User Reviews

I have seen "Bloody Sunday" twice now - once on the big screen and once on DVD - and read Don Mullen's book, "Eyewitness Bloody Sunday." This movie is a very realistic depiction of the defining moment of the "troubles" in Northern Ireland. The hand-held cameras and grainy film style make it feel more like a documentary than a movie, which of course is the intent. As another reviewer has mentioned, the acting is very natural throughout. It does take some time to get started, but once the the shooting starts it hits the viewer like a sledgehammer. Very powerful.

The film jumps so frequently from scene to scene that at times it is distracting, though I was much less annoyed by this the second time around. And, having seen it once with and once without subtitles, I must say that although the subtitles (optional on the DVD) are intrusive they are quite welcome. I love the Irish accent but at times it can be difficult for me to decipher,and much of the dialogue in the movie is muted. It was good to know what was being said.

As for the objectivity, of course the movie is slanted - so was the situation. But it is not unreasonably slanted. The British are not shown as one-dimensional demons - in particular, Nicholas Farrell does a great job of conveying Brigadier Mclellan's ambiguity and even disapproval of the course taken against his wishes by the supposed "Observer," Maj. Gen. Ford (who, if the movie has a villain, is the prime candidate.) At one point early on several Paras are discussing the day's prospects, and reveal how tired they are of being harassed, shot at and otherwise abused by the native population. This makes the day's events more understandable. This does not EXCUSE the cold-blooded gunning down of 27 people - there is no excuse for that - but at least one can see a contributing factor. And protesters are shown, once or twice, firing back. (The key here is firing BACK - evidence indicates that no marchers fired until the first two protesters were wounded. And those scattered few that attempted return fire were quickly dissuaded by their countrymen. Later in the day the IRA did go into action, but not until after the bloodletting in Bogside was over with.) Ivan Cooper's (James Nesbitt) words at the close of the film were shown to be all too true in the years since the actual incident. The IRA was on unsteady legs at the time, but has never lacked support since January 30, 1972.

The film is a powerful object lesson concerning the misuse of force, and one that governments everywhere - including my own country, the United States - should take to heart. It has a few flaws, but I think deserves the awards it has received. 8/10 points.

Normally I don't enjoy the handheld documentary style films, as they tend to induce waves of nausea, but Bloody Sunday had me riveted from the word go. That we already know how it's going to end is irrelevant, the pressure building on the day of the march is almost unbearable. Though there's been criticism that the film is slanted towards the republican point of view, I found it balanced, even in the depiction of the soldiers and officers. Everybody certainly looked the part and I went away feeling some sympathy for both sides. Given the close quarters and inflammatory nature of the conflict, it's amazing that bloodbaths like this (soldiers blasting civilians) haven't happened more often in Northern Ireland. It's only now, that retired soldiers have broken ranks and talked about what actually happened, that a film like this can see the light of day.

This is a film with a terrible nerve, from the press conferences in the Sunday morning, through the preparations for the march and the preparations of the military, and forward to the scenes in the hospital afterwards. The camera is working in a way, there you definitely can feel the gloomy weather and the excitement.

It's also a 1972 feeling about it, which doesn't feel acted, but like a documentary. James Nesbitt is making a tremendous job as the MP and when you notice that this man hasn't got an Oscar, the Oscar institution definitely seems like the stupid joke it is.

The only thing you can have against this Paul Greengrass' movie is the tendency in the end, where the relative documentary objectivity in the beginning, moves over to tendency. The unionists and the British government remain the totally bad guys and the catholics are the eternal martyrs. They might have been that this Sunday, but the conflict of Northern Ireland is a little more complicated.

However, this is definitely more exciting than most of what you see in the action genre.

Obviously an important day in history, and the events of that day are breathtakingly conveyed by the best Docudrama filmmaker we have, Paul Greengrass, Before we Knew who he was-and that may have made a certain difference in my experience of the film-it was more exhilarating (and impressive) before Greengrass had made a name for himself at this kind of documentary-styled filmmaking. This one, when it came out, definitely gave me goosebumps....todd gold

I saw this film about 2 years ago, and was extremely impressed with the realism of the film.Having served with the British Army in Northern Ireland many years later I found the atmosphere and the general appearance and manner of the Paras extremely accurate, as I have seen many films about Ireland when trying to portray British soldiers they unfortunately could of done a little better. I consider myself to be open minded and understood and sympathized with the local catholic population during these events as this is or was pretty much how things are with regards to the catholic population in Northern Ireland.For me, the main good points were that the film was made in a documentary style in which the facts were shown in a straight to the point manner without any fancy computer effects or handsome faces portraying the main players. well done to the production team !!!!

