Assignment #2 Critical Review and Bibliography
Paradise Road
Kirsten Ellery
Murdoch University
MED231 Australian Cinema
Tutor: Garry Gillard
PART ONE: FILM INFORMATION
Plot Synopsis
In the middle of World War II, the 'impregnable' island of Singapore comes under attack from advancing Japanese forces. Women and children of all nationalities- British, American, Australian, Dutch-, are spirited away in the dead of night, on an overcrowded and poorly defended ship. As they flee towards the relative safety of Australian waters, they come under attack from Japanese fighter planes, and the ship sinks with heavy casualties. The survivors are washed up on the shores of Sumatra, and are forced to spend the next three and a half years in a prison camp in the jungle. Amongst the murders, the rapes, the beatings and the daily terror the women have to endure, they form an orchestral group, singing classic operas from memory. The music of the choir brings hope to the prisoners, and helps them to dream of a day when they will one day be free again.
Lead Actors
Glenn Close as Adrienne Partiger
Glen has been involved in film and stage for nearly thirty years, with fifty-four film productions to her name, and a further eight as a producer. She has been nominated for and won many awards, including five Academy Award nominations, one BAFTA nomination, six Golden Globe nominations and one Golden Globe, seven Emmy nominations and one Emmy, three Tony awards, and two Screen Actors Guild Award nominations and one SAG award. She is best known for her roles in Fatal Attraction and Dangerous Liaisons.
Frances McDormand as Dr. Verstak
Frances received much criticism for her role in this movie, especially on the back of her Oscar win for Best Actress in a Leading Role (Fargo, 1996 season). Involved in film and stage for many years, she has been in forty-three movie productions, her best known being Fargo and Mississippi Burning.
Pauline Collins as Daisy 'Margaret' Drummond
Pauline has been part of the British film and stage scene for many years now, and was awarded an O.B.E. in 2001. Nominated for an Academy Award and winning one BAFTA, she is best known for her part in Shirley Valentine.
Cate Blanchett as Susan Macarthy
One of Australia's favourite actresses, Cate has had a string of successes over the years, with Paradise Road acknowledged as her first major production on screen. Since then she has won Oscar success for her part as Katherine Hepburn in The Aviator, has played the elf queen Galadriel in The Lord of the Rings trilogy, and has played the title character in Elizabeth, the film credited with propelling her into international stardom. She has been involved in stage and screen, with thirty film and television productions. She also has produced one film.
Jennifer Ehle as Rosemary Leighton-Jones
Probably best known for her role as Elizabeth Bennett in the BBC adaptation of Jane Austen's Pride and Prejudice, Jennifer has been in nineteen productions, and has won awards for her performances on stage, winning a Tony in 2000 for Best Actress in a Play. She also won a BAFTA for her part in Pride and Prejudice.
Julianna Margulies as Topsy Merritt
Julianna has been in twenty-three movies, but is most famous for her role in ER (1994-2000) as Head Nurse Carol Hathaway. She has been nominated for and won many awards, including Golden Globes, Emmys, Golden Satellite and the Screen Actors Guild Award.
Supporting Actors
Wendy Hughes as Mrs. Dickson
Johanna Ter Steege as Sister Wilhelmina
Elizabeth Spriggs as Mrs. Roberts
Pamela Rabe as Mrs. Tippler
Clyde Kusatsu as The Snake
Stan Egi as Captain Tanaki
David Chung as The Interpreter
Sab Shimono as Colonel Hirota
Penne Hackforth-Jones as Mrs. Pike
Production Credits
Director: Bruce Beresford
Bruce has been a part of the Australian film industry for over the last two decades, directing thirty productions, writing nine, producing six and was the cinematographer for one. He started his career as a film officer for the British Film Institute Production Board from 1966 to 1971, and was also a Film Advisor to the Arts Council of Great Britain. A director from the Australian 'New Wave' era, he has been nominated for nineteen international awards (including Academy Awards, Golden Globes and BAFTAs), and has won a total of four.
Writing/Screenplay: Bruce Beresford, David Giles, Martin Meader
Producers: Sue Milliken, Greg Coote
Executive Producer: Graham Burke, Andrew Yap
Co-Executive Producers: David Giles, Martin Meader
Director of Photography: Peter James
Peter has had a lengthy career in the film industry, encompassing work on twenty-eight films, and has worked with Bruce on Double Jeopardy, Driving Miss Daisy, and Black Robe.
