New Zealand Identities in the Cinema of Peter Jackson

Representation of New Zealand National Identities in the Filmmaking of Peter Jackson

In this essay, I will explore how Peter Jackson’s filmmaking activity in New Zealand contributed to the national identity of New Zealand on screen and how Jackson may also have not represented New Zealand accurately in his work. Peter Jackson is a filmmaker from New Zealand, an island off the coast of Australia. New Zealand has a very small film industry that was only boosted recently by the creation of the New Zealand Film Commission in 1978. The NZFC supported New Zealand films financially, including some of Jackson’s work such as: Bad Taste (Jackson, 1987), Meet the Feebles (Jackson, 1989), Braindead (Jackson, 1992), Heavenly Creatures (Jackson, 1994) and Forgotten Silver (Jackson, 1995). Prior to the creation of the NZFC, few films were being made in New Zealand and released for audiences to see, with the country relying on imported films for spectators. As a result of this, the views and opinions that comprised to make the national identities of the people of New Zealand were not being represented on screen. It was more often the case “that foreign funding for films in New Zealand was used, but often the deal turned into a Hollywood movie being made with New Zealand as a location, rather than a ‘New Zealand story’” (Swart, 2018: 3). The lack of a New Zealand story and the use of it as only a setting meant that the nation could get little to no statement out about its people and their culture. This statement could even arguably include Jackson’s work on The Lord of the Rings trilogy (Jackson, 2001-2003) franchise, showing how Jackson could potentially have chosen to later ignore the matters of national identity he addressed in his earlier works such as Forgotten Silver and Heavenly Creatures, which I will be using as my primary examples in this essay.

It is important to establish what national cinema means; there is no universal definition of national cinema, but it generally captures the image of a nation through its themes, representation and the pro-filmic elements of its texts. Higson states “the concept of national cinema is used prescriptively rather than descriptively, citing what ought to be the national cinema, rather than describing the actual cinematic experience of popular audiences” (Higson, 1989, 37). This is why there is much debate regarding the national cinema of New Zealand and how the national identity of the country is shown within its national cinema. It is also vital to establish what national identity means in New Zealand; however this is difficult as it is a nation filled with the “majority of citizens of European descent, a significant indigenous population, long-established Pacific and Chinese communities, and slowly growing numbers of immigrants from around the world, New Zealand is the site of various developments and debates that reflect global forces and local battles in film policy […with] indigenous voices and minority cultures fight for recognition” (Blomkamp, 2012: 630). This means that many New Zealand films could accurately portray the national identity of a white New Zealand family but completely ignore the distinct national identity of the indigenous population that also require their representation on screen. This creates a sense of tension and uneasiness about the multiple cultures included in New Zealand’s population not being equally portrayed in New Zealand cinema backed by the NZFC. Emma Blomkamp says that “although it is possible to measure benefits of a film industry such as employment opportunities, it is very difficult to measure progress towards the more abstract goals of social cohesion and identity formation” (Blomkamp: 2012, 639). This means that the issue of representing the national identity in cinema for New Zealand may always be a point of contention even if filmmakers such as Jackson attempt to form a presence for people to identify with elements of their texts.

In their work, Understanding New Zealand Cultural Identities, James Belich and Lydia Weavers state: “It is not possible to live without a cultural identity, as an individual, a community or a nation. In a time of globalism, cultural identities are what other nations, and people within them, notice about us and our nation” (Belich, Wevers, Hill and Bönisch-Brednich, 2008: 15). There have been several developments in the national identities of New Zealand that have been represented on film in different ways by Peter Jackson himself and other New Zealand directors who often discuss matters of national identity in their texts such as Vincent Ward, Jane Campion and Lee Tamahori. The disassociation from Great Britain brought more independence to the nation, encouraging “the notion of a culture that is specific to New Zealand, a notion which has become increasingly complex in recent years in response to the changing nature of New Zealand society” (Read, 2006). This has led to more liberation for New Zealand as a nation and the ability to reflect on their place in the Commonwealth as Jackson does in his text, Heavenly Creatures which is set in 1950s New Zealand when New Zealand still had heavy dependence on the Commonwealth. In the text, Juliet Hulme (Kate Winslet) mocks the British Royal Family and is scorned by her teacher (Moreen Eason) for disrespecting “the Empire” as it is referred to. This displays how New Zealand has transitioned from a country that required substantial support from countries such as the United Kingdom to having its own self-funded national cinema – creating a sense of proudness for New Zealand people to relate with as a reflection on the progression towards a better New Zealand.

