I have only just seen They're a Weird Mob and I have to say it was a great trip back to the 1960s in Australia. It's very cheesy of course, but then just about everything made in the 1960s was cheesy. It's a good story with some very good characters and actors, based on a book. These days the humour falls a bit flat, but even so there are moments, and the script is engaging, and certainly the homage to Aussie culture of the time is right on the money, sharp, and well written. This is an important contribution in terms of Australian film.
26 Reviews
A period piece that doesn't match the original book
danielemerson3 December 2015
Warning: Spoilers
This film was based on a much-loved 1957 comic novel by John O'Grady, which is a great favourite of mine.
The plot of the film is changed a bit from the book and is not really improved by it. It seems to have been done to get the female lead into the film much earlier in the story. The pace drags at times, too.
While Walter Chiari's portrayal of Nino is likable, it misses the charm of the character in the book. He also doesn't look right for the part, as Nino is supposed to be a tall, hefty blond guy with a more soulful, introspective take on life. If you haven't read the book (and you should), this won't really matter, but some of us love the original.
A period piece, portraying an Australia that has changed a lot since the Fifties and Sixties.
The plot of the film is changed a bit from the book and is not really improved by it. It seems to have been done to get the female lead into the film much earlier in the story. The pace drags at times, too.
While Walter Chiari's portrayal of Nino is likable, it misses the charm of the character in the book. He also doesn't look right for the part, as Nino is supposed to be a tall, hefty blond guy with a more soulful, introspective take on life. If you haven't read the book (and you should), this won't really matter, but some of us love the original.
A period piece, portraying an Australia that has changed a lot since the Fifties and Sixties.
Six Stars
xpat-551921 February 2020
I give this well-acted movie six stars as I had seen it when it was first released in New Zealand (1966) and I had read the excellent book first.
Unfortunately, by comparison to the superb book, the movie seems tissue-thin and ends quickly without any of the genuine Aussie humour of the book - also bought again after a hunt.
The screenplay ought to be completely rewritten in 2020 and the movie re-shot.
I'd watch it.
"Great Big Country, won't you come and play..."
bamptonj26 February 2002
'THEY'RE A WEIRD MOB' tells the story of an Italian's migration to Australia during the 1960's and his effort to adapt to this unusual breed of Englishmen living on the opposite side of the world that he soon comes to love.
The film is one of few Australian films made in the 1960's, and therefore given its subject matter, one of the most important time capsules of that era. 'THEY'RE A WEIRD MOB' was also probably the first Australian film made with a realistic eye to international distribution, not only because much of the movie seems to delight in explaining and translating many examples of Aussie lingo, but because it takes delight in simply showing Australians being Australians and "them being a weird bloody bunch!" Technically, it is well-made movie and the acting quite decent. I was actually surprised by the number of shots achieved with hand-held cameras and steady-cams. Perhaps for what it is, it is a little too long, but no matter.
The movie paints an extraordinarily funny picture of how the ordinary Australian viewed himself in the 1960's: optimistic and belonging to an overwhelmingly cheery, egalitarian community. The working-male is presented not as a bludger, but as a generally reliable worker who enjoys nothing more than indulging in leisure activities with either his family or his mates. Upon finding work on a construction site in suburbia, Nino works diligently under the sun oblivious to his colleague's slower pace. He is told by his "mates" in a sympathetic tone to take a break: "there's plenty of time mate, she'll keep...roll yourself a smoke, mate / come and have a cuppa".
The movie almost seems like a propaganda movie for prospective immigrants, as Australia paints itself a destination inexhaustive of employment opportunities and as the land of opportunity, which in all truth it was. For instance, not only does our Italian protagonist find a job on his first day in the country, but even his future father-in-law - a prosperous building company magnate - started out from humble beginnings as a bricklayer upon his family's migration to Australia the generation before. For a learned critique of how Australia enjoyed "such a good lot" in the 1950s and 1960s, read the book 'The Lucky Country' (1964) by Donald Horne. 'THEY'RE A WEIRD MOB' paints ordinary Australian's as being overwhelmingly receptive of `New Australians' to such a point that they delight in submersing immigrants in the full extent of their customs and traditions which they relish as the best in the world.
More than anything else, the movie is a testament to the policy of assimilation during the post-war boom. As Nino makes a sturdy effort to adapt himself to the customs of the new country, most of the people he comes across display nothing if not their utmost admiration and respect for him becoming an Australian. On a ferry in the Sydney harbor, however, Nino comes across a drunkard who, after witnessing another group of New Australians' having a lengthy exchange in their mother tongue exclaims "Bloody dagoes, why don't you go back to your own country?!" Sitting down, he asks Nino for a light of his smoke, to which Nino reluctantly but politely obliges in almost natural English. When he subsequently affords more hostility to the family, Nino consoles them in Italian to which the drunkard demonstrates his utmost surprise. This latent premonition of multiculturism that is, that a New Australian could maintain links with his native country and its culture, yet still behave in all manners like an 'Australian' - was, for then, too much to ask of a previously insular, overwhelmingly Anglo society. Surprisingly, the drunkard is the only person in the move to adopt an outwardly racist tone, the movie generating the feeling that Australia is accepting of all immigrants who take a dedicated effort to assimilate.
Predating Bazza McKenzie and Paul Hogan by some years, the movie could legitimately be described as a document of propaganda, though this definition should not detract from its historical or artistic merits. Most Australian's would enjoy watching this movie for the parodies of Australian speech and lifestyle. For instance, a national in-joke is realized with Graham Kennedy playing himself in a hilarious cameo that serves to reveal the traditional Sydney-Melbourne rivalry. Asking for directions, he is given the cold shoulder by a loyal Sydney-sider to which he responds: "You're a Sydneyite?...I thought so. You're a weird mob up here, you don't appreciate art" to which he is told that it "must be a bloody weird mob in Melbourne if they keep watching you on TV." In any event, Australians would no more cringe at this film than they would at their parents' or grandparents' generation who actually had the privilege or misfortune - depending on how critical you are of the times and its achievements - of living in the time we see on the screen.