Production Designer: Herbert Pinter
Herbert, like Peter, has worked on a number of films with Bruce before Paradise Road, including Black Robe, Good Man in Africa, and The Fringe Dwellers. He has been involved in thirteen films, including the Australian war film Gallipoli.
Costume Designer: Terry Ryan
Described as 'The Other Australian Designer‰, Terry has been involved with more than thirty film and television productions. Most lately, his work has been seen in the Australian/New Zealand sci-fi television series Farscape. Other works include Muriel's Wedding, Chopper, and Gallipoli.
<http://members,aol,com/MG4273/costume.htm>http://members,aol,com/MG4273/costume.htm
<http://movies2.nytimes.com/gst/movies/filmography.html?p_id=109415>http://movies2.nytimes.com/gst/movies/filmography.html?p_id=109415
Art Direction: Ian Gracie
Ian is one of Australia's foremost Art Directors, having worked on Moulin Rouge, Ned Kelly, Pitch Black, Star Wars II, Star Wars III, and the soon to be released Chronicles of Narnia. Previously, he has worked with Bruce on Sydney: A Story of a City. In total, he has been the art director on twenty-one productions, and has been involved with the art department on a further three.
Set Direction: Brian Edmonds
Casting: Joseph Middleton
Alison Barrett
Patsy Pollock
Editor: Timothy Wellburn
Tim is best known for his local work, having been an editor on thirty-seven productions, and involved in the sound department in two. Previously he has worked with Bruce on The Fringe Dwellers and Black Robe.
Composer: Ross Edwards
Ross has had a prosperous career in music spanning many decades, writing for orchestras, ensembles, vocal groups, stage productions and films. Paradise Road is his first major movie score, in which he was nominated for Best Music Score by the FCAA in 1998.
<http://www.rossedwards.com/>http://www.rossedwards.com/
Sound: Gary Wilkins
Special Effects: Brian Cox
Makeup: Nikki Gooley
Stunt Coordinator: Glenn Boswell
Distributors: Village Roadshow Pictures/ YTC Pictures in association with Planet Pictures
Production: Australian Film Commission and Pacific Film and Television Commission, in cooperation with the Queensland government.
Specifications
Classification: Drama/War
Run Time: 122 minutes
Rating: M15+ (For Medium Level Violence)-Australia
R- America
Filmed: 1996
Country: Australia, Malaysia and Singapore
Locations: Marrickville, Sydney, NSW
Penang, Malaysia
Port Douglas, Queensland
Raffles Hotel, Singapore
Singapore
Release Dates
United States: 11th April 1997
Australia: 5th June 1997
United Kingdom: 5th December 1997
Box Office Figures
Total United States Gross: $1 990 257
Total Australian Gross: $ 2 970 653
57th Highest Grossing Film for 1997
<http://www.afc.gov.au/gtp/mrboxausttops.html>http://www.afc.gov.au/gtp/mrboxausttops.html
<http://www.moviemarshal.com/bowaus1997.html>http://www.moviemarshal.com/bowaus1997.html
Awards & Nominations
1998 Golden Tripod Feature Productions Cinema: Peter James
1998 FCAA (nominations) Best Director: Bruce Beresford
Best Music Score: Ross Edwards
Best Screenplay- Adapted: Bruce Beresford
Links
<http://movies.go.com/filmography/credits?movie_id=38954>http://movies.go.com/filmography/credits?movie_id=38954
<http://www.awm.gov.au/journal/j32/nelson.htm>http://www.awm.gov.au/journal/j32/nelson.htm
<http://www.imdb.com/>http://www.imdb.com
<http://kzsu.org/~romain/paradise.html>http://kzsu.org/~romain/paradise.html
<http://www.screensound.gov.au/cgi-bin/waxhtml.exe/olc/olcsearch.wxh?sDBlode=PR>http://www.screensound.gov.au/cgi-bin/waxhtml.exe/olc/olcsearch.wxh?sDBlode=PR
Online Reviews
The Chicago Sun-Times, review by Roger Ebert
<http://www.rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/19970418/REVIEWS/704180307/1023>http://www.rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/19970418/REVIEWS/704180307/1023
James Berardinelli
<http://movie-reviews.colossus.net/movies/p/paradise_road.html>http://movie-reviews.colossus.net/movies/p/paradise_road.html
The New York Times, review by Stephen Holden
<http://www.nytimes.com/library/film/road-film-review.html>http://www.nytimes.com/library/film/road-film-review.html
Assorted reviews (55 available at time of this publication)
<http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/paradise_road/>http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/paradise_road/
Author Unknown
<http://crazy4cinema.com/Review/FilmsP/f_paradise_road.html>http://crazy4cinema.com/Review/FilmsP/f_paradise_road.html
<http://www.urbancinefile.com.au/home/view.asp?a=248&5=Reviews>http://www.urbancinefile.com.au/home/view.asp?a=248&5=Reviews