Forgotten Silver is a mockumentary style text regarding imaginary filmmaker, Colin McKenzie. This involves Jackson addressing matters of national identity in that he states there have been no New Zealand film figures to aspire to and take inspiration from to create a ‘New Zealand’ film. Belich, Weavers, Hill and Bönisch-Brednich say that “New Zealanders are the youngest people in the world, but acknowledges that our history is therefore fast and dynamic as well as short” (Belich, et al, 2008: 14). This quote relates well to the topic of national identity being represented in Forgotten Silver because it is Jackson effectively showing that in his text; the lack of history within the country is the topic that is being ‘mocked’. In other terms, he addresses the matter of national identity being unrepresented in film by creating a false history on which to base its identity. The idea is based in comedy due to the mockumentary format of the text, but the central theme of a confused identity remains relevant to the issue and provides an interesting comedy on how Jackson feels about his country’s character.

In comparison, Peter Jackson represents national image in a completely different way in Heavenly Creatures by putting a real-life event that occurred in New Zealand into the text; “Heavenly Creatures was also an adaptation but in this case, was based on an historical occurrence rather than a fictional narrative” (Dunleavy & Joyce, 2011: 165). This meant that Peter Jackson was showcasing a ‘New Zealand story’ made in New Zealand and set within New Zealand, displaying a clear change from previous New Zealand texts from earlier where only a New Zealand setting without the story was shown. The use of the 1950s setting and famous criminal case in the text allows Jackson to explore the past in New Zealand and reflect on how changes in society from that time have affected the national identity of the country. One example of this is the representation of the British monarchy in the text that I reference earlier in the essay; during this time the country was much more dependent on the monarchy and has since distanced itself; this could be the reason that this moment in the text is chosen for self-reflexive comedy in the portrayal of New Zealand’s lack of independence in the past.

This is despite the focus of the text being on narrative and character rather than themes or motifs of New Zealand, Jackson still attempts to address these matters of national identity. The argument that Jackson succeeded in making New Zealand a more well-known entity in cinema from Roger Ebert’s review of the text in 1994 which does reference that the text is set in New Zealand stating: “New Zealand was stunned in 1952 by a brutal murder carried out by two girls, ages 15 and 16” (Ebert, 1994). Despite this, at no point does he reference this having any real effect on the reaction to the text or the overall image of New Zealand itself, creating a point of contention about whether Jackson had truly addressed national identity in this text.

Jackson was certainly interested in displaying New Zealand more on screen to create a more defined and globally seen view of the country and to help form the characteristics of a ‘New Zealand film’. This is in comparison to the British gangster film or the American musical, Jackson drove for a distinct New Zealand style. For example; “analysis of the development of Braindead shows that those principles of film storytelling were absorbed and reworked within a local setting” (Joyce, 2006: 116). This recognises that Jackson changed his text in order to help it relate more to New Zealand and its distinctiveness. Jackson uses shock factor values such as gore and black comedy to create a sense of style and identity in three of his films: Bad Taste, Meet the Feebles and Braindead. Jackson and his producer, Jim Booth, have acknowledged that this kind of filmmaking is necessary to create a national image for New Zealand in cinema with Booth saying: “We are not bold enough at being uncommercial. We have to be more extreme, make angrier dramas, more outrageous comedies. What we basically do are gentle art films, which we hope will be ‘break out’ films. It’s not good enough – our films need more meat” (Wakefield, 1992:10). This, however, did detract from the national image of New Zealand’s identity in these texts often. Instead, focusing on creating a genre text that could be accepted by global audiences, rather than relating to New Zealand culture as explored in Jackson’s other texts.

