User reviews

What worries me about films based on historical characters and events, is that a lot of people take them at face value and accept them as fact whereas very few of them are completely accurate, and this film is no exception. However, despite the inaccuracies and speculations, it's a good film. Liam Neeson in particular gives a great performance in the title role, really bringing the complexities of the character to life. Rickman is also good as DeValera. Julia Roberts is horribly miscast and I can only think she was in it to boost box office ratings - although I would have hardly thought that necessary with Neeson and Rickman as the main characters. To be fair her character was pretty superfluous anyway and only included to add some romantic interest.

Overall it's worth a watch, although if you really want to know about the British/Irish conflict read a book!

In 1916 Dublin, Michael Collins (Liam Neeson), Harry Boland (Aidan Quinn), and Éamon de Valera (Alan Rickman) are among the captured rebels in the Easter Rising. After being released, they are politically active. De Valera and the political leadership get arrested. Collins is tipped off by double agent police detective Ned Broy (Stephen Rea). Collins goes into hiding with his best friend Boland. He meets his love Kitty Kiernan (Julia Roberts). Collins and Boland lead a guerrilla war against the British forces. De Valera takes Boland with him to work diplomatically. Eventually, the Brits relent and De Valera sends Collins to negotiate. Collins returns with home rule and splitting off Northern Ireland with De Valera opposing him. In 1922, the Anglo-Irish Treaty is approved. De Valera and his men resign taking Boland with them. They start their own revolt against the Irish Free State Army headed by Collins.

This is an expansive epic historical drama. Liam Neeson leads this with his powerful presence. He looms over this movie like the leading man that he is. The actors are all great although Julia Roberts does stick out a little. It would have been more fitting to have an Irish lass. The movie does try to fit a lot into two hours. Some of it can feel a bit disjointed. Liam Neeson is big enough to tie it all together. It would also be nice for him to have a constant foil. Whether or not he deserves it historically, the movie seems to make De Valera Collins' foil. It would be great to fully embrace the conflict and give De Valera more screen time. Make this Collins versus De Valera.

This is a very touching film. I was shocked to see the IMDb score of 6.8. The only major fault of this film is Julia Roberts. She really takes a wonderful film and turns it down a few notches. She can't keep an Irish accent, switching back and forth with her American accent throughout the duration of the film.

Anyway, Michael Collins is great to watch. The story is heartfelt, and the nuances between personal battles and patriotic duty are displayed in a very mature fashion - - to what extent will you go for your country? What will you lose? Who will you fight? Why will you do any of it? Who are your true friends? etc.

The music is FANTASTIC. Worth renting just for the listen. Of course Neison is great. So is Aidin Quinn (when I first saw this movie I thought Quinn was Irish given his name and his performance here). Alan Rickman is Alan Rickman - - which is great, though he doesn't pull off the Irish thing too well. However, given his character, Eamon de Valera, it isn't really a miscast, just takes time to get in.

If you can ignore how horrible Julia Roberts is and think about the heart and emotion behind this film while enjoying the awesome score you're in for a treat. A jewel in the rough. (my favorites)

I saw this first in the now defunct Capitol Cineplex in Cork. I was surprised to see so many senior citizens in the cinema. The cineplex was so scummy it had to be something special to draw them in. Some of them might have been old enough to remember the civil war or at least to have had a close family member killed in it. Many of them were clearly moved by it particularly the end with its archive footage. It is a moving film, but you have to be careful.

One should never confuse history with entertainment and this is not a history lesson. All the major events are there, but there is a horrible bias from the director. I don't like DeValera or what he stood for, but what was hinted at the end in this movie is a travesty. If such a thing is true, you have to prove it, you can't slyly hint at it. There are other insidious things such as mortars and car-bombs which are clear reference to the 1970s-90s Northern conflict. Such weapons did not exist in 1916. To me this is an oblique way of implying that the Provos are somehow the legitimate heirs of the IRA in 1916 which of course they are not.

