Reviews

I haven't seen this film in years, but this is one of the most memorable lines from a movie that stick in my mind even today spoken by the character Bowser Egan who may just be poor tragic Bridie's last hope of getting herself a man before she finally resigns to being left on the shelf as an old maid. In another part of his charm offensive Bowser tries to entice her back to the house with "American cigarettes".

By all accounts from the commentary of those of my parents generation who lived through the period and in the culture portrayed in this movie, this is a wonderfully accurate representation of what it was really like. Even the band in the movie led by a real life local "showband" legend Tony Chambers, cut their real life teeth in small rural dance halls just like this one.

This curio thing (it's a bit unfair to bestow the title "film" on it!) was screened on Irish TV last night and I stuck with it for about half an hour just to see how bad it got, but to be honest I gave up after the first commercial break. I read it was supposed to be a parody of all things "Oirish" in films, but I'm afraid I didn't manage to last til this kicked in. As one of the other reviewers noted, signs were ominous when it took about 5 minutes of credits including self congratulatory and vanity publishing style lists of people and film boards associated with it, before the actual title of the movie finally appeared with still little indication of what it was about.

Even then it was difficult to ascertain where exactly the film was supposed to be located, whether in Wales or Ireland, which wasn't helped by such glaring clangers as geographically inaccurate police/gardai cars and the fact that the majority of cars had UK registration plates even thought this was supposed to be Donegal? As I say, it may be unfair to classify this as a review considering I'm basing it on the 20 or 30 minutes I managed to stick with this for, but to term it comedy or anything near it based on what I saw is grossly misleading - I'd put it up there with Boy eats girl in terms of brutal Irish themed films of the past twenty years. It makes Darby O'Gill and the one with Dana (Rosemary Brown) as traveller girl look like classics!!

I watched this film not quite sure in what vein to approach it. On one hand the negative publicity or perhaps intentional smear campaign alleging anti Semitism left me very curious, On the other hand the clambering of the right wing fundamentalists left me somewhat suspicious and sceptical. What I experienced was a powerful, very graphic and definitely emotive piece of film making, which most certainly offers considerable food for though.

This charge that this is an anti Semitic movie was to the forefront of on my mind as I sat through the 2 hrs and 40 odd minutes of the film. But overall I could find little justification for the charge. True there are some very nasty portrayals of Jews in Mel Gibson's movie, The high priests in particular but also the mob and rabble they manage to raise up and bribe out in the middle of the night, come out particularly badly in this movie, but then this was always the case also, in the four Gospels on which this movie is based. Out of the advance criticisms, I didn't expect to encounter any positive portrayals of Jews in this movie, yet they are considerable. The few high priests who council caution and question the charges being levelled against Jesus (Who are swallowed up and chased away by the mob for their efforts!), Simon of Cyrene who is called in to carry the cross for Jesus and for his trouble get abused and name called in tones that could be straight out of 'Schindlers List', The young woman who comforts her own daughter before she goes to bring Jesus a drink of water after he has fallen for the third time.

Of course if one wants to be hyper critical (Or sensitive, depending on your level of political correctness!) the Romans don't come out of this movie at all well either. The centurions that take a perverse pleasure and a great deal of entertainment, as well as pouting masculine rivalry, in dealing out the scourging to Jesus, whilst they vie to flay strips of skin off his torso, are deeply disturbing in the same way as the most sadistically portrayed prison or concentration camp guards from a host of previous movies. Mind you this movie did reflect something that I've always been inclined to feel myself yet which I've rarely seen portrayed in other movies, namely that Pontius Pilate was, by and large, a good man caught in a very difficult situation, which admittedly he wasn't brave or strong enough to stand up to, despite his best efforts at compromise. He did near everything he could to release Jesus, stopping just short of provoking a riot and finally washing his hands of the affair and all apparently at the instigation of or for the love of his wife who felt deeply at the wrong being perpetrated.

I have little need to outline the plot of this movie. A thousand gospel stories and many previous movies have already paved the way. It begins with Jesus' agony of waiting for his impending death in the garden of Gethsemane and follows through, pretty much word for word, to the crucifixion and resurrection in the tomb with occasional flashbacks to his childhood, his works as a carpenter, his sermon on the mount, the last supper and his rescue of Mary Magdalene amongst other scenes. One of the wonderful things about it is that it is all in Aramaic (The actual language of Jesus and Palestine/Galilee 2000 years ago) and Latin with subtitles, so that even that most dramatic of cries from Good Friday "Eli Eli Lama Sabachthani?" (Father, father why have you forsaken me?) is rendered in its apparent original.

The movie carries the distinct imprint of Mel Gibson and makes more than a few nods to Braveheart, from its slo-mo sequences, to the wonderfully haunting soundtrack and the graphic-ness of the gore, right down to the squelch of nails penetrating flesh and the spurting of blood. More than once in this movie you will find yourself physically wincing from the sheer vividness of what is portrayed on screen, you sense the pain of the passion which I think is the ultimate intention of Gibson and an indication of his brilliance in crafting this movie.

