BRILLIANT LIES

Australia, 1996, 96 minutes, Colour.
Gia Carides, Anthony La Paglia, Zoe Carides, Ray Barrett, Michael Veitch, Catherine Wilkin, Neil Melville.
Directed by Richard Franklin.

Sexual politics and harrassment issues are at the centre of Brilliant Lies. David Williamson has a reputation of being a satirist as well as a moralist. Both aspects are seen here.

The difficulty with listening to both versions of a harrassment case (as the arbitrator must) is that both can seem plausible and one has to be alert to inconsistencies, to body language, to the reliability of witnesses. Here Gia Carides accuses Anthony La Paglia of harrassment and the issue goes to mediation and then to court. The screenplay heightens the ambivalence by showing dramatisations of both versions in stylised flashback style. Audiences have to compare what they see with what they understand of each character and of motives.

There is further complexity with issues arising from family scandal and brothers and sisters taking sides with regard to their father. Richard Franklin used to direct thrillers but made Hotel Sorrento last year and has now made an efficient and thought-provoking version of a play that is relevant and, while geared to a popular audience, nevertheless invites them to think. Modern morality play.

1.The work of David Williamson, in the theatre, for the screen, his setting of scenes, the importance of verbal encounters?

2.The locations: the office, home, the tribunal? The musical score?

3.The structure: the introduction to Susie, to Gary, to Katie? To the family, their father and Paul? Gary and Vince in the office? Seeing different perspectives? The importance of the flashbacks, the camera style, the contrast between truth and lies? The childhood flashbacks to the father’s molesting his daughters?

4.The title, the issue of truth and lies, lies by each of the characters, deliberate, by habit? Intended deceit?

5.The audience and listening to Susie’s story, Gary’s perspective? The workplace, the harassment, Susie’s reaction?

6.The audience believing Susie? Her speaking to Marian, Marian’s questions, counsel? The importance of documenting the assault? The claim for forty thousand dollars, Susie’s intent?

7.Audience reaction to Susie and her lifestyle, her father’s wealth, her childhood (and later discovering the molestation and her explanation of it and her reactions)? Studying overseas, having to come home, the loss of the money, not getting a job, her moral behaviour, taking Ecstasy, promiscuity? Her relationship with Katie? In her home, irresponsible? The selfishness? The possibility of getting the money? Katie at work, her father, Paul persuading them to have the party for their father’s birthday? Her wanting to go to other parties? The truth about the molestation? Paul and his reaction? Katie and the truth about the accusations? Marian and the questions, her lie about Marian being attracted to Katie? The confrontations with Katie?

8.Gary as a person, seeming innocent, his version of what happened, the various discussions with Vince? Vince believing Susie? The past, Gary and his work, jokes to the women, the phone calls, the innuendo? The golf game with Vince? The bets and Gary winning? Gary’s anger with Vince? His anger at the tribunal?

9.The building up of the pictures, their being modified by the various comments?

10.The family themes, the father, his life, womanising, drinking, treatment of his wife, molesting his daughters and his explanation of being concerned about their growing up? His attitude to each of his children? The discussions, the party, his discussions with Paul, thinking Paul weak? Appreciating the party, his defending himself? The operation, the aftermath?

11.Paul, his life, being in debt, work, his Christian background, his girlfriend, his concern about profane language, his relationship with his sisters, persuading them to have the party, the discovery of the truth about his father, his negative reaction?

12.Katie going to see Marian, her admitting the truth? Marian being married?

13.The hearing, the claims, Susie standing firm, the reaction of Gary and Vince? Katie and her interventions, observing? Marian presiding?

14.The tribunal, the lawyers, the judges? Susie telling her story? How much truth, how much lying? Gary and his reaction, shouting, his wife being present? Susie denouncing Gary, his womanising, his lies? The effect on Gary, the effect on the judges? The audience trying to gauge what really happened – and the later conversation with Katie about the fifty-dollar note?

15.Susie giving the money for the operation, the party afterwards, the discussion with their father? His marrying again? The effect on each of the members of the family? Susie’s future and her changing her lifestyle? Gary, buying the company, his being humiliated?

16.The relevance of issues of sexual harassment in the office? Molestation in the family? Dysfunctional families? The legal background? The importance of truth and lies?