Despite this I enjoyed the movie a lot. The production values and acting was so good, it really felt like a timewarp. Neil Jordan is a great director, Neeson and Rickman are superb in their parts. Rickman looks so much like DeValera it is uncanny. I even liked Julia Roberts. It looks like she made a fair attempt at a Dun Laoghaire accent and of course it sounded phony. Southside Dublin accents all sound phoney to me anyway so I didn't mind. The best moment was the scene where Collins starts the civil war sitting behind a howitzer aimed at the Four Courts and fires. You can see a huge explosion and bits coming out portico. I actually felt scared that they had damaged this famous Dublin landmark. This won't mean much to someone from overseas, but anyone familiar with the Four Courts and the resident lawyers (sorry "barristers") in their eighteenth century costumes would surely enjoy firing an artillery piece at the overpaid clowns. I wish I had a howitzer like that.

Fiction heavy bio-pic of the man who lived and died for Irish independence.

History on film is a difficult beast at the best of times and no one - and I mean no one - could produce an uncontentious film about Michael Collins: The Irish rebel rouser and politician who helped (the key word) form the first Irish Free State.

Sadly writer/director Neil Jordan takes the view that the history book can be tossed away if it goes against his own agenda or hampers audience sympathy. He created a stick for reviewers to hit him with - and boy did the blows rain down on his head. These blows, alone, might have killed any chance this "difficult" film had at the box office.

(It went down like a lead balloon in America which shows that behind the bluster and flag waving most Irish-American's aren't really interested in their own history.)

If only they had stuck more closely to the uncontested facts film writers would have focused on the good things. Which include excellent cinematography (good use of filters) and first class performances from all bar the all-at-sea (and mostly unneeded) Julia Roberts.

A perfect example of the Hollywood of today: All perfect teeth and good looks, but no ability to do characters or accents. I actually cringed while she was speaking in her "Irish" accent!

(The producers don't help much either by dressing her in a range of expensive outfits that change between shots: Destroying any sense of her being a poor country girl! Indeed scenes of poverty seems to be avoided rather than played upon.)

Liam Neeson was born to play Collins both physically and temperamentally, a dream part for him. There isn't a second that I don't believe in him. Shame there isn't more parts like this for him to play.

I don't mind my country being the bad guy in this movie, because we deserve it. What we did in Ireland will always be a stain on our history, but where is the context? The two countries have always been closely intertwined - not only due to geography but also due to wealth and technology reasons.

Also to be understood is that British troops had no experience of civil war or terrorism. They had been fighting wars against a uniformed enemy that stood in front of them. The people that joined up were often criminals or people that couldn't find alternative employment; or even wanted a bit of adventure in their lives.

Here their enemy dressed in civilian clothes and shot at them in the street (often from point blank range) and then ran. The people they killed were often Irish police or suspected informers. It was very ugly, but it was ugly on both sides.

There was also plenty of infighting (of the literal variety) that was more about gangsterism than Irish politics: A side road this film doesn't want to wander down.

The film also takes the view that "violence was the only path." South African apartheid crashed without the blacks winning any kind of civil war - indeed theirs probably extended the run of the white elite. Times move on, to quote Ghandi, "all tyrannies must fall.... however strong they appear at the time."

Despite everything this is an important film and Neil Jordan's best so far. It has too many little truths about power and real politics to be ignored easily and it does expose one "Irish hero" as a weasel. Watch the film to see which one.

A lot of responsibility fell on Neil Jordan's shoulders making this. It is a one-off deal. It isn't like a book, there won't be another Michael Collins film next year. More people - world-wide- will gain information about him from this film than any other medium. Therefore the hodgepodge mix of fact and fiction makes me uneasy - especially when so many of the debates and politics that are raised here are still ongoing.

I didn't know if Hollywood was distorting history but someone who knows the story of Michael Collins assured me this was a pretty accurate portrayal of him in here, which makes this film go even higher in my ratings, because it's definitely entertaining and is spectacularly photographed. There is more blue color in here - beautiful blue - than in any movie I've ever seen. It looks just gorgeous on DVD.

Liam Neeson's charismatic portrayal of Collins keeps you riveted to the screen, even though it's a fairly long movie. Julia Roberts and Alan Rickman seemed a bit miscast. Being American and British, respectively, they weren't quite believable as Irishmen, perhaps because I'm used to hearing them as they normally talk. I also don't like to hear the Lord's name in vain so often as what was in here, but that seems commonplace among the Irish, at least in all the movies I've seen and books I've read (and my relatives, half of whom are Irish!)

Anyway, this is a very interesting story with a nice combination of drama, action and romance. Very much recommended regardless of anyone's stance on Irish-English relations.

