WILLFULL
By Nicholas Savatovic
DETAILS
MA 15+ Rating
96 Minutes Running Time
2002 AFI Award Nomination – Best Costume Design
PRINCIPAL CAST AND CREDITS
DIRECTOR - Rebel Penfold-Russell
PRODUCER - Vicki Watson
ASSOCIATE PRODUCER - Stephan Elliott
EXECUTIVE PRODUCER - Sheridan Jobbins
SCREENPLAY - Harry Crips
DIRECTOR OF PHOTOGRAPHY - Steve Arnold ACS
EDITOR - Nicholas Beauman
MUSIC - Antony Partos
PRODUCTION DESIGNER - George Liddle
COSTUME DESIGNER - George Liddle
CASTING - Alison Barrett, Nikki Barrett
* * * * *
CATHERINE WATERFORD - Anna Lise Phillips
KATYA - Anne Looby
NAT WOLFF - C. Thomas Howell
MARTIN - Charles “Bud” Tingwell
BILL - John Gaden
CYNTHIA - Nikki Wendt
GINNY - Jennifer Claire
YOUNG CATHERINE - Ellesha Dobbs
GIFF - Christopher Stollery
COMPANY CREDITS
Latent Image Productions Pty. Ltd.
DISTRIBUTORS
Cinemavault Releasing Inc. (Canada)
Columbia TriStar Home Video (Australia)
http://www.columbiafilms.com.au/
Showtime Australia
http://www.sat-address.com/ss/Showtime-Australia.shtml
RELEASE
WillFull was released nationally in Australia on the 29th August 2002, approximately a year after it had been filmed. Greater Union distributed the film in Australian Cinemas. There is no information online about WillFull receiving a theatrical release in another country.
It has been screened in the Dublin Film Festival, on the 28th April 2001, where it is mentioned in the following link:
http://www.showbizireland.com/news/april01/05-montgomery01.shtml
BOX OFFICE
In WillFull’s first week of release, it was shown in 12 theatres and made $6,369.
http://www.boxofficemojo.com/intl/australia/2002/35.htm
It ended up earning $15, 068 in 2002. This places it 387th in the list of the highest grossing Australian films ever. That’s not too bad…Oh. At the time of writing, April 2004, the list only goes to 416.
http://www.moviemarshal.com/idg-australianfilms.html
BIBLIOGRAPHICAL DETAILS OF INTERVIEWS
The one interview found online was at the SBS Movie Show website. It is an audio interview in the mp3 format, which can be listened to or loaded from the link:
http://www.sbs.com.au/movieshow/interviews.php3?id=122
There are also some production notes found on Stephan Elliott’s website featuring comments from the director, producers and cast. This can be found here:
http://www.stephanelliot.netfirms.com/willfull.htm
ON-LINE PRESENCE AND REVIEWS
As indicated in the above section, I did not find any reviews of this film on hardcopy media like magazines, newspapers or journals. Yet for a film that was filmed in 2001 and released in 2002, there is not much on-line presence at all either! As the box office figures above indicate, this film was made with quite a modest budget and it had taken a lot of time to find a distributor for the film, which didn’t seem get much advertising while it was playing - I had personally never heard of it before I saw it mentioned on the MED231 site.
There were five reviews listed at Rotten Tomatoes, and just three of them were accessible (one of them was only partly available as you had to pay to read the rest of the review). There are not many more links to add to the above, but here they are…
The Movie Show website has a short review of the film here (Margaret gave it 3 stars and David gave it 2.5):
http://www.sbs.com.au/movieshow/reviews.php3?id=951
There is a brief synopsis at this site:
http://www.hollywood.com/movies/detail/movie/417728
There is the beginning of a positive review (the one and only it seems) at this website, pay to read more:
http://www.urbancinefile.com.au/home/view.asp?a=6465&s=Video_files
A short review that manages to classify this film as a certain type:
http://nofreelist.com/review/?movieid=234
This is a longer review of the movie, though not necessarily better:
http://hollywoodbitchslap.com/review.php?movie=6146&reviewer=104
This is one very short and unhelpful review:
http://www.moviepie.com/filmfests/willfull.htm
Finally, there is the film’s official website, which contains only a synopsis, and is almost identical to the production company’s website, so here they both are for your browsing pleasure:
Aside from a couple of mentions in articles relating to Australian films, particularly in 2002, the above links were the only sites that dealt with WillFull, the movie (there were thousands more that dealt with ‘willfull murder, rape’ etc). I searched the web with Rotten Tomatoes and with the Google search engine.