"Bloody Sunday" is a very startling, cinema-verite recreation of a very specific date (January 30, 1972), in a very specific place (Derry, Northern Ireland) of an event that for the Irish became "our Sharpeville."

But for an American audience with no benefit of subtitles for the brogues and working class Brit accents, no explanations outside of eventual context for lingo and slang (it took me awhile to keep track of "provos" vs "paras"), the quasi-documentary, in-your-face approach takes on a tragic universality.

It could be part of a Cassandra trilogy with `Black Hawk Down' and `No Man's Land' about why military should not be in charge in urban strife, whether as "peacekeepers" or in civil wars or regime changes, no matter how heinous the regime to be changed. A lesson for the Baghdad invasion planners?

Cities are complicated social ecologies, and the film shows a great diversity of attitudes and pressures on all sides, managing to be both clinical in meticulous detail and visceral in shocking impact. The film is probably not objective about the British (I don't think it's a coincidence that the imperious Brit "observer" who takes repugnant charge is played by Tim Pigott-Smith who was a similar colonialist in `The Jewel in the Crown.") A central universal image becomes the awesome power of rock-throwing, unemployed teen-age boys to spark war.

The liberals in the middle, clinging to dreams of Gandhi, Martin Luther King, and fair community relations, are morally destroyed over the course of a few hours and the extremists with guns on both sides feed on each other in perpetual destruction like the ouroboros image of the snake eating itself. I kept feeling I missed the exact flash point in a wandering attention moment and wanted to immediately re-watch it to see if I could track the gotcha! moment when escalation could have been prevented, so I look forward to this being available on video tape.

But the film does clearly show that it was attitudes that created the violent outcome and consequent government non-investigation, as we see in so many police situations. Once soldiers enter a city it is a police situation with all those complexities.

I know James Nesbitt primarily from frothy Irish comedies, like `BallykissAngel,' so his staggering portrayal of the M.P. in the middle is a revelation, as he goes from planning a civil rights march to pleading with his girlfriend to physical heroism to a break-down in shock.

The version of the titular U2 song played out at the end, running well past the credits finish, is a moving, live, passionate audience sing-along where Bono shouts out other locales that have experienced similar situations to emphasize the universality.

Naive or not, the film version of Bloody Sunday couldn't do anything else but show the pandemoneum and confusion of a massacre of many innocent people. This confusion was shown on both sides. An army of young men being thrown into a situation which they didn't understand. A people of a City riddled with gerrymandering and oppression.

The film showed stones being answered by guns and gas. As a British citizen I was moved and shocked. The film brought to life the many books i've read on the subject. It didn't point blame. It was never shown in the film who fired first but it showed that both sides fired. It documented how 13 people protesting for civil rights (majority of them children) were gunned down in cold blood by a 'peace keeping' security force. The bodies are the evidence, their memory is the legacy.

This film highlights the importance of sensitivity when approaching the dark days of our history. It succeeds where so many films fail by showing that no good can come from such events. A sterling performance from James Nesbitt shows that he is a versatile actor not afraid of approaching difficult and controversial roles. Perhaps we should forget the bickering and respect this for what it is; a stylistically impressive and well acted movie.

Paul Greengrass directs this dramatization of the civil rights march that ended with British paratroopers killing 13 civilians, kicking off the long and bloody civil war that engulfed Northern Ireland for the next 30 years. Greengrass manages to do justice to the events despite his terrible visual style that involves an insanely shaky camera and hundreds of pointless jagged edits. This is largely chalked up to "documentary realism", but no documentarian would be happy with a film that consciously draws attention to it's own stylistic quirks and away from the events depicted in the film. James Nesbitt stars as Ivan Cooper, a politician who organized the march and bore witness to much of the slaughter. He does a magnificent job of depicting hope and optimism dying.

being from belfast, i have an all too familiar recollection of this and many other tragic events.

being born protestant, i have little use for the cowardly, yet brutal and malicious, mutation of the provisional ira; under the helm of gerry addams.

being born sentient, i have little use for the fire and brimstone polarisations; counterspin and half-truths of ian paisley.

being born human, i have empathy for the slain.

the bloody Sunday massacre in derry, was a tragic testament to man's blood-lust, fueled by fear and adrenaline. the events depicted in the movie "bloody Sunday," provide an arresting portrayal of a tacitly monumental aspect of modern ulster history. the portrayals of the people and the events maintain an objective testimony toward a tragedy that is both sobering and inexcusable.