The San Francisco Examiner, review by Edvins Beitiks
<http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/e/a/1997/04/18/WEEKEND12569.dH>http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/e/a/1997/04/18/WEEKEND12569.dH
The San Francisco Chronicle, review by Peter Stack
<http://www.sfgate/com.cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/1997/04/18/DD26782.DTL>http://www.sfgate/com.cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/1997/04/18/DD26782.DTL
Books of Interest
Colijn, Helen, Songs of Survival: Women Interned, New York 1996
Jeffrey, Betty, White Cookies: Australian Nurses Behind Enemy Lines, Angus & Robertson, Sydney, 1954
Kenny, Catherine, Captives: Australian Army nurses in Japanese prison camps, University of Queensland Press, 1986
Simons, While history passed: the story of the Australian nurses who were prisoners of the Japanese for three and a half years, William Heinemann, Melbourne, 1954
Warner, L. and Sandilands, J., Women beyond the wire: a story of prisoners of the Japanese 1942-45, Michael Joseph, London, 1982
Interviews
The Movie Show, SBS Television, Sydney, 4 June 1997 (Bruce Beresford)
Journal Articles
<http://www.awm.gov.au/journal/j32/nelson.htm>http://www.awm.gov.au/journal/j32/nelson.htm: The Australian War Memorial Journal; Issue 32; 1999
Why I chose this film
With the ninetieth anniversary of Gallipoli being celebrated recently, a lot of media attention has speculated on how Australia- as such a young nation- has been shaped by the World Wars. There have been theories that, as such a young nation without a strong national identity, we 'created' ourselves during the horror and the bravery that emerged during the war years.
With that in mind, I wanted to see how we portrayed ourselves in films about war. The film is not as well known as Gallipoli or Breaker Morant, but it still addresses what is important- how the Australian spirit copes with the hardships of war. The film is not always flattering, nor is it always critical. But what's important is that it does look at an issue not often associated with war, that being the treatment of women and how they survive.
PART TWO: CRITICAL REVIEW
The History behind Paradise Road
The movie Paradise Road is, as already stated, based on the true events of the internment of Australian, European and American women after the fall of Singapore in 1942. The Australian War Memorial Journal provides a haunting account of the events upon which the movie is based.
In the early afternoon of Saturday 14 February the British ship Vyner Brooke, carrying some of the last civilians to escape from Singapore, was steaming just off southeast Sumatra. Among the passengers and obvious in their uniforms of grey dresses, white cuffs and Red Cross armbands were 65 women of the Australian Army Nursing Service. Having come straight from duty in crowded temporary hospitals in Singapore the nurses wore a variety of headgear-white caps and red capes, tin hats, and felt hats with scarlet, brown and grey bands (brims, as matrons instructed, neither curled nor set at a provocative angle). Although the Vyner Brooke carried only about 300 passengers, there were no bunks and no meals for most, and the nurses had slept on the deck. At around 2 pm the ship's siren sounded a warning, passengers crowded below deck, and six Japanese aircraft attacked with bombs and machine gun fire. On the first pass the bombs missed, the Vyner Brooke changed course sharply, and its one gun fired token resistance. The Japanese planes returned, the Vyner Brooke convulsed under the tearing crash of bombs, and its engines stopped.
This horrific attack was seen in the first twenty minutes of the film, but did not truly convey the terror of the situation. Even those shot down by the spray of bullets don't seem terribly realistic. It seems too cinematic to be 'based on real events'. With the soaring background music, and the courageous actions of some of the characters, the scene seems almost tragically noble on screen. It is easy to forget that the real event- the attack on the Vyner Brooke- would have been far less noble and heroic than it seemed on screen. No heart-wrenching music prompting a tear to the eye, no close up on the almost peaceful faces of dead children. Just women and children screaming, burning, drowning, dying, and scrambling for their lives. Fleeing from a sinking ship that would pull the unwary down with it, with the only escape to be found a shark-infested sea stained with the blood of those shot down by the planes.