* * * * * * * * * * *
PLOT
‘Catherine Waterford (Anna Lise Phillips) is the winner she always wanted to be – until she returns to Australia after years abroad only to be confronted by her willfull mother – a ghost with attitude, and a wardrobe to match.
‘Her mother, Katya (Anne Looby), was an extroverted, glamorous woman who loved champagne, life and men – in that order. Considering Katya’s mothering (somewhat cavalier), Catherine left home at 18 to live anywhere but with Katya.
‘Catherine finally returns home to see her estranged mother. However, Katya beats her to it, dying a mere two days before her arrival. Katya comes back as a woman scarcely older than Catherine – with all her infuriating vices intact. Suddenly, Catherine is forced to deal with a restless spirit only she can see and who firmly believes: “Mother knows best!” ’ from http://www.latentimage.com.au
SYNOPSIS
The film begins in Singapore, with Catherine (Anna Lise Phillips) on the job as a, well, ‘Success Motivator’. Those people who go around the world ‘selling success’ and inspiring people to reach for their goals, dreams and forget the word ‘quit’. Catherine not only works for one of these men, Nat Wolff (C. Thomas Howell), but is also romantically involved with him. When it’s Catherine’s turn to walk on hot coals however, she burns her feet. The session is cut short. Nat’s business partner Cynthia (Nikki Wendt) receives news that Nat is being sued by one of the people they’ve apparently helped, and Catherine finds out her mother Katya (Anne Looby) has died.
Back in Sydney, for the first time in an unspecified (but presumably long) time, Catherine is taking her mother’s death extremely well. At times however, she sees a young version of herself that is apparently trying to communicate with her. Catherine has never had a good relationship with her mother, and is even somewhat happy that she is dead. She greets good family friend and lawyer, Bill (John Gaden) back at home and together they pack up all of Katya’s things (notably, the dead animals in the lounge, such as the mongoose). She also sees her stepfather Martin (Charles ‘Bud’ Tingwell) and confides that she may be pregnant.
At Katya’s funeral, Ginny (Jennifer Claire), Katya’s best friend, is devastated to find Katya in a pink dress. Later in the night, Catherine receives flowers, which then spread and grow to cover the entire living room. She then sees her mother’s face and faints. Soon, Nat and Cynthia arrive in Sydney to prepare for their first seminar. Soon, Catherine is seeing Katya and talking with her at numerous occasions, while her friends and family think she is losing her mind. After the first third, the film takes on an element quite like a fairy tale before leading to its touching conclusion, which I won’t spoil for you here. All I should really give you is the exposition. And perhaps the tagline: Sometimes, death can be the beginning of a beautiful friendship…
REVIEW
The primary reason I chose this film was that it was not your usual Australian film. I don’t usually associate any one Australian film with the words comedy, fantasy, mystery AND drama! It was an Australian story that did not feel compelled to deal with the clichéd ‘Battler overcoming the Big Bad Businessman’. Interestingly, the story features characters who all seem to be ‘economically comfortable’ as the protagonists, not the antagonists. In fact, looking at the story itself, it reads somewhat like a fairy tale. The ghost of a woman who recently died visits her daughter, a woman who does not like her very much at all (living or dead), and while this is played for laughs at first, it becomes an important part in re-establishing the bond between the two characters by giving them a second chance that ends up revealing the true reasons as to why Catherine hates Katya so much. And then once the air cleared, they live happily ever after.
When trying to classify the type of film this is, you can run into a bit of trouble. While there are numerous funny moments in the film, it could not exactly work as a comedy on the whole. The mystery that takes centre stage by the end is not the defining feature of the film either. The fantastical element of Katya appearing from the dead is a constant feature of the film, yet seems to be more whimsical than seriously supernatural. The drama that comes from Catherine’s relationships with all the characters is a constant aspect of the film, but not it’s defining aspect. I feel if the film had perhaps blended the different genres a little more cohesively; it would be a more successful ‘comedy-drama’, or fantasy, as some web-sites label the film.
