Australian filmmaker Scott Hicks ("Snow Falling on Cedars", "Shine") returns to form (anyone else catch "No Reservations"?) with the utterly brilliant "The Boys are Back". ''Prime Suspect'' writer Allan Cubitt adapts U.K. sportswriter Simon Carr's popular novel about a successful sports journalist who is suddenly saddled with the responsibility of raising two sons from different marriages in this single-parent drama. Davin Sgargetta caught up with the man to discuss what's undoubtedly one of the best films of 2009.

How's the response to the film been?

Good. We had a real good response at the premier in Adelaide and then up in Sydney the other night, we had a Q&A in Melbourne last night and people seem to really like it.

Is it a story that has personal significance? Is that why you were drawn to it?

The most personal element is fatherhood - I've brought up two sons, they're about 16 years apart and they're both well grown up now but I found myself drawn to that side of it and I just found it very touching in the sort of struggle of Joe's to become a better father. Trying to capture the realness that I felt in the story, I felt like I had not seen relationships depicted like that so realistically. You know, how a six-year-old talks or understands what's going on. Yeah, so all those elements appealed to me.

Was there a temptation to shoot the English stuff in Australia?

No, for quite a number of reasons it had to be shot in England. The co-production arrangement means that you have to spend a certain amount of money in each territory so you may as well spend the money and given that the story took place in both territories... it was one of those co-productions where there was nothing contrived about the setting. It was based on a memoir about an English journalist who came out and lived here. So no I was never tempted to try and shoot that in Australia... now wait a minute. That's not true. We did look at some locations for the interior of the school and some courtyards in an old sandstone school in Adelaide but it never felt authentic to me. I thought, I had seen schools in England and I had been to a school in England as a kid and it just didn't feel believable so that was the end of that.

With the Australian landscape depicted so much in Australian film, is it difficult to find a unique perspective of the backdrop?

Not really. What I liked most of all was to use the vineyard as a setting, because that lovely contrast between the lushness of the vineyard, where everything's so bright green, against the yellow of the hills - I like that. But of course it's not outback at all - it's about an hour's drive from Adelaide, sometimes 45 minutes. So it's really just rural. But I like that, being able to set the story in that kind of landscape, which I felt hadn't been used before, that I could think of in Australian film. And I also felt like I understood it, because I have a vineyard and I have an understanding of what that entails. I believed in the setting.

I ask that because the seen where Clive runs off into the grass, it was a stunning piece of cinematography that I feel is often lacking in Australian film.

It was a great moment. It was obviously a big scene for Clive and we had talked about it and it was originally scripted at night and I just felt that we'd have to create moonlight and contrive light so that we could see him. And then I thought, no, what we'll do is we'll have it during the day. They've had the funeral and now they're at the wake and it would still be light. I wandered outside for some reason and I saw the last sun on the top of those hills and I ran back inside and I said come on everybody, we're going to shoot that seen now. Come on. Clive was mentally prepared for it and we shot it. We shot it in one take; the whole thing. And it was just one of those perfect moments.

Was there much planning involved in shooting the real-life sporting scenes? The Australian Open...?

Very. It was very complicated actually. But we obviously got all the support and permission we need which was great. But the logistics were pretty full on.

Was Clive your first choice?

I read the script, loved it. It was 2004 and I was sitting in a cinema looking at Closer and I thought, wow. He would be an amazing Joe. He's got great charm about him but he's also got this toughness. He's very contained as an actor. I thought it would be very interesting to have him reach even more emotion but still keep all that strength and charm that we often forgive him for a lot of the crazy things he does. Somehow he keeps our sympathy, which is a credit to Clive and I just thought he was the perfect choice.

When you see an actor of his stature in a film that is very Australian, you can't help but wonder whether there was any reluctance for them to come out and spend a lot of time here. Was there any of that with Clive?

Absolutely not. He brought his family out and they had the best time and he really enjoyed it. It's just a shame - he was all set to come here and be a part of this tour but he's started shooting a new film. It fell by the wayside unfortunately but he really loved it and had a great time.

And good to work with obviously?

Yeah, he was. He's incredibly well-prepared and meticulous about everything. But then doing it, he likes to have a laugh, he likes to relax and he's good at putting people at their ease. He's very unselfish - a very generous actor. And that's not always the case. And that makes life easier for everybody else.

There's a sense that he's not that meticulous because of that carelessness he brings to the screen...

Yes. I think that was also helped by having to connect with this six-year-old. He had to free himself up a bit and accommodate the unpredictable.

How was the casting process for that role?

It was huge. There were hundreds of kids screaming and I just saw the pick of the bunch and it was all a bit scary, because I just thought it was impossible - how  could you possibly find a six year old who could do this. And then Nicholas walked into the room and there was something just immediately about him. I just thought shit, he had a kind of self-reliance - I don't know how to describe it - he felt self-assured, for a child that young. Very confident and almost quite defiant. It's the  kind of quality we needed. And he turned out to be great.

Te beauty I think of their interaction was not how they connected though but the wall that separated them, which was just a purely genuine interaction...

The whole thing of Joe trying to be a better father is exactly that - he doesn't have a connection and he doesn't know what make this kid tick and it's so true of fatherhood generally. There's no instruction manual. Kids, you have to try to figure them out. And I felt that came through quite well.

Was there any contact with the author of the memoir?

Not until the end of shooting. That was Clive's choice - he felt he didn't want to be distracted by feeling like he had to imitate someone; he wanted to interpret the character from the script. But Simon (Carr) really just showed up right at the end of shooting with his two boys. They were about 20 and 27 and it was great. It was really interesting dynamic. Especially when the boys met the actors playing them. Immediately it underlined my casting because George MacKay who plays Harry stood beside Hugo, who Harry's based on, and they were very polite and very English and they chatted with each other. Whereas Alex, who's the Arty and little Nicholas looked at each other, grabbed hold of each other and screamed. It was perfectly in-tuned casting.