Today I am reviewing the film Charlies Country, directed by I personally feel like the film makers of Charlie’s Country
Country were
Rolf de Heer.
The film, Charlie’s Country, is based in the Northern Territory,
and is about an Aboriginal elder, named Charlie, and how he
is determined to live and reconnect with the traditional ways of
his people. However, he always finds himself being frustrated
by white man laws, and paternalistic attitudes against his
people. The film also outlines all of the additional challenges
Aboriginal people faced, including there being an absence of
Aboriginal voice, drunkenness and drug abuse, and the low
expectations regarding indigenous poverty.
In one of the very first scenes of the film where Charlie was
first introduce, he was shown living in what looks like a tin hut
that is surrounded by old curtains and sheets. His “house”
wasn’t actually a house as we know. It didn’t have four walls, a
door or windows, and there was no bathroom or kitchen.
Charlie himself appeared to be very thin and frail, and his
clothing was tatted and falling apart. The film makers use a
dolly shot of Charlie isolated in his home, and use sombre
music in the background of the scene, that leads us to believe
that Charlie is alone and poor in both health and living
conditions.
With the use of these 2 examples, the film makers were able
to portray the idea of poor health and living conditions within
the Indigenous communities and this was very effective in
showing the audience the harsh reality of Indigenous people’s
lives.
very successful in portraying what certain ideas and
viewpoints they wanted to share and express throughout
Charlie’s Country. The biggest viewpoint being the struggles
that the indigenous Australians faced during and after white
settlement. I thought that this film was highly impactful in a
positive way, and portrayed the Aboriginal experience in a way
that was both insightful and relatable from many perspectives.
One of the main key ideas in the film was that there was a very
low expectation from the white people regarding indigenous
poverty and their living conditions.
Later in the film, there is a scene of Charlie admiring a red
house, with windows and doors, and completely closed in.
He says to himself, “This is the sort of house I want, if its like
this house, I will be ok”. The next day he went to see a white
man who works for the Government providing homes in his
community. Charlie asked him for a house, and the man
rejected him, saying that he already has a house, “A good
house”, and that if he chooses to walk away from it, that is his
problem. This is another example of the low expectations
shown by the white community towards indigenous living
conditions, because as we could clearly see from the scene
described earlier, his home is far from being a, “Good house”.
We then see Charlie taking cigarettes from a packet of a fellow
community member. He then returns home and burns them
one by one in a fire. This is another example of internalisation
as it symbolises his resentment to accept white culture,
especially the aspects that are killing members of his
community, or leading them to health problems, that is
Another key idea of the film was internalisation. One of the first
scenes of the film shows Charlie calling out to the police
station in his own language, saying, “You come from far away
and bring us alcohol, ganga, tobacco… All bad!” This is an
example of internal protesting as he knew the police would not
be able to understand what he was saying, and he would not
get in trouble, and because he knew they would not listen to
him due to their being a major lack of Aboriginal voice.
Paternalism was one of the major ideas portrayed in Charlie’s
Country. The white people viewed the indigenous people as
being simple minded, naive and childlike in their minds and
levels of understanding. The opening shot to the film was a
close up of a alcohol ban for the indigenous community
Charlie lives in. This displays paternalism because it shows
how white men laws that are stupid and unrealistic are being
forced onto Indigenous people, and only Indigenous people,
because white people believe that they are simple minded and
that they need to be looked over 24/7 just like children.
Paternalism is also shown later in the film in a scene when
Charlie goes hunting with a friend. They shoot a buffalo with
their hunting rifles, and tie it to the hood of their truck.
including himself. In a way, the burning of the cigarettes
symbolises Charlies internal protest to himself in that he will
quit smoking because he knows that it is bad for his health.
This was a very impactful scene. To a lot of viewers, the
concept of throwing cigarettes into a fire is so simple but so
impactful at the same time because he is a frequent smoker
and he didn’t smoke them, instead he threw them into a fire
and destroyed them.
They were then stopped by two white police officers as they
were driving down the path, for not wearing their seatbelts.
The policemen found the rifles and questioned if they had
permits. As they did not have permits to use their rifles, they
were taken to the police station for questioning, and their rifles
were confiscated, despite them explain to the police officers
that they needed them for hunting. Paternalism is shown here
because the police officers were treating them like children.
Everything that white man found was dangerous in Aboriginal
possession, they took away. We see more examples of this
throughout the film.
They also did not take into consideration their cultural
practices, and Charlie and his friend were not listened to,
which displayed a lack of voice. A crucial part of their
traditional culture is to hunt and gather their food. This is
especially important as the white man’s food was not good for
their health and was causing a lot of them to become ill. Not
only is hunting good for their diets, but it is also an important
part of their cultural identity and these white laws are
inconsiderate of their traditions.
This scene is also a significant example of how the film has
used prop design and humour to engage the viewers.
This is displayed in a scene where Charlie is visiting the
doctor, and explains that his teeth do not fit him properly and
he can’t eat with or without them, and he also refuses to eat
white man food because it was making him sick. The doctor
says to Charlie that he will need to see the dentist about his
teeth, when the dentist is in the community next. Charlie then
replies with, “I’ll be dead by then.” This was effective in
communicating the key idea of the white settlement’s lack of
care for Indigenous wellbeing and lack of care for them in
general.
The tying of the buffalo to the hood of the truck is an example
of the film aspects, magic realism and absurdist comedy. This
is due to the buffalo being way too heavy for Charlie and his
friend to lift and manoeuvre, and in the scene, you hear gun
shots, and then the next shot is of the buffalo already tied to
the hood of the truck. This is both absurd, and humorous.
The film successfully portrays the key ideas of there being a
lack of healthcare, cultural isolation, and how the white people
are inconsiderate of the Indigenous’ peoples desires to live
traditionally as well as connect with their country and
ancestors
Drunkenness is another key idea the film makers show
throughout the film. Many of the Aboriginal community would
use alcohol for an escape out of their sad reality, however,
even this was monitored and governed by white settlement.
When the film first begins, the opening shot was a close up of
an alcohol ban sign for only Aboriginal people. The sign stated
that if any Aboriginal person caught in the possession of, or
consuming alcohol beyond that sign, would be punished by the
law.
 This is an example in the film of indigenous alienation. The
Much later in the film, Charlie is drawing money from an ATM laws only pertained to the indigenous people, they were
machine, and a woman approaches him asking if he could buy treated like children in a sense as choices were taken away
her some grog, as she had been banned from buying liquor, from them, which is, again, another example of paternalism
due to white laws against excessive drinking. He buys her a displayed in the film. He is in the liquor store when the man
box of beer, takes it back to her community, and a big group of behind the counter warns him that the law has been changed
indigenous people come out of hiding to drink the beer with and that he can be sentenced up to 18 months in jail for
them. This is significant because it show how many indigenous supplying a banned person with grog
people have turned to alcohol to numb their pain. Charlie
continues to drink with them, and to supply them with alcohol Charlie got into trouble with the law whilst under the influence
for quite some time. of alcohol, and was sentenced to 18 months in prison. When
he enters the prison, a scene shows a white man shaving off
all of his hair.
This is highly significant due to the fact that his hair is what He is told that he will be released to a dry house for the first
makes him an elder in his culture, which is a very big deal. month, and he realises he will still not be free once he is
This is also significant because it shows how their culture is released.
taken away from them and it also symbolises the fact that He is finally released from jail and it pans to a scene of him at
white people are trying to take away their identity. To a supermarket, and him complaining in his language about the
emphasize on the significance of this scene, the filmmakers same old junk food. This is emphasising on the fact that
used a very close up, still shot of Charlie in a dark room, and nothing has changed, and he has gone back to the same old
very solemn music was playing in the background. Charlie’s life he was living before, only now he can’t even drink to numb
facial expressions look that of a broken man. the pain. This scene was very effective in portraying the fact
that nothing had changed, and that Charlie was going back to
We then move to a scene where Charlie is talking to a parole his old, poor, unfair way of living. It was also successful in
officer about his conditions of release, and how he is not able portraying the idea that there was no hope for change.
to drink anymore.
This film had a very positive impact and it was highly
successful in communicating their views of the challenges of
being an Indigenous person and the harsh reality of their life,
with their ways of living, their diets and health conditions,
because of white settlement.

Thank you for listening.