This is not a pleasant movie nor an especially attractive one, thought there are moments of truly moving beauty in it, in the portrayal of the tenderness of the Christ, The love of a mother, The pieta at the foot of the cross borrowed from Michelangelo himself and the horror of both Judas and Peter in their moments of weakness. I don't know whether it will make a better person of those who see it or whether it will bring people closer to God, but it certainly projects all the pain, determination and an indication of the immense love it must have taken for a man to give up his own live for the sins of all men, two thousand odd years ago and, if only for that alone, it's worth seeing.

The Hurricane is an inspiring biopic of Rubin "Hurricane" Carter whom I had only brief previous knowledge of, predominantly through Bob Dylan's excellent narrative song "The Hurricane".

Denzel Washington gives a sterling and Oscar nominated performance of Rubin Carter over a thirty year period, from his initial youthful run in's with a vengeful, grudge bearing and corrupt detective, through his boxing career and his bid for the world middleweight boxing crown followed by his framing and long imprisonment for a New Jersey bar room triple murder.

Rubin Carter was one of those cause celebre's a la Nelson Mandela, The Birmingham Six and The Guilford Four all of whom attracted considerable public attention, high profile personalities and a series of failed appeals which, it would seem if the movie and Bob Dylan's song are true, if they were to succeed would have meant exposing a deep rooted racism and corruption within the New Jersey police and the judicial system that went right to the top.

Even within the movie itself, the point is made that even though Rubin's cause has managed to gain attention and many high profile supporters including Muhammad Ali and the aforementioned Dylan, very few have really managed to stay the course and stick with it doggedly over a twenty year span which has seen the failure of two appeals and even a biography penned by Carter within prison ("The 19th Round") laying out his claim for innocence and the trail of events that got him to where he is.

It is out of this biography, long discarded and battered and published so long ago that it's been forgotten by most, that Reuben's hope for clearing his name is reawakened, in the hands of a barely literate young black refugee from the Bronx called Lesra Martin who has himself been taken under the benevolent wing of a threesome of somewhat idealistic, hippyish, but well intentioned Canadians in Toronto. Lesra chooses the battered volume as his first ever book purchase attending a used book sale with his Canadian friends. In another parallel, right from the start, Lesra finds similarities and something of a soulmate in reading about the life and fate of "The Hurricane". Eventually the story so inspires and motivates young Lesra that he kick-starts a new campaign to get Rubin freed and succeeds in enlisting the help of his Canadian friends to do so.

Admittedly, whilst the goodie goodie and over idealistic, even bordering on sinister, intentions of the Canadian threesome are at times somewhat unbelievable (They live in a sort of a threesome commune, surviving apparently quite comfortably renovating and selling houses, have plucked a young black kid from the streets of the Bronx and out of the grasp of his alcoholic parents, merely because they believe in him and feel he "deserves a chance" in life and NOW, along with their young black friend, they uproot their lives to move from Toronto to New Jersey "for as long as it takes" to prove Rubin's innocence) yet there is quite the air of realism in aspects of the difficulties and dilemmas they encounter such as the harassment (apparently very much truth based) they get from senior forces in New Jersey, but most significantly during their first visit to Rubin in prison. Indeed this is one area of the movie that pulls no punches and doesn't attempt any major makeover of Rubin's character. The Canadian's are subjected to his full wrath and venom and all the hateful spewing of an oppressed black man that has through experience come to hate all white men and everything they stand for. Of course his character isn't overtly polished or sanctified either. He has had his brushes with the law, all be it, if we are to believe the film at least, unprovoked. His swaggering, intimidatory ways and arrogance (though he terms it "pride") and indeed his real life temper are touched upon at least, albeit minimally most notably in a scene where he meets his future wife. However even with all this, Washington's portrayal of the Hurricane is so touching and sympathetic that one does come to respect and like this guy and to feel really sorry and angry at the way he has been wronged.

Possibly the major achievement of this movie is its documentation of one mans near descent into madness and total despair when the only way he can survive in the end is to retreat deep into himself and completely shut off the outside world. It is a credit to the talent of Denzel Washington as an actor the way he carries this portrayal off so convincingly. However whilst it may take all of his inner composure to survive and stay sane, it will take much more and the efforts and perseverance of others outside to prove his innocence. This is essentially what the last third of the movie deals with and similar to other "based on a true story" movies it has attracted some criticism of how events and incidences were condensed and manipulated to suit the plot and lead to the desired outcome.

That aside, this is an emotive movie about major miscarriages of justice and the necessity for perseverance of hope within utter despair and indeed for perseverance full stop.

I also particularly liked the sound track of this move, which predictably enough featured Dylan's song along with some other jammin' tracks particularly the one about "the revolution".

Finally as a point of trivia, this movie stars one Clancy Brown, reprising his role from Shawshank Redemption as a prison guard, all be it this time a sympathetic one who treats Reuben with the respect and dignity he desires right from the start, as opposed to the brutal figure he played in Shawshank.

