My second review of this title. In reading other reviews it is apparent that some critics saw only an abbreviated version of the mini-series. Please, make certain that you get the complete version. It is excellent.
6 Reviews
Which version?
jordans-4867130 January 2021
A romance yarn advertising Australia
mybah5 February 2008
Firstly, this film is not the greatest in the world, but it does make you feel good and I have watched it over and over again. It shows some fantastic Australian scenery, and even though it displays some bigotry, shows some of the truthfulness of how we developed as a nation. Doesn't every country have its bumps along the way?! I've not read Nevil Shutes book. It appears from another commenter that the book was ruined because of this film. But I feel its a pity to get all religious about any book, (except maybe the bible!). They are just human made stories. The book may be excellent, so perhaps both both and film should be appraised in their own right. It's a fact of filming that films are often just BASED on a book.
The film had a feel good repetition throughout, in between the drama. The ending, while a tack corny, emphasise that racial tolerance and budding respect can triumph on bigotry. The ending made you feel good. The far country showed Australian personalities of both types - the drongos, and the true blue Aussie mate who'll slap you on the back and make you feel you're his kindred spirit. The Australian country, which has become extremely racially divers in recent years, could use more Australian/ racial messages like this.
The film had a feel good repetition throughout, in between the drama. The ending, while a tack corny, emphasise that racial tolerance and budding respect can triumph on bigotry. The ending made you feel good. The far country showed Australian personalities of both types - the drongos, and the true blue Aussie mate who'll slap you on the back and make you feel you're his kindred spirit. The Australian country, which has become extremely racially divers in recent years, could use more Australian/ racial messages like this.
Most Enjoyable
fowlesjohn14 February 2013
"Fred from Maine" said very dismissively "The book was good, but apparently not good enough for the screenwriter. Some flagrant differences: In the book, Zlinter's coworkers are good, companionable fellows, who all like him and defend him when he is in trouble; in the film they beat him up when they find he was in the German army. In the book, the Australian doctor rose to Zlinter's defense; in the film, he is a heel. In the book, not a word appears about the Holocaust; in film, it is in your face, both at the start and at a crucial scene where an Australian Jew undertakes to erase a swastika painted on Zlinter's door (a scene totally fabricated for the film). The book ends with the lovers in England; in the film they are in Australia. In the book, Zlinter tries to learn about a namesake who lived in Australia. This entire subplot was deleted from the film. The good news: Michael York gives a first-rate performance as Zlinter. The bad news: Sigrid Thornton is an unconvincing Jennifer. Bottom line: Nevil Shute must have been spinning in his grave."
Whilst everybody is entitled to his own opinion, I thought that having thoroughly enjoyed this adaptation many times I would comment The book in common with all of the Prince of Storytellers novels includes such compleat descriptions, story line and dialog that I can sympathise with any screenwriter who has to write a film script from one and feels that he has very little to do to justify his salary! David Stevens who covered Shute's other major Aussie novel ATown Like Alice as a marvelous five hour long mini series starring Bryan Brown realized this and very largely left well alone, and in so doing paid far more justice to the full story than the earlier version starring Peter Finch which by comparison was a risible incomplete adaptation of only half of that book. A correction here regarding Fred's assertion that a major subplot was omitted There were in fact several different length videotape versions issued (two on single tapes) and the shortest does indeed leave out all mention of Carl's discovery of his namesake and even omits Rosie Sturgess who played Mary Nolan/Williams from the final credits roll In another review here Edwin said a tad over enthusiastically "Unlike most movies, which are pale copies of the books that inspired them, The Far Country is even better than the Nevil Shute novel upon which it is based." I would not myself go so far as saying that, but I certainly found that the "extra" Jewish detail was very well handled and IMHO added to the story and the change of opening and closing details unimportant. but I cannot think of any cogent reason why the local doctor's name ("Jennings" in the book) had to be changed to the film's "Edwards" Finally there is as yet regrettably no official re-release on DVD but there IS a Korean sourced DVD rip that is well done including a proper menu with scene selections on 2 DVDs with the full (190 minute) total time of the longest (3 tape) videocassette issue, (note that that is appreciably longer than the 100 minutes shown on the IMDb page If you search the internet long and carefully enough or check on an auction site you should be able to find that DVD set, but do make sure that it is the full 190 minute version
