Stop steering and start driving. This ain't no dead piece of metal. A car's a living, breathing thing, and she's alive. Feel it talking to you. Telling you what she wants, what she needs. All you gotta do is listen. Close your eyes and listen.

AICN-DOWNUNDER

The saga of Bill Henson -- Australian artist whose art was accused of actually being child pornography... Google it, I'm not going into the whole thing here -- overshadowed another Arts vs Government debate that was taking place over the past couple of weeks.

For those who missed it, the Australian Medical Association recently called on state and federal governments to cease their support for projects that "glamorise, feature or promote smoking". Oy vey.

I'm a little more tolerant of this argument coming from the AMA, given they're approaching the debate with the aim of stemming the undeniable problem of teens smoking. They have a complex understanding of health, even if they haven't quite grasped the concept of "art".

It's worth mentioning that this is simply something the AMA has requested; there's no indication (that I've seen) that the government bodies are actually going to take them up on their suggestion, but since it's come up, I think it's worth discussing.

If airport novels about young, idealistic lawyers taking on Big Tobacco have taught me anything, it's that smoking is bad for you. I don't think there'd be too many arguments about that. But isn't the solution obvious? I mean, this debate is nothing new. Sure, the recent uproar has done some re-igniting, but this is something that comes up at least once every couple of years.

So, what's this solution that I think is obvious. Well, begin with the question: how do we properly define the problem here? Smoking is clearly drug use, even though it's on the mildest end of the scale. Why not classify smoking as "low level drug use" that, on its own, could incur a maximum PG rating? I'm not being rhetorical, I'm honestly asking. Has anyone else suggested this? If so, why was it ignored?

Naturally, sticking something with the PG rating is not going to stop teens from seeing the film (nor is, if we're honest, sticking it with an 18+ rating), but it's the closest reasonable compromise we can make without getting into actual censorship. To my eyes, this seems like a fairly logical way of looking at the problem, and for years I've wondered why this hasn't been the clear-cut solution. The fact that it hasn't been done suggests to me that there are some good arguments against it, so have at it. There's a talkback section below that's usually reserved for the mentally-anguished to work out their anger issues, but just this once we can appropriate it for some actual discussion. So, go on then: what's the best solution for the smoking-on-screen issue?

NEWS

Though I'm sure that they're going to be doing their casting well in advance, I think that assuming they're doing it this far in advance is maybe going a bit too far. I know THE HOBBIT will be pure fantasy, but it seems that a lot of the casting rumours are mired firmly in that genre as well. In trying to predict who will eventually be cast as Bilbo, the tabloids have looked to anyone Peter Jackson has worked with before (Jack Black, who actually made a good Hobbit at the MTV Awards a few years back), anyone whose name is synonymous with fantasy movies (Daniel Radcliffe), and anyone who's really just hot right now (James McAvoy, who kind-of also fits into category two). Normally, I would ignore this as fluff, but I thought it was worth asking why Ian Holm is automatically out of consideration. If that flashback in FELLOWSHIP with Holm as a young Bilbo (in a scene that will eventually find its way into THE HOBBIT... continuity hounds prepare to launch!) wasn't a good enough audition piece, I don't know what is. There's already an emotional connection with Holm's Bilbo, and I, for one, would really like to see him return. AICN-Downunder: where personal opinion poses as news. Hey, I wonder if Fox News is hiring...

As much as I love the local passtime of pretending New Zealand talent is actually Australian, it always throws me when I see Andrew Lesnie referred to as "Australian cinematographer", despite the fact that he was born, and currently resides, in Sydney (which I'm prepared to admit is, indeed, part of Australia). The guy got famous shooting LORD OF THE RINGS, so it's a hard connection (in my head) to make. Either way, he'll be in this neck of the woods lensing RESISTANCE, an Australian film about a covert alien invasion. The film will be shot (at least partly) in Canberra, so I suppose the easiest way to to subvert them is to get them to navigate through the CBD. (lolz!!!) But hey, an Australian movie about a resistance fighting an alien invasion with Andrew Lesnie shooting? Thus far, I am very sold.

James Colmer, the graphic artist on HOUSE OF WAX and, er, AQUAMARINE, is in pre-production for THE FURY, which he will both write and direct. Not a remake of the Brian De Palma film from 1978, the film features -- so imdb informs me -- "five teenagers taking shelter in an abandoned slaughterhouse rumoured to be haunted by malevolent poltergeist". The film will shoot in Adelaide this July.

