The Loser in NZ Film
Recently I watched the NZ film Boy on dvd, which I enjoyed, but at the end of the film I was struck by how much, both in this film and in a whole line of NZ films I’ve seen, the stories are focused around people who are—not to put to fine a point on it—losers. The father, in the case of Boy, but there are many more that spring to mind: Eagle vs Shark; Apron Strings; Via Satellite; Scarfies—all the way back to Goodbye Pork Pie.
There’s also our most successful recent export, the tv series Flight of the Conchords, where it’s hard to argue that the three central characters are anything but losers.
I have to say, it’s got me thinking, wondering what it is that leads us to focus on, even celebrate, the loser when we hold up the mirror of film to our culture and society? Is this really how we see ourselves—although it doesn’t seem to fit with our approach to sport, for example. Or is it just another form of cultural cringe writ large?
I don’t have any answers yet—am more just struck by having recognised what I perceive as a theme, but thought it worthwhile putting the observation out there and seeing what others think. Do you agree or diagree? Do you have any rationales to offer? And do you think we are starting to move past the “loser” phase with films like Dean Spanley and The Vintner’s Luck. But then again, you could argue that these are not precisely NZ stories … so does the different focus just underline my theme?
I’d be fascinated to hear your thoughts.
I’d agree with your observation. My two cents? Culturally, Kiwi’s always choose to downplay or even repress achievers – especially if they’re willing to recognise achievement in themselves. Good old Tall Poppy syndrome: It’s considered poor taste, self-gratifying, even rude to believe in yourself too strongly. Thus, I suspect, this attitude plays out in our movies in the way you’ve identified.
We celebrate the loser.
Ironically, when a Kiwi achieves OUTSIDE of New Zealand they’re applauded, and Kiwi ingenuity is given the nod.
The way I see it, we accept and multiply the applause of other countries, while stifling it in our own. We curse our strongest men and women for going elsewhere and living in places where they won’t meet raised eyebrows and scoffing comments when talking about what they believe they can achieve.
It’s one of the few areas I think Kiwi culture really fails its own.
And it’s a paradox as well, because although our films certainly appear to embrace celebrating “the loser” as a theme, I have also detected a heavy element of “blame” in our culture toward those who aren’t doing so well, ie the “losers.” Almost as though we are punitive toward both non achievers and achievers as a society, which is odd … So perhaps the real drive is toward conformity, but that still doesn’t explain why our films celebrate the loser quite so strongly—unless it’s as an antidote to the conformity, but it’s still too dangerous to celebrate success given the other factors you mention?
You’re right Helen. That was my reaction to ‘Boy’. The theme goes back to ‘Sleeping Dogs’. ‘River Queen’ had the same feeling. I think it something akin to a cultural cringe along side big neighbour Wombat Australia.
It not entirely true. ‘Sione’s Wedding and Second Hand Wedding both had a joyous bounce.
Look at Brian Turner’s poem ‘In the Nineties’ for an antidote.
Cheers
Harvey
Thanks Harvey–I know it really ‘struck me’ with Boy, perhaps because I spent 10 years growing up in a small, very remote Maori community and so I recognised both the authenticity of elements of Boy, but also those elements that I felt were far from being universal. And for the first time—slow learner, huh?—I joined the dots to so many other films that I had seen and not really ‘connected’ with, even though I could never (until now) quite put my finger on why. I shall certainly check out Brian Turner’s poem.
Hmm, I’m not as sure. Loser themes show up in humor everywhere (Zoolander, anything staring Will Ferrell, Dumb and Dumber, etc). Admittedly, there is a lot of it here, percentage wise, but then, we don’t produce that many films in a year. It’s a tricky one. I can think of almost as many NZ films with the opposite view, Whale Rider, Number Two, for example. At least, I saw them that way.
I always thought that FOTC was poking fun at the way we can be perceived overseas — as Australia’s slightly goofy, socially awkward younger siblings.
Then again, I’m a perpetual Pollyanna, always seeing the best in everyone’s intentions.
Wen, I don’t think it’s a matter of ‘best’ or by implication ‘worst’ intentions; it’s more a matter of me suddenly sitting up a little straighter and saying: “Now do I see a theme here?” After all, a theme is just that, a theme—the value judgments are purely what we place on it once we have recognised/postulated its existence. But I am certainly fascinated by the whys and wherefores of why we choose certain themes to work with, either consciously or unconsciously, and what drives them …
I agree that other cultures also do films that feature ‘losers’, but in the case of US films in particular, they are only one part of a very much larger array of themes and tropes, including a fair swag of heroes and antiheroes (just to name one example.) The Australians, too, do a far wider range of characters and stories than what we saw in The Castle, for example. (My Brilliant Career, Breaker Morant, Better Than Sex, Three Dollars, Looking for Allibrandi, Getting Square, The Bank, Lantana, Jindebyne, Tomorrow When the War Began, just to roll off a few—but I definitely see a more diverse range of themes and characters in this mix.) I agree that Whale Rider bucks the trend—it is very much a classic “coming of age” story—and I haven’t seen every NZ-made film, but I think it is the “percentage wise” of what I have seen that struck me in terms of my reflections on Boy.
With regards to Flight of the Conchords, I am unsure re your take, mainly because I am not certain that the rest of the world has much of a perception of NZ and NZ-ers at all (we’re a pretty small blip on the globe) and there’s really only one episode in the tv series where a comparison to Australians is drawn. But it’s hard to argue that the three main characters are anything but “losers” (par excellence, in fact, wherein resides the humour) and when you marry it up with Eagle vs Shark, which was also made by Jemaine Clement, I feel a trend maybe detected.
