The special extended Onfilm website dance remix of the interview with writer/director Mark Gordon on the eve of Her Majesty's nationwide tour of New Zealand theatres.
A shorter version was published in Onfilm, December 2004/January 2005.
ONFILM: So, what possessed you to write a script based entirely in New Zealand, in which all the characters are New Zealanders (as opposed to, say, having an American character through which to introduce the audience to this foreign milieu)? Did you have to get used to people saying to you, "Hey man, what are you, nuts?!?"
Mark Gordon For starters I've had this taunting quote taped to my bookshelf for the last 16 years: "Only those who attempt the absurd, achieve the impossible." So I'm thinking that may be the root of things.
Additionally, it probably came out of a frustration with the types of material I was being asked to pitch or write at the time. Sort of a knee jerk reaction to the pat advice often dished out by studio executives and development types, fond of saying, "You should write what you know." Well, when I hear that I'm thinking, "There's nothing that interesting about a white middle-class guy who had a pretty happy childhood."
I mean, I certainly don't want to see that movie. I always felt it would be more of a challenge to write what I didn't know and try to make it believable.
I realised early on in my career that in order to differentiate myself from the pack, I would need to do something dramatic, original, unexpected and perhaps a bit foolhardy or "nuts." About that same time I remember seeing and becoming enraptured with Lasse Hallestrom's seminal film, 'My Life as a Dog', which really changed my worldview. It was subtitled, there were no stars (that I knew of) and you needed a magnifying glass or maybe a high powered microscope to find the ad in the newspaper. But when I left the theatre I felt elated, filled with hope and optimism, like I had discovered a gem and I wanted to tell everyone I knew about the film. Call it my epiphany. Like that Farside cartoon where a human guy who has been lurking amongst a flock of lambkins, leaps up, whips off a camouflage fleece-skin hide and shouts: 'We don't have to be sheep any more!'
Creatively it can be extremely liberating to do what people don't want or expect you to do. So I guess I was looking to create something as non-American and anti-Hollywood, as possible. New Zealand, a country which, at that time, most studio executives probably couldn't find on a map, seemed like the ultimate challenge. At minimum I hoped I would end up with a good writing sample - something on the other end of the spectrum from the broad comedies I had been writing.
I know you were partly prompted as a result of being stymied in your desire to travel here after college, but why the interest in NZ in the first place? These days it would be a lot more explicable, given the profile of 'Lord Of The Rings' and 'Whale Rider', but back in 1988 the country simply didn't have that kind of profile in the US, did it, except perhaps as a nuclear-free haven in the South Pacific?
In a business where scripts and projects can often take years (or decades) to come to fruition, I knew I had to think ahead and look where no one else seemed to be looking.
I wish I had a dollar for every person who, in 1987, when I mentioned that I was working on a story set in New Zealand, would tell me "Oh, that's my dream, to quit my job and move to New Zealand", "It's soo beautiful", "There's no traffic or pollution", "You don't have to tip!" It was never Australia. Always New Zealand. And their longing was palpable. Like some geographic aphrodisiac, the mere mention of NZ seemed to conjure up images of Xanadu, Nirvana, Camelot, OZ or even Glocca Morra. I guess a cultural anthropologist might have recognised this as a desperate cry for help - an instinctive yet genetically futile drive to return to a happier, peaceful, less complicated time amidst our spiralling material excesses of the 1980s. For frazzled statesiders a pilgrimage to your Nuke-free, 100% recyclable, dollar-friendly, virtually homicide-less bastion of purity and goodness, would be like making a trip back to the warmth and security of the womb. Or at least that was the perception. Which seemed like an interesting bit of Zeitgeist to tap into. I remember the very first person, a director friend, to whom I showed my very first draft of the script. After reading it he said "I don't know what New Zealand was like in the '50s, but that's what I would have wanted it to be like."
On the surface it may not have been apparent, at least to the bandwagon jumpers in the studio system, but already in 1987 New Zealand had a Svengali-like grip on the American psyche, and clearly I was not immune to its seductive charms.
At what point did you decide you wanted this film set in NZ to be a family film, and from the point of view of a 13-year-old girl? And at what point were the plot elements of the Queen's visit and the town's strained race relations included in your story?
I'm not sure I really set out to write a family film, per se, as much as I wanted to create an engaging story that would work on multiple levels and make people feel good when they came out of the theatre.