The best war movies in my humble opinion are those that endeavour to show it exactly as it is, i.e. that however much Gung Ho or patriotism or brainwashing or propaganda is involved and no matter how it is glorified and even how it does indeed sometimes make heroes of otherwise average and relatively insignificant men, war is hell, plain and simple! For anyone even vaguely familiar with the history of the Second World War the name Stalingrad towers head and shoulders above even Normandy, Iwo Jima and The Battle of The Bulge in sheer carnage. The movie "Enemy at the Gates", directed by Frenchman Jean Jacques Annaud (Seven Years in Tibet, The Bear), sets out to tell the personal tales of some individuals, both Russian and German in a much more focused account than the last movie of note to address the subject, the sweeping German production "Stalingrad" from 1993.

In "Enemy at the Gates", Vassili Zaitsev (Jude Law) is a young peasant from The Urals who is befriended shortly after his arrival into the horror of front line 1943 Stalingrad, by a Soviet propaganda officer, Commander Danilov, played by Joseph Fiennes, who, after witnessing first hand his prowess as a sniper in assassinating five German officers, sets out to elevate him to the status of hero in a bid to raise the spirits of a demoralised Red Army, who are battling to hold the last tenth of their ruined city against the German onslaught. To witness the graphic horror of how these two are thrown together at all, it is easy to see why 20 million Russians died in The Second World War. Arriving by train at the rail head across the Volga from the city proper, Zaitsev is fed into the mincing machine that was the Second World War's Verdun, along with his "comrades", where the instructions from the commanding officers, since there aren't enough rifles to go around is, "follow the man in front of you until he is killed and then take his rifle". This, along with those retreating being machine gunned down by their own officers as cowards and traitors to The Motherland is, it seems, what goes for motivation in besieged Stalingrad.

It is upon this opportunity, therefore, that Commander Danilov seizes, to sell his motivational hero idea to the field commander, one Nikita Krushchev, played quite excellently by Bob Hoskins. The plan is wholly embraced by Khrushchev and before long Zaitev has become a legend, receiving fan mail from Factory Workers and Coal Miners all over the Motherland as his ever increasing German officer kill tally is daily reported. Indeed so successful does the legend of Zaitev become, and so counter demoralising for the Germans, that they dispatch an ace sniper of their own, one Major Koenig (played by Ed Harris), to Stalingrad to hunt down and kill Zaitsev.

This is the main preoccupation of the rest of the movie, apart from a parallel subplot, the female love interest, of a female sniper Tania Chernova, played by a strikingly pretty Rachel Weizs, whom both friends fall in love with, which understandably leads to major jealousy, particularly on the part of Danilov and puts a major strain in their friendship, as they fight their own little battle for her affection within the claustrophobic ruins of the city.

The battle of wills and wits of the opposing snipers is gripping, particularly in the way they track each other and try to anticipate each others thoughts, and other methods (In Koenig's Case, the enlisting of a young Russian boy, Vasha (Gabriel Thompson), by chocolate and food bribes, who though he worships and idolizes Danilov, yet feeds Koenig information about him, perhaps in a bid to entrap the German, as he also relays information back to Danilov and Zaitsev about the German and his whereabouts) In any case, whilst the hunt it is filled with suspense, in the end it does become a bit drawn out and makes the movie perhaps a half an hour longer than it should be.

Apart from some of the dramatic failings of this movie, it does manage to portray a horrific and realistic picture of the tragedy of war, and like all great anti war movies, if it achieves nothing else but this, then it can be justifiably deemed a good movie. It is however not a "great" war movie up there with "All Quiet on The Western Front", "The Great Dictator", "The Red Badge of Courage", "The Longest Day", "Platoon" and "Saving Private Ryan".

The Hours is probably best classified as a serious, somewhat highbrow and intellectual film, partly biography of the writer Virginia Woolf, focusing on a period of her life and the turmoil she endured in writing her book Mrs Dalloway, but also cleverly intertwining this with the impact the story has on the lives of two other women in different times.

Woolf herself is played brilliantly and darkly by an almost unrecognisable Nicole Kidman, appearing dowdy unkempt and frail as befits a brilliant author on the edge of a nervous breakdown or worse.

The movie actually begins with Woolf's suicide in the Thames in 1943 but then backtracks to her wrestling with the writing of Mrs Dalloway in Richmond in 1921. Enter Julianne Moore playing a pregnant housewife in 1950s LA with a devoted husband and an intensely sad young son who anxiously observes his mother's own mental unravelling as she reads Mrs Dalloway. Meryl Streep plays a contemporary editor organising a party for her friend, ex lover and award wining poet Richard (a wonderful Ed Harris) who is terminally ill in the later stages of AIDs.

The story follows all three in their outwardly pleasant and successful lives, but it is the delving deeper into the pain and despair that plague all three that is the real focus of the film. The jumping back and over in time periods is a bit disconcerting initially and makes the movie a bit hard to follow and even lacking in continuity. However as it progresses the threads all start being drawn together and we are gradually introduced to the connections between the three women.

