This film gives full play to the power of images. It's actually a road movie with no plot, but everything I want to say is said in visual language. Australia's natural scenery and animals have increased the visibility, but it is by no means just staying in the stage of appreciation, but the fragility and selfishness of human civilization are contrasted from the journey of the two siblings. Now it seems that the shooting of the aboriginal people is still limited to portraying them as primitive tribes, such as playing in the car of their father who committed suicide (in contrast to the whale rider in the 90s and other movies from the perspective of aboriginal people). Of course, the aborigines are not insulated from modern civilization. For example, the aborigines help a white man who sells tourist goods to do things. But I still don't understand why the aborigines who helped the sister and brother died in the end. Of course, his death was symbolic. It was a protest against the wild hunting of wild animals, but it also showed that he was trying to woo his sister and died.
There are various aspects to expressing opinions with images, such as the use of dissolving to put the walks of sisters and brothers together with the images "developed" by the early colonists in Australia; or the cross-editing of ordinary slaughterhouses when the aborigines hunted animals. Some people might think This editing is abrupt, but I think this is the intention of the film, making you realize that the aboriginal killing of animals is not a performance in front of the camera to satisfy our curiosity, but a legitimate need, and this is the same as what we call modern civilization. The slaughter is the same. This kind of editing logic has established this logic of contrast from the beginning of modern architecture to desert.
View more about
Walkabout reviews