The film is one of few Australian films made in the 1960's, and therefore given its subject matter, one of the most important time capsules of that era. 'THEY'RE A WEIRD MOB' was also probably the first Australian film made with a realistic eye to international distribution, not only because much of the movie seems to delight in explaining and translating many examples of Aussie lingo, but because it takes delight in simply showing Australians being Australians and "them being a weird bloody bunch!" Technically, it is well-made movie and the acting quite decent. I was actually surprised by the number of shots achieved with hand-held cameras and steady-cams. Perhaps for what it is, it is a little too long, but no matter.
The movie paints an extraordinarily funny picture of how the ordinary Australian viewed himself in the 1960's: optimistic and belonging to an overwhelmingly cheery, egalitarian community. The working-male is presented not as a bludger, but as a generally reliable worker who enjoys nothing more than indulging in leisure activities with either his family or his mates. Upon finding work on a construction site in suburbia, Nino works diligently under the sun oblivious to his colleague's slower pace. He is told by his "mates" in a sympathetic tone to take a break: "there's plenty of time mate, she'll keep...roll yourself a smoke, mate / come and have a cuppa".
The movie almost seems like a propaganda movie for prospective immigrants, as Australia paints itself a destination inexhaustive of employment opportunities and as the land of opportunity, which in all truth it was. For instance, not only does our Italian protagonist find a job on his first day in the country, but even his future father-in-law - a prosperous building company magnate - started out from humble beginnings as a bricklayer upon his family's migration to Australia the generation before. For a learned critique of how Australia enjoyed "such a good lot" in the 1950s and 1960s, read the book 'The Lucky Country' (1964) by Donald Horne. 'THEY'RE A WEIRD MOB' paints ordinary Australian's as being overwhelmingly receptive of `New Australians' to such a point that they delight in submersing immigrants in the full extent of their customs and traditions which they relish as the best in the world.
More than anything else, the movie is a testament to the policy of assimilation during the post-war boom. As Nino makes a sturdy effort to adapt himself to the customs of the new country, most of the people he comes across display nothing if not their utmost admiration and respect for him becoming an Australian. On a ferry in the Sydney harbor, however, Nino comes across a drunkard who, after witnessing another group of New Australians' having a lengthy exchange in their mother tongue exclaims "Bloody dagoes, why don't you go back to your own country?!" Sitting down, he asks Nino for a light of his smoke, to which Nino reluctantly but politely obliges in almost natural English. When he subsequently affords more hostility to the family, Nino consoles them in Italian to which the drunkard demonstrates his utmost surprise. This latent premonition of multiculturism that is, that a New Australian could maintain links with his native country and its culture, yet still behave in all manners like an 'Australian' - was, for then, too much to ask of a previously insular, overwhelmingly Anglo society. Surprisingly, the drunkard is the only person in the move to adopt an outwardly racist tone, the movie generating the feeling that Australia is accepting of all immigrants who take a dedicated effort to assimilate.
Predating Bazza McKenzie and Paul Hogan by some years, the movie could legitimately be described as a document of propaganda, though this definition should not detract from its historical or artistic merits. Most Australian's would enjoy watching this movie for the parodies of Australian speech and lifestyle. For instance, a national in-joke is realized with Graham Kennedy playing himself in a hilarious cameo that serves to reveal the traditional Sydney-Melbourne rivalry. Asking for directions, he is given the cold shoulder by a loyal Sydney-sider to which he responds: "You're a Sydneyite?...I thought so. You're a weird mob up here, you don't appreciate art" to which he is told that it "must be a bloody weird mob in Melbourne if they keep watching you on TV." In any event, Australians would no more cringe at this film than they would at their parents' or grandparents' generation who actually had the privilege or misfortune - depending on how critical you are of the times and its achievements - of living in the time we see on the screen.
Nothing is real in this world that wasn't, except ...
gr67931714 December 2009
Warning: Spoilers
I loved John O'Grady's books, and laughed myself silly, in my early teens in Australia. The books presented a world that was unknown to me, of Aussie battlers and the land of the "fair go" - Australia's first pizza house had not yet opened - the hardship of the 1962 recession passed me by as I dutifully went to and from high school, oblivious to the pressures that caused both my parents health to fail. I didn't know anyone who spoke like O'Grady's characters, but the caricature was funny, and the romantic plot was pure Jane Austen.
As a fifteen year old, I loved the film. Today, as I watched it again on DVD, the gulf of time is horrifying. The obsessive colourless and characterless household interiors of the battlers and toffs alike is scarily real. The funniest scene is afternoon tea with the men unable to pick up a meringue without crushing it.
The pointless bravado of slang that is impenetrable to outsiders. Why is it funny? The overt humour of making fun of those not in the know rebounds and we are left pathetically trying to be different. I still can't tell the difference between a schooner and a midi - just ask for a bigger glass of beer if that is what you want, because the pubs closed at 6 o'clock.
That this slang-based "look at us" humour is not a thing of the past also stuns me - think of the 1990s verse novel and film "The Monkey's Mask" - the book was published overseas with a glossary of archaic authentic Aussie words that most of us never use, and it is hard not to cringe when they appear on screen - both films play the travelogue card, with many scenic shots of Syndey and that damned opera house still unfinished. I'm not envious, I'm really not.
Still amazed what this time capsule tells us about the fictional world of Australia in the 1960s - but I'm still bound to love it because it would be unbearable to destroy my 15 year old idyll.
The documentary on the DVD was also stunning - the film meant something to Michael Powell and Walter Chiari, about egalitarianism and the "fair go" - easy to say, but still so much harder to live by.
As a fifteen year old, I loved the film. Today, as I watched it again on DVD, the gulf of time is horrifying. The obsessive colourless and characterless household interiors of the battlers and toffs alike is scarily real. The funniest scene is afternoon tea with the men unable to pick up a meringue without crushing it.
The pointless bravado of slang that is impenetrable to outsiders. Why is it funny? The overt humour of making fun of those not in the know rebounds and we are left pathetically trying to be different. I still can't tell the difference between a schooner and a midi - just ask for a bigger glass of beer if that is what you want, because the pubs closed at 6 o'clock.