Jackson’s films have most often tended to only represent the national image of white, middle class New Zealand citizens or immigrants such as Juliet Hulme in Heavenly Creatures. This meant Jackson left the indigenous people within the country with little to no focus, including multiple Polynesian subcultures such as the Maori. This could be because “until relatively recently, New Zealand immigration policy was a sorry tale of ethnic prejudice, seeking to maintain a Better British New Zealand, if not a wholly white one” (Belich, et al, 2008: 12). This would suggest that Jackson was working under the NZFC to portray this false image of New Zealand and ignore the elements of New Zealand that were considered as against the image they wanted, purposefully misrepresenting New Zealand on screen and not providing an authentic national image of the country. However, in Forgotten Silver, the text does show some indigenous people in some of the ‘revolutionary Colin McKenzie films’ to relate to the history of New Zealand cinema. This relates to the early New Zealand films created for tourist attraction purposes in the 1930s by filmmakers such as “Gaston Melies (Georges’s brother), who portrayed New Zealand’s landscape and Maori culture as interchangeable exotic commodities” (Thompson, 2014: 103). It could therefore also be argued that Jackson is showing the national identity of New Zealand in a positive manner and battling against his criticism of only representing a one-sided view of New Zealand identities. The reference to this history and the positive connotations it carries within the text show how Jackson wants the audience to understand and see that there is a rich history behind New Zealand that needs to be brought to attention. I would argue that Jackson could be attempting to encourage New Zealand filmmakers to explore this history, much like Australian filmmakers did in the mid-1970s.

It could be argued that the indigenous Maori culture was never represented in mainstream New Zealand film until recently with “Taika Waititi, a Maori director, has emerged as an influential New Zealand filmmaker with his films Hunt for the Wilderpeople (Waititi, 2016) and Boy (Waititi, 2010), which have gained the number one and two spots for highest grossing films in the local box office, respectively” (Swart, 2018: 7). This however is not the first time for the Maori to be represented as a primary piece of New Zealand culture because “early films made in New Zealand, often by filmmakers from Europe and America, rested on a vision of New Zealand as a remote pastoral paradise; a kind of Antipodean Arcadia, populated by Maori noble savages and dusky smiling maidens” (Read, 2006). It is only as American imported films became popular in New Zealand and the number of local films reduced that the Maori became almost completely absent from the national identity of New Zealand represented in cinema and by the NZFC.

Having looked at one of the ways Higson defines national cinema through exploring the representation of New Zealand, he also talks about “comparing and contrasting one cinema to another, thereby establishing varying degrees of otherness” (Higson, 1989: 38). A good comparison to make with the cinema of New Zealand is with the cinema of Australia. This is because there are many similarities and differences between the two national cinemas as well as its cultures and lifestyle. The similarities include making film originally as a way to attract tourists and the establishment of a film commission in 1975 for Australia and 1976 for New Zealand. However, Australia have had much more success and a more easily identifiable national image to the global audience because there have been many movements within Australian film. The ‘Ocker’ films, such as The Adventures of Barry McKenzie (Beresford, 1972), becoming a popular within the country and capitalising on stereotypes to gain profit, a pattern which would continue right up to texts such as Crocodile Dundee (Faiman, 1986). This was then followed by the Australian New Wave which brought in filmmakers who represented all aspects of Australian life including that of its indigenous peoples. It has also continued to explore and expand on these representations of Australians over the years, producing a much larger number of films per year than New Zealand. New Zealand, however, did not go through any of these movements until much later, and so did not garner a strong national identity, instead making successful television productions for local audiences. New Zealand however has a far younger cinema than Australia and it may have been filmmakers such as Peter Jackson who have helped to establish a stronger industry. Therefore, this has allowed more contemporary New Zealand filmmakers to explore national identity even further than Jackson did and begin to push for the global success that the Australian cinema has achieved. An example of this is Taika Waititi, who was previously discussed in this essay, as he has made extremely successful New Zealand films and has since made Thor: Ragnarok (Waititi, 2017) in Hollywood. The film was widely popular and will make the global audience much more aware of the New Zealand national cinema just as Australian filmmakers did so with the New Wave movement.