"bloody Sunday" takes no sides, and distributes no blame. it simply reenacts the events as they were recorded, and lets the viewer make his or her own decisions.

if you are familiar with the conflict; if you are distressed by man's inhumanity unto himself; if you are simply interested in a detached account of history; this is an important film to see.

Paul Greengrass has made a provocative drama documentary of the events in Derry in January 1972 which is to this day still an open wound.

The film with its numerous quick edits covers events over 24 hours from Saturday evening with its main character Ivan Cooper (James Nesbitt), a Protestant MP for the Social Democratic Labour Party and leading a peaceful anti-internment march which developed into the Bloody Sunday massacre on 30 January 1972.

Most of the 10,000 marchers that day would be Catholics, some with IRA links. Cooper wanted to develop a pan religion civil rights movement to counteract the violent nationalist and loyalist groups.

Intercut with Cooper organising the march are the British troops setting up roadblocks and barricades to prevent the march going much further due to newly introduced restrictions on marches.

When some rebellious youth start to to throw bricks at the troops they are met with a disproportionate response as the army shoot at some of the protesters which lead to thirteen people being left for dead.

The events ended up being a prime propaganda tool for the IRA. It turned many of the Irish against the presence of the mainland troops and set back the civil rights movement and any hope of a peaceful resolution to the Troubles.

Greengrass's documentary approach does not leave much for characterisation. Apart from Cooper, many of the people are painted in broad strokes with Tim Piggott-Smith's Major Ford being the main hissable villain.

Greengrass also does well to recreate the early 1970s setting and look. The editing might be jarring but the art direction, costumes and make up are well realised.

I've been getting overall information from IMDb for quite a while. Couple of days ago, I accidentally read a list called 'Best Irish movies'. By double checking, or triple checking or even more maybe, because I was too upset to count and I couldn't find this film, which made me terribly upset about till now. For those who haven't see this film, you need to see this film before you want to make any comment on Irish films.

Secondly, Paul Greengrass has set up a new standard of handy cam producing. I believe many late comers learned a lot from him. It's such a brilliant work. All these intense scenarios, conflicts and faces built in this film are not just impressive, I would say it's unforgettable.

Sometimes, people move on because life told them to. But sometimes, people cried and fought because no more they can hold on to.

This film, is definitely & absolutely the BEST Irish film, EVER.

Bias view but good drama and account of the days events. The drama/documentary style worked well and no doubt will have stirred up emotions in viewers both British and Irish. I'm not privy to the full facts of that day but even I could sense there was an agenda behind this documentary and it stuck in my throat.

As many of the previous commenters have pointed out, this is a very exciting and well acted film about a shameful day in British history. However, the documentary style film-making style means that factual omissions and implications have greater impact than in a film that doesnt purport to be 'historical fact'.

A couple of the previous comments have stated that Bloody Sunday was the start of the 'Armed Struggle'. In fact, the hardline Provisional IRA split from the Official IRA in 1970, 2 years before Bloody Sunday - this was the start of the resumption of IRA military operations. 200 soldiers, policemen and civilians were murdered in 1970-1, so the soldiers would indeed have been scared about being shot, and would also have wanted to 'strike back'. I didn't think that these motivations were portrayed in the film, and other than the historical omissions this is the only real weakness of the film which i would recommend to anyone irrespective of their own opinions on Northern Ireland.

Powerful, provocative & prompting, Bloody Sunday is a meticulously researched, expertly crafted & thoroughly gripping recreation of the Bogside massacre that occurred in the Northern Ireland town of Derry when British troops opened fire on civilians during a protest march, killing 14 & wounding just as many in the process.

Dramatising the events that led to the tragic incident on January 30, 1972, Bloody Sunday follows a civil right activist named Ivan Cooper who was the central organiser of the peaceful rally against internment that ended when British army paratroopers began firing on the unarmed demonstrators in full view of the public & the press.

Written & directed by Paul Greengrass, the movie sets its foreboding tone right within the opening segment after which it takes a step back to put its pieces on the board but once the stage is set, it explodes & moves forward with stunning immediacy. Greengrass' direction is at its very best when things go south & the whole episode is extensively detailed in the script.

Cinematography employs the quasi-documentary-style to film the entire event as it unfolds, thus bringing the viewers right into the conflict, while the frenetic hand-held camera-work further reflects the chaotic nature of such circumstances. Editing is slick for the most part, music is nearly absent and its cast contributes with convincing performances, playing their given roles with utmost sincerity.