Sometime in 1987 I discovered there was a small library in the waiting room of the New Zealand Consulate in Los Angeles. I think it was on one of my several trips to get a tourist visa that I was never able to use. At that point I really didn't have a story that was working properly. I think it might have roughly been set in a New Zealand university or intermediate school in the '50s. Basically I was procrastinating by doing more research. That's when I stumbled on a little pamphlet that featured a story describing the day in the life of a 12 or 13 year old New Zealand Marching Girl who was preparing with obsessive commitment for a big meet. The very next moment I pulled a Year-in-Review annual off the shelf and opened it to a single paragraph which described the Royal Tour of Australia and New Zealand made by Queen Elizabeth II in 1953/54 in the months following her lavish, fairytale-like coronation. That was my "Eureka!" moment. Young girl - obsession - Queen.
Now, where that angle might have be enough for a typical studio film, it still seemed a little thin to me. I'm a big history buff, and, in preparation for my twice-aborted trip, I had been reading quite a bit about Maori culture, New Zealand history and its colonial past. The element of strained race relations in an otherwise seemingly placid and innocent time, gave me that rich additional layer of depth and texture I was looking for. It also felt like it would resonate strongly not only with American but international audiences as well. That's when I really starting getting excited about the story.
I know it's generally popular to grouse about government services. But if not for that public access reading room/library in the New Zealand Consulate in Los Angeles, which sadly was eliminated when they moved to new digs, 'Her Majesty' might never have been written and the film never made.
As I understand it, prior to deciding to get the show made yourself, the script attracted a fair amount of interest from Hollywood over the course of a decade, though that interest came with such suggested compromises as setting it somewhere other than NZ and casting Angela Lansbury as the kuia, Hira Mata. What made you so adamant about retaining the story's essential 'New Zealand-ness' (after all, you have talked about it being a universal story, so many of the same concerns and even plot points could have been translated to elsewhere)?
Superior geography combined with a ripe political and socio-cultural landscape.
I thought, "Well, we've got this indefatigable young girl who idolises the newly crowned Queen, whose coronation was one of the biggest news events of the decade. Why not put her in the smallest country, in the smallest town, on the other side of the world from the epicentre of the Commonwealth. To me it seemed natural, the further away from London, the stronger the emotional pull, the better the dramatic conflict when other forces, equally as strong, like her developing relationship with Hira Mata cause her to begin to question the status quo as well as her own identity. Not unsurprisingly, at the very same time the country, emerging from a blissful post-colonial slumber, was beginning to re-examine its own national identity. Bottom line, there was no place in the world in 1953 other than New Zealand that offered all that magnificent story fodder perfectly aligned in one place.
At what point did you decide to bring the project to fruition yourself, how did you go about it and how long did it take before you'd raised the required budget?
Well, I definitely had some help.
For 12 years I watched other people try to get the film made. During that time there were several attempts to put the film together as an Australian-New Zealand co-production, or, with funds from the New Zealand Film Commission. None were successful. As I was only involved as the writer during those attempts, I wasn't privy to the decision-making rationale or the politics. But I do remember in one scenario I was given the option (by the Australians) of giving up or sharing my screenwriting credit with an Australian producer in order for the "package" to have enough co-production points to be worthy of funding. Obviously that did not go over too well.
Over the years I learned from watching what not to do, and realised the only way to get this film made, with me as a first-time director, would be to raise the money privately, put it in the bank, go to New Zealand and cast the best actors we can find and make the movie.
In late 1999 after finishing a second stint working on a sit-com staff, I informed my then agent, who wanted nothing to do with features, that instead of writing another spec TV script as he would have liked, I was going off to raise the money to make an independent feature to be filmed in New Zealand, which, by the way, I intended to direct. Our parting was amicable and instantaneous.
At that point I teamed up with our two very dynamic and well-connected executive producers - my sister, Lisa Gordon, and a longtime friend, Susan Hailey, both of whom were living in Silicon Valley in the San Francisco Bay Area. Fortunately, they had no preconceived notion of how difficult, in fact, nearly impossible it can be to raise money to make a movie. We formed an LLC and had an attorney who specialises in independent films create an offering memorandum. Six months and 35 courageous private investors later we had raised the requisite funds. In fact, if you look closely, you might recognise a few of our investors in the background of the big parade scene down in Cambridge at the end of the movie.