That this slang-based "look at us" humour is not a thing of the past also stuns me - think of the 1990s verse novel and film "The Monkey's Mask" - the book was published overseas with a glossary of archaic authentic Aussie words that most of us never use, and it is hard not to cringe when they appear on screen - both films play the travelogue card, with many scenic shots of Syndey and that damned opera house still unfinished. I'm not envious, I'm really not.
Still amazed what this time capsule tells us about the fictional world of Australia in the 1960s - but I'm still bound to love it because it would be unbearable to destroy my 15 year old idyll.
The documentary on the DVD was also stunning - the film meant something to Michael Powell and Walter Chiari, about egalitarianism and the "fair go" - easy to say, but still so much harder to live by.
Wake in Nice
rbececa13 March 2024
This Australian classic is from a time where Australia didn't really have it's own film makers. It is very much a call to European markets of the day to come to Australia to not only build the country but also build their own Australian dream. While this isn't Oz-sploitation there are some real hints here that there was something bubbling under the surface. A great cast with Australian acting stalwarts as Chips Rafferty and a special guest appearance by Graham Kennedy. Better than the Barry Mackenzie and Alvin Purple movies that would come along in the early 70's. Watch this with Wake In Fright for a double feature of assimilation stories Australian style.
An icon of Aussie culture!
opsbooks2 August 2003
Recently restored and remastered (within a limited budget) for DVD release, this movie was a revelation in Aussie ways and customs, a near-to-totally honest portrayal of what it was like for immigrants arriving here back in the last half of the 20th Century (yes, it seems a long time ago).
The house that Nino built occupied a block in Greenacre, NSW, less than half a mile from where I was living at the time. I must have driven by it thousands of times. Previous prints screened on TV have been abysmal with washed out colour and scratchy images and sound. To see this near-as pristine print (for the most part) was an eye-opener and the scenes of Greenacre, Bankstown and other Sydney locations brought memories flooding back.
The cast of fine supporting actors makes the film worth watching, while the lead actor is simply perfect. One can't imagine anyone else in the part. The film flags towards the end but generally, it's great viewing.
The house that Nino built occupied a block in Greenacre, NSW, less than half a mile from where I was living at the time. I must have driven by it thousands of times. Previous prints screened on TV have been abysmal with washed out colour and scratchy images and sound. To see this near-as pristine print (for the most part) was an eye-opener and the scenes of Greenacre, Bankstown and other Sydney locations brought memories flooding back.
The cast of fine supporting actors makes the film worth watching, while the lead actor is simply perfect. One can't imagine anyone else in the part. The film flags towards the end but generally, it's great viewing.
Another annoying late-Powell film..but does have good visuals..
imdb02010627 May 2005
This film and Age of Consent seem to be competing for annoying characters..and scenes that go on and on.
The fat man at the bar. Endless closeups of his sweating face. You can see every pore. Nino doesn't understand a word. Then it gets explained to him. Then we move on to the next word. Which he doesn't understand either. And on and on. ...
...to the newstand scene. He doesn't understand the money. So he hangs around so we can get lots of stunning visuals of the newstand troll.
Then it's on to the drunk guy on the transit ferry - he stumbles around and around and around, cursing the Italians around him. Fine. We get the point. But it doesn't stop. Plus, drunk people don't stumble around so obviously like that. He seems to be imitating Foster Brooks. And people don't just sit there while some drunk screams at them. Then the drunk gets thrown in the water. Then they fish him back and he screams some more. Why didn't they just let him drown?
And then there's the ditch-digging scene. Endless closeups of ditchdigger. They dig and dig and dig.Then they smoke a cigarette. Then they dig and dig and dig. Then they have some coffee. Then they dig and dig. Then Nino falls backwards and collapses. Then he lies there and sweats and heaves. Then he lies there some more. Then there's the endless trip back to town.
I hope you've enjoyed this, because this whole scene at the construction site took about 45 minutes.
The lead character is naive and stupid. You want to smack him over the head. Sorry, people in real life are not this dumb. In one scene he goes swimming. He goes too far out in the forbidden section. The lifeguards wave at him. He thinks they're waving to be friendly, so he waves back. They wave more, he waves more. We are supposed to believe that anyone can be this stupid.
Then 20 lifeguards go to save him. They drag him back and throw him in the lifeguard box. Then he gets, and we get, an exciting lecture about riptides. Beware! Riptides are DANGEROUS! Don't swim where you're not supposed to! Only positives of this scene are lots of nice shots of lifeguards chests, and lumpy-where-it-counts swimsuits.
Main interesting thing about this film are all the great backgrounds of 1966 Australia - when you could still actually migrate there without a 15 year waiting period to become a citizen...and before everything "Australian" became chic.
I fled this one early, too...and commiserated with people in the lobby.
The fat man at the bar. Endless closeups of his sweating face. You can see every pore. Nino doesn't understand a word. Then it gets explained to him. Then we move on to the next word. Which he doesn't understand either. And on and on. ...
...to the newstand scene. He doesn't understand the money. So he hangs around so we can get lots of stunning visuals of the newstand troll.
Then it's on to the drunk guy on the transit ferry - he stumbles around and around and around, cursing the Italians around him. Fine. We get the point. But it doesn't stop. Plus, drunk people don't stumble around so obviously like that. He seems to be imitating Foster Brooks. And people don't just sit there while some drunk screams at them. Then the drunk gets thrown in the water. Then they fish him back and he screams some more. Why didn't they just let him drown?
And then there's the ditch-digging scene. Endless closeups of ditchdigger. They dig and dig and dig.Then they smoke a cigarette. Then they dig and dig and dig. Then they have some coffee. Then they dig and dig. Then Nino falls backwards and collapses. Then he lies there and sweats and heaves. Then he lies there some more. Then there's the endless trip back to town.
I hope you've enjoyed this, because this whole scene at the construction site took about 45 minutes.
