Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest
Michael Collins
-
18-05-2010 4:58pm#1
Comments
-
TempleogueHead wrote: »First off what an epic, Classic film
Makes me so proud to be Irish!
BUT
WHO THE HELL CAST JULIA ROBERTS IN MICHAEL COLLINS????
she is so out of context, so not Irish and just such a fly in the ointment...
:mad:
Big stars = Box office draw.0 -
-
-
TempleogueHead wrote: »First off what an epic, Classic film
Makes me so proud to be Irish!
BUT
WHO THE HELL CAST JULIA ROBERTS IN MICHAEL COLLINS????
she is so out of context, so not Irish and just such a fly in the ointment...:mad:
Alot more wrong with that film then Roberts TBH. Not a fan of the film as it felt more like a "Visit Ireland" bord failte ad at too many points esp towards the end...something awful is about to happen but quick before that make sure to pan around so the americans can see the pretty Cork country side and will come spend money here.0 -
-
Advertisement
-
TempleogueHead wrote: »Awh I love the film What about it is incorrect???
The armoured car firing in Croke Park for a start...trying to hard to be like Attenborough's Gandhi at certain parts with a much less interesting and historical relevant character. Alot of the facts for the Easter Rising [who was were and in what building are off] De Valera as a character is really off [I blame bad writing for that not Rickman]0 -
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
Julia has red hair, what more does Hollywood need to cast her as an Irish character? It wasn't the first time - anyone else see Mary Reilly?
You are the type of what the age is searching for, and what it is afraid it has found. I am so glad that you have never done anything, never carved a statue, or painted a picture, or produced anything outside of yourself! Life has been your art. You have set yourself to music. Your days are your sonnets.
―Oscar Wilde predicting Social Media, in The Picture of Dorian Gray
0 -
-
-
I recall reading before that the reason for that change is that the person in question died in a hotel by the sea and they couldn't find a period hotel by the sea for the location.Biggest one for me is the manner ofBoland's death.To change the circumstances surrounding the death of an actual person just for dramatic effect ticks me off. Some other details such as dates and that are off and I can forgive, Jordan has defended this issue serveral times with the truth, it's a two hour movie covering 6 years of history, changes were inevitable to speed things along.
Defo a lot of inaccuraccies in the film but you're never going to get 100% accurate history in a Hollywood film. I love the acting though, with the exception of Roberts. I think Liam Neeson and Alan Rickman do really well in their respective roles. I also really like the music
0 -
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
I'm aware that it's historically based, thank you. If it were to be a grand re-telling of the acquisition of independence, it would need to be a RTE/ BBC co-production, where there would be significant attention to detail. Hollywood does not care about the foundation of our state as much as we do. Nor, I imagine, does Hollywood care much about making a meaningful contribution to our collective memory of the period. Hollywood wants a successful, money-making film, unfortunately.Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »I can accept film adaptations of literary works not being accurate but remember this is a film adaptation of historical events, arguably the most important historical events in our recent history. Therefore I think there should have been greater care taken in what was presented.
Yes, I knew of the misquote. I have my own views on de Valera during the war, too extensive to go into here! I wouldn't call him war hungry (he did spend most of the war of independence in jail or in America!), but I do think he manipulated the events surrounding the outbreak of the Civil War, possibly not as successfully as he'd hoped. However, the nuances of the differentiation between de Valera's Document No. 2 and the Treaty (the main reason for his rejection of the Treaty) as it was offered is a bit much for a two hour film to get intoMr.Nice Guy wrote: »The funny thing is that speech from de Valera has also been misrepresented through history. It's been a while since I read about it but from memory my understanding was he never said they would wade through rivers of blood, but warned that this could end up happening if events took their course. That's quite an important distinction as some people like to present him as a war hungry maniac which I don't think was the case.