Later, Glenn Close's character accuses Captain Tanaki of breaking with the Geneva Conventions of War by firing upon a vessel carrying innocents. What the film doesn't reveal, is that Japan had in fact, acknowledged the Geneva Convention, if not signed it.
As they walk along a dirt track, indifferent Japanese soldiers cycle past, and then a car stops and all three are ordered into the back seat. A Japanese officer, Captain Tanaka, sitting beside the driver, turns around and engages the three women in conversation. He explains that for some years he had been a newspaper correspondent in Singapore. When the women say they were on a ship sunk by Japanese aircraft, Tanaka, in an apparently friendly gesture asks, "What can I say? Attacking the enemy is a characteristic of war." Not placated by small talk, Pargiter tells Tanaka that the Prince Albert was carrying only women and children and that they were protected by the Geneva Convention. Tanaka, now colder and more menacing, says that Japan did not sign the Geneva Convention and "If war has begun, the time for rules has ended. The aim is to win." He turns abruptly, ending the conversation, and the women realise they have entered a world where the physically powerless are without appeal to protective rules.
In the film the Prince Albert is shown as a grey ship identified by the letters M1121, and with its one anti-aircraft gun it returns fire. The dark grey Vyner Brooke of 1942, flying the British white ensign, and the Prince Albert of the film were both legitimate targets of war. By contrast, the Wah Sui, another of the ships leaving chaotic Singapore, was painted white with a large red cross clearly visible and was carrying wounded and six women nurses; clearly a hospital ship, the Wah Sui was protected by the conventions of war. While the Wah Sui was anchored in Singapore harbour the Japanese did not attack it, but warned that it was too close to other ships and facilities that would be bombed, and so should shift. When the Wah Sui sailed on 12 February, Japanese planes flew low across it but did not attack [<http://www.awm.gov.au/journal/j32/nelson.htm#n47#n47>47]. When the Australians and the British used like the Empire star and the Vyner Brooke to evacuate civilians from Singapore when the Japanese completely dominated the air, had already occupied points to the south in Borneo and Ambon, and were about to capture Singapore, they knowingly took a terrible risk. They had strong arguments in 1942 (and others since) to justify the decision, but it troubled some of those who took it for the rest of their lives.
When Tanaka says "Japan has signed no Geneva Convention" he is nearly correct. The Japanese government had not ratified the Geneva Convention of 1929, but it had said that it would abide by its rules. Sometimes the Japanese did comply, as with the hospital ship Wah Sui, and sometimes they were guilty of gross violations, as in the shooting of the men and women on Banka Island.
Whilst this does not excuse the war time atrocities committed, the fact that this evidence is omitted from the film shows a willingness to portray the Japanese as bloodthirsty savages. An evil villain is needed in order for the tragic and noble sufferings of the heroines to appear all the more gracious and virtuous.
The movie claims to be based upon a true story, and for the most part that is correct. The books by Betty Jeffrey (White Cookies) and Helen Colijn (Songs of Survival) were the basis for the story, of the internment of women in Sumatra, and the choir they formed whilst imprisoned. However, on many occasions, the film either overdramatises events or fails to recognise their significance. Whilst women were beaten and treated harshly in the camps, almost never did the punishments reach the level portrayed in the film. One woman is doused with petrol and incinerated in front of the assembled women for sneaking into the jungle to trade for medicines to save the ailing women in the camp. We are told that, historically, there was such a woman, who very often left the confines of the prison to swap the jewellery and valuables of the women for food, medicines, alcohol and other contraband. On one occasion, she was almost caught when an alarm clock she was trading went off- as in the film. But this woman escaped unharmed- she was certainly not burned to death. Other punishments, such as when Cate Blanchett's character is forced to kneel amidst sharpened stakes for two days in the blazing sun without water, shade or rest, are according to survivor accounts, simply did not happen- at least, not in the women's camps.
