Film review: Australia

UK release date: Boxing Day
Starring: Nicole Kidman, Hugh Jackman and a lot of Australians


Big huge balls. That's what you need if you're going to name your film after a country. Giant cojones of lead that are impervious to all attack.

Just think about it. No one's had the swollen sack to call a film Britain, or China, or Denmark or even France. Even directors from crap countries like New Zealand, Lichtenstein and Vanuatu (apologies but, really, your countries aren't up there with the likes of Portugal, Morocco and Peru - and those are all barely scraping into the second division of nations) don't have the scrotal strength to name their celluloid odysseys after their own nation.

So just how big is director's Baz Luhrmann's bean bag? Well, imagine that sack that the Elephant Man wore on his head. Now double that - with both heads in there - and then double that. And that a rough approximation of the grain sacks that "Brass Balls" Baz has down there.


On the set of the film, stars (and I use the word loosely) Kidman and Jackman (also two lesser known members of the Justice League - Kidman, who can make anyone believe that she's a she and an actress; Jackman, whose special power is the ability to be both macho and intensely camp at the same time) were so impressed with Luhrmann's conker container that they would take turns shaving it and then polishing it with a chamois cloth each morning.

The film itself (and the country it is named after) is irrelevant when compared to Luhrmann's sperm satchel and its size. A two hour documentary of how he gets trousers big enough for that bad boy is what we want to see - does he only wear sarongs? Has he stolen Hammer's trousers? Does he just use a wheelbarrow? How does he sit down?

Oh and if you don't believe me about his onion bag then remember this is the man who put Terence Stamp in a dress; re-imagined Kidman as a French Whore; got us to think that Ewan McGregor could sing, dance and act; and tried to re-educate society to the fact that it was Shakespeare who wrote Romeo and Juliet... sorry, Romeo + Juliet (= just how big are those gooey boulders, Baz? You're messing with Shakespeare).

And the fact that he caved in to studio pressure and gave the film a happy ending does not mean his vast testes are any less vast. In fact, er, he wanted it that way. Yeah, that's right, it's the ending he wanted all along, like he told ABC News in Australia:

"You really think that on my films people tell me what to do? I don't think so," he said. "On my films I decide. I wrote six endings and I shot three... There is a death at the end of this film, but it's a surprise how that works."

The fact that he went back into the editing room and promised not to come out until it was happier and less sad and just what the audience wanted had nothing to do with compromising his directorial vision, like he also told ABC news in Australia:

"I'm going back to the mixing desk to finish it in 24 hours," he said. "It's right on the edge, we're right up against it. I literally have to, on Friday night, push that button. This is really dangerous, I hope there's no problem with the plane going back."

So there you have it: Baz Luhrmann. All man, all the time.

UPDATE: Rumours that the "surprise" death at the end of the film is that of Lurhmann's integrity have neither been confirmed or denied by anyone. Or asked of anyone. We couldn't be bothered. And we started the rumour.

UPDATED UPDATE: All Australians hope Lurhmann's vast balls can duplicate the Crocodile Dundee effect and revive the country-continent's flagging tourist industry. Is there nothing this man's testes cannot do?

Shatner Scale: Kirk
Must see: Yes. Just for the balls.