I have to admit, after replying to your post, I remembered something I thought earlier this week when Hilary Clinton was here. When she said that we were a small country that punched well above our weight — I did ask myself why, when I spoke to other people about what she’d said — that most of them said things like, “well, she would say that, wouldn’t she? She’s here for diplomacy, to butter us up.”
That made me rethink my stance a little.
The truth is, she was right. We are a little country that punches well above our weight. Considering the size of the country, we’re incredibly successful internationally, but don’t really portray that to the world. We’ve probably got more reason to be patriotic than many countries, yet we seem almost embarrassed by that. We do have the worst case of tall poppy syndrome, especially when you compare our culture to countries like America.
So, I do agree with you in lots of ways.
I think it’s absolutely true that we do punch above our weight in a foreign relations type way, in the role we play through the UN and doing peace-keeping missions etc But I don’t think the average person-in-the-street in the US or Russia, for example, would have that high a perception around NZ / NZ-ers even so: when I was living in Sweden I found that a lot of international people I met either weren’t aware of NZ at all or thought it was part of Australia. But in terms of film—and possibly other arts as well—we’re certainly not highlighting that aspect of NZ, or the Sir Edmund Hillary’s, Rewi Alley’s and Dame Whina Cooper’s, or the many other NZ-er’s who’ve achieved significantly in the sporting and intellectual arenas. How many people reading this blog for example know who Sir Geoffrey Cox was—and the amazing things he did—without having to go and look him up?
I completely agree with you Helen, I’ve noticed that too. In almost every area except sport I’ve seen Kiwis regularly cut themselves down, belittle their own achievements, etc. (In that respect I fit right in, unfortunately.)
This IS a country that punches well above its weight and you/we should be proud. With a population equivalent to the London borough of Islington, NZ produces world class artistic, scientific and social contributions. Kiwi ingenuity not to be sniffed at, least of all by Kiwis!
And isn’t it strange, when sport is such a huge part of our lives here, that we aren’t making films about it. Where’s NZ’s The Blind Side, or Field of Dreams, or A League of Their Own, or Mystery Alaska? Mind you, I don’t think we’re writing fiction centred around sport either. Which is not to say we “should”, but once you start thinking about it, it does seem strange … almost a disconnect.
Oh, Helen, you have struck such a chord with me – I have hesitated to dis ‘Boy’ as it was such a lovely movie in so many ways but I was furious at the end of it (pathetic i know) that the Grandmother had gone to Wellington and left those kids alone knowing the Dad was due out of prison. It felt as if they had glamourised “Jake the Muss” when they choreographed the fight outside the pub, as if to sanitise it somehow. But friends reckoned I missed the point that the kids saw through their loser Dad – but yes, to me it’s time we moved on and celebrated something beyond this. But of course, the scenery, the kids, the dialogue, it was great on so many levels, but still – good to have the discussion.
Maggie, I agree that there was a lot to like in Boy, although I also don’t think you are “pathetic” at all for responding to aspects of the movie that particularly affected you. The focus was on the kids and their resilience, but the father was the foil for that and his “loser” persona really struck me—mainly because it caused me to join dots back to a whole lot of other movies in terms of subject matter. So this is not about liking / not liking Boy for me, because I did like it, but about the trends/themes in Kiwi movie making.
Then, have you seen The Insatiable moon? http://www.facebook.com/#!/insatiablemoon
One of the BEST movies I’ve seen in a very long time. Brilliant acting, cinematography and, the story! I laughed till I cried. I cried until I smiled. I have been telling EVERYONE that this is a not-to-be- missed NZ film. I came out of the theatre so uplifted in my soul. Yes, the story focuses on what our society considers losers (adults with mental health issues) but it turns the mirror on us and does what Atticus said to Scout:
‘You never really understand a person until you climb inside their skin; until you walk around in it.’
That’s exactly what this film did for me and for everyone else I’ve spoken to who has seen it. The actors (Ian Mune, Rawane Paratene, Sara Wiseman, Ray Woolf, John Leigh, Bruce Phillips, Matt Chamberlain and Greg Johnson – all respected and amazing actors (not too mention the crew) – believed in the power of this story so much that they were prepared to act in this for way way less than they could have asked for. (BTW Mike and Rosemary made this movie for less than 500,000).
But, isn’t all story about the loser? Even To Kill A Mockingbird (yeah, I know, American but I’m just linking points) has as the focus of its two narratives, two losers – Boo Radley and Tom Robinson.
BTW Helen, haven’t you got a book to write. Do I detect a hint of procrastination? My affliction as well although I did increase my word count by 2,000 this weekend despite severe editing.
Tania, I haven’t seen The Insatiable Moon yet although I have heard good things from other sources so have it on my list of ‘things to do.’
I don’t think that all story is about the loser, or about the winner either necessarily. I believe stories should, like life, reflect “all sorts and conditions” of people and it is the apparent narrowness of our Kiwi focus that I am speaking too … Interestingly, I don’t perceive Boo Radley in the context of Mockingbbird as a loser, because he transforms his situation. Tom Robinson “loses out” in a very bitter way, but that is different (imho) from being a loser in the sense we focus on/ portray people in our films, i.e. inept, ineffectual, more than a little pathetic. But my point, in relation to my theme, would be that Atticus clearly isn’t a loser . . .
And yes, I do indeed have that book to write and am off to do that now—great news about your increase of 2000 over the weekend. It’s good to keep those words rocking. 🙂