/ 7 February 1997

It’s brilliantissimo!

Shine has been called the ‘best film you’ll see in 1997’ but its dramatisat= ion

of the truth has been questioned.=20

Mike Hutchinson

ADELAIDE, Western Australia, May, 1986: Kerry Hicks had a memorable birthda= y t hat year. She and her husband Scott were expecting friends for dinner, to c= ele

brate. The scene was set for a convivial but hardly unusual evening.

Until, that is, Scott, an established film-maker, read in the local newspap= er=20

of an eccentric pianist who had survived a mysterious “illness” to return t= o t he recital trail. The man was playing in Adelaide that night. Hicks felt he= ha

d to attend. He listened and marvelled.

The result, 10 years in the making, was Shine, the unlikely story of a dera= nge

d pianist, which is already on course to become one of the most talked-abou= t m ovies of 1997. With its bittersweet theme of destructive and redeeming love= , S hine tells the tale of childlike genius David Helfgott. But the story behin= d t he story – the making of the film – is almost as compelling. The narrative = inc

ludes some potent cinematic myths: a director with a dream, a virtually unknown star,=

an

unseemly wrangle over distribution rights, and controversy over the film’s=

ve

rsion of the truth.

“Something – I don’t know what – compelled me to skip Kerry’s supper that n= igh

t and attend that recital. I’m glad I did,” says Hicks. “She’s since forgiv= en=20

me. I remember I came away from the recital feeling like you do when you’ve= se

en a good film. It was an extraordinary experience.” What intrigued him is = evi

dent from his biopic. David Helfgott is no thin-blooded interpreter of the = pia

no reperto ire. He hums, grimaces and laughs while he performs. His interpretations ar= e n ot purist: notes or lines occasionally go missing.=20

He was “like Groucho Marx on speed”, Hicks recalls.” I was captivated by th= e m ix of man and music.” Helfgott has also been known to wander down to the au= die

nce and kiss and hug anyone within reach. It is as though he has lost whate= ver

restrains our innermost impulses. Despite, or because, of that he plays li=

ke=20

an angel.

So, Hicks found himself face to face with a conundrum. What lay behind this= ex

traordinary anomaly – a shambling, virtually incoherent idiot-savant who pl= aye

d Rachmaninov, Chopin and Liszt so beautifully? Who were the key figures in= hi

s life? Where had Helfgott disappeared to for a decade? Shine offers a few = ans

wers.=20

Helfgott, born in 1947, was one of four artistic children of Polish-Jewish = Hol

ocaust survivors, who fled to near-poverty in Perth, Western Australia. His= do

mineering father drove his son to succeed at the piano, but dissolved in an= ger

when David’s talent took him to Britain on a scholarship. At graduation, H=

elf

gott tackled the technical and emotional demands of Rachmaninov’s Third Pia= no=20

Concerto,=20

collapsed, and entered a 10-year netherworld of psychiatric wards and hoste= ls.

On the road again to recovery and recitals, he married and rebuilt his life= .

After that ground-breaking 1986 comeback tour, it took Hicks – now 44 – man= y m onths to gain Helfgott’s confidence and that of his equally extraordinary w= ife

and manager, Gillian. Hicks regularly travelled the 600km between Adelaide=

an

d Perth to interview the pianist and hear him play.

This sounds simple, but it was an achievement because of the way Helfgott t= alk

s. Hicks constructed a screenplay, Flight of the Bumblebee. It wouldn’t do.= It

was mundane, too “TV movie”. In came screenwriter Jan Sardi to craft somet=

hin

g finer, the screenplay that came to be filmed as Shine.

It was now 1991, five years since Hicks had first met Helfgott. Shine was s= til

l only halfway to celluloid. The script was no longer literal: it took libe= rti

es, just as Helfgott takes liberties with music. According to Hicks, the fi= lm=20

depicts “being eaten alive by a piano”, by the formidable bulk and terrible= ma

w of an open concert grand on stage. “No wonder they go crazy,” Hicks excla= ims

.