In conclusion, Peter Jackson certainly raised the profile of New Zealand cinema and within that the representation of the nation that came alongside that. To say if Jackson had any positive or negative effect on the representation of the New Zealand national identity comes down to defining the national identity itself which is becomes difficult in this example because “any attempt to determine the characteristics of ‘a New Zealand film’ remains hotly debated, fuelled by ethnocentric definitions of national identity” (Blomkamp, 2012, 630). I would argue that Jackson’s rise to fame as a Hollywood director will have brought more attention to his older work in New Zealand and as a result raised awareness of the cinema there and their national image, increasing knowledge and educating global audiences to become more conscious of representation rather than stereotypes and scapegoating. I would also however say that Jackson rarely used his influence to directly address national identity in any of his early texts and so the effect that his texts could have had is reduced. Certainly, in comparison to directors such as Lee Tamahori and Geoff Murphy whose respective texts Once Were Warriors (Tamahori, 1994) and Utu (Murphy, 1983) – “one of the foundational texts in New Zealand cinema” (Cook, 2016: 412) – showed a more varied range of the cultures and history that New Zealand has to offer. However as stated in the introduction to the essay it will always be a point of contention on how the national identity of New Zealand is shown no matter how much or who addresses the issue.

References:

Beresford, B. (Director). (1972). The Adventures of Barry McKenzie [Film]. Australia: Longford Productions.

Blomkamp, E. (2012). Discourses of legitimation in New Zealand’s film policy. International Journal of Cultural Studies, 15(6), 629-644.

Cook, D. (2016). A History of Narrative Film (Fifth ed.). New York:  W.W. Norton & Company.

Dunleavy, T. & Joyce, H. (2011). New Zealand film and television institution, industry and cultural change.

Ebert, R. (1994, 23 November). Heavenly Creatures Movie Review. [Blog post]. Retrieved from: https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/heavenly-creatures-1994

Faiman, P. (Director). (1986). Crocodile Dundee [Film]. Australia: Rimfire Films.

Higson, A. (1989). The Concept of National Cinema. Screen, 30(4), 36-47.

Jackson, P. (Director). (1987). Bad Taste [Film]. New Zealand: WingNut Films.

Jackson, P. (Director). (1989). Meet the Feebles [Film]. New Zealand: WingNut Films.

Jackson, P. (Director). (1992). Braindead [Film]. New Zealand: WingNut Films.

Jackson, P. (Director). (1994). Heavenly Creature [Film]. New Zealand: WingNut Films.

Jackson, P. (Director). (1995). Forgotten Silver [Film]. New Zealand: WingNut Films.

Jackson, P. (Director). (2001). The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring [Film]. USA: New Line Cinema.

Jackson, P. (Director). (2002). The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers [Film]. USA: New Line Cinema.

Jackson, P. (Director). (2003). The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King [Film]. USA: New Line Cinema.

Joyce, H. (2006). Hollywood bound: Peter Jackson’s Braindead in development. Metro Magazine, 146(147), 116-121.

Murphy, G. (Director). (1983). Utu [Film]. New Zealand: Utu Productions.

New Zealand. Victoria University of Wellington for the Ministry of Culture and Heritage. (2008). Understanding New Zealand Cultural Identities. Wellington: Stout Research Centre for New Zealand Studies. [Authors: Belich, J., Wevers, L., Hill, R. & Bönisch-Brednich, B.].

Read, L. (2006). New Zealand Film: National Identity and the Films of Vincent Ward: The Development of New Zealand’s National Cinema Attests to the Changing Nature of New Zealand’s National Identity. Metro Magazine, 148.

Swart, V. (2018). New Zealand Film Industry: Building Culture and Identity. The Kabod, 4(2), 1-10.

Tamahori, L. (Director). (1994). Once Were Warriors [Film]. New Zealand: Communicado Productions.

Thompson, K. M. (2014). American Treasures from the New Zealand Film Archives. Moving Image, 14(1), 103-108.

Waititi, T. (Director). (2010). Boy [Film]. New Zealand: Whenua Films.

Waititi, T. (Director). (2016). Hunt for the Wilderpeople [Film]. New Zealand: Piki Films.

Waititi, T. (Director). (2017). Thor: Ragnarok [Film]. USA: Walt Disney Pictures.

Wakefield, P. (1992). Neo-Liberalism and the Consolidation of a National Film Industry (1988–97). In T. Dunleavy & H. Joyce (Eds.), New Zealand film and television institution, industry and cultural change. (pp. 137-171).

---