The offer to join the 'officer's club' is another event that did not receive accurate attention. According to historical accounts, it did not take the Japanese more than a year to make the offer, as seen in the film. Within weeks of their incarceration, the women were taken to a modest bungalow- hardly the Dutch palatial estate seen in the film- and were held for weeks on end. The temptations were the same as the film- good food, satin sheets, hot water- but it was not made so politely. The soldiers withheld food, deliberately starving the women to make them cave in and provide the sexual pleasures the men wanted. Those who succumbed to the pressure were looked down upon by the other women, who saw it as an act of treachery to their countries to have any sort of liaisons with the enemy. The women were only saved from the threat of the officer's club when a Dutch doctor, respected because of his profession and his association with the Red Cross, appealed to the soldiers to end the club. The film portrays these weeks of torment, of sexual harassment, possible rape and starvation, as a polite encounter held within the space of an afternoon, where the women are given the choice of staying in the luxurious quarters. It certainly does not represent history in a particularly accurate way on this occasion.
The film also fails to portray the lifestyle of the women within the camps. Whilst it is true in essence, with the suffering and the hardship and the terror, many things are skipped over or blurred. At one point, when the women are discussing their intention to start a choir, some of the more 'senior' prisoners advise them against it, claiming that gatherings of any kind are forbidden. This, she says, includes church services and school for the camp's children. At another point, a woman accuses the choir leaders of trying to get them all killed by keeping writing and music sheets hidden in their quarters. In reality, the women were not truly subject to such harsh restrictions.
The diaries of the prisoners give a completely different picture. After being shifted from Banka Island to Palembang, Sumatra, the women were settled into the new camp. From April 1942 they gradually organised their basic services and some entertainment. A newspaper, the Camp chronicle, each issue up to sixteen or eighteen pages, was produced on a typewriter, and carbon copies issued to house groups. Women competed in quiz shows, charades and debates. On ANZAC Day, "a day so sacred to us", the nurses held a service and sang "Advance Australia fair" [<http://www.awm.gov.au/journal/j32/nelson.htm#n39#n39>39]. The Dutch nuns and various Protestant missionaries conducted weekly church services. The nurses salvaged a piano from a Dutch house and, with great effort, wrestled it into their quarters [<http://www.awm.gov.au/journal/j32/nelson.htm#n40#n40>40]. What began as community singing developed into concerts. People sat outside, but the concerts still had to be repeated to meet demand. "Even the Nips", Jessie Simons wrote, "came and enjoyed our efforts" [<http://www.awm.gov.au/journal/j32/nelson.htm#n41#n41>41]. Margaret Dryburgh, a missionary, accompanied many of the singers in popular and semi-classical songs; comic lyrics commenting on life in Palembang were written to fit known tunes; and plays and sketches were performed. From mid-1942 the women were regularly singing Dryburgh's "The captive's hymn", and they have continued to sing it ever since. The program for the special Boxing day concert of 1942 began with nursery rhymes, continued with songs such as "Men of Harlech" and "Polly wolly doodle", a Dutch song, and then the orchestra performed various items, including a Waltz by Brahms, a "sea song" and Bolero [<http://www.awm.gov.au/journal/j32/nelson.htm#n42#n42>42].
Clearly, the life portrayed in the movie is slightly different to the reality. It is 'based on a true story', but we must remember that it is not the true story- at least, not in it's fullness. The directors and writers have selected elements that most clearly make the story interesting, not necessarily what is the truth.
The final and most important omission is of course, the massacre on the beaches of Banka Island. The event that captured the attention of the nation, and became one of our most important war legends in the years following the war (although it has faded into obscurity in recent years in comparison to our other war stories). The survivors of the sinking washed ashore on the beaches of Banka, along with British soldiers from another sunken ship. Whilst the civilians walked towards the relative safety of the towns, the Japanese soldiers killed first the soldiers, and then returned to the nurses and cleaned their bloodied weapons in front of them. Once the weapons were clean, the nurses were forced into the surf and mowed down with machine guns.
At mid-morning the ship's officer returned with about twenty Japanese soldiers. Having separated the men from the women prisoners, the Japanese divided the men into two groups, and marched them along the beach and behind a headland. The nurses heard a quick succession of shots before the Japanese soldiers came back, sat down in front of the women and cleaned their bayonets and rifles. A Japanese officer, smaller and more "nattily" dressed than his men, told the women to walk into the water. A couple of soldiers shoved those who were slow to respond. Twenty-two nurses and one civilian woman walked into the waves, leaving ten or twelve stretcher cases on the beach. Vivian Bullwinkel said that when the women were up to their waists in water the Japanese
"∑started firing up and down the line with a machine gun. ... They just swept up and down the line and the girls fell one after the other. I was towards the end of the line and a bullet got me in the left loin and went straight through and came out towards the front. The force of it knocked me over into the water and there I lay. I did not lose consciousness. ... The waves brought me back on to the edge of the water. I lay there 10 minutes and everything seemed quiet. I sat up and looked around and there was no sign of anybody. Then I got up and went up in the jungle and lay down and either slept or was unconscious for a couple of days "[<http://www.awm.gov.au/journal/j32/nelson.htm#n3#n3>3].
