terrorist glamorizing [email protected]
Nowhere near 'enough said'. Just how are they 'glamourized'?share
It sounds like this is a typical (British?) response to any film that portrays the human side of Irish rebels or the IRA and it's members.share
How about you go and ask the people of.. say Manchester what they think about the IRA (short for I Ran Away)?
Over 30% of the population of Manchester are of Irish origin, still the city was a favorite target for the mob of terrorists called IRA.
Sorry if I don't have any fond feelings for those rats.
Okay, agreed, but I still don't know how this film glamorizes them...
I mean, certainly it shows them as human, but Downfall shows Hitler as human. Fact is men may act like monsters at times, but they're still men.
It's obviously not a British response - just look at how they spell "glamourising!"
Last Film Seen:
* Girl Shy (1924, Fred C. Newmeyer, Sam Taylor) – (9/10)
The Irish never commited genocide.share
You obviously don't know your history. The Old IRA (Which this film characterizes) Fought for freedom from the murdering country that had ownership of Ireland for hundreds of years. Ireland is for the Irish. Not for the Saxon, the British or the English.
The New IRA (Which is a totally different organization) is who terrorizes. They have nothing to do with the hero IRA of old times.
My message was not directed at you, Bilwick. It was directed at the scumbag who started this topic.share
Did we see the same film? "The Informer" in no way glamorizes terrorism. Gyppo Nolan is a sad an excuse for a human being but the key here is that he is human. Because Ford is of Irish descent, are you projecting your own prejudices onto this film and calling it pro-terrorist? The film in no way glorifies terrorists. Haven't you noticed that all of the action takes place at night and there was certainly a reason for this. "The Black and Tans" in the film are not the villains, if anything they are overshadowed by the ruthlessness of the IRA and Gyypo's duplicitousness. If Ford wanted to be an apologist for terrorists, don't you think he would have portrayed the Brits considerably more villanious instead of merely officious?share
I certainly agree with most of you about the film. The IRA is certainly not presented in the best light here; even the couple of references glamourize it a little more. However, I think the issue being circled around here is the how we should perceive the IRA. As an Irish-American, I am certainly sympathetic to the suffering they have faced at the hands of the British and the IRA's fight can be very easily romanticized, and not without reason. But it cannot be denied that a lot of innocent people have been caught up in the mess; IRA bombings have killed innocent people, both English and Irish. (Of corse, the British have done their share, too.)But there is a certain hypocrisy in those who have no problem with church basement gatherings in which money is sent to fight "the cause" but haul those in mosques who do the same thing to jail. I am not defending the Moslems who do so here; I am saying it is all wrong. The average Irish American is unaware that a tremendous amount of IRA money went to Quaddafi in the 80s and has gone to more threatening groups over the years for "training." The cash comes back to hurt us. We can't wink about helping the Irish and condemn other groups who claim to be doing the same thing. Those who give money to an Irish terrorist group are no better than those who give money to a Middle Eastern group.We shouldn't allow any of these groups to be supported and should use our justice evenhandedly.share
Are you sure you are talking about the right movie?
In the movie the Gypo Nolan is an anti-hero (for selling out his
comrade to the British). The real hero of the film and the romantic interest is the IRA commander who actually states the message of the film : "a single traitor can paralyse an entire army", meaning that the executions of traitors is justified as they betray everything for their own selfish gain.
The IRA in the story are portrayed as being both patriotic and moralistic ( a member chides a pub landlady for selling booze on a sunday). The Black and Tans are accurately portrayed as being ruthless mercenaries which is what they were.
As for what the original poster stated you cannot blame a movie that was made in 1935 for the actions of a completely different paramilitary in the 70's.
The informer is a classic movie made by one of the finest directors of all time.
"Be seeing you!"
No.6 has it right.....
I have to disagree.
Before commenting further I must declare an interest. My paternal great grandfather was hanged for a Fenian. Two of my uncles were Nationalist sympathisers and their sons served with distinction in the movement. One ot them paying the ultimate price for his devotion.
Althougth this is an excellent film it only uses the great struggle as a backdrop to explore human activity of a universal understanding. The depiction of the organisation is not historically accurate and does not need to be for the purpose. Betrayal, remorse and redemption could easily be slotted into any time in history and would not need to draw from that period.
I have not seen my surviving cousin for thirty years. Since both of us are now old men it is unlikely we will ever meet again. But I often feel he, like me, would feel a sense of sadness at the way the most recent hierachy of the organisation has sold out.
There is no united Ireland. There never will be. In this respect the souls of all those who died in the struggle have been betrayed.
A Roman historian once wrote, ‘ All revolutions ultimately betray their instigators and followers ’ From my limited study of the subject throughout history I have yet to find an example which puts the lie to this axiom
How about the American Revolution?share
arlycan, i am assuming that your reply in the form of a question is in response to: "a Roman historian once wrote, ‘ All revolutions ultimately betray their instigators and followers. ’". i would have to say that this Roman historian couldn't be more correct with respect to the present leadership of the United States of America. the signers of the Declaration of Independence would not be pleased with our corrupt Congress, fiscal irresponsibility and indebtedness to a communistic government in order to wage unjust wars to make the military–industrial–congressional complex the ruling class.
i could go on and on with examples of why i see the grand experiment of democracy is now in its declining years but i think you get my point that the Roman historian is correct.
with respect to this movie's portrayal of the Irish/English conflict i have often wondered why no other alliances were forged with the IRA similar to the French alliance with the Continental Congress. many colonists in America were loyalist, many were patriot, many were indifferent. this is as is was with the Irish in the early days of the conflict and in the 70's.
"We deal in lead, friend."
Well, there wasn't another way to show the unwelcomed guests out.
Listen to your enemy, for God is talking
I know virtually nothing about the original IRA or the 1970's version, but I don't see anything glamourous in this film. Everyone seems to be running and hiding, or broke financially and emotionally. There are no heroics in the classic sense. Gallagher doesn't seem to really want to be involved in Nolan's death, but he has to be because he knows Nolan is weak and stupid and for half a bottle of whiskey, he'd betray the whole movement.
"We're fighting for this woman's honor, which is more than she ever did."