Whilst everybody is entitled to his own opinion, I thought that having thoroughly enjoyed this adaptation many times I would comment The book in common with all of the Prince of Storytellers novels includes such compleat descriptions, story line and dialog that I can sympathise with any screenwriter who has to write a film script from one and feels that he has very little to do to justify his salary! David Stevens who covered Shute's other major Aussie novel ATown Like Alice as a marvelous five hour long mini series starring Bryan Brown realized this and very largely left well alone, and in so doing paid far more justice to the full story than the earlier version starring Peter Finch which by comparison was a risible incomplete adaptation of only half of that book. A correction here regarding Fred's assertion that a major subplot was omitted There were in fact several different length videotape versions issued (two on single tapes) and the shortest does indeed leave out all mention of Carl's discovery of his namesake and even omits Rosie Sturgess who played Mary Nolan/Williams from the final credits roll In another review here Edwin said a tad over enthusiastically "Unlike most movies, which are pale copies of the books that inspired them, The Far Country is even better than the Nevil Shute novel upon which it is based." I would not myself go so far as saying that, but I certainly found that the "extra" Jewish detail was very well handled and IMHO added to the story and the change of opening and closing details unimportant. but I cannot think of any cogent reason why the local doctor's name ("Jennings" in the book) had to be changed to the film's "Edwards" Finally there is as yet regrettably no official re-release on DVD but there IS a Korean sourced DVD rip that is well done including a proper menu with scene selections on 2 DVDs with the full (190 minute) total time of the longest (3 tape) videocassette issue, (note that that is appreciably longer than the 100 minutes shown on the IMDb page If you search the internet long and carefully enough or check on an auction site you should be able to find that DVD set, but do make sure that it is the full 190 minute version
Corny Romance Channel fodder
emuir-120 October 2007
The ham fisted direction and the corny acting detract from what could have been an above average miniseries. The Australian setting and the story of how the New Australians had to overcome prejudice are the only things that save this work. It is not generally known outside Australia that despite all they had suffered in WWII, the refugees and displaced persons who were resettled in Australia had to work where they were sent, usually construction projects such as the massive Snowy Mountains project. It was extremely difficult for many to work in their chosen professions, and to have their qualifications recognized, especially if they had graduated from Universities in countries behind the iron curtain, or in cases where all records had been destroyed in bombing raids. Many of them had to start their education over again. That so many of them made a better life for themselves is to their credit, and the film certainly got that part right.
My main fault with is with the casting of Sigrid Thornton, as always, as the leading lady. One would get the impression that she was the only actress in Australia. Unfortunately Jennifer Morton was English, and Ms. Thornton is not. Michael York does his Mittle European accent once again (are there no European actors available?) The direction could have been tightened up a little to eliminate some of the long pauses and endless close ups of Sigrid Thornton, and it would have been much better to have stayed with the book rather than inserting unnecessary sub plots.
My main fault with is with the casting of Sigrid Thornton, as always, as the leading lady. One would get the impression that she was the only actress in Australia. Unfortunately Jennifer Morton was English, and Ms. Thornton is not. Michael York does his Mittle European accent once again (are there no European actors available?) The direction could have been tightened up a little to eliminate some of the long pauses and endless close ups of Sigrid Thornton, and it would have been much better to have stayed with the book rather than inserting unnecessary sub plots.
This movie is even better than the Nevil Shute novel upon which it is based.
sandy-j25 July 2000
Unlike most movies, which are pale copies of the books that inspired them, The Far Country is even better than the Nevil Shute novel upon which it is based. The movie reminds me of A Town Like Alice, also a Shute story, in that it moves from World War II Europe to Australia and tells of two young people making a new life in that far country. The story is excellent, and the actors are more than capable. Anyone who likes a good adventure/romance should try this film.
A good novel spoiled
mainefred27 April 2005
The book was good, but apparently not good enough for the screenwriter. Some flagrant differences: In the book, Zlinter's coworkers are good, companionable fellows, who all like him and defend him when he is in trouble; in the film they beat him up when they find he was in the German army. In the book, the Australian doctor rose to Zlinter's defense; in the film, he is a heel. In the book, not a word appears about the Holocaust; in film, it is in your face, both at the start and at a crucial scene where an Australian Jew undertakes to erase a swastika painted on Zlinter's door (a scene totally fabricated for the film). The book ends with the lovers in England; in the film they are in Australia. In the book, Zlinter tries to learn about a namesake who lived in Australia. This entire subplot was deleted from the film. The good news: Michael York gives a first-rate performance as Zlinter. The bad news: Sigrid Thornton is an unconvincing Jennifer. Bottom line: Nevil Shute must have been spinning in his grave.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