If one has the patience to persevere and not get irritated by the sometime delicate pace of the film, it is in the end a truly emotive and revealing experience with some brilliant insights on life and death and human relationships thrown in.

If you like thought provoking, fairly intense and artistically crafted films with some great performances you'll probably like this one but if you're looking for thrills spills and a fast pace avoid it.

Of course like all paper to celluloid projects this movie was inevitably going to pose the question "but is it as good as the book?" but with JK Rowling firmly in control and overseeing the film production it was to be expected that she would push for authenticity in any case. It is still likely, however, that many die-hard Harry in print fans who have their own image of how it should have been will still say "not near as good as the book". But that is possibly more so a reflection on the delights of reading and how the imagination can conjure up an image in ones mind as opposed to being a criticism of the film.

Inevitably of course elements of the book had to be sacrificed for brevity to make a movie that could retain the attention span of children - and even still it comes in at a considerable 2 hrs and 32 minutes. It still does manage to convey the core parts of the book admirably though and indeed it is said that, such were they complexities of aspects of the plot and location, it would have been very difficult to do just credit to the book without the advances in digital editing of the past five years. In that context Harry's School of Wizardry, Hogwarts, is portrayed exactly how you imagine it should be and even the Wizarding Game of Quidditch, which is basically like an airborne cross between seven a side soccer and basketball played on broomsticks with four balls, is portrayed quite well, though this is possibly one area where an over-dependence on special effects and high action (excuse the pun!) didn't exactly equate with what I had conjured up in my own head from the book. The casting is also rather inspired. Daniel Radcliffe quite simply IS Harry Potter. Richard Harris, as Headmaster Dumbledore, sports a beard even wilder looking than as the Bull McCabe if that is possible. Robbie Coltrane is excellent as the unkempt giant caretaker of Hogwarts; Hagrid and it seemed almost inevitable than no one but Alan Rickman at his super evil best could play Professor Snape, Harry's nemeses at Hogwarts.

And so for those rareities who have never heard of Harry Potter – What of the plot? Basically young Harry Potter is something of a prodigious celebrity amongst Wizarding folk for surviving an attack from "You know who", otherwise known as, but seldom called the arch evil dark Wizard, Lord Maldevort, who killed both his parents when he was only one year old. Afterwards Harry is doomed to live with his very nasty muggle (Wizarding Folk Terminology for non wizards) aunt and uncle and cousin for the following ten years, knowing nothing about his wizardry, until he is finally rescued by Hagrid on his eleventh birthday and brought to Hogwarts school of Wizardry to begin to learn his trade. The film thereafter basically follows the adventures of Harry and his friends Ron Weasley and Hermoine Granger during their first year in Hogwarts.

And so to the verdict? I found it a highly entertaining and quite inspired adaptation of the book; admittedly with some flaws, but I'd still grant it 7/10.

The premise of Catch Me If You Can is interesting to say the least. The Spielberg directed biopic is based on the true story of Frank Abagnale Jr who pulls of a series of breathtaking and unbelievable but nonetheless credible in their execution scams, and all before his 19th birthday.

However this is also essentially the story of a young man who witness's his fathers business failure and consequently the break up of his happy family life, and accordingly sets out on something of a reactionary and desperate, but unattainable crusade to try and reclaim that which he has lost.

Leonardo di Caprio, in a Michael J Fox eternal youth stereotyping role, stars as the teenager who is pursued over a period of years by an FBI agent played by Tom Hanks who is determined to get his man no matter what.

The movie opens by setting the scene of the relationship between Di Caprio and his father, played by Christopher Walkin, whom the son obviously idolises. Early on we see Frank Abagnale Sr. being honoured by the local Rotary chapter but it soon becomes all to apparent that his success is not as it seems and in fact he is on the verge of bankruptcy and being pursued by the IRS for tax evasion. Things rapidly crumble leading to the Abagnale's losing their house and soon after the break up of the family when his Frank Senior's French wife leaves him for his best friend. Frank Jr, forced to choose between living with his mother of father, instead opts to run away and very soon realises an ability to graft and deceive people, more often than not women, based on his good looks, charm and, as he discovers, the awe and glamour in which the public hold airline pilots in 1960's America.

Frank Jr. starts by breathtakingly impersonating a Pan Am Co Pilot which, more than anything exposes the gullibility and trusting nature of people before an age of air terrorism. Buoyed by his success and the relative ease in which he manages to carry off his assumed role, Frank's rapid learning curve combined with the necessity to keep ahead of the FBI chase leads him to further roles as a James Bond type super cool sophisticate, A Night shift doctor and ultimately a State prosecutor. All through this he keeps in contact with his father holding out the vague hope that he can get his mother and father back together and all will be the same as before and the nightmare will end. As his star continue to rise and his daring reaches new heights his fathers conversely falls as he ultimately ends up working as a mail man to make things meet.

