Baz Luhrmann: I’m not ‘the black hole of cinema’


So Australia isn’t really tanking, but it’s not a hit either. In the first three weeks of it’s release, Australia has made $39 million in the American box office, about on par with Moulin Rouge. The difference is that Moulin Rouge was a lot cheaper to make than Australia’s bloated $130 million production cost. The other difference is that Nicole Kidman’s face moved in Moulin Rouge, but now I’m just being nit-picky.

So Baz Luhrmann decided to step up and defend Australia, and talk about his next film, a new adaptation of The Great Gatsby. And yes, there’s already been talk that Baz is going to do what he (and many other directors) do: cast Nicole Kidman in yet another wildly age-inappropriate role. The rumor is Nicole Kidman as that archetypal American literary character, Daisy Buchanan. But Baz isn’t confirming anything beyond a rather severe martyr complex.

In one of his first interviews since the movie opened, he spoke out against Australia’s critics and those he feels call him the “black hole of cinema.” He also said he will move quickly on his next project, an adaptation of The Great Gatsby, which he described as a perfect parable for economic disaster.

“A lot of reviewers like Australia. And we’re making people cry; I know because they write to us,” he told the Hollywood Reporter during an interview at the Four Seasons Hotel. “But there are those that don’t get it. A lot of the film scientists don’t get it. And it’s not just that that they don’t get it, but they hate it and they hate me, and they think I’m the black hole of cinema. They say, ‘He shouldn’t have made it, and he should die.'”

The movie’s detractors, he said, were used to movies that were neatly defined.

“This is not (simply) a romantic comedy for 40-year-old women or action movies for 17-year-old boys, and that’s not OK with some people. It’s not OK for people to come eat at the same table of cinema. But you look at movies like ‘Gone With the Wind’ and Old Hollywood classics, and they don’t fit in any box.

“Corny Hollywood movies from the ’40s freak out (the film scientists),” he added.

Luhrmann struck a tone that was as unyielding as many of the creative choices in his movies, but was also occasionally conciliatory. “I’m not whining, because when you do what I do, you expect to be covered in mud. But there seems to be a lot of misinformation.”

[From Reuters]

Really, Baz? Because it seems like you are, in fact, whining. And I’m not sure where he gets off even mentioning Gone With the Wind in the same breath as Australia. I know I’m coming across as harsh, so let me mention that I actually loved Baz’s Romeo + Juliet, and I liked Moulin Rouge. But Baz Luhrmann has some ego problems – and he’s not even through! He has some preaching to do about The Great Gatsby and the American recession.

Luhrmann sees the pre-Depression story as a wake-up call as the economy crashes and another gilded age, as he sees it, comes to an end. “If you wanted to show a mirror to people that says, ‘You’ve been drunk on money,’ they’re not going to want to see it. But if you reflected that mirror on another time they’d be willing to.”

Luhrmann appeared as particularly interested in worsening economic times and attitudes — noting a kind of glib wealth that came with “the Wall Street trader who has a house in the Hamptons as big as an airport” — and he went on to say that the people needed to take the message of hope from Australia.

He said that he wants to move quickly on the “Gatsby” project because of that timeliness. “I’m going to move faster than I have before. I’d be surprised if it’s another seven years,” he said, referring to the period between Moulin Rouge and Australia.

The project also might not be with Fox. The director said he’s “talking to everyone, and they’re all interested” — and paused a full 10 seconds when asked if his experience with Fox was a satisfactory one, before offering a noncommittal answer.

[From Reuters]

So… it’s going to take seven years to make a film about the 1920s that will reflect the current economic condition? Close your eyes and think about what Nicole Kidman will look like in seven years… about the same, right? So will Kidman be cast? Does Baz come across as badly as I find him? Is the subtext of Australia’s financial failure that Baz will never direct again?

Photos are of Luhrman with Hugh Jackman on 12/12/08 and with Jackman and Nicole Kidman on 12/2/08. Credit: WENN

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

14 Responses to “Baz Luhrmann: I’m not ‘the black hole of cinema’”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Codzilla says:

    Agreed, Kaiser. He comes across as a self-important windbag who’s making lame excuses for his epic failure of a movie. Yeah, Baz, the film’s just too heavy and abstract for our feeble minds to process. That must be the problem.

