Listonixio Fresh and Exciting

Sexyloutak Absolutely the worst movie.

ThedevilChoose When a movie has you begging for it to end not even half way through it's pure crap. We've all seen this movie and this characters millions of times, nothing new in it. Don't waste your time.

ChanFamous I wanted to like it more than I actually did... But much of the humor totally escaped me and I walked out only mildly impressed.

MartinHafer "Uncivilized" is no great film--but it is a fun film to watch. So, despite a strange and often illogical plot, it's so weird and so unusual, you can't stop watching! Margot Rhys plays a writer whose work has become stagnant. She accepts an offer for a trip into the Australian outback to look for a white man living among the aboriginals--sort of like Tarzan of the Apes, but more like Mara of the Koalas! During the trip, she's kidnapped by an Afghan man(?!?!) and taken to Mara...to become his woman!! You'd assume he'd rape her but instead, their relationship is quite tame. Eventually, the plot gets weird with subplots involving illegal drugs, rubies and an aboriginal war. Often, none of it makes much sense, but since the movie is so odd, you can't help but watch. Also making it easier to pay attention is that the print available for download from archive.org is the original uncut Australian print--complete with a nude bathing sequence. You really can't see much, but it certainly was hot stuff back in 1937--and also an apparent attempt to copy Hollywood's notorious nude swimming scene in "Tarzan and His Mate".The plot has some serious logical issues--mostly involving the Afghan but also relating to Mara's unwillingness to mate with an Aboriginal (a weird nod to the anti-miscegenation laws of the day in the so-called 'civilized world') and WAY too much native dancing (it was obvious padding). Also, some will blanch at the film's language, as the Aboriginals are referred to as 'stone-age savages' and the like! Still, it was exciting. And, I loved that the macho white man living in the wild (Mara) was played by the not exactly sexy Dennis Hoey--the British actor who later gained fame as Inspector Lestrade in the Sherlock Holmes series starring Basil Rathbone. Weird...but interesting.

obloco This 1930's Australian adventure flick has all the typical clichés found in movies of the period, including some obvious nods to "The Sheik", and the writers had to have seen a Johnny Weissmuller Tarzan movie or two... ("Homage" not "Rip Off", right?) The story is a bit slow at parts, and telegraphs most of its punches well in advance, but there is one nice plot twist, and the slow story advancement isn't overly off-putting in such a short work, especially when some very nicely done travelogue style cinematography fills the gaps. Worth watching at least once, if only for the awesome native dances done by the aboriginal cast! Download it from Archive.org, the price is right...

Vladimir There is only one redeeming quality of this drab, boring, ridiculous film, and that is its time. If "Uncivilised" had been made thirty, or even just five or ten years later, it would be the sort of movie that causes people to hammer a huge railway spike through it so as never to poison anyone ever again. But because it is such an early, low-budget and (horror of horrors) Australian film, it deserves a chance.*** SPOILERS ***It tells the classical tale of a woman who travels to meet a wild white man who is chief of a tribe of Aborigines. In the spirit of the King Kong and Tarzan stories, she is to use her sexuality to win him over, and in the process, write an article about him for some capitalist city newspaper. No problems with the plot so far. Then we see the emergence of a strange Aboriginal witch doctor and a very stereotypical Afghan villain who actually turns out to be a missing British police officer working under cover. Bet you didn't see that one coming, eh? And couple that stupid plot twist with a bunch of embarrassingly out-of-place songs from Mara, the wild white man, and the worst possible over-the-top acting and you have one fair dud of a film.*** END SPOILERS ***The acting itself is like an uncomfortable transition from silent to mono, it's as though the overacting characteristic of silent films is copied here, only the actors haven't quite managed to pair that with actually speaking words yet. Besides that, I've never been much of a fan of Australian acting with the exception of a few rare gems we've produced, and this is just a very early rustic and tacky version of that already poor quality.I studied this film for a university English course. God knows why. One important reason was the fact that this film was made by Australian director Charles Chauvel in order to try and crack into the big western film markets. I'm not quite sure what strategy he was trying to use but it evidently didn't work. In fact, the rumour is that even Chauvel himself was appalled at what a crummy film he'd made.I'd love to recommend this film but it's very hard. Watch it only if you're interested in the history of world cinema or want a good laugh at the expense of others' dignity.* out of *****