On an overall scale, Bloody Sunday is a fiercely directed, deftly scripted, viciously photographed, skilfully edited & brilliantly performed movie that brings the dreadful event to life with remarkable precision, brims with intense emotions from start to finish, and not only works as a riveting thriller but also as an unsettling documentary. Disturbing & disquieting but essential viewing nonetheless, Bloody Sunday is strongly recommended.

'Bloody Sunday' is, if nothing else, a very powerful film and,

depending on which side you're on ideologically, can move you to

tears or incite you with rage. Is this film an accurate depiction of

the days events? I personally can't say for certain. Having read

enough contemporary Irish history, including Don Mullan's

"Eyewitness Bloody Sunday", I can say that both sides of the

conflict in Northern Ireland can conduct some very shady

operations and dealings when the moment suits them. A lot of

people have asked "Where was the IRA in this "no-go zone" that

they controlled?" Well according to the book they had been asked

by NICRA (Northern Ireland Civil Rights Association) to remain at

the Creggan Estate. Cooper and the rest of NICRA knew that the

march was banned and they didn't need the Provos to cause

anymore trouble. Also, at that point the Provos were at a nadir of

sorts in terms of numbers and support. There was a lot of hope

placed in the Civil Rights movement, and Bloody Sunday crushed

all chances of it really succeeding. The operation conducted by 1

Para was, I can only hope, a "grab & snatch" operation gone

terribly, terribly wrong.

I can only surmise that out of the some 10,000 people in the

march (not a few hundred as listed in other reviews) some were

either in the IRA if not most definitely IRA sympathisers. Do I

believe most of the marchers that were killed to be innocent

civilians? Yes. Should the "young hooligans" have thrown stones

at the RUC & British Armed Forces? Probably not. Did the IRA

shoot first or did 1 Para? I doubt that with all the confusion going

on, between CS gas & rubber bullets being fired anyone can tell

for certain. I don't think that the Widgery Report was anywhere

near right, or the current Saville Inquiry will get it 100% right either.

But these opinions are coming from a remove of 30 years and a

pretty large ocean.

As for the film itself. i liked it. James Nesbit gave a career defining

performance as far as I'm concerned, going from the height of one

emotion to the absolute depths of another. The Gerry Donaghy

character's accent was a little thick, to say the least. However he

played a good victim with Republican feelings. The jerky handheld

camera, which people either love or hate, worked well in this

movie. It gave a real sense of being "in the moment." Long story

short I'd give this film 3 1/2 stars out of 4.

I thought this was an amazing movie.

Now I learned about this in school for a while and as an Englishman I do feel a certain, oblique connection to the troubles. I didn't realise this kind of thing could happen among my compatriots (I'm not trying to belittle Irish Nationalism by calling the Northern Irish my compatriots, it's just how I have come to see them), and I hadn't realised I'd thought this way. It was a real consciousness raiser for me.

My biases notwithstanding, this movie is as a hypnotic account of a confusing episode of an even more confusing time. It has the task of representing the mindset of the times, the mindsets, I should say, while still making it into a spontaneous narrative.

I'm not an expert so I cannot vouch for the authenticity of any of this, but I feel I can believe all of it. There is a tendency for us to demarcate history from real life. A million deaths is a statistic as Stalin said. But here I really feel history and the lives of regular people converge in a devastating way.

At its heart I suppose the movie is a mystery. Not so much who-done-it but a why-did-it. I really felt while I was watching, all the chaos and threat that leads to tragedy while still feeling baffled and disorientated throughout. It feels like a documentary. The dialogue is spontaneous but still rich with nuance. The cinematography is candid and even shaky, giving it an often hypnotic, Blair Witch quality.

A movie to never forget.

This docudrama recreates the filmmakers' view of the events in the Northern Ireland city of Derry on January 30, 1972. It starts by showing an announcement by the British outlining the restrictions against public assembly in Northern Ireland. A protest march is clearly not approved.

The night before a planned civil rights march, Ivan Cooper (James Nesbitt from "Waking Ned Devine"), a Protestant member of Parliament representing the Irish Catholic district where the illegal march will take place, is making preparations. We see him moving through the streets, greeting people and trying to reinforce peaceful, non-confrontational interactions with the "occupying" British military force. We see that there are doubts about whether the march should go on and whether or not the more radical marchers will remain peaceful, but Cooper is resolute: "If we don't march, civil rights is dead in this city."