  2. Ling says:

    One of the reasons I have no interest in seeing Australia is because of Nicole Kidman.

  3. geronimo says:

    Ok, I’m a Baz fan. I have loved him since Strictly Ballroom (that film rocks) and I’ve loved pretty much everything he’s done since. Saw a recent special (Culture Show) on him and he was really interesting and funny, not at all chippy or whiny so not sure about that? Just very Aussie in a no-bullshit, slightly sarcastic way. Haven’t seen Australia although the critic who interviewed him really liked it and the extended clips they showed actually looked great, incl Kidman!! Really! And her face moved at least twice!

    Wasn’t keen at all when I first heard about Australia but I’m kind of interested now since hearing him talk about it.

  4. vdantev says:

    Moulin Rouge is a good movie, but it’s definitely a niche sort of film, nearly a cult movie. Sorry, the honor of being the ‘black hole of cinema’ still belongs to Uwe Boll.

  5. NotBlonde says:

    Meh…Baz Lurhman seems very sweet from the interviews I’ve seen him do. He also seems a big egocentric, of course, but what director isn’t?

    I hope to Jebus he doesn’t cast Nicole Kidman as Daisy Buchanan though. I don’t think he will, since she is waaaaaay too old for that part, but I suspect she’ll be in it playing someone else.

    I haven’t read that book since I think 11th grade in AP Language…and the only thing I remember about it is that Robert Redford was in the movie and someone got their left breast ripped off in a car accident.

  6. The Old KC says:

    Scarlett Johansson (sp?) as Daisy – that would work much better.

  7. Arvedia says:

    Daisy Buchanan is about 25 years old. WTF?

  8. rlr260 says:

    It’s funny how Nicole (allegedly) Botoxes her face to immobility, but shows her gray hair. Of course, there’s nothing wrong with a little gray. I’ve got the gray, but then again, I have the wrinkles too!

  9. mike says:

    At least Australia is better than Gone with the Wind, not that Australia is all that great either. Gone with the Wind is just simply a despicable movie, on par with the Birth of the Nation or the Triumph of Will. At least Birth and Triumph were technical masterpieces; Gone with the Wind was the Sex and the City for bored housewives of era. About the only “great” thing about the movie was its stellar cast.

    Sure you can argue that it is in fact a great movie. You know what, so was the Triumph of Will or Birth of the Nation.

  10. MT says:

    Moulin Rouge was a terrible movie. and I LOVE musicals, so it was really awful.

    Australia was insufferable.
    The story about the boy was boring, sanctimonious and done very poorly.

    It was a dismal attempt to steal some ideas that worked in other successful movies.

    How dare he even compare it to Gone with the Wind.

    Even though GWTW was made decades ago, it is still an incredible film and great performances and interesting storyline.

    I like Nicole and she is beautiful and charming, but I don’t understand why would she even work of such a silly plot, not to mention the terrible direction.

    The sad part is that he doesn’t understand what a bad movie he has made.
    That is even worst, since he will not be able to learn WHAT NOT TO DO, and doesn’t show the understanding of what is a dismal work.

  11. Dubdub2000 says:

    Pfff….Baz is just one of those over rated self important windbags that somehow always seems to get mad financing for his movies that systematically under perform (to say the least).

    He wouldn’t know an original idea if it hit him in the ehad, so all he does is remakes or steals ideas and scenes from other movies and spends 5 times the money remaking them.

    YAWN!

  12. brista says:

    ‘He shouldn’t have made it, and he should die.’

    I’m pretty sure that reputable film critics aren’t saying the second half of that quote. I mean, at least not in print. Maybe behind closed doors.

    While I didn’t really love Moulin Rogue and Australia just looks boring, I loved Romeo + Juliet. We watched it in 7th grade English and compared it to some old 1960s-era version. Even if it was way stylized in parts, his version was a lot more understandable. The actual language was exactly the same, but it sounded more like English than the 1960s version or the staged production we went to see. So A+ on that one, Baz Luhrmann.

  13. Candy says:

    La Johanssen would be a great cast for Daisy. Think Ms. Kidman should do something with the hair…go back to being a readhead?

  14. bnd says:

    I actually live IN Australia and I don’t know a single soul who wants to go see this movie. Main reason? The plot sounds ludicrous, the previews were cheesy, it has simply dreadful word of mouth, and very few people here want to see Kidman in ANYthing.