The lead character is naive and stupid. You want to smack him over the head. Sorry, people in real life are not this dumb. In one scene he goes swimming. He goes too far out in the forbidden section. The lifeguards wave at him. He thinks they're waving to be friendly, so he waves back. They wave more, he waves more. We are supposed to believe that anyone can be this stupid.
Then 20 lifeguards go to save him. They drag him back and throw him in the lifeguard box. Then he gets, and we get, an exciting lecture about riptides. Beware! Riptides are DANGEROUS! Don't swim where you're not supposed to! Only positives of this scene are lots of nice shots of lifeguards chests, and lumpy-where-it-counts swimsuits.
Main interesting thing about this film are all the great backgrounds of 1966 Australia - when you could still actually migrate there without a 15 year waiting period to become a citizen...and before everything "Australian" became chic.
I fled this one early, too...and commiserated with people in the lobby.
Portrays a different Australia which has long gone
BruceCorneil23 September 2003
A largely accurate portrayal of typical Australian attitudes, lifestyles and aspirations of the era, this movie was a celebration of the country's easy going and proudly egalitarian spirit. And, even more significantly, as it predates the contrived, heavy handed and deliberately boorish "Ocker" nonsense that came into vogue a bit later, it remains an excellent example of genuine, laid back Aussie humor at its best.
However, looking at it again, all these years later, it now provides a stark reminder of just how much things have changed. Sadly, Australia is no longer quite the same sun drenched "workers paradise" where the average punter could afford a Sydney Harbourside home on little more than a basic wage and buy a crayfish (lobster) for a couple of dollars on a Saturday night. It really was one big endless summer.
However, looking at it again, all these years later, it now provides a stark reminder of just how much things have changed. Sadly, Australia is no longer quite the same sun drenched "workers paradise" where the average punter could afford a Sydney Harbourside home on little more than a basic wage and buy a crayfish (lobster) for a couple of dollars on a Saturday night. It really was one big endless summer.
Out of date before film was made
willjohn9 April 2023
The book was written in the middle 1950s. By the time the film was mad Australia had changed a lot and the plot was out of date.
Nino was written in the book as a Triestino, a man over 6 feet tall and fair haired. Walter Chiari looked more like a southern Italian. Australians in the 1960s were more sophisticated than Joe and his team of labourers. The slang had changed due to the influence of American and English music. I can remember people in Australia were laughing at how dated the film was. Clare Dunne was a poor choice to play a young Australian women, she was Irish and too fair skinned. Her accent was all wrong. All I remembered her for at the time the movie was made was as a "weather girl" and doing a few commercials.
Nino was written in the book as a Triestino, a man over 6 feet tall and fair haired. Walter Chiari looked more like a southern Italian. Australians in the 1960s were more sophisticated than Joe and his team of labourers. The slang had changed due to the influence of American and English music. I can remember people in Australia were laughing at how dated the film was. Clare Dunne was a poor choice to play a young Australian women, she was Irish and too fair skinned. Her accent was all wrong. All I remembered her for at the time the movie was made was as a "weather girl" and doing a few commercials.
Keith Loone - My Father
matthewloone431 May 2005
My late Father filmed this very funny movie and as a boy we heard many stories about the fun times both cast and crew had together whilst filming.
If any one out there knows more stories about Keith Bryan Loone, please feel free to email me. Dad died in 1988 and would love to hear more stories about himand his work. Dad used to work for Ajax films in Balmain then from memory went freelance and filmed quite a few movies over the years working with Australia's top directors, actors, writers and crew. They're weird mob is one of the original funny movies Australia produced with an international cast complete with local actors who later in life also filled our screens in memorable movies. I would like to hear more what people think of this classic.
If any one out there knows more stories about Keith Bryan Loone, please feel free to email me. Dad died in 1988 and would love to hear more stories about himand his work. Dad used to work for Ajax films in Balmain then from memory went freelance and filmed quite a few movies over the years working with Australia's top directors, actors, writers and crew. They're weird mob is one of the original funny movies Australia produced with an international cast complete with local actors who later in life also filled our screens in memorable movies. I would like to hear more what people think of this classic.
More than just a historical curiosity, and better than you think
Spleen7 June 2000
Whoever you are, you probably have no desire to see this film. I understand. I had no desire to see it either. It was a blockbuster in its day, but only in Australia, and Australians are among the last people on the face of the planet who'd want to see it now. We don't want to be reminded what our country was like in the mid-1960s. Not that "reminded" is the right word, for most of us either weren't born or weren't here in 1966 (I certainly wasn't), and so it's easy for us to suppose that this film is nothing more than (a) a sustained exercise in wog-bashing, and (b) a celebration of everything we've all been earnestly trying to escape ever since the introduction of decimal currency and decent coffee. I'm sure most Australians, like me, will be thinking: If I watch this movie, how much will it make me cringe?
The short answer: okay, it probably WILL make you cringe now and then; but it's more moving, more witty, and more enlightened, than you might think. No wog-bashing. And it's NOT, as I feared, the 1960s equivalent of "Crocodile Dundee". Neither a kangaroo nor a swagman in sight. Powell even resists the temptation to show the Sydney Opera House as he pans over the harbour, probably because it hadn't yet been built.
I wouldn't have seen it if it hadn't been directed by Michael Powell. And here I have grounds for disappointment, since there's none of Powell's usual visual inventiveness or splendour. But fair enough: visual splendour would have been beside the point in this kind of comedy, and it may have been fatal. It's not that there's anything WRONG with the cinematography. To compensate for the fact that it's not another "Black Narcissus" we get a nice, light, and in the end surprisingly touching, comedy. The obvious cultural misunderstandings (Nino thinks, for a while, that there's a region of Sydney called "King's Bloody Cross" - that kind of thing) are neither laboured nor over-stated. Nor are they really the point of the film. Sure, Nino solemnly does what everyone tells him to do as if he were an anthropologist entering a mosque, but the story takes us further than this.