Paradise Road and Racism
The film, upon its release in America, was subject to harsh criticism for it's portrayal of the Japanese soldiers. Many critics called the film racist, and implied that it was two dimensional with it's depiction of the noble, suffering white women and their sadistic, cruel captors determined to break their spirit. However, in order to combat the negative reviews, survivors of the war camps were interviewed, and asked for their opinions of the film. Overwhelmingly, all those interviewed agreed that the film was entirely accurate, and none of the cruelty, terror and pain portrayed in the film was in any way an exaggeration of what they endured.
As soon as Paradise Road was released in the United States in 1997 Beresford was accused of racism for showing the Japanese as excessively and consistently brutal [<http://www.awm.gov.au/journal/j32/nelson.htm#n21#n21>22]. Ex-prisoners of war were questioned by journalists and they uniformly supported Beresford. Tom Uren, ex-prisoner and ex-Minister in the Whitlam government, made a clear distinction between "Japanese militarists" and their sadism and brutality and the different Japan and Japanese of today [<http://www.awm.gov.au/journal/j32/nelson.htm#n23#n23>23]. A question was even asked in the Australian Parliament, and the Minister for Veterans' Affairs, Bruce Scott, assured members that ex-prisoners had told him the film was accurate. He went on to give a homily about the importance of "telling history as it really was" [<http://www.awm.gov.au/journal/j32/nelson.htm#n24#n24>24]. In his own defence Beresford said that, if anything, the atrocities had been "played down" [<http://www.awm.gov.au/journal/j32/nelson.htm#n25#n25>25]. As the massacre on the beach, the worst act of violence against the women, had been left out, of course that was true. But it was also true that some of the most dramatic punishments inflicted on women in the film did not occur, or at least not in the camps where the Australian nurses were imprisoned [<http://www.awm.gov.au/journal/j32/nelson.htm#n26#n26>26]. The needs of the film forced the dramatic scene of the shooting on the beach out of the film, and the needs of the film meant that other dramatic events had to be imagined or transferred from other camps and made relevant to its main themes..
Directly following the war years there was a strong anti-Japanese sentiment amongst the Australian population that took years to dissipate. The horrific and cruel treatment of nurses and civilians- probably more so than the treatment of the soldiers- was to play a major part in shaping the opinions of the nation. Whilst many of the events in the film may have been overdramatised- the incineration of the Chinese woman, the Australian nurse played by Cate Blanchett being forced to kneel amidst sharp stakes in the sun for two days- much of the events that provoked the ire of the Australian public such as the massacre on the beach and the forced starvation of the prisoners- leading to a level of emaciation in some cases that no amount of makeup or special effects can replicate on Hollywood's starlets- were not addressed properly or even shown at all. Indeed, Issue 32 (March 1999) of the Australian War Memorial Journal almost solely credits the massacre of the nurses as being one of the highest contributors to our post war attitude to our Asian neighbours.
The Australian Women's Weekly expressed the general mood of the Australian public: If ever, anywhere in the world, a plea for mercy or leniency for the Japanese race is heard, there will rise before Australian eyes the accusing picture of 22 gallant women walking, with heads held high, into the sea as the Japanese machine-guns opened their murderous fire [<http://www.awm.gov.au/journal/j32/nelson.htm#n15#n15>15]. The Weekly italicised its judgement for emphasis. But the Australians were unable to bring any Japanese to trial for the shooting of the nurses∑
It was what happened to the nurses on the beach on Banka that most fuelled the immediate post-war anger of Australians against the Japanese.
As mentioned earlier, whilst the omission of the beach massacre would have made sense in a cinematic sense, it seriously hinders the development of the Australian characters. Whilst the women are obviously afraid of their situation, they do not seem to grasp the severity of it. Take, for example, the moment when the women first arrive at the prison camp after being captured. During an assembly in the main square, where the women receive instructions about their incarceration, and the sins of the nations, a pompous women steps out of line and asks the soldiers how long they intend to keep her there. Her attitude is that of one addressing a servant, or someone perceived lesser than herself. The character does no fear these men, merely perceives them as a hindrance and annoyance- someone lesser who has dared to inconvenience her. After being struck to the ground, the woman lies sobbing in the mud whilst the soldiers run through the crowd randomly beating women and forcing the group to bow to the Japanese flag.
