This writer tries to avoid comparing the film with the book, They are totally different media. I've never before referred to other posts on this site. This time I have to break both rules.
This film is effectively a sequel to the memoir 'Surviving Maggie', John Fingleton's tale of his dysfunctional family, and their violent, alcoholic mother. Yes, John's grandmother. The slant here is that of 'Once were Warriors', the great little movie from New Zealand, which was based on the experiences of a violent mother. In 'Warriors' the violent one becomes the father. The victim in John's memoir is Harold, played here by Geoffrey Rush, who has been turned into a violent alcoholic. Why authors do this, I do not know. What I do have to ask is: Is this a good movie, in itself? Now, the other posts. It is obvious that the American cut is different than the Australian version. Correction: The DVD is different. It would seem that at 'live' showings in the USA, there was a Q & A. Parts of this appear as part of the DVD version.
So, what about the movie? It's a good story, well acted. Judy Davis does the oppressed woman very well. So well, that it indicates some bravery on her part taking these roles. The invariably competent Geoffrey Rush is an excellent drunk. I suppose most of us have met his like. The camera work is fine, but the sound (all that splashing water!) is not good.
For the social psychologist, this is an interesting rendition of the effect of inherited characteristics through three generations. It is likely that more people have read 'Surviving Maggie' than have viewed 'Swimming Upstream'. I usually refrain from suggesting that people take in both the film and the book. In this case, You might enjoy both. There's a six-months wait for the book at my local library!
This film is effectively a sequel to the memoir 'Surviving Maggie', John Fingleton's tale of his dysfunctional family, and their violent, alcoholic mother. Yes, John's grandmother. The slant here is that of 'Once were Warriors', the great little movie from New Zealand, which was based on the experiences of a violent mother. In 'Warriors' the violent one becomes the father. The victim in John's memoir is Harold, played here by Geoffrey Rush, who has been turned into a violent alcoholic. Why authors do this, I do not know. What I do have to ask is: Is this a good movie, in itself? Now, the other posts. It is obvious that the American cut is different than the Australian version. Correction: The DVD is different. It would seem that at 'live' showings in the USA, there was a Q & A. Parts of this appear as part of the DVD version.
So, what about the movie? It's a good story, well acted. Judy Davis does the oppressed woman very well. So well, that it indicates some bravery on her part taking these roles. The invariably competent Geoffrey Rush is an excellent drunk. I suppose most of us have met his like. The camera work is fine, but the sound (all that splashing water!) is not good.
For the social psychologist, this is an interesting rendition of the effect of inherited characteristics through three generations. It is likely that more people have read 'Surviving Maggie' than have viewed 'Swimming Upstream'. I usually refrain from suggesting that people take in both the film and the book. In this case, You might enjoy both. There's a six-months wait for the book at my local library!