By the way, you'll note that almost every spoken sentence contains either a "bloody" or a "bugger". Powell later said that this was the key to getting past the censors. If he'd been conservative and had his characters swear only once or twice, the censors would have insisted on minor cuts; but since everyone swears constantly, it's impossible to cut one scene without cutting the rest, so the film emerged unscathed - with a G rating!
The short answer: okay, it probably WILL make you cringe now and then; but it's more moving, more witty, and more enlightened, than you might think. No wog-bashing. And it's NOT, as I feared, the 1960s equivalent of "Crocodile Dundee". Neither a kangaroo nor a swagman in sight. Powell even resists the temptation to show the Sydney Opera House as he pans over the harbour, probably because it hadn't yet been built.
I wouldn't have seen it if it hadn't been directed by Michael Powell. And here I have grounds for disappointment, since there's none of Powell's usual visual inventiveness or splendour. But fair enough: visual splendour would have been beside the point in this kind of comedy, and it may have been fatal. It's not that there's anything WRONG with the cinematography. To compensate for the fact that it's not another "Black Narcissus" we get a nice, light, and in the end surprisingly touching, comedy. The obvious cultural misunderstandings (Nino thinks, for a while, that there's a region of Sydney called "King's Bloody Cross" - that kind of thing) are neither laboured nor over-stated. Nor are they really the point of the film. Sure, Nino solemnly does what everyone tells him to do as if he were an anthropologist entering a mosque, but the story takes us further than this.
By the way, you'll note that almost every spoken sentence contains either a "bloody" or a "bugger". Powell later said that this was the key to getting past the censors. If he'd been conservative and had his characters swear only once or twice, the censors would have insisted on minor cuts; but since everyone swears constantly, it's impossible to cut one scene without cutting the rest, so the film emerged unscathed - with a G rating!
Sweaty shouty and overlit
award-7871518 November 2021
This is an ugly film which portrays Australia as stupid racist misogynist and obsessed with beer. It is difficult to believe it was made by Michael Powell but not difficult to believe it was made by someone with no appreciation and understanding of Australia. Would be forgotten if not for the fact it was one of the few films made in Australia in the 1960's.
A "bloody" good movie - along with the book, the film provides a timeless piece of well recommended entertainment and history.
abamonte25 November 2000
A "bloody" good movie - accurate, very accurate from my perspective as someone with Italian heritage who migrated to Australia in 1964 . The character and experiences of Nino could've been either of my two uncles who migrated in the mid-1950's.
Notwithstanding the story, it's an amazing photo story of what Australia was like for millions or migrants in the'60's - particularly the larger cities of Sydney and Melbourne. The character of the Aussies is spot on - you can meet them any day on any street in any city of Australia right now. The aussie "mateship" unique to the Australian psyche is very well portrayed; the Aussie mentality of always willing to give a bloke a fair go and taking people for what they are - fair dinkum - and not who they are is also well captured. The actors are the creme de la creme of Australian theatre, tv, radio and film - most of them appearing in many Australian dramas of later years such as Homicide, Division 4, Number 96, Prisoner, Skippy(Ed Devereaux & Tony Bonner), and Crocodile Dundee (John Meillon)
It's a refreshing retro to an era of quality storylines, acting and the promotion of individual potential. The language, the 6 o'clock closings of the pubs, the white aussie's prejudice to the 'Eye-tie"(ITalian) and anyone else who wasn't a Smith, Brown, McKenzie, O'Farrell is as accurate as I experienced. And all served up with a laugh.
Along with the book, the film provides a timeless piece of well recommended entertainment and history.
Notwithstanding the story, it's an amazing photo story of what Australia was like for millions or migrants in the'60's - particularly the larger cities of Sydney and Melbourne. The character of the Aussies is spot on - you can meet them any day on any street in any city of Australia right now. The aussie "mateship" unique to the Australian psyche is very well portrayed; the Aussie mentality of always willing to give a bloke a fair go and taking people for what they are - fair dinkum - and not who they are is also well captured. The actors are the creme de la creme of Australian theatre, tv, radio and film - most of them appearing in many Australian dramas of later years such as Homicide, Division 4, Number 96, Prisoner, Skippy(Ed Devereaux & Tony Bonner), and Crocodile Dundee (John Meillon)
It's a refreshing retro to an era of quality storylines, acting and the promotion of individual potential. The language, the 6 o'clock closings of the pubs, the white aussie's prejudice to the 'Eye-tie"(ITalian) and anyone else who wasn't a Smith, Brown, McKenzie, O'Farrell is as accurate as I experienced. And all served up with a laugh.
Along with the book, the film provides a timeless piece of well recommended entertainment and history.
Garbage
turtlezkingdom27 June 2022
The worst movie I have ever seen in my entire 50 year long life. The lady next to me started crying when the movie began and her child jumped off his seat when the music started playing. Most members of the audience couldn't even watch the movie properly as they were too busy puking. Thos who were strong enough to resist the undying urge to vomit, constantly wiped away tears of sadness as they wrote death notes to their families. The only reason this mocie got a 1 star was due to the relief I felt when it was over and that it can be used by forces like the KGB and the FBI as a torture device to get info out of spies. By the way, the main character dies at the end out love which was received with a standing ovation.
a movie about another time in Australia, immigration theme
petersj-216 September 2005
I recently watched the DVD of this movie. Way back in the sixties it was a big hit at a time when very few Australian movies were being made. I am delighted to say that the movie holds up remarkably well. It is now a charming curiosity of another time. The plot is by now well known but I wondered if I would cringe over the way Australians were portrayed. I need not have worried as the characters are warm and earthy. It was wonderful to see some of those fine actors of the past, most of whom have passed away. Chips Rafferty is superb in one of his last movies. The only character that does not work is the love interest Clare Dunne who has a very cold screen presence. She sounds like she is taking elocution lessons on screen. The most pleasant surprise is Walter Chiari as Nino. He is delightful. Chiari had a troubled career, especially in his Broadway misadventure in the flop musical "The gay time" opposite Barabara Cook. The musical however sounds wonderful now, perhaps it was ahead of its time. In this film Chiari is enchanting and dam cute too. The real joy for most Aussies is seeing a brief appearance by the undisputed king of Aussie television Graham Kennedy. Graham allows the script and director to send him up. There will sadly never be another Graham but hopefully there will be many more Australian movies as charming as this. It really was a pleasant surprise. Do see it.