The most striking thing about this movie is how it develops each of the deceptions or roles he adopts, so that we start out finding it hard to see how he can carry off a role when he introduces the concept and yet as we are led through his deceptions the, ease and credibility of his performance and the naivety or unquestioning attitude of his audience carry us along and make us too see how he could have really pulled the trick.

In the end the movie does stretch on a bit in its telling of the story and introduction of additional supporting cast of a love interest and her father played by Martin Sheen so that the end product runs well over 2 hours but if you think you might be on for sitting that long it's worth a look.

I saw this initially when it came out and even thought it was low key after its flop at the US box office, the attractiveness of it was infectious, probably to a large degree due to its excellent soundtrack and seeming like one feature length music video with a basic underlying storyline and some admittedly at times woefully corny dialogue tying the various wonderfully stages music pieces together.

The Fire Inc "Tonight is what it meant to be young" is particularly catchy and amazingly to contemplate 22 years later still manages to get my feet tapping in nostalgia.

True the whole thing can be justifiably described as high camp at times. The indefinate or intentionally ambiguous placement both geographically and time wise. The displaced Cowboy Cody Character straight out of a John Wayne Western. The delightful maliciousness of William Dafoe and loads of loud bikes and leather and Rock and Roll make this a cinematic monument to the excess of the 80's that hasn't dated near as much as its counterpart movies of the decade, indeed it hasn't dated at all.

Rock on...

This film has provoked considerable debate here in Ireland in addition to the somewhat unfair and misguided controversy elsewhere especially within the UK media.

To me probably the biggest tragedy of this particularly harrowing period of Irish history was not especially the atrocities carried out by the Black and Tan British Mercenaries on Irish civilians and replicated back in kind by IRA flying squads, but rather the fact that when all this was over, then the two opposing factions of Irish, pro and anti treaty turned on each other with a ruthless matching and even surpassing that which they had targeted the British with previously.

This has been hailed in some quarters in Ireland as an accompanying balancing piece of cinema to Neil Jordan Michael Collins. In truth, whereas Michael Collins sought to package the story in a nicely accessible and embraceable to all summary, complete with a romantic interest in the form of Julia Roberts, TWTSTB pursues a much more gritty trademark Loach realism on a wider theme of social issues and morals. It is this feature of the film that helps it rise above the mere story of a period of Irish history and offer an insightful social commentary for our times for those that care to look for it and don't allow themselves to be blinkered by questions of history.

There are parallels to be drawn from this movie to the current situation in Iraq and all the other Imperial incursions in war zones of the 21st century. There are legacies hinted upon in this movie which persist to this day in Ireland: when one of the characters foretells what the treaty will mean for the Catholics of the 6 counties of Northern Ireland or that the proposed boundary commission encompassed within the treaty is merely a ruse and that it will never be fully explored further. Or more pressingly in the light of the current impasse between Big Energy Corporations and residents of the West Coast over Gas, where one of the characters proclaims that freedom for Ireland should mean much more than mere freedom of the people but ownership of the land and all its resources by the people and for the people.

There are parts of this movie that are truly harrowing and the movie as a whole could certainly not be described as particularly uplifting or happy in any way yet within it there are some moment of intensely observed beauty. At varying points the movie brings into focus the personal dilemmas of a doctor turned IRA gunman and a British Army officer surrounded by men driven mad and out of control by their experiences from the slaughter on the Somme battlefields, both perceptive enough to realise the line that they have crossed.

True there are unpleasant scenes involving British Auxiliaries (The dreaded Black and Tans) out of control and truly obnoxious towards the Irish but the accuracy of these scenes can be confirmed by thousands of eyewitness accounts of the time and by the legacy or towns burned by the Black and Tans in reprisals. Equally similarly brutality is shown and portrayed by the IRA flying columns in their summary executions and ambushes, albeit even if most of their intending victims are portrayed in a less than favourable light prior to their demise, as if to somehow make them more worthy of their fate.

There is also a brilliant portrayal of the chinks already appearing in the Irish side even while they fight the Brits, where two very different ideologies are developing who will ultimately turn on each other with neither really emerging victorious or unscathed but both of which will dictate the pace and economic deprivation to come for Ireland from which she will only eventually emerge in the 1990's when the so called Civil War politics are finally laid to rest.

As an insight into this period of Irish History and an accompanying piece to Neil Jordan's "Michael Collins" this is a wonderful piece of film making. But it is also a wider social commentary on the dangers and price of Colonialism and Imperialism at any cost which those nations trying to impose their will and norms on another to this day could do to take note of.

Reading the other reviews of this served to remind me what an "event" it was on Irish TV at the time. Prior to this, the extent of 15 year old RTE's TV's drama output were the parochial Sunday evening soap offerings of Tolka Row and The Riordans. Being quite young at the time I hadn't realised how much criticism RTE drew for its commissioning of this huge undertaking and of course 25 odd years on "plus ca change", There are always those, politicians and so called self styled critic and journalist types as well members of the general public who strive to make personal capital out of rubbishing or attacking the creation or good efforts of another, most recently notable with RTE's latest and quite impressive drama commissions The Stardust and Fallout.