Most of the comedy is of the ‘situation’ variety, which does tend to get tired after the first couple of times. There are many instances where Catherine is talking to a Katya only she can see and other people think she’s talking to them. There is a small battering of physical comedy, and quite a few good one-liners (that mostly belong to Katya). Speaking of Katya, Anne Looby does a good job with the character, bringing her to life with some cliché but it isn’t enough to make you groan. Anna Lise Phillips does okay, but I’m not sure if comedy suits her very well, she seems much better at drama (she was on TV’s Young Lions). Her dramatic scenes in this film are moving, whereas she doesn’t seem to have the best sense of comedic timing, but that’s really subjective. Charles “Bud” Tingwell does a great job with the stepfather Martin, a character who proves to be someone quite different by the end of the film. Ginny, short for Gin and Tonic was a laugh and it was amusing to listen to her interrupt Cynthia constantly during dinner. C. Thomas Howell is the same C. Thomas Howell who was in a little movie called ET: The Extra Terrestrial. He does a decent job as Catherine’s boyfriend, but as there is no real resolution between Catherine and him by the end of the film (in relation to their baby), his role seems a little thankless.
The cinematography of the film is gorgeous Steve Arnold has done a fantastic job in capturing a world that is rich with vibrant colours, particularly red, which is Katya’s signature colour. George Liddle also did a great job with the production design. Katya’s house in Sydney is fantastically designed and a perfect fit for the character of Katya. The music is appropriately quirky and supportive of the mood in a particular scene, whimsical, or sombre. Russell’s direction is competent enough, though perhaps not as exciting as it could have been for this type film.
What I feel this film is really about, is responsibility. All the characters seem to be having trouble dealing with it. Catherine feels Katya is responsible for her father’s death, a part of the reason why she hated her so much; Martin was sick of being responsible for Katya, which kept him from passing on important information on to Katya from Catherine; Nat is not taking responsibility for his actions and is being sued as a result and Cynthia is trying be as responsible as she can of her business, but Catherine inadvertently is ruining things.
Overall, I would recommend that people watch this movie, as I found it a refreshing experience that I almost couldn’t believe was Australian, as I have never seen another Australian film like this (or any film really – nothing springs to mind).
3.5 Stars out of 5.
CRITICAL RESPONSE
The response to this film from the reviews that I have managed to find (links to which are located above), indicate a lukewarm feeling amongst movie critics. The Movie Show highlighted its genre identity problem and some problems with certain unconvincing parts of the script.
It has also been described by Stephen Groenewegen: “I came out of Willfull feeling unsettled rather than exuberant. Russell’s direction tries to generate comedy out of empty busyness. Her efforts jar with the pain inherent in the film’s unresolved ending and theme of awkward reconciliation with the dead.” I know business has an I and not a Y, and I’m sure Groenewegen does too. However, I do understand where his comment is coming from, as I had some similar thoughts about the unresolved, yet touching, ending.
The one positive critical response to the film was on the Urban Cinefile website but I was not able to read all of the review. Go figure. As reviewed by Andre L. Urban: “Treading the well worn path of movies about dead people who benevolently haunt their loved ones, WillFull manages to inject some invention into the premise by way of sheer audacity. This works best in the film’s second half, where the dramatic meets the fanciful with a nice payoff that brings tears to the eyes. The performances and the production design match each other as rather fruity manifestations of a single idea...”
PRODUCTION AND RELEASE
The production of WillFull occurred in early 2001. Many of the roles had been written with actors in mind, except for the primary leads, Catherine and Nat, which were cast closer to the shooting date. The script was written over a four year period, and underwent roughly nine rewrites!
The production was on a very modest budget and that led to many location shoots as they could not afford to build many sets. The exterior of Katya’s house is at Potts Point in Sydney, and the property was actually for sale but after a long negotiation process was allowed to be used for their exterior scenes. Both the cast and crew all got along well and everyone seemed to enjoy the experience of making the film.