You got some American folk with some impressive credits on the project in key positions (ie, producer Walter Coblenz; 'All the President's Men') - how were you able to attract them?
With two things that are very hard to find in Hollywood, besides 'the truth': a decent script, and money in the bank.
Definitely the turning point for me and the project was when Walter Coblenz agreed to come on board. From the beginning I knew I needed an experienced producer-partner.
Not just a dealmaker, but a creative producer with a serious line producing background to ensure that our investors' money would be spent appropriately (ie, getting it up on the screen). By coincidence, for over 15 years Walter and I had shared the same entertainment attorney, Wayne Alexander, but never knew each other. Wayne understood the type of producer we needed and thought 'Her Majesty' was just the sort of script that Walter had been looking to get involved with. We were approaching a critical decision-making time. If we didn't begin the process shortly so that we could finish the film by Christmas, we would likely have to return the investment monies.
In a town where everyone is trying to spin straw into gold, it can wear you out listening to tales of people who "have" the money, "can get" the money, have someone, who knows someone who "has" the money. Even though I knew Wayne trusted me when I told him we "had" the money, I wanted to make sure he could pitch it with confidence, to the point where I physically walked into his office and showed him our bank account balance.
After Wayne sent Walter the script and Walter liked it, the first thing Walter asked was whether we had the money to make the film. Wayne told Walter, "They have the money." Walter laughed and said, "Right." Wayne said, "No really, they have the money."v
Two weeks later, we were off to New Zealand to begin location scouting.
Walter definitely gave the project an additional level of credibility. His contacts and relationships enabled us to secure the extraordinarily talented cinematographer, Stephen M. Katz, when our Kiwi DP bailed two weeks before the beginning of production, and also the invaluable services of Ginny (no relation to Stephen) Katz, who just recently edited 'Kinsey'.
And given your success in doing attracting these talented Americans, why did you decide to draw the vast majority of the crew and 100% of the cast from NZ, rather than bringing in as many Americans as possible (which is unfortunately more usual than one would like)?
Economic necessity. Fortunately we didn't have the budget to bring more of us over.
From a cast standpoint, I always wanted it to be 100% pure New Zealand, for authenticity and truth, as well as other reasons mentioned elsewhere in this interview.
Did you do much research into the NZ screen industry's capability before making that decision?
I had definitely been following industry for many years, since the late 1980s. I would read old copies of NZ Film Magazine. I studied the credits of the few New Zealand films that made it onto US screens in the late '80s and early '90s. From very early discussions with contacts at the National Film Unit, I had put together a speculative budget. I knew there were very capable crews and adequate resources in country, and with the long run that 'Xena' was having thought, from a skill-set standpoint, that we might benefit from that a bit as well. Of course until we actually got to New Zealand and teamed up with a very experienced NZ producer, Judith Trye, who put together a realistic budget and gave us the lay of the land, the truth is we really didn't know if we had the proper funds or could get the key production personnel needed to make 'Her Majesty' at the studio quality level we all wanted.
When you arrived in NZ and announced your intention to make 'Her Majesty', what kind of reception did you get? I imagine it would have run the gamut from, "What gives you the right to come here and make our stories" to "Bless you for thinking we're interesting enough"…
I suppose there was some bemusement. No one was indignant, but perhaps a few folks were a tad guarded at first, and understandably so. However, once people realised that our intentions were genuine, and that we wanted to make a purely New Zealand story and not some kind of bogus hybrid with New Zealanders speaking in American accents, we were warmly embraced, or at least patiently tolerated, like some slightly crazy cousins you always knew you had, but have never met.
In terms of the industry, we had done some homework. Early on in the process of raising the money we made contact with the New Zealand Consulate in Los Angeles, and in particular, Diana Cloughley at Investment NZ. We kept Diana in the loop on our efforts and she directed us to Jane Gilbert and the folks at Film New Zealand, who offered guidance, introductions, and, once we arrived in country, facilitated our initial whirlwind recce, Auckland to Wellington in three days, stopping at, or passing through, just about every hamlet, town and city, from Paeroa to Waitara to Martinborough.
We had the bungee-like thrill of driving through the Rimutaka Gorge (on the wrong side of the road of course), while behind the wheel, our very capable and energetic liaise, Lisa Kissin, set up appointments for us on her cell phone - while entering them in her day planner. Lisa made sure that people understood we were "good" Americans, not the other kind. Ultimately, she was instrumental in helping us get about two months worth of location scouting and interviewing done in less than two weeks, as was producer Michelle Turner, who assisted us superbly once we reached Wellington. Most importantly, by the time we were ready to leave, so we could come back in two weeks, we had secured the invaluable services of an experienced production manager, Judith Trye, who became our New Zealand co-producer, as well as hiring a first-class production designer, Kim Sinclair, and stellar casting director, Terri de'Ath.
As far as authenticity goes, were you inundated by people who felt the need to "put you right" about how things "really were", or did you find the amount of research you did when writing the script largely protected you from that sort of nitpicking?
Beyond the basic story, I think the research and detail definitely garnered me some initial respect. When, after reading the script, many of the folks being interviewed for key crew positions thought they were coming in to meet with a New Zealand director, I knew we were in the ballpark. But I was still smart enough to know what I didn't know, and not to pretend that I did. So when it came to fine-tuning and finessing the script, I got wonderful input and suggestions from everyone and everywhere. Which I welcomed and encouraged, to a point, because it meant people cared. I would have been more concerned if they didn't say anything because then you can be pretty sure they're thinking, "This thing is a piece of crap and there's nothing I can say or do that's going to save this turkey."
To the point of how things "really were", history filtered by time tends to create some latitude and variance when it comes to memory. For example, before we cast the lovely and regal Rachel Wallis as Queen Elizabeth, we were considering her and two other actresses. We had pictures of all three women made up as a young QE II pinned to the bulletin board in the production office. Various visitors to the office, who clearly were of the era, each remembered Queen Elizabeth as looking "exactly like" a different one of the three choices.
As a side note regarding research, one of the most exciting moments for me actually came many years before production began when, about four years after I finished the script, I got my hands on a black and white documentary of the 1953/54 Royal Tour shot by the now defunct National Film Unit. It was like watching part of the story come to life before we'd ever shot the first frame of film. The other serendipitous event was choosing Cambridge as a key location for our big parade scene before learning that the Queen had actually stopped there on her Royal Tour. Subsequently, our amazing art department got their hands on some fantastic 16mm (or it might have been 8mm) colour footage shot during the Queen's visit to Cambridge, so the welcoming stage we set up for our shot was on the exact spot where the town had set up theirs in 1953.
In terms of the race relations aspects of the story, did you feel this was risky, contentious material to tackle, especially as "an outsider"? Or did that afford you a position of neutrality, if you like?
Yes and no. And yes.
As a first time director, and not a New Zealander, I probably would not have attempted a contemporary story that deals in any significant way with elements of race relations because the issues and landscape are constantly shifting. Particularly since I had never been to New Zealand prior to shooting the film. (I was willing to be singed if I stumbled but I didn't want to be vilified.)
However, because the story is set in the '50s, in sort of a magical, vivid, frozen moment in time, I felt confident I could effectively and accurately capture the milieu in a way that would ring true, but more importantly, be entertaining.
Nevertheless, I do clearly remember thinking as I began work on the story (over 16 years ago), that this could be a potential minefield - for any writer.
But I guess in a way, the thrill of the challenge made it even more enticing because I thought, "Boy, if I can pull this off, then I'll never have to sit in another meeting with studio executive or producer and be typecast as only being able to write or direct this or that kind of material."
Once we were under way, I had several Kiwis tell me they thought a New Zealander might never have gotten 'Her Majesty' made. But as you suggested, perhaps because we were "affectionate outsiders", we were afforded a wee bit of diplomatic immunity and were able to fly reasonably gracefully under the radar screen.
How important was it to you to have Don Selwyn's input as cultural consultant on the movie?
For me it was vital. I had always hoped we would find someone of Don's stature to offer guidance with the film. If it had not been suggested, I would have insisted. And the fact that he is so well-respected both within the Maori community and also as a filmmaker was a real bonus.
Even though the story is a fairytale (inspired by the actual Royal Tour) and the setting and characters entirely fictional (excepting QEII & Philip), I still wanted the film to be as culturally sensitive and historically accurate as possible. I was very prepared and willing to make changes in the script if there was anything deemed offensive, but was extremely flattered and honoured to learn that none were requested. And while some purists, both Maori and Pakeha, may notice minor licence taken here and there for dramatic effect or production necessity, Don clearly understood the intent of the piece and the potential impact of a positive cross-cultural story designed for both local and international audiences and gave us his blessing and endorsement without reservation.