A couple of years ago I read James Plunket's excellent social account of the turbulent years in Dublin prior to the Easter rising. Many of the characters so vividly portrayed in this 1980 TV production came rushing back to me off the pages so memorable were their portrayals in the TV adaption.

Amongst the many notable performances, pride of place must go to David Kelly for his career high representation of Rashers Tierney (well before Waking Ned and Charlie and the Chocolate Factory he still looked ancient!). However other performances stand out too, Cyril Cusack's restrained performance as the humanitarian alcoholic parish priest Fr Giffely, Donal McCann as the tough socialist true "Dub" Mulhall, Peter O'Toole's almost fanatical Big Jim Larkin and in one of his earliest roles before hitting the soap big time Bryan Murray as Bob Fitzpatrick.

The series also showcases the appearance of many stars of Irish soaps who were latterly to make prolonged appearance in future episodes of Glenroe and Fair City, people like Brendan Caldwell, Eileen Colgan, Donal Farmer and Alan Stanford.

The range of the book meant that it was always going to take a mini series rather than a 90 minute film to do it justice. Using as it canvas the famous Dublin General Strike and Lockout of 1913, this production takes us convincingly into the backstreets and tenements and oppressive poverty of what was at the time allegedly the worst slums in Europe in what was the British empires supposed 2nd city. However what makes it great is how it equally takes us into the lives of the privileged classes who also shared their lives and the very same streets with these people yet managed to remain largely oblivious and removed indeed one could almost term it unsoiled by these unfortunates. It sheds a great educational light on the pro empire sympathies of Dublin prior to the 1916 rising and also on the birth of Trade Unionism in Ireland from the beginnings of the ITGWU which in later years was to become SIPTU. What it also portrays very well through the bigoted snobbery of Fr O'Connor, is the fanatical grip that Archbishop McQuaid's Catholic Church in Ireland had made on the people of Dublin and beyond, a stranglehold with a litany of abuses and shameful episodes that would extend right into the early 1990's.

A couple of years ago this series was rescreened on RTE TV again on Sunday nights after which the entire re digitised version was released on DVD. For those that want a grasp of Irish history in the early years of the 20th century prior to nationalism and independence I can highly recommend this as an excellent produced dramatic accompaniment to further research

I saw this film when it first came out but after reading two rather diverse but equally recommended books on the subject ("Ten men dead" by David Beresford and "Nor Meekly serve my time" Edited by Brian Campbell, Laurence McKeown and Felim O'Hagen) , I figured I'd like to see it again.

The story portrayed in the film echoes the 2nd book in particular so closely at times that I expected to see the three men credited (They were actually H Block prisoners who took part in the protest and hunger strikes themselves). Of course from that perspective it is understandable that some would claim that it tends towards bias or discriminates towards a one sided view on a very complex issue.

The reality of the film is that whilst the majority of the characters save Bobby Sands are fictional, many of them, with just a little background reading are recognisable as real life people such as Fr Denis Faul, Bik McFarlane, "The Mounain Climber" and a composite of Gerry Adams/Danny Morrison.

It is a charge fairly frequently levelled at Jim Sheridan that he embellishes or takes liberty with factual real events such as in Michael Collins or In America - However, that is usually levelled by someone with an obvious axe to grind or viewing from an opposite perspective. So whilst it is desirable for a good film to document even real facts in an understandable way in less than two hours it is also nice to be entertained and have your curiosity aroused so that you can read further on the subject if you so desire. Some Mothers Son is probably one of these types of movies where the viewer's experience and insight is best enhanced by prior knowledge or at least some background of the events which out of necessity the film is compelled to synopsise and simplify some times.

The facts surrounding this turbulent period in Northern Irish history is that after a prolonged "dirty protest" to be recognised as prisoners of war instead of criminals or terrorists, in 1981 the republican H-Block prison inmates embarked on a hunger strike which by the time it had ended some 6 months later had seen ten of them die but more significantly for the republican movement in NI had seen a wider world focus on them and also had seen a new dawn towards the use of the ballot box instead of the Armalite assault rifle as a means to an end by Sin Fein/IRA which 25 years later is culminating in an electorally strong Sinn Fein and a decommissioned largely stood down IRA.

All in all therefore, as a pen picture which goes some way towards giving one a basic insight into the Northern Ireland Hunger strike of 1981 it does a good job which is greatly helped by very good performances by Helen Mirren, Fionnula O Flanigan Gerald McSorley and John Lynch in particular. Oh and if the soundtrack sounds vaguely familiar it may be because it is by Bill Whelan of Riverdance fame.

I'd been skirting past this one in the video shop for ages wondering whether it was gonna be too depressing and harrowingly sad to sit through.

And before continuing I have to say I love the Irish characters that Aidan Quinn has created from Playboys, thru This is My father and Harry Boland in Michael Collins - all characters you can empathize with and truly feel their pain, largely, it must be said, because of the projection of Quinns acting.