Russell had a hard time shopping the movie for distribution, but eventually Greater Union decided to take care of that for Australian Audiences. You can find some more elaborate discussion of these points at Stephan Elliott’s website and the Movie Show audio interview:
http://www.stephanelliot.netfirms.com/willfull.htm
http://www.sbs.com.au/movieshow/interviews.php3?id=122
WORK IN CONTEXT
WillFull is Rebel Penfold-Russell’s first feature film as a director, she has previously produced and executive produced ‘The Adventures of Priscilla, Queen of the Desert’, ‘Frauds’ and directed numerous short films, as well as being the head of Latent Image Productions, the film’s production company. She has developed and produced plays, as well as telemovies and documentaries, and was a graduate of NIDA. She is currently working on a feature film script, a drama that is called Sea of Snow.
Anna Lise Phillips has acted in both television and film, one of her notable film performances was in a film called ‘Envy’. She has also guest starred in ‘The Secret Life of Us’. Since WillFull, she has been a main character in another TV show, ‘Young Lions’, as well as appearing in the feature film ‘Walking on Water’.
C. Thomas Howell was originally in E.T. The Extra-Terrestrial as Tyler, and honestly, how could you top that? Well, take a look at the Internet Movie Data Base (IMDB) to see how many films he’s appeared in since (79!)
With 93 credits in the IMDB Charles “Bud” Tingwell has been around for quite a long time. Interestingly enough, When Russell was acting in the past, Tingwell was her first director. Haven’t the tables turned now?
Harry Cripps wrote the feature film ‘Paws’, which Russell produced.
Stephan Elliot, the associate producer of this film wrote and directed a little film you may have heard of called ‘The Adventures of Priscilla, Queen of the Desert’ that Russell produced. He also wrote and directed ‘Welcome to Woop Woop’ and is currently directing a film he has written titled ‘Venetian Wedding’. Elliott also made an appearance in WillFull, as the Customs Officer that Cynthia gives a hard time to.
UPTAKE & CURRENT PLACE OF AUSTRALIAN CINEMA
As mentioned in the ‘Online Presence and Reviews’ section, this film was generally not well received, and managed to make only $15 068 dollars at the box. I had never even heard of the film while it was in the cinema, it seemed to have disappeared behind films such as ‘Australian Rules’, ‘The Tracker’ and ‘Rabbit Proof Fence’ that were a lot more serious in their nature and presentation. It was screened at the Dublin Film Festival in 2001, over a year before it was released here. It seems to be one of those films that for some reason or another have no luck in getting distribution, despite it being a decent film (whereas many movies of lesser quality get released everywhere). It is funny that the film itself seems to be a Battler, a figure that is not represented by a character in the film itself.
THE WILLFULL TYPE
So what ‘type’ of film is this? I suppose it would be safe to say that this film doesn’t particularly belong to one genre only, as its ‘multiple personalities’ are each as important as each other (if not completely successful as each other). I suppose primarily, it would be a Woman’s Film, as it explores the Catherine’s relationship with her mother as the central relationship. Perhaps there is an inversion of the maternal melodrama, looking at the results of a mother’s trials and tribulations from the daughter’s perspective. Catherine and Nat are also in an established, but evolving ‘love story’. There is family melodrama with the ‘mystery’ that ends up revealing the cause of Catherine’s hatred of Katya, as well as with Martin’s behaviour at the end of the film.
Then again, there are comedic aspects that arise. Situation Comedy also plays a part in the proceedings, and to a lesser extent, so does visual humour. The mystery and fantasy, as different as they are, seem to propel the drama rather than be used as they usually are in mysterious or fantastical films. Elements of fantasy are used to emphasise the comedy, while the mysterious flashbacks are used to heighten the drama.
I have not seen any Australian films quite like this before, and I feel that it is sitting in its own seat in the history of Australian Cinema. So it is its own, ‘Willfull’ type of film. Perhaps it will encourage other Australian Filmmakers to make risky decisions, and not be afraid of trying new things with genre, for creating new types of film should be the goal of not just Australian Filmmakers, but any filmmakers.
REFERENCES
All my references were from the web, and if they haven’t already been linked to previously, here they are.