Film
What's on at the cinema plus reviews of the latest movie and DVD releases
Bookmark this page
Cannes diary part three: 'The Wind that Shakes the Barley' review
Dave Calhoun takes a look at the latest controversial effort from Ken Loach.
May 19 2006
Ken Loach returned to the Croisette last night with 'The Wind that Shakes the Barley', a provocative drama set in Ireland's County Cork between 1920 and 1922; that dangerous period that saw the signing of the Anglo-Irish treaty in December 1921 and the outbreak of civil war soon afterwards. It was a civil war that pitched brother against brother, as Irish popular history still very much remembers, and it's this powerful dynamic that Loach adopts as the fulcrum of his film.
For Loach, it marks a return to territory last seen in his Spanish Civil War film 'Land and Freedom'. Like that earlier work, 'The Wind that Shakes the Barley' proves to be a moving and intelligent historical play that explores divisions on the left on an intimate level and succeeds in presenting the prevalent ideas of the time without ever losing sight of the personal stories that Loach and his regular screenwriter Paul Laverty have decided to explore.
Loach presents two brothers, Damien (Cillian Murphy) and Teddy (Padraic Delaney), who together join a 'flying column' of armed guerilla republicans after witnessing the murder of a relative. A strict approach to casting and location pays off; almost all the cast are from Cork and the entire film was shot there, much of it outdoors and within its rugged rural landscape. There's a pleasing camaraderie and sense of purpose among the cast that make up the 'flying column' and lead actors Murphy, Delaney and Liam Cunningham as a Dublin train driver turned revolutionary all put in good turns amid this ensemble. Loach is quite adept at marrying his more experienced actors such as Murphy and Cunningham with a number of less experienced, local hands. The sense of purpose and cohesion of this grouping drives much of the film as they wage an armed campaign against the British.
Anyone expecting the British to come off lightly would be naive; the quite fair prognosis of Loach and Laverty is that the violence of British troops in Ireland helped to stoke the passions and the mission of those who fought this vicious guerilla campaign against the British government. As such, we see British troops behaving atrociously towards those they suspect of sedition. Are his British characters caricatures? I'd say not; Loach has decided to tell a republican story and the contact between these revolutionary republicans and the British would inevitably have been fraught and violent. It's a republican tale, in terms of the film's perspective, and we see the British through the eyes of Damien, Teddy and their comrades: as vicious occupiers.
Most tricky for Loach is presenting the complex arguments within the republican movement that followed the signing of the Anglo-Irish Treaty and led to the political split that very soon saw the outbreak of war. He succeeds, and masters some compelling group scenes of debate and argument that never feel awkward or staged. It's refreshing to see Loach move away from the Scottish stories he's been telling (with much success) in his last few films. I wouldn't be surprised if the film picks up prizes come the end of the festival, most likely for Murphy as best actor or even Laverty as best screenwriter.
To read Dave Calhoun's 'Wind that Shakes the Barley' set visit, click here.
User comments on this story
-
- m.wainwright said...
- I will have more respect for Mr Loach when he makes a film about left wing atrocities, such as the collectivisation of the Soviet Union under Stalin-he never will of course! Posted on May 30 2006 13:53
- Report as inappropriate
-
- Padraig Caughey said...
- Why is it that foul language, crassness and anonimity always seem to wed? Posted on May 30 2006 13:04
- Report as inappropriate
-
- John Doe said...
- You English numbskulls should read “Police Casualties in Ireland 1919-1922” by Richard Abbot and see what the “Freedom fighters” really did. Ken Loach is a high principled **** stirring English plonker who knows **** all. Posted on May 30 2006 10:08
- Report as inappropriate
-
- Paul McCabe said...
- The problem with this film for the British estableshment is its discourse on colonialism. The dominant view of Britain as peace-maker in Irish affairs is challenged by the movie. This 'Realism' is not a concept that colonial views of the so-called 'Natives' has ever found easy to recognise. Posted on May 30 2006 06:57
- Report as inappropriate
-
- John Hannan said...
