Little Fish

Synopsis: Tracey Heart (Cate Blanchett) is a thirty-two-year-old recovered heroin addict who and lives with her mum, Janelle (Noni Hazelhurst), in a Sydney western suburb. She manages a video shop but dreams of owning her own business. Lionel (Hugo Weaving), a powerful father figure in her life, is a gay, drug-addicted ex-rugby champ, who's had a past connection with Brad Thompson (Sam Neill), a Mr Big in the underworld. Her brother Ray (Martin Henderson) leads a wastrel existence. When ex-boyfriend Jonny (Dustin Nguyen) turns up life gets really complicated with Tracey being torn between her past and her hopes for the future.

Rowan Woods is renowned for his hard-hitting first feature The Boys. Here he returns, many years later, again to gritty no-nonsense stuff, this time the world of the drug addict. It's to his credit that he chooses strong subject matter, and gives a voice to the unheard people - those thirty-somethings who wonder what the hell they have done with their lives, and try to repair the damage done in their twenties. The use of Sydney's multi-cultural Western suburbs also makes for a strong identifiable feel.

The best thing about this film are the performances, especially by Weaving, Hazelhurst and Blanchett. Weaving gives an eye-opening performance as Lionel, who is an incredibly complex and sad character. Hazelhurst hasn't been seen in a feature film for years, and it's great to see her back. Her performance as the caring worried mother is at once strong, tender and very authentic. Blanchett shows yet again just how good she is at nailing the intrinsic nature of her characters. Replete with Western suburbs accent and the look of a real battler, she brings a lot of empathy to Tracey's character, as she works hard and swims everyday to keep herself going. The smaller roles, including a big screen debut by Lisa McCune, were also solid.

One problem however with Little Fish for me is the plot, which I found somewhat muddied and confused, especially in understanding how the characters related to each other. It seems that too much was taken for granted and I found myself too often thinking : "hang on, who is this character?" Especially towards the film's conclusion things get a little unclear, and I felt there was too much emphasis on the crime side of the drug world. Why did this need to be dragged into a story that would have been better concentrating on interrelationships and Tracey's personal quest, rather than getting into predictable dirty-double-crossing-crooks territory? The almost forced visual associations with the film's title were also a little too contrived for my liking.

Overall the film is a damning testament to the negative power of drug taking, and leaves one with a saddened view of that element of society and the obstacles that so often prevent them from making a fresh go of it. Overall it's a good film which, with more clarity, could have been excellent.

 

 

Want more about this film?

    

Want something different?