Michael Collins is a dreadful film. It's totally inaccurate nonsense, they may as well watch Far and Away with Tom Cruse. Complete rubbish. As historically accurate as Black 47.I have a young Spanish person working for me and she wants to watch some films to help understand Irish history.
Suggestions at work have been; and I am not saying they are good…
Michael Collins
The wind that shakes the Barley
Belfast
The Quiet Man
The Field
Any other ideas?
It's as historically accurate as Braveheart and Schindler's List as in it's nowhere near it.Incidentally, Michael Collins was the only film I viewed where there was a huge round of applause from the patrons using the cinema at the end of the movie. I'm not saying the plots were ultra accurate, but it was "box-office."
We know what you think, but we have no idea why we should agree with you.Michael Collins is a dreadful film. It's totally inaccurate nonsense, they may as well watch Far and Away with Tom Cruse. Complete rubbish. As historically accurate as Black 47.
In no particular order:We know what you think, but we have no idea why we should agree with you.
I'm still not getting where the issue isIn no particular order:.....
To which I would add the casting of Severus Snape as Dev.In no particular order:
- The film showed Dev hiding behind a wall in Béal na Bláth
- The portrayal of Dev as a pantomime villain
- Dev is portrayed as a bit of a racist when he says in a speech that "only pure blood Irish" should be able to participate in the new Republic which never happened and wouldn't have happened since he wasn't pure blood Irish and he wasn't a racist
In fairness I don't think these are serious issues for the film. Anyone who wants that level of historical accuracy, should read a book.
- The deaths of Harry Boland and Ned Broy are completely made up
- The car bomb in Dublin Castle never happened (there were no car bombs at all)
- Dev surrendering in the GPO at the end of the 1916 Rising instead of Boland's Mills
- The portrayal of Collins as anything other than an Armchair General
- The portrayal of a political campaign right after 1916 even though the first Dáil hadn't met
- Not showing Collins appointing himself as Commander and Chief and later strong-arming Arthur Griffith into ratifying that appointment in the Dáil
- Griffith, not Collins was the head of the Treaty negotiations
These are very important historical issues and the film's lack of any reference is significant, however it is after all a circa 2 hour movie. Neither of these things could be dealt with in any meaningful way in that context, plus a movie about Michael Collins.
- The lack of a mention of Home Rule
- The lack of any acknowledgement of the unpopularity of the 1916 Rising at the time
This is true but perhaps misleading. There were armoured cars and regular soldiers in the operation, and I understand the army was in charge of the operation. It was RIC (interesting) and Tans who fired on the crowd.
- The portrayal of the use of an Armoured Car in Croke Park on Bloody Sunday
- It was the Black and Tans and the RIC that fired into the crowd on Bloody Sunday, not regular British Army forces.
This of course is the rub. I wouldn't agree with you that Jordan is trying to that, but I think that there is such a connection.But the worst part of the film was the attempt by Neil Jordan to create a historical and emotional connection between the Provisional IRA and Michael Collins which, of course, couldn't be further from the truth.
Rickman is a great actor who was playing the part that Jordan wanted him to play. Jordan wanted Dev to be a pantomime bad guy. It was very disrespectful and a gross distortion of history. Not, as I mentioned, the same level of distortion as Schlender's List, but up there with it.To which I would add the casting of Severus Snape as Dev.
Making Collins head of the delegation was a big issue.In fairness I don't think these are serious issues for the film. Anyone who wants that level of historical accuracy, should read a book.
It's a movie "inspired by actual events". It's about Michael Collins in the way that Rambo III was about the Russian war in Afghanistan.These are very important historical issues and the film's lack of any reference is significant, however it is after all a circa 2 hour movie. Neither of these things could be dealt with in any meaningful way in that context, plus a movie about Michael Collins.
There were armoured cars but not in Croke Park. That's a biggie for me.This is true but perhaps misleading. There were armoured cars and regular soldiers in the operation, and I understand the army was in charge of the operation. It was RIC (interesting) and Tans who fired on the crowd.
Collins fought a war against the people the Provisional IRA say that they are a continuation of. He was pro-Partition and used British guns to ensure that partition remained. That's not a criticism, it's a statement of fact. While Collins did indeed open the Pandora's box of what would now be regarded as terrorism (and was then by most people) he couldn't have been further from the PIRA in his aims or goals and, crucially, didn't engage in pointless unwinnable terrorist campaigns that targeted the incriminate killing of civilians. In fact the IRA in Britain in the 20's were destroying infrastructure and doing low level things like burning hey.This of course is the rub. I wouldn't agree with you that Jordan is trying to that, but I think that there is such a connection.
Way too broad a stroke to use when trying to draw a line of connection.Or maybe Collins had a democratic mandate, and conducted military operations in the open, and never caused civilian casualties.
Well if Michael Collins is on the list...If it's historical accuracy you're after, Darby O'Gill and the little people is a must, obviously.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?