- Conor Mac Eochaidh - Any so called disrespect for British troops in Ireland at any time in Irish history is commendable. Anybody accepting those british troops as their masters must surely be of British ancestry and feel safer hiding behind the British. I bet you are not really Irish. The shame is on you whether you are Irish or British. Posted on May 30 2006 01:07
- Report as inappropriate
-
- Mike Byrne said...
- Raymond.-I understood your point. Stigmatizing particular films that question British rule in Ireland is the second line of defense; it is damage control after a film has been made. I just wanted to point out the British governments first line of defense against such films, one about which most Americans are utterly clueless- secret censorship agreements that prevented such films from being made in the first place. Posted on May 29 2006 18:06
- Report as inappropriate
-
- John said...
-
'Oliver Tweedy said...
I am ashamed to be English'
Ken Loach is English and he's not ashamed. Many great English people have stood up to the establishment and opposed the oppression against Ireland. Even Churchill seemed to recognise right on the side of Irish independence. Posted on May 29 2006 15:50 - Report as inappropriate
-
- Raymond (London) said...
- Mike, I'm not sure whether you grasped what I was getting at (?). I am well aware of British attempts to undermine the production of films relating to Ireland. My point is that even when such films are made, the labelling of them as "controversial" is another method of subverting them, suggesting as it does, that liberties have been taken with the truth (closely followed by the term "romanticise"). The film is labelled "controversial" because it is unfavourable the British establishment of the time - ANY film that is critical of Britain is destined to be labelled as such to diminish its status. Posted on May 29 2006 12:21
- Report as inappropriate
-
- Mike Byrne said...
- If you wonder why a film like this seems "controversial" to many people, read a book called "Censoring Irish Nationalism", by Burns-Bisagno. Films sympathetic to Irish republicanism, or that even mention it, have been censored with the collusion of Hollywood for 80 years. The British have gone to great lengths to insure that few films like this have ever been made. Hollywood studios were advised decades ago that if they want to sell their wares in Britain, they had better present a British view of Irish history, or none at all. Consider that the Irish Famine was one of the most consequential events not only in Irish, but American history; yet no major film has ever been made that depicts the events in Ireland during that time. It might encourage sympathy for Irish independence and reunification. That is why movies like this startle people when they come out. They are not supposed to be made at all. Posted on May 28 2006 21:08
- Report as inappropriate
-
- Raymond (London) said...
- Why do you refer to "The Wind that Shakes the Barley" as "controversial"? If the film were about any other country's colonial past would it be described thus, or, as I suspect to be the case, does any work that attempts to shine a light on Britain's less than glorious history in Ireland automatically find itself labelled as "controversial" in this country? Do you think there is a single other country in the world that people will share this view? Posted on May 28 2006 17:20
- Report as inappropriate
-
- Padraig Caughey said...
- No surprises here for me. I witnessed ' British troops behaving atrociously towards those they suspect of sedition' [looking for their freedom] over here in Belfast since I was 15. Meme change et meme plus change. Posted on May 28 2006 16:41
- Report as inappropriate
-
- paul collins said...
- Great news to see a crucial time in anglo-irish history portrayed by a director of the integrity of ken loach.Can't wait to see it. If you're looking for a new project ken read Michael O'Riordans "Connolly Column" re-printed last year. Posted on May 19 2006 19:12
- Report as inappropriate
Most popular on this site
Features
To the letter
Forty years later, Costa-Gavras's Z still brims with fury.
Mind over matter
David Cronenberg reflects on a most bizarre body: his own corpus of work.
Fool's gold
Can an Oscar win lead to a cursed career? Here are five stories of postaward professional meltdowns.
We are the championed
Terrorists and teens abound in this year's "Film Comment Selects."
A history of violence
Matteo Garrone's kaleidoscopic Gomorrah wallops you with Italy's crime crisis.
True romantic
James Gray exchanges urban amorality for amour in Two Lovers.
Playing in the dark
MoMA salutes pianist Stuart Oderman's 50 years as the one-man sound of silents.
Junk bonds
Cast and crew recall the making of the classic NYC drug drama The Panic in Needle Park.
What do you think?
Post your comment now