The reality of the situation is, even with a racist attitude, no woman would dared to have stood out like that in a prison camp. After the callous massacre of unarmed nurses on the beach in Banka, the women were all too aware that these men had little regard for their lives, and would not hesitate to kill them despite their strength of numbers. This overriding fear was hardly touched upon in the film, as it would have seemed to have had no basis, nothing to ground it on. The massacre of the nurses shaped the actions of the incarcerated women for the next three years, something that we as viewers did not have a chance to see in the film.
When introducing viewers to setting and characters, and getting the characters into a prison camp, Paradise Road makes an obvious change from "true incidents": the killing of eighty people on the beach is completely omitted [<http://www.awm.gov.au/journal/j32/nelson.htm#n21#n21>21]. This is a serious gap. The omission is important, not simply because it leaves out the most violent and brutal act committed by the Japanese against the women, but because the killings had a profound effect on the women, particularly the Australian nurses, during the rest of their imprisonment. From that moment of the emotional reunion with Bullwinkel on 28 February 1942 in the coolie-lines at Muntok, the nurses knew that the Japanese would kill prisoners; that there was no safety in numbers; and that they, and particularly Bullwinkel, eyewitness to the killings on the beach, were particularly vulnerable. They had entered life as prisoners of war with terrible knowledge and under a terrible threat. In all of their subsequent dealings with the Japanese, or as they watched other women enter into relationships with Japanese, they could not forget that the Japanese were responsible for killing 21 of their colleagues. Also, by not making mention of the killings on the beach, Paradise Road cannot make any connection with Australians who know about the massacre; the central evocative moment has been left out. This is Breaker Morant without the firing squad at the end, or Gallipoli without the charge at the Nek. Without the killing on the beach a major factor explaining the post-war anger of Australians against Japanese has been omitted. Without the killing on the beach many of the arguments about whether the women should have been evacuated and when the evacuation should have taken place lose their impact.
Paradise Road and Australia
Before this film the director Bruce Beresford made the now famous Breaker Morant, an Australian anti-war movie set in the time of the Boer war. Many in the crew worked on Gallipoli, Australia's most well-known war film. Paradise Road, Beresford's second war film, again carries an anti-war sentiment. However, whilst Gallipoli is clearly an Australian film, displaying the struggles of Australian characters, their ability to cope with the war and it's horrors, and overall depicting an entirely Australian point of view, Paradise Road is rather jumbled in it's loyalties. Firstly, the mix of nationalities and classes forced into close quarters in the prison means that no one nationality receives the limelight, so to speak. In terms of an Australian point of view, the most important Australian event- that being the massacre of the nurses on the beach- is omitted, leaving the film an examination of all the women, rather than the Australians. Had the film shown the massacre, it could be said to be a film strongly sympathising with an Australian audience, where it is quite clearly made for an international- or rather American- market.
It cannot be said that this is truly an examination into the Australian character, as no one character receives enough time for her personality to be developed and fully understood by the audience. We know nothing of the past behind these women- very little about their family lives, their social standing, their political views and so on. Whereas Gallipoli made more of an attempt to show Australia at the time of war, and initially how the propaganda affected family life, social groups and so on before going on to the war itself, Paradise Road is solely about the hardship and suffering, regardless of race, age and social standing. There is barely any pre-war information, the only information we receive about after the war is in the form of brief written overviews of the characters real life incarnations, and how the war changed them. The film attempts to bring too many characters together in too short a time, and we do not get to know any of them well.
So while it is based upon the historical accounts of mainly Australian survivors, the story-line becomes lost amongst the British, American, Dutch, Chinese, Irish and Australian characters all fighting for the attention of the camera. Therefore, it could be considered a drama, or a war film, or a women's film, but it is not particularly an Australian film. That is, we do not receive an in-depth portrayal of Australian culture, Australian war attitudes, Australian family life, or Australian politics. We receive only a brief glimpse from the two or three Australian characters, only a hint of the Australian spirit that was supposedly shaped by our contribution in the two World Wars.