The only Irish "reform school" I've ever visited is the building that used to house Letterfrack Industrial School in Co Galway, now (somewhat ironically considering some of the scenes in SFaRB) a fine arts furniture college. But to say that the building is still haunted by the ghosts of the boys and the pain and abuse inflicted there is an understatement. It literally oozes and sweats from the very walls of the former institution, defying every admirable attempt by the current education guardians to drag it into the present and positively project its glorious current use.

And so, whilst what is effectively a "year in the life" of this particular unidentified industrial school, does manage to capture in a nutshell much of this pain, and instill in the audience a huge anger at what was perpetuated in these places in both the name of reform and religion, somewhere in the back of ones mind there is a discomfort that it's all being just a bit too neatly packaged, summarized and concluded for the benefit of Hollywood and the happy ending with a massive nod to Dead Poets Society when in reality, as still continues to be daily documented in the Irish courts and tribunals of Inquiry and media reports into such abuse, this was not and sadly never would be something that one brave and progressive teacher might have hope to take on and buck the system - As the tragic caption at the end points out, this system of education and authority with all it's abuses persisted in Ireland right up to 1984 and along it way produced such brilliant and brave people Don Baker, Paddy Doyle (The God Squad), Colm O'Gorman and Mannix Flynn but equally claimed as victims such brilliant and capable people as Noel Browne, and probably most tragically, the graveyard and unmarked graves behind Letterfrack college bears testament to the many many young boys that shed their very lives to these institutions - So to try to imply (for whatever feel good factor and positive connotations it gains) that one man may have successfully stood up to this system during the first year of the "Emergency" in 1939/40 and everything was hunky Dorey after that and the authorities and the church sat up and took notice, is just too syrupy of a picture and a quick fix solution when one is sadly aware that the tragic reality is far removed and some 50 odd years away from that - and whilst it was admittedly a very good picture, this simplistic portrayal of a huge and continuing Irish problem, served to tarnish rather than endow the film as a whole.

According to the Edison Film Historian C Muesser this piece of film featured genuine Native Americans (Possibly Sioux) from Buffalo Bill's Wild West Show, decked out in full war paint and war costumes. Filmed on 24th September 1894 in Edison's Black Maria Studio, this clip is poignantly historic in one particular aspect, that it represents the first ever appearance of Native American's (Indians) on moving film, either in a real or fictional context. One could almost say that out of this very birth came a million movie cliches.

Another clip from the shots taken on September 24th 1894 in Edison's Black Maria studio with William Heise behind the camera. This 15 second (20 fps) clip features the three named Native American dancers (from Buffalo Bill Cody's Wild West Show) plus three drummers. It is interesting to note that the three dancers are particulary aware of the camera and appear to act to it on occasion, although this may be merely a feature of the Buffalo dance itself or quite possibly under receipt of direction from Movies first ever acting coach/director behind the camera.

A little slice of American History from the Edison Black Maria studio from November of 1894 shows the real life Annie Oakley shooting fixed targets and airbourne tossed glass balls. Truly a fascinating little piece of film that bridges the real Wild West with a theme that was to run through countless fictional movies in the century to follow.

Long before the days of You've been framed and Candid Camera, someone in the Edison company had the brilliant idea that staging of practical jokes on unsuspecting victims and the filming of the proceedings and reaction would make for great comic entertainment. And they were right, in this offering, wherby the fisherman sitting on the plank out over the riverbank falls victim to the fulcrum effect when a joker sneaks up and removes the stone weighing down the other end of the plank. Of course, like all such opportune clips, the excessive padding on either side of the actual focal event contribute little extra to the entertainment value of the piece, as in this piece when a couple passing in a cart stop to join in, in laughing at the unfortunate victim

Even at this early stage in their US breakthrough U2 were already displaying the elements which have made them one of America's favorite rock acts and Ireland's greatest musical export.

This concert recorded in 1983 during their US tour at Red Rocks Amphitheatre outside Denver in Colorado (Near the little town of Morrison which has a great Mexican Restautant called the Morrison Inn!!) showcases most of the early hits from Boy, October and War.

Flare and torches blaze at either side of the stage as Bono struts (and steams in the aftermath of a torrential downpour) his way through Gloria, I will follow, 11 O'Clock Tick tock, Party Girl, New Years Day, A blistering version of Sunday Bloody Sunday containing the now immortal introduction of "There's been a lot of talk about this song, maybe, maybe too much talk, This song is not a rebel song. This song is..." and The Electric Co before finishing off with the excellent crowd singalong 40 which fades to the wonderfully atmostheric crowd chant of "How long to sing this song".

Edge playes the blues and Larry bates the drums and Adam with a great big blond mullet haircut just acts cool. This is an excellent companion piece to the more mature and sophisticated Rattle and Hum DVD and it would be nice to see this also released on DVD sometime soon.

My God!!!! A twenty seven year old movie with what we thought was a relatively far fetched plot with an all star cast and some awful hammy acting.