No we're not.
ptb-823 February 2004
This charming valentine to life in Australia in the 1960s and particularly in Sydney shows truly how good it is to live here.
Fortunately we are still not too far away from some of the Anglo working class types shown. It is only because the population has grown so much, particularly in Sydney since this time that 2004 is a difference in society. It was filmed just before the Vietnam War and recreational drug influx by US soldiers polluted Sydney morals and living standards, and on the verge of a huge American influence in advertising and consumer goods. Australia's immigrants were British and European up until that point. In the 80s there was a big rise in Arabic and Asian immigrants which has changed the face of Sydney literally.....but somehow the "Australian" sense of humor and egalitarian attitudes seen on this lovely film sort everyone out even today. The 2001 film DIRTY DEEDS is a good chaser to WEIRD MOB because it is set in 1969, and at the height of the American changes in Sydney.
Fortunately we are still not too far away from some of the Anglo working class types shown. It is only because the population has grown so much, particularly in Sydney since this time that 2004 is a difference in society. It was filmed just before the Vietnam War and recreational drug influx by US soldiers polluted Sydney morals and living standards, and on the verge of a huge American influence in advertising and consumer goods. Australia's immigrants were British and European up until that point. In the 80s there was a big rise in Arabic and Asian immigrants which has changed the face of Sydney literally.....but somehow the "Australian" sense of humor and egalitarian attitudes seen on this lovely film sort everyone out even today. The 2001 film DIRTY DEEDS is a good chaser to WEIRD MOB because it is set in 1969, and at the height of the American changes in Sydney.
You'll be bloody right
Chase_Witherspoon23 December 2016
Delightfully light-hearted look into Sydney pre-Vietnam attitudes, still brimming with confidence straddling 50's conservatism and the beginning of the counter culture movement that emerged in the latter part of the decade. It was a very good time to be a ten pound Pom, or indeed any number of European immigrants who accepted the invitation, as Walter Chiari's character (Giovanni 'Nino' Carlotta) experiences, though not without comic incident as he tries to right his cousin's business debts. As other reviewers have remarked, a sort of humorous propaganda promo for Australian immigration.
The beer flows like rivers of amber nectar in a Gold Top commercial, the formal bars and building site where Nino comes to learn the Aussie vernacular; Ed Devereaux (pre- "Skippy"), John Meillon (who almost steals the show), Chips Rafferty, Anne Haddy was there much younger obviously than her later soapy salad days. Obviously the movie needs to exaggerate reality to create humour and I reckon you'd need to be *bloody* churlish to be offended, it's pretty harmless (self-deprecating in fact) when viewed in context.
A wonderful time capsule and source of nostalgia from Rank, perhaps a little bittersweet too when you consider how much of that beloved character we've since abandoned.... worth watching, should bring a smile to your face.
The beer flows like rivers of amber nectar in a Gold Top commercial, the formal bars and building site where Nino comes to learn the Aussie vernacular; Ed Devereaux (pre- "Skippy"), John Meillon (who almost steals the show), Chips Rafferty, Anne Haddy was there much younger obviously than her later soapy salad days. Obviously the movie needs to exaggerate reality to create humour and I reckon you'd need to be *bloody* churlish to be offended, it's pretty harmless (self-deprecating in fact) when viewed in context.
A wonderful time capsule and source of nostalgia from Rank, perhaps a little bittersweet too when you consider how much of that beloved character we've since abandoned.... worth watching, should bring a smile to your face.
SPOILERS! How (and IMHO why) the film differs from the book.
HenCat4 September 1999
Warning: Spoilers
A classic piece of Australiana. Like all Australian films of the era seemed to, it even had a foreign star! Plus cameos from established stars like Graham Kennedy.
The film differs somewhat from the book.
In the book, Harry Kelly is just another house builder like Joe Kennedy (Ed Devereaux), not the large-scale construction firm boss in the film.
Consequently we see a lot more of Mr Kelly in the film and also of his daughter Kay, right from the start where Kay is in the process of evicting Nino's magazine from the building. In the book there was no La Seconda Madre office, no cousin Leonardo, no missing thousand pounds, and therefore no eviction. In the books Nino continued to write articles for the magazine until well after he got a job working for Joe.
The scene in the cafe where Kay is trying to eat spaghetti with a spoon is where Nino first meets her in the book. (As an Italian-Australian myself I know it really is better to use a fork.)
I believe all the extra stuff referred to above was in the interest of giving Chips Rafferty (as Mr Kelly) and Clare Dunn (as Kay) much larger roles in the film than their characters had in the book.
The film differs somewhat from the book.
In the book, Harry Kelly is just another house builder like Joe Kennedy (Ed Devereaux), not the large-scale construction firm boss in the film.
Consequently we see a lot more of Mr Kelly in the film and also of his daughter Kay, right from the start where Kay is in the process of evicting Nino's magazine from the building. In the book there was no La Seconda Madre office, no cousin Leonardo, no missing thousand pounds, and therefore no eviction. In the books Nino continued to write articles for the magazine until well after he got a job working for Joe.
The scene in the cafe where Kay is trying to eat spaghetti with a spoon is where Nino first meets her in the book. (As an Italian-Australian myself I know it really is better to use a fork.)
I believe all the extra stuff referred to above was in the interest of giving Chips Rafferty (as Mr Kelly) and Clare Dunn (as Kay) much larger roles in the film than their characters had in the book.
The film differs from Powell's work too.
dbdumonteil5 April 2002
The Powell buffs who know him mainly for his forties and fifties works,such as "a matter of life and death" "black narcissus" "gone to earth" ,not to mention "peeping tom" might be puzzled here.Actually the form is rather a mix up of Italian neorealism-but much more optimistic- and Italian comedies of the sixties and the seventies -but a bit more macho.