How difficult was the casting process for you, and were you satisfied by the calibre of the performers you got to work with? (The reason I ask is that it's often a battle to get overseas shows to consider local actors, certainly for anything like a lead role.)
Making an independent film is always a risky proposition. Doing so with no distributor attached, no recognisable stars, shot in a "foreign" country, with kids, a dog and a first time director, tends to put a little extra pressure on the decision-making process.
I knew our cast had to be perfect - everyone down to the smallest cameo role. Or we were DOA. With the help of our casting director Terri de'Ath in Auckland, and Rachel Bullock down in Wellington, I spent an extraordinary amount of time with Walter looking at tapes, auditioning folks, putting them together in different combinations, staring at head shots and I guess praying for the stars to align, all the while being appropriately threatened by Walter to "hurry up and make some decisions".
Not only was I "satisfied," with the calibre of the performers, I was bloody thrilled - ecstatic really. We found a great choice for every role. And we had almost 50 parts. I'm obviously biased but I don't think there's a weak link in the lot. And that's what we are constantly hearing from American audiences who have seen the film thus far. They love the cast of 'Her Majesty'- especially those irresistible Kiwi faces (Thank you award-winning make-up supervisor Debra East and costume designer Lesley Burkes-Harding).
Most importantly, as evidence by the film festival audience awards, they're totally enraptured with the stellar, melt-your-heart debut performance of our 11-year-old star (now 15 if you're counting) Sally Andrews, who plays Elizabeth Wakefield, and appears in almost every scene of the movie.
Honouring the unselfish, spot-on performances of this cast, including the work of Mark Clare, Liddy Holloway, Anna Sheridan, Craig Elliott, Alison Routledge, Stuart Devenie, Cameron Smith, David Stott, Geoff Snell, Rachel Wallis and others, but especially Sally Andrews and her multi-talented, now internationally known co-star Vicky Haughton, is the main reason I've spent the last three-and-a-half years doing everything in my power to make sure that audiences everywhere get a chance to see these fabulous New Zealand actors in 'Her Majesty' on the big screen. If you're a New Zealand or an offshore producer reading this, I strongly encourage you to consider their work.
If you could do it again, do you think casting an actor (presumably from the US) with some kind of marquee value or at least name recognition would have been desirable in terms of marketing and distribution?
Perhaps. But whenever I see an independent film, particularly an international one, where someone has been cast, especially an American, primarily because of their marketability or box office appeal, and not because they were the best actor for the role, it's always so transparent and generally makes me not want to see the film.
If the choice is between making a distributor's job easier or creating an authentic, believable world in which the audience can lose themselves for two hours, I'll always choose the later as long as I have the control to do so. I've got nothing against American actors or movie stars, but it just didn't make sense for 'Her Majesty' and, in my opinion, would have spoiled the magical "discovery" potential of the story. As a filmmaker you're constantly having to make compromises, so it's nice in those rare instances when you don't have to broadcast your biggest one on the one-sheet.
And how about your experience with the NZ crew? Would you recommend them to your family and friends?
In a heartbeat. Hard working, talented, resourceful, good humoured. In fact, I'm not sure I would want to shoot again in New Zealand unless I knew that most of our key people were available. I was really touched by how personally involved and totally committed so many of our crew were to making 'Her Majesty' a happy and glorious experience.
I would strongly encourage anyone who is thinking about shooting a feature film in New Zealand, whether a local or offshore production, to go to our website (www.HerMajestyTheMovie.com) and print out our crew list. If you get a chance, watch the film on the big screen. When you see the production value and extraordinary rich detail that we were able to achieve with very modest resources you'll understand what a truly amazing job everyone on that list did, and why I tend to get rather gushy when singing their praises. They worked their butts off, and it shows. Everyone made a significant contribution to what you see on the screen. Many saved the day - more than once. Producers would be lucky to get them on their film or project. We were.
What was the most enjoyable aspect of shooting the film?
Finally being in New Zealand and getting to travel around the country "location scouting" for the film.
Certainly the people we met and the friends we made, especially amongst our cast & crew, many of whom I've stayed in pretty close touch with via email.
Then there was that little cooler by my chair that was always well-stocked with Spirulina, berry smoothies, M&M's and Coca-Cola.
And finally, I guess it didn't hurt that my home away from home for three-and-a-half months was a very spacious suite on the 6th floor of the Sebel Hotel overlooking the splendour of Auckland Harbour - which clearly beats the heck out of staring at a blank computer screen in a tiny LA apartment... dreaming of being in New Zealand.
What was the most frustrating aspect of shooting the film?
A-4 paper, no 24-hour Kinko's in Auckland and, I'd have to say, our total inability to control the weather.
We were advised to expect a mere eight days of rain in the entire spring into summer season in the areas we were shooting. We were a bit under-promised, as we enjoyed eight days of intermittent torrential downpours in the first 11 days of shooting which, owing to a lack of cover sets, nearly put us out of business. Major credit to our keen 1st AD, Wayne Rose, along with Judith and Walter, for a practical, well-designed shooting schedule, allowing for swift and creative scheduling and location adjustments.
I understand that you had a bit of a struggle finding a US distributor after you'd finished the film, but in the end hooked up with Panorama Entertainment, who are committed to slowly building the film. How's that going?
'Her Majesty' is a film that audiences, at least here in the States, definitely fall in love with, once they see it. In fact right now, by popular demand, 'Her Majesty' has returned to Kansas City, where we first opened in April [2004], for a second theatrical run there.
Additionally, we're planning to expand the US theatrical release in mid-February [2005] to San Francisco, Chicago, Salt Lake City, Indianapolis and possibly several other key markets such as Seattle, Portland, Tucson, St Louis, and Albuquerque.
As they did with 'Whale Rider', the NZ Consulate in Los Angeles, along with Investment New Zealand will be sponsoring a promotional screening in the San Francisco Bay Area when we open there, and possibly in Salt Lake City as well. So if readers have any friends or family in the US we hope you'll spread the word. Dates and venues will continue to be posted to our website (www.HerMajestyTheMovie.com) as they're confirmed.
How's the strategy of entering the film in film festivals as a profile-building exercise working? 'Her Majesty' certainly seems to be racking up the awards - are you finding it difficult to keep track of them all?
The film festivals are a cost effective way to seed a potential city in advance of any formal release in that market. In certain markets, the festivals also have strong Film Society or grassroots marketing networks and can really help a smaller distributor with limited resources support their film. Additionally, sometimes a terrific festival capsule review will be expanded upon and re-run once the film opens to general audiences.
Of course the awards are nice as well, especially the audience awards, and can be helpful to raise awareness. Yes, the bookshelf is getting crowded. But I'm even more excited that our exceptionally talented young star, Sally Andrews, has recently begun to receive some top honours (Best Actress at San Diego Film Festival and The Rising Star Award at the Marco Island Film Festival) to go along with the critical acclaim she has already racked up.
It must be gratifying to you that 'Her Majesty' has finally been picked up for a proper release in NZ.
Very much so. To his great credit and vision, John Davies, president of Arkles Entertainment, recognised the untapped potential of the film and realised it had not received anywhere close to the exposure or national attention it deserved.
He clearly understood the potential synergies with our ongoing US activity and, supported by a grant from the NZ Film Commission, John and his marketing team have designed a terrific plan to launch, promote and distribute 'Her Majesty' theatrically nationwide.
What's your pitch to the potential audience for the movie?
For New Zealand audiences, I would say 'Her Majesty' is a multi-generational film for parents to experience with their children and grandchildren for a glimpse back at New Zealand in the '50s.
What's next for you, project-wise? Is the fund you set up for 'Her Majesty' still a going concern?
My next passion project is another script I wrote called 'Paper Son', which is set in China, San Francisco and on Angel Island in San Francisco Bay in 1913. It was written while I was at UCLA Film School, where the script won the Eleanor Perry Women in Film Award for best original screenplay depicting women in a current or historical perspective. Apparently I was the first male writer ever to win the award.
Our LLC fund for 'Her Majesty' was set up as a single film offering, despite the open-ended moniker Silicon Valley Film Fund I. That's not to say there couldn't be a Roman numeral II if the right project or opportunity presents itself...
· For dates and venues at which 'Her Majesty' will be screening during its nationwide theatrical release, see: www.arklesentertainment.com/her_majesty_playdates.htm
© Copyright Onfilm magazine,
December 2004/Janusry 2005 www.onfilm.co.nz