AWARDS, FESTIVALS AND SCREENINGS

CANNES FILM FESTIVAL

Nothing we like more than a local-kid-made-good story. Melbourne filmmaker Julius Avery picked up a Special Mention Prize (not as good as the All We Can Talk About Prize, but still better than the We Overheard It Was Decent Prize) for JERRYCAN, a film about kids blowing shit up. In the grand tradition of Australians hearing about movies after a Prestigious International Organisation has made it famous, we'll be able to see Avery's short when it plays at the Melbourne International Film Festival next month.

BOX OFFICE

I'm dreading seeing SEX AND THE CITY atop this list next week, but it's inevitable. I'm guessing that WALL-E's upcoming domination will help counter that depression.

1. INDIANA JONES AND THE KINGDOM OF THE CRYSTAL SKULL

2. WHAT HAPPENS IN VEGAS

3. IRON MAN

4. 21

5. MADE OF HONOUR

RELEASED THIS WEEK

George Clooney steals Scorsese's original title for his Stones documentary, Gabriel Garcia Marquez kicks off a new Ludlum-esque franchise, the second scariest film of the year frightens audiences young and old, the scariest film of the year frightens audiences young and old, and Scorsese retaliates by stealing the title of Clooney's upcoming Sudanese lighthouse drama.

LEATHERHEADS

LOVE IN THE TIME OF CHOLERA

THE ORPHANAGE

SEX IN THE CITY: THE MOVIE

SHINE A LIGHT

REVIEWS

SPEED RACER

Australian/NZ release: June 12

Well, it does everything it says on the box.

When this project was first announced, I couldn't for the life of me imagine why anyone would want to make this film. It seemed like the adage that Everything That Has Ever Existed Must Be Made Into a Movie was being strictly adhered to, with no attention paid to whether the world needed a SPEED RACER film or not.

Then I saw the trailer. Yes, the one that turned everyone off. It was such a balls-out, ridiculous piece of absurdity, that only two things would be possible: the film would be a brilliant drug trip of a movie, or it would aim for the stars and fail so spectacularly that the resulting car crash (get it?) would be more fascinating than just about anything else around it.

I think I was pretty on the money with that assessment. I have a lot of respect for the Wachowskis for putting themselves out there this much. I like THE MATRIX, but I consider it to be one of the most overrated blockbusters of all time... even as an undergraduate, its Cliff Notes philosophy seemed way too surface-level to me. SPEED RACER suffers from no such conceits, allowing the brothers to revel completely in a very well-designed and overly-constructed (in a good way) world.

SPEED RACER is, in my mind, a complete success. If you can get on board the cartoony style, you're going to love it. It's something we haven't seen before, different from the cartoon worlds of, say, WHO FRAMED ROGER RABBIT? or SIN CITY. Although, that said, I could picture SIN CITY and SPEED RACER existing in the same universe, so maybe it's not that big a jump. But your enjoyment of this film is going to depend on how much you want to give yourself over to what you're watching. When you hear John Goodman give his anime-inspired grunts at things he disapproves of, or hear Christina Ricci's note-perfect delivery of "cool beans", or watch Matthew Fox eat up the screen with one of the most natural hammy performances ever given, how could you not?

Oh, that cast. It's not enough to cast good actors in a film like this; you have to bring in people who understand the tone that you're going for. Every actor in the ensemble appears to "get" the film, hitting all the serious and comedic notes with total perfection. Emile Hirsch is the real standout, as he has the hardest job. He has to play an intense, serious, and driven (get it?) guy who still fits into this extreme animated world. It's a difficult balance to pull off, but he does it. The fact that he's not just saving his A-grade performances for serious films like INTO THE WILD is impressive in itself.

Film criticism often suffers from reviewers who judge the film not on what it tries to be, but on what the reviewer himself wants it to be. I've been guilty of it myself, I'm not denying that. But your best bet is always to look at what a film is attempting to do, and judge its success or failure on that. VAN HELSING, for instance, proclaimed itself as a throwback to Universal Horror, when the result was actually a throwback to Hammer Horror, and a particularly bad one at that. SPEED RACER sets out to present an established world where impossible things are commonly accepted, and pushes every element of that to its logical extreme. It does everything it says on the box, and is the most unashamedly fun and enjoyable movies of the year.

NEXT WEEK

- Due to an unfortunate mistranslation, Takeshi Miike signs on to direct the movie version of Barbara Walters's just-released memoir AUDITION

- Paramount decides to remake CLUELESS, hiring Douglas McGrath to change the film's setting to England in 1816

- Universal inadvisably greenlights Peter Morgan's epic VIET KONG based purely on the title, re-hiring Weta Digital to create the giant ape FX

Peace out,

Latauro

AICNDownunder@hotmail.com