Actually,the lead recalls such Italian luminaries as Alberto Sordi and Nino Manfredi,but he's not got the same charisma and the same comic skills.Although the sory takes place in Australia,it's actually the same old story of the immigrante thinking that the country he's heading for is depending on him.Thus the first part is arguably the best,particularly the scenes of the hero digging the earth in a chic suit and tie,complete with hat.The movie begins with a fake documentary à la "seven years itch" (1955)but Powell 's humour is no match for Wilder's.
Only one short dialogue recalls the former work,as it happens,"Black narcissus": To his girlfriend's father who cannot stand wops,the hero shows the picture of pope Paul VI,hanging on a wall,and says :"Isn't he Italian?" It's a nod to this scene in which Deborah Kerr does not want the young Indian to study in the mission because he's a man.Shrewdly showing the Christ,he replies "HE was a man wasn't HE?
This is mainly a curio,watchable ,but which is not representative of Powell's genius.
Actually,the lead recalls such Italian luminaries as Alberto Sordi and Nino Manfredi,but he's not got the same charisma and the same comic skills.Although the sory takes place in Australia,it's actually the same old story of the immigrante thinking that the country he's heading for is depending on him.Thus the first part is arguably the best,particularly the scenes of the hero digging the earth in a chic suit and tie,complete with hat.The movie begins with a fake documentary à la "seven years itch" (1955)but Powell 's humour is no match for Wilder's.
Only one short dialogue recalls the former work,as it happens,"Black narcissus": To his girlfriend's father who cannot stand wops,the hero shows the picture of pope Paul VI,hanging on a wall,and says :"Isn't he Italian?" It's a nod to this scene in which Deborah Kerr does not want the young Indian to study in the mission because he's a man.Shrewdly showing the Christ,he replies "HE was a man wasn't HE?
This is mainly a curio,watchable ,but which is not representative of Powell's genius.
Great movie
Bot_feeder17 December 2018
I think one good litmus test of a good movie is: is it fun to warch? This one is. It's not deep cinema in terms of symbolism or plot complexity. It's just an exuberant presentation of a particular culture with good acting, directing and humor.
My rating applies to the re-edited theatrical version only! Not to the DVD!
JohnHowardReid14 October 2017
Warning: Spoilers
Produced by Michael Powell. A Williamson-Powell Film. Photographed on locations in Sydney in Eastman Color. Processed by Rank's Denham Film Laboratories. No New York opening. Never released in the U.S.A. U.K. release (in original 112-minute version) through Rank Film Distributors: 4 November 1966. Sydney opening at the State. Australian release through British Empire Films: 19 August 1966. Original running time: 112 minutes.
Powell recalled the film after its initial Melbourne and Sydney seasons and quickly re-edited and re-issued it in a 95-minute version for suburban, country, and all other capital city showings.
SYNOPSIS: An Italian journalist, finding that his Sydney magazine job has folded, seeks employment as a builder's laborer.
NOTES: The top money-making movie released in Australia in 1966. The version released on DVD is the original version that played only in Melbourne and Sydney first-run theaters, before it was recalled.
COMMENT: It seems that critics can fill a useful function after all. Thanks to a number of intelligent suggestions in newspaper and magazine reviews, more than a quarter hour has now been intelligently edited out of the film's original running time of 112 minutes. No longer can it be argued that individual scenes overstay their welcome, or that the film as a whole runs too long. Or that the songs are a discordant intrusion. (Or that there's a surplus of great Australian adjectives). Of course, nothing could be done with the movie's basic story line. It is admittedly very slight, but often quite charmingly handled. I particularly like the beautifully- lit scene when Culotta returns to his magazine-strewn office to pass the night; and Slim de Grey's laconic remarks about Culotta's method of work.
The film was obviously made on a very tight budget, resulting in very inconsistent photography (which doesn't look so bad on television, but is a distinct drawback in a theater). The studio scenes are excellent, but some of the outdoor material was undoubtedly shot under far from ideal conditions. However, the comedy still comes across unimpeded. At times, indeed, it's very funny.
It is ridiculous, however, to talk of "Weird Mob" as a genuine Australian effort. It's no more Australian than "The Battle of the Bulge" is Spanish. Almost all the technicians were British, and even the screenwriter turns out to be Powell's old collaborator, Emeric Pressburger, hiding under a pseudonym!
OTHER VIEWS: Hard to believe, but here we are in 2017, and what version of "Weird Mob" surfaces on DVD, but the discredited original version. Bloody awful it is too (to borrow some of the film's now copiously re-inserted vernacular). In this version, the more interesting players — Chips Rafferty, Alida Chelli and Judith Arthy — are reduced virtually to walk-ons, while a procession of bores usurp center stage. Even Chiari wears out his initial welcome, and as for that colorless bossy-boots, Clare Dunne, and the rest of the camera hoggers led by Devereaux and a miscast John Meillon, the less said the better. The ferry scene with Keith Peterson, which is a bore even in its cut version, has now been stretched back to excruciating length.
The slightest of slight stories just cannot sustain some of the essential plot episodes like all the repetitious building sequences, let alone the many pointless, interpolated scenes such as the boring party on Clark Island. But the most disappointing aspect of all is Michael Powell's lackluster, completely unimaginative, colorlessly routine, hack direction.
Powell recalled the film after its initial Melbourne and Sydney seasons and quickly re-edited and re-issued it in a 95-minute version for suburban, country, and all other capital city showings.
SYNOPSIS: An Italian journalist, finding that his Sydney magazine job has folded, seeks employment as a builder's laborer.
NOTES: The top money-making movie released in Australia in 1966. The version released on DVD is the original version that played only in Melbourne and Sydney first-run theaters, before it was recalled.
COMMENT: It seems that critics can fill a useful function after all. Thanks to a number of intelligent suggestions in newspaper and magazine reviews, more than a quarter hour has now been intelligently edited out of the film's original running time of 112 minutes. No longer can it be argued that individual scenes overstay their welcome, or that the film as a whole runs too long. Or that the songs are a discordant intrusion. (Or that there's a surplus of great Australian adjectives). Of course, nothing could be done with the movie's basic story line. It is admittedly very slight, but often quite charmingly handled. I particularly like the beautifully- lit scene when Culotta returns to his magazine-strewn office to pass the night; and Slim de Grey's laconic remarks about Culotta's method of work.
The film was obviously made on a very tight budget, resulting in very inconsistent photography (which doesn't look so bad on television, but is a distinct drawback in a theater). The studio scenes are excellent, but some of the outdoor material was undoubtedly shot under far from ideal conditions. However, the comedy still comes across unimpeded. At times, indeed, it's very funny.
It is ridiculous, however, to talk of "Weird Mob" as a genuine Australian effort. It's no more Australian than "The Battle of the Bulge" is Spanish. Almost all the technicians were British, and even the screenwriter turns out to be Powell's old collaborator, Emeric Pressburger, hiding under a pseudonym!
OTHER VIEWS: Hard to believe, but here we are in 2017, and what version of "Weird Mob" surfaces on DVD, but the discredited original version. Bloody awful it is too (to borrow some of the film's now copiously re-inserted vernacular). In this version, the more interesting players — Chips Rafferty, Alida Chelli and Judith Arthy — are reduced virtually to walk-ons, while a procession of bores usurp center stage. Even Chiari wears out his initial welcome, and as for that colorless bossy-boots, Clare Dunne, and the rest of the camera hoggers led by Devereaux and a miscast John Meillon, the less said the better. The ferry scene with Keith Peterson, which is a bore even in its cut version, has now been stretched back to excruciating length.
The slightest of slight stories just cannot sustain some of the essential plot episodes like all the repetitious building sequences, let alone the many pointless, interpolated scenes such as the boring party on Clark Island. But the most disappointing aspect of all is Michael Powell's lackluster, completely unimaginative, colorlessly routine, hack direction.
Not perfect but a chance to see a lost Sydney and a lost way of life
PeterM2719 December 2021
This sixties Australian film is more famous for the fact of its existence than for its artistic merit. Not that it is totally without merit, but its importance lies elsewhere.
Weird Mob was the most successful of a handful of Australian films to get a general release in Australia between 1950 and 1970, and the first film to depict contemporary Australian city life for Australian audiences since the early Australian film industry succumbed to the invasion of Hollywood films in the late 1940s.
And now it is the only film from that era to show us Australia and Australians as they were then. The film broke new ground in other ways, it was the first major Australian film to show Sydney in colour and it was the first to show (a version of) multicultural Australia and the impact and experiences of non-British migrants in Australia. As such it is an important cultural artefact.
And so to the film itself. The film follows the comic adventures of an Italian migrant, Nino Cullotta, who arrives in Sydney in the mid-1960s. Italian star Walter Chiari is perfect in the role, full of cheerful energy that carries him through many challenging situations.
The film also features many great Australian actors of the time, including Chips Rafferty, John Meillon, Ed Devereux, Slim deGrey, and even has a cameo from Graham Kennedy, playing himself.
The film offers an idealised view of the immigrants' story, with little of the racism many faced, but at least it tells the story from a migrant's view, which few other films or TV shows attempted.
It was directed by the great British director Michael Powell, and while it's not one of his best, it is a rare chance to see Australia as it was, more or less, at the time.
Weird Mob was the most successful of a handful of Australian films to get a general release in Australia between 1950 and 1970, and the first film to depict contemporary Australian city life for Australian audiences since the early Australian film industry succumbed to the invasion of Hollywood films in the late 1940s.
And now it is the only film from that era to show us Australia and Australians as they were then. The film broke new ground in other ways, it was the first major Australian film to show Sydney in colour and it was the first to show (a version of) multicultural Australia and the impact and experiences of non-British migrants in Australia. As such it is an important cultural artefact.
And so to the film itself. The film follows the comic adventures of an Italian migrant, Nino Cullotta, who arrives in Sydney in the mid-1960s. Italian star Walter Chiari is perfect in the role, full of cheerful energy that carries him through many challenging situations.
The film also features many great Australian actors of the time, including Chips Rafferty, John Meillon, Ed Devereux, Slim deGrey, and even has a cameo from Graham Kennedy, playing himself.
The film offers an idealised view of the immigrants' story, with little of the racism many faced, but at least it tells the story from a migrant's view, which few other films or TV shows attempted.
It was directed by the great British director Michael Powell, and while it's not one of his best, it is a rare chance to see Australia as it was, more or less, at the time.
A Truly Australian Story albeit a bygone one
steve-256-36042711 January 2019
This beautiful little film encapsulates the Aussie virtues of authenticity and the fair go.
Yes, it's corny - yes, it's not Olivier-like in its acting.
What it delivers, is a true snapshot of life in Australia in the 60's and for Aussies at least, the film provides a beautiful, nostalgic peek into the past. Were things "better back then?" Well, that's a subject for another time and greater minds than mine.
But, if you seek a thoughtful insight into Australia's recent past, replete with "Aussie-isms" and good honest fun, look no further.
Yes, it's corny - yes, it's not Olivier-like in its acting.
What it delivers, is a true snapshot of life in Australia in the 60's and for Aussies at least, the film provides a beautiful, nostalgic peek into the past. Were things "better back then?" Well, that's a subject for another time and greater minds than mine.
But, if you seek a thoughtful insight into Australia's recent past, replete with "Aussie-isms" and good honest fun, look no further.
Possible author cameo?
HenCat4 September 1999
I think I spotted author John O'Grady in the opening sequence where the voiceover bloke is introducing us to Australia and its customs.
Two blokes are in a pub having a beer. The voiceover bloke tells us, "These are called schooners," referring to the size of the beer glasses. Then the two blokes take a pull of their schooners. The bloke on the right looks just like O'Grady, whose photo appeared in his autobiography There Was a Kid 10 years later.
Two blokes are in a pub having a beer. The voiceover bloke tells us, "These are called schooners," referring to the size of the beer glasses. Then the two blokes take a pull of their schooners. The bloke on the right looks just like O'Grady, whose photo appeared in his autobiography There Was a Kid 10 years later.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