Even 10 years on no one that ever watches this movie again after 11th September 2001 will probably be able to do so without thinking rather than how far fetched it was, how horrible the awful tragic reality on the twin towers must have been.

Hollywood may be able to create happy endings but that's where art and reality cease to mirror each other. There was unfortunately no big water tanks or other Hollywood props atop the twin towers on 9/11 to save the day.

Picking up the story of Dr Hannibal Lecter, ten year have elapsed since our introduction to FBI special agent Clarice Starling. Clarice, this time, is played by Julianne Moore who, to her credit with the, at times, terrible characterisation material, manages to make a very fine stab at Agent Starling's role. Early in the movie we find her leading a botched up FBI raid and the only thing that saves her is the high powered machinations of one Mason Verger who, in cahoots with her nemesis; Paul Krendler, manoeuvres to have her put back on Hannibal's trail, for his own ends.

Her old "friend" Dr Hannibal Lecter, now in Florence, is being hunted by multimillionaire Verger, the only one of his victims to survive, albeit as horribly mutilated cripple. There is a scene in the book, (omitted from the film presumably for PC purposes), which serves to illustrate just how nasty and twisted the character of Verger is. In the scene Verger "borrows" young children from the local orphanage to play in his mansion (shades of Great Expectation's Miss Havisham perhaps?) and whilst there, verbally torments them to them to the point of tears, which he carefully has collected and used to make his Martini's with. Whilst the role of Verger, appearance wise in any case, is carried off very well by Gary Oldman with his Elephant Man esque make up, the truly nasty and malevolent aspects of his character which Harris took such pains to illustrate in the novel, never really come across in the movie and it tends to overtly depend on his horrific appearance to convey this to us, and therefore largely fails.

Right from the start however, it is quite apparent that if anything is to salvage this story it will be Anthony Hopkins reprising his role as one of the most chilling characters ever put on screen. To his credit Hopkins does indeed mould the material he has been given this time, but even he cannot give a liberated Hannibal the terrifying aura of the man in the mask or behind the bullet proof glass of ten years ago. Indeed, in trying to pinpoint what exactly it was with Hannibal that just didn't seem the same, it occurred to me that it was this aspect of Lecter in Silence that actually made him so terrifying. It has often been said, in both drama and sex, that what is insinuated and suggested rather than what is actually shown is often much more effective. In Silence, Hannibal was, for the most part, a character with an off screen history, related by himself or third parties, and his menace was made up to a large degree of our drip fed knowledge of these facts and the potential he had to re-offend. In Hannibal however, Dr Lecter mingles freely amongst the unaware populace of Florence and manages to refrain from eating any of them. Indeed, posing as a Dr Fell, an expert in Dante and an impeccably cultured aficionado of the arts, Hannibal is, outwardly at least, the very epitome of a civilised gentleman.

Another aspect of Lecter's character, dealt with quite effectively in Silence and laid out extensively in the book of Hannibal, is his serenity and how effective he is in removing himself from reality when necessary. Therefore, when he told Clarice in Silence that he wanted a room with a view, he was, within his own mind, actually in Florence and it was this total mind control (The same mind control that could make him credible to the paramedics in Silence, when even his monitored heartbeat doesn't sell him out) that also added to his chilling persona. Again, disappointingly this aspect doesn't transfer to the film here and we are left instead with a materialistic Hannibal, rather than the one who's mind control was so powerful that it could not only have him achieve whatever he wanted but he could also get others (man and beast alike) to also do his bidding. So, whilst in Silence we never see the scene in which his neighbour in an adjoining cell, who has offended Starling, is essentially taunted to death, here the director Scott feels it necessary to show us Hannibal's earlier compelling of Verger to self-mutilation, along with other gruesome and graphically detailed aspects of the book.

We also encounter a Florentine detective called Rinaldo Pazzi who is attempting to deliver Hannibal to Verger to claim the $3m reward for himself. Much of the initial action in the movie therefore centers on Italy, particularly on Florence where Pazzi is trying to entrap Hannibal.

So, with the characters and the locale of the movie established, what of the plot? This is where Hannibal fails miserably, resorting to gratuitous and graphic shock factor in an attempt to entertain and grip us. Indeed some of the scenes border on parody, which had moviegoers on the verge of giggles rather than revulsion.

Admittedly I emerged from this movie hungry rather than satisfied on a number of levels. Much of the mystique of Hannibal was gone, to be replaced by the image of an eccentric but incredibly coherent and attuned, ageing doctor with a love of the quality things in life and just once slight indiscretion, namely his penchant for human flesh. Ironically I would put this movie in the same category as Babette's Feast, Big Night and The Cook The Wife the Thief and her Lover rather than within the realms of horror. It is, in part, a movie about gourmet food and classical taste, all be it definitely in the most extreme. I have to admit it left me disappointed, but then from the book I didn't really expect anything better. I've actually grown to admire Dr Hannibal Lecter some more and can't seem to fear him as much as I used to and that is possibly the most thing I lost in the viewing of this movie.