casts are only connected through the relationship that existed between the roles, like the husband and wife, the father and daughter, the master and servant, the people and nation, and lastly this film and its origin.

In addition, I have found that a couple of the scenes are very amusing. I do not understand why Micheal should constantly reinstate his nationality as an Australian in the film. Is this how Chan convinced the viewers and the sponsor that Traps is an Australian film? Isn't that very immature of her? I do not see any form of connection between Michael being an Australian and the plot of the film. I would definitely give that a miss. In the series of articles written by Tom Oregan, he has gave a chronicle review of the Australian Cinema towards the last three decade, the 1970s, 1980s and the 1990s. He had identified the causes for the changed in trend over the last three decade. Traps exhibits the characteristics of any 90's Australian film. The only direct Australianness about the film is that it was source from an Australian book by an Australian author. Unlike on the 1980s and 1970s, most of the films that were in the last two decades do show a stronger presence of Australianness both in the production and the film itself. Most of these films are shoot in Australia. I will highlight the possible reasons that are faced by the Australian cinema through film like Traps.

Australia Cinema

In the 1990s, we saw the structural change in the film industry in Australia. Given to the limited domestic's opportunity, filmmakers seek internationally for funding and other resources. It is the era where international integration is a must. Many would have argued that Australian film are losing its purpose as a cultural tools to represent Australian culture in film, which I feel it's not true. Instead I feel that film in the 90s are more Australian then those make before. Australia, like America, is made up of multi ethnic groups. Australia does not have its own culture; it is a country that is made up of many different cultures. Since it does not have a culture of its own, I do not see the point of emphasizing Australianness in film. At the same time, the distinction between Australian film and other national cinema film is getting more and more gray.

I find that Australia cinema is a confusing and contradicting industry. Personally, I was not really bother about the origin of an English language speaking film. I am more concern about the quality of the film in terms of the story, the way it is film, the quality of the actors and other aspects. I do not understand why people are concerned about deciding whether the film is a product of Australia or America, since there are no distinctive guidelines to decide the origin of a film, especially in the 1990s. One of these examples is the film Piano, which was term Australian film due to some unimportant connection. Such recognition is only a material thing, why should one be concerned about it. More importantly, filmmakers should be more concerned about the finance for their next project. This where the difference lies between the American cinema and the rest of the English language cinema.

American cinema has prevailed and dominates the global movie industry because they are not concerned in making the best American film. They have succeeded because they have made films that are desired by the audiences, which in return generate substantial income to support the next film. They are not concerned whether the film carries any cultural nodes or whether American makes it. Unlike the Australian film industry, filmmaker in America rely on private funding, thus they are moulds to be more independent. They do not just produce film; they also market the film. This is what Australian cinema is lacked off.

In the past, Australia filmmakers in national cinema depend on funds from the government to produce films. They are not concerned whether the film will generate substantial income as the government provides the funds. They are more concerned in convincing the government bodies as they reckon that it is their only source of funds. This resulted in low-grade film being produced from time to time. Though occasionally there are some good film being produced, many audience are not aware due to limited publicity.

I have found a very interesting way to look at Australian Cinema, a national cinema. Being a marketing and media student, I would like to understand and comment on Australian Cinema, not from two different perspectives, instead a mixture of ideas from the two schools of thoughts. I have felt that people tend to be very biased when they view and put an opinion on something. Normally they rely on their experiences and the knowledge that is taught to them to form an opinion which will result in a certain action. For example, those people who are involved in making the film, like director, will think differently from those who try to profit from the film, the sponsor.

There are no one winning formula in the making of the film. The reasons are that every body gauge success differently from one another. Let me ask you, how do we know whether a particular film is good or successful? While a director might look into the technical side of a film to judge whether the film is good, the owner of the company might rely on the ticket sales or the profit generated as a form of measurement for performance of a film. As for audiences, it varies from one to another, depending exactly on the taste of individuals need and wants. Though there is no one universal set of measurement, it is important to set the goal right before any film is made.

In the case of Australian cinema, we should set two objectives, instead of one, for the future of this national cinema. They are to make quality film with its own characteristics and to be able to generate substantial income for the next production. In my opinion, other than concentrating in making a film, strategic marketing programs will enhance the awareness of the consumer and thus will increase the sales of tickets in cinema. Like other consumer product, we can apply marketing concept on film too. They should identify the kind of audience that they would like to attract. The audience should not be subjected to only domestic market; instead they should distribute the film to possible oversea market. Once they identified the type of audience for the film, they should formulate communication strategy that caters to the targeted audience.

The Future

Australia has the potential to become an influencing force in the global movie industry. Being an English language cinema, Australia has the comparative advantage over those non-English language cinema like French and Japanese because English is a common language that are used in most countries. Australia has large pool of human resources that are trained in the making of a film. In the recent success, like Babe and Muriel's Wedding, Australia cinema has proven that it have the capabilities to produce quality film. Australia cinema should focus on films that revolve around themes that are more down to earth, especially those social problems that are currently faced by the society. For example in the film, Trainspotting, the issue that was carried across to the audience was the problem of consuming drug in our society.