Not a bad show - characters I could identify with, even if they seemed much older than the 17 or so they were supposed to be. And there's the sheer incompetence of all the highly-trained invading soldiers.
This movie is, of course, based on John Marsden's popular novel. Worth looking at it, but some of it was a bit too implausible to sustain disbelief ... as underscored for me by the groups of giggling teenagers in the audience who expressed their merriment at any moment that seemed appropriate to them.
I can assure you, the novels are believable enough if you read 'em when you're ~13.
Remembering it now, and considering its a radically alternate history (the U.S passing up a chance to invade another country? Ha!), it doesn't seem too bad for all that. Don't think you can expect an author to really understand war without experience it and even then it can still be iffy.
It's mature writing based,partly on Marsden's close observation of his own students. What he carefully obscured - and presumably it may have been another aspect that went unnoticed by the target audience (maybe!) - was the nature of the invaders. The soldiers are never directly described, when you'd think their physical (ie ethnic) appearance would be the first thing you'd pick up.
At least in the first book, that was the case - I've only read the first of the series. I gather from someone who's read them all that the enemy leader is identified as General S in a later book - what nearby country had a leader called that?
Of course, you can't obscure the enemy's physical appearance in a film!
The series fits into the Australian invasion literature genre which goes back at least a century. All these outsiders are always casting envious eyes upon our immensely desirable country.
Post a Comment