Meanwhile, the leaders of the British military know that a march is planned the next day. The upper-level officers give the directive that success will be defined by the number of so-called "hooligans" who are arrested. They make detailed plans for exactly where the march will go and where they will attempt to make the arrests. They spend little time planning what forms of force are appropriate.

And so the stage is set. With thousands of marchers, most will be peaceful while a few will inevitably push the boundaries. And on the military side, some will have measured responses while others will overreact.

The film style is intense. One is reminded of Black Hawk Down, with the washed out, almost monochromatic, color palette. Another similarity is the shaky handheld camera work, although I believe this film goes too far (TurboSpastiCam(tm)). But a contrasting aspect of the style here is to cut to black and then pause briefly between scenes, which gives you a moment to think and catch your breath. The accents are difficult to follow, not just at the beginning of the film but throughout, and subtitles would probably help.

The acting is uniformly good, making you feel as if you are watching a true documentary, with James Nesbitt clearly standing out. He has the most interesting part, and he lets you inside to feel what he is feeling. The film has won many awards, including the top prize at the Berlin International Film Festival and an audience award at Sundance.

After the film is over, one is left to wonder just how accurately it portrays the events. Not having studied the history, I can't say for sure, although I suspect the film is somewhat biased, but is probably not blatantly so.

If you have trouble with shaking cameras, you should stay very far away from this film. For everyone else, this film is worth watching. And if you wait for the DVD, you can decide if subtitles help.

Seen on 10/13/2002.

Bloody Sunday, also known as the Bogside Massacre, was an incident on 30 January 1972 in a neighborhood in Derry, the second largest city of Northern Ireland. British soldiers opened fire on a protest march of the Northern Ireland Civil Rights Association against internment without trial that was introduced by the British administration a year earlier. The soldiers wounded 26 unarmed civilians, of which 13 were killed on the spot or died soon after wounding. This resulted in great rise of influence and recruitment into the IRA. Bloody Sunday is one of the most significant events during the Troubles in Northern Ireland. Based on actual events.

Originally from Derry, I had wanted to see this film for a very long time, and was very impressed when I did. The film far exceeded my expectations and must be one of the best films on the troubles in Northern Ireland. The acting was fantastic, especially Jimmy Nesbitt as Ivan Cooper, but the cast as a whole done a brilliant job. The film was very realistic and some nice cut editing added to the confusion of the day. Very provocative film, which seems to bring across the facts of what actually happened, as far as anyone can really know. Definitely worth watching. 8/10

The logistics of this movie was amazing. To direct all those extras to act in a film-worthy manner is a herculean feat. For this reason alone I give the movie a high rating. But I also liked it on the level of a plain movie-watcher. It had me on the edge of my seat thruout. I felt that I was right in the middle of it all. James Nesbitt was superb.

A very well done movie. I found it to be a very factual and a very frank account of a terrible time in Irish/British history.

When compared to other books and materials I have read about the account in the past few years, I would have to say it was probably about as accurate as it could be. Of course we don't hear the exact language that was used, especially by British commanders during that time, but I think the movie gives a very likely occurrence of what happened behind closed doors.

Soldiers that were allowed to speak up, many years after the fact, have themselves, shed light onto what happened during that time.

I have posted before on this film. I am from Northern Ireland and am well aware of the facts and feel qualified to give an opinion.

There are so many faults with this film that seem to be being ignored. This is based on the statements to the Saville inquiry as people have said..but guess what, the Saville inquiry is only half way through the evidence and hasn't heard from the soldiers involved.

This is biased, it was made by a well known left wing film maker Paul Greengrass, who used to work for World in Action. That is not to denegrate anyone for being left wing but it should flag up where they are coming from.

The film showed a token IRA presence, which was included no doubt to allow rioters to be seen chasing them away, I wish. There is equal evidence and claims of the IRA shooting first why was this not shown in the film? There were a number of IRA men on the streets that day, why show one or two.

Why because it is more fashionable to knock the army, and to assume their guilt even though the Saville enquiry has not finished. I wonder if the enquiry finds any different from this film or hears conflicting evidence will we see another film being made - hardly.

What next? a film about the three innocent 'tourists' in Gibraltar? or the poor AlQueda tourists on the streets of Khandahar?

What about a film showing how the IRA tied poor catholic workers to vehicles with explosives turning them into 'suicide bombers' all beit that the IRA hadn't the bottle to drive them themselves.