So far, Shine was on paper, and in Hicks’s head. He had not yet found finan= ce,

turning to Jane Scott, producer of Jane Campion’s debut box-office wonder =

My=20

Brilliant Career. Scott raised the necessary $6 million; she and Hicks resi= ste

d the pleas of financiers to involve more big-name stars. Hicks saw that th= at=20

would loosen the emotional grip of the film.

He was right. Three actors play David Helfgott – child, teenager and adult = – e ach virtual unknowns. The youngest David, victim of a father who loves not = wis

ely but too well, is Alex Rafalowicz, struggling to conclude a competition = pie

ce as the piano rolls symbolically away downstage.

The teenage David, who escapes his concentration camp of a home to study at= Lo

ndon’s Royal College of Music, is played by Noah Taylor.=20

Geoffrey Rush, a graduate of the Lecoq school of mime in Paris, plays Helfg= ott

as an adult. Rush learned every stammer, repetition, gasp and “whooah” of =

Hel

fgott’s deranged but systematically scripted soliloquies. Nothing was impro= vis

ed. Aware that nothing convinces less than a film “pianist” whose hands flu= tte

r meaninglessly over the ivories, Rush honed a credible piano technique. Th= e s oundtrack=20

is played by the real-life Helfgott, but it never shows.

Rush explains: “I’m not a pianist … but if you play Hamlet, you’ve got a = swo

rd fight at the end of the play.” If you can’t convince in that, you’ve thr= own

away the final act. So with Shine. At various stages, the adult Helfgott h=

as=20

had a caffeine addiction – scores of cups of tea a day – to put the PG chim= ps=20

in the shade, and smoked like Marlboro Man. He played the piano, and, bizar= rel

y, swam le ngths of the pool, for hours on end. His nervous energy was, and is, prodig= iou

s.

How to do him justice? Rush clearly succeeded. The story goes that after He= lfg

ott saw the final cut of Shine for the first time, he bounded up to Hicks, = tri

lling the single word, “Brrrilliantissimo!” So, Hicks had his film. He had = Hel

fgott’s approval. What he didn’t have was a distributor. The movie’s first = pub

lic screening was at the United States’s Sundance Film Festival in January.= Th

e result?=20 “All hell broke loose,” recalls Hicks. “Suddenly there was this feverish fr= enz

y to lay claim to the film.”=20

Other controversies were to follow. Helfgott’s father, played with devastat= ing

emotional force by Armin Mueller-Stahl, is at the centre of the film: the =

pow

er of his performance comes from the anguished contradictions apparent in t= he=20

desperate, but severe tenderness the elder Helfgott shows his son. He bulli= es=20

and terrorises, because he wants “to keep the family together”.=20

Travesty, cry members of the late Peter Helfgott’s family (he died in 1975)= . D avid’s sister Margaret wrote to Australian papers condemning Shine’s “unfai= r a nd inaccurate” portrayal.=20

The film’s second controversy involves another change that has been made fo= r d ramatic effect. In life, a far-sighted doctor, Chris Reynolds, brought Helf= got

t out of his twilight world. Shine, however, credits Helfgott’s emotional a= nd=20

musical renaissance to a lesser character. In life as in fiction, Helfgott = is=20

a holy fool (and the first to admit it) whose relationship to experience is= in

discrimina

te. Hicks defines the pianist as “a force of nature”. “A near genius” is ho= w H elfgott’s teacher at London’s Royal School of Music, played in Shine by Joh= n G ielgud, described his pupil.=20

The question is, how many of those who go, and will go, to his concerts, do= as

a result of seeing Shine? How many will hope for a mid-concert hug and a k=

iss

? Does his personality overshadow the music? Is he something of a freak sho= w?=20

And does it matter?

“Many people are attracted to his music who wouldn’t otherwise attend class= ica

l concerts,” says Hicks. “But that’s wholly positive.”=20