I would disagree - de Valera has the great advantage over Collins in that he lived to have a long political career, where he made more than one significant contribution to the Ireland of today. Also, the recent Judging Dev series and book gave de Valera quite a lot of publicity, very evenly balanced and much of it positive.Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »Dev just gets quite a bad press it seems to me. It's as if it's trendy to make de Valera out to be a cartoon villain (Tim Pat Coogan being a good example of this as a guy who wrote one book praising Collins and another bashing Dev :pac:) and this movie is part of the problem in my view.
As I said, I don't think this is why the film was made. You would need the BBC or RTE involved to do something of that nature. Indeed, RTE already have done so in The Treaty. While it is excellent, from what I recall, it's largely forgotten - which says a lot for the contribution it's made to Irish society!Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »I'm not usually one to dwell on inaccuracies in movies or TV, but I think the fact that this movie is the most well known attempt to deal with that part of our history - and the fact it has been done so poorly - has meant it has failed in a massive way as a useful contribution to Irish society (imo).
Well, as I said above, anybody referencing this film to make a credible historical argument is not doing themselves any favours. Also, de Valera's official biography is quite the fairytale too! I don't think people should expect to get the facts from a film, and certainly not a Hollywood film. There are more than enough books on both Collins and de Valera, some better than others in the case of both men. This film is over ten years old. More than one book has been published on each since then.Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »I would use the example of Glasnevin cemetery. You can see the graves of de Valera, Brugha etc. which are rather modest graves. Then you see this big, lofty, grandiose grave for Collins with the flags and wreaths everywhere. I am convinced the movie is responsible for the elevation of Collins in the public eye and a lowering of admiration for de Valera.
I'm not saying de Valera should be put above Collins necessarily. I think both men had good points and flaws. I do however think people should make their minds up on the men based on facts and not Neil Jordan and Tim Pat Coogan's fairytales.
Oh, I know - my point is that Hollywood uses and abuses history for its own ends. For example, The Madness of King George III was renamed the madness of King George. Britain has never had a King George. I really think historical films should be judged more for their film value than their historical values.Anastasia is an animated film aimed at kids! When we had the preview screening for the Secret of Kells with the keeper of the book of kells his only response to the whole film was that it was historically inaccurate in parts and we pointed out the film had magic fairies in it....of course it wasn't going to be historically accurate. Animated films rarely are.
I think you misunderstand. I wasn't referring to the comparison between this film and Gandhi. MNG commented that he was annoyed by people who criticised de Valera based on their perception of de Valera as portrayed in the film. My point was that people who want to criticise de Valera would do better to do so based on his portrayal in history books.I'm not getting your argument at all. Why shouldn't we compare this film to other films in the same genre dealing with similar figures and stories? Gandhi is set during roughly the same period, deals with alot of the same issues and had a comparative filming budget.
I think to expect pure history from a Hollywood film fundamentally foolish tbh. I've already agreed that parts of it are ridiculous. While I'd prefer the film not to have such ridiculous elements, they don't upset me as much as Julia Robert's acting does! I'm alone in this, it seems. Meh!0 -
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
Yeah, cause shooting it in Croke Park would make it look completely accurate! :rolleyes:Spiritoftheseventies wrote: »I think the most obvious one being the shootings in Croke Park which they filmed in the Carlisle Grounds in Bray.
0 -
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
actuallylike wrote: »Yeah, cause shooting it in Croke Park would make it look completely accurate! :rolleyes:
WHERE DID YOU FIND THAT PIC? ITS SO LEGIT!!!!0 -
Spiritoftheseventies wrote: »Anyone wantiing to know about Collins should read Tim Pat Coogans excellent biography. Gives you a far better picture of him.
He crammed an awful lot into his very short life and the film doesnt really and couldnt really do him justice.
Michael Collins a good hollywood flick but only half the story really
I must read it 0 -
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
I'm aware that it's historically based, thank you. If it were to be a grand re-telling of the acquisition of independence, it would need to be a RTE/ BBC co-production, where there would be significant attention to detail. Hollywood does not care about the foundation of our state as much as we do. Nor, I imagine, does Hollywood care much about making a meaningful contribution to our collective memory of the period. Hollywood wants a successful, money-making film, unfortunately.
I don't get your point. Neil Jordan, an Irishman, was behind the film so the buck stops with him frankly, not Hollywood. It wouldn't have had to be a grand re-telling of anything in order to be historically accurate. Remove the car bomb scene, the torture and death of Broy, the cartoon nonsense of de Valera etc. and it still would have been a success.Hermione* wrote:I would disagree - de Valera has the great advantage over Collins in that he lived to have a long political career, where he made more than one significant contribution to the Ireland of today. Also, the recent Judging Dev series and book gave de Valera quite a lot of publicity, very evenly balanced and much of it positive.
I don't think that was an advantage at all. In fact many historians have said that de Valera's long life was actually to his detriment as he lived on to be a frail old man, who showed himself to be increasingly out of touch, and who presided over a country that was economically struggling with people emigrating. Collins in contrast was destined to be held up as a figure cruelly cut down in the prime of his life. He was made a martyr.Hermione* wrote:As I said, I don't think this is why the film was made. You would need the BBC or RTE involved to do something of that nature. Indeed, RTE already have done so in The Treaty. While it is excellent, from what I recall, it's largely forgotten - which says a lot for the contribution it's made to Irish society!
I've no idea why you think you would need the BBC or RTE to do something of this nature. The inaccurate aspects of the film offered little to the movie itself. They weren't exactly highlights. :pac:Hermione* wrote:Well, as I said above, anybody referencing this film to make a credible historical argument is not doing themselves any favours. Also, de Valera's official biography is quite the fairytale too! I don't think people should expect to get the facts from a film, and certainly not a Hollywood film. There are more than enough books on both Collins and de Valera, some better than others in the case of both men. This film is over ten years old. More than one book has been published on each since then.
Of course you're right there is plenty of literature available but the problem is not everyone is interested in reading it. Unfortunately, many in this country do place their faith in the events of this movie as factual and will make judgements on Collins and Dev based on it. Because of that, I think this film is disappointing on several levels.
I'm not saying the movie needed to be 100% accurate to real life, but it should have at least attempted accuracy. The fact the film finishes with footage from the funeral and a quote which we're supposed to believe was said by Dev (which I do not accept) seems to me an attempt to portray the film as true to events. It's an attempt to influence Irish people into forming opinions on Collins at Dev's expense, and if one hasn't read about the events then it's likely they will do precisely that.DublinWriter wrote:Here we go, scratching over those old Civil War wounds again...
I seriously don't think Collins had much input into the design of his grave. It's a bit disingenuous to start comparing burial sites, don't you think?
Did I say he had an input? My point was that the perception of Collins from the mainstream public has been influenced by the works of Jordan and Coogan which have made Collins into something he wasn't at the expense of Dev, who has been portrayed as something he wasn't. I think the graves are a very good example of this.DublinWriter wrote:We can gain say Collins vs DeValera till the cows come home, but to me it all boils down to the fact that DeValera rejected the mandate and democratic majority decision of the first Dail, walked out taking his ball home and started one of the most bitter and divisive chapters of Irish history.
Well I think you're completely wrong. The delegates were instructed to consult back to de Valera and the Cabinet before signing the Treaty. They had promised they would do so in the days before they signed. They went back on their word. I don't blame de Valera for walking out, seeing as the Dail had taken an oath to a Republic and not 26 county Dominion Status.
De Valera didn't start the civil war. He stuck to his principles as Collins and Griffith did to theirs. Who was correct will always be a matter of debate but de Valera is not the big bad villain some people like to think he is. The responsibility for the civil war rests with more than just Dev.
Anyway I think we're deviating from the main topic here...this movie is pants. 0 -
![[Deleted User]](/applications/dashboard/design/images/defaulticon.png)
Advertisement