This movie is an excellent portrayal of the brutal and often non-conventional Irish freedom struggle. The movie has several great strengths. The biggest strength is Liam Neeson in his tour-de-force. His acting in this movie is as good as it gets. His personality changes subtly throughout the movie, becoming increasingly affected by the changes of the world around him. The supporting cast is also excellent, with Rickman in one of his best roles.

Cinematography is very nice, capturing everything from the hopelessness of the defeats in the ashy cities to the beauty of the Irish landscapes. The pacing is very good as well.

If you saw this movie with no opinion on the Irish history, you will have one when you leave the theater. This shows to me how powerful this movie is. After all, Michael Collin's tactics were not pretty, everything from car-bombings to mob-style executions. Yet we still care for him, we want him to succeed, even if he himself isn't sure he wants to.

Without it's politics, this movie is still excellent. It's a great piece of movie-making, it's involving, sad, funny and sometimes tense. One of the movies I consider classic.

I really enjoyed this film. I didn't enjoy Julia Roberts in it and thought that was about the worst attempt at an Irish accent I had ever heard. Being British and a Protestant, I didn't know how I would feel about the film, but I found it very enlightening. It has really changed my views on the British position on Ireland. The bloodshed and death seems so wasteful. Michael Collins seems like a very brave man and I think the worst decision De Valera made was not going himself and negotiating for the independence of Ireland. That was a very cowardly decision to send Collins. He was not a negotiator and De Valera would have done better, and that seemed like a very cowardly move. Anyway, the film really opened my eyes and gave me some perspective. I lived in Northern Ireland for five years and I am a Protestant, but to see what my people did in Ireland is really shameful. Nevertheless, a very enjoyable film.

An epic movie about the hero of the Irish revolution that commanded a guerrilla war and led an army against the British . It is set in Ireland 1916, Michael Collins uses terrorist tactics and organizing political assassinations . By 1921 The British are willing to negotiate. But Sinn Fein President , Eamon de Valera , doesn't accepts the result of the complex negotiation. As Collins is unwillingly drawn into a stateman's role as negotiations for an Anglo-Irish treaty begin in1921, ultimately dividing the country in two and leading to Collins to fateful consequences. As Michael Collins' dreams inspired hope. His words inspired passion . His courage forged a nation's destiny.

This is an epic tale of passion and fate whose starring has to face off several dangers , treason, and extreme difficulties to get his purports . The picture gets great production design , spectacular scenes , impressive movement of masses and a cast of thousands. Based on historical events about a revolutionary leader with the Irish volunteers, a guerilla force , an early version of the IRA, dedicated to freeing Ireland from British rule by any means necessary. Interpretations are pretty good , such as Liam Neeson giving a nice acting as the stubborn Michael Collins , Aln Rickman as the cunning Eamon de Valera and Aidan Quinn as Harry Boland . Accompanying the starring trio, there's a good support cast, such as : Julia Roberts, Stephen Rea, Ian Hart, Sean McGinley, Brendan Gleeson, Charles Dance, Stuart Graham and Jonathan Rhys Mayers, among others.

It displays a luxurious and colorful cinematography by prestigious cameraman Chris Menges. Likewise, an emotive and sensitive musical score by great composer Elliott Goldenthal, adding catching Irish songs. The motion picture was competently directed by Neal Jordan (Danny Boy , Mona Lisa , In company of wolves , Crying game , Breakfast on Pluto, Greta, Byzantium). Rating : 7.5/10 . Better than average . Essentian and indispensable seeing for historical cinema fans and Liam Neeson fans.

Anyone interested in history especially that pertaining to how Ireland broke away from the United Kingdom and became it's own country definitely should check out this movie.

Liam Neeson was born to play Michael Collins, can't think of any other actor who would've been appropriate to play this role. Aidan Quinn and Alan Rickman were both also great in their roles. Julia Roberts gets way too much hate for her role in this movie. She was perfectly fine in her role and if anyone else without the attention that she brings had been in that role it wouldn't have gotten all the negative reaction that it had gotten.

Better when viewed a few years later, now the controversy about the accuracy [or otherwise] of the film has died down, this is one of Neeson's better performances, regardless of what your views are about its portrayal of the facts.

Rickman is surprising mediocre as Eamon DeValera, and there are some other reasonable performances from the usual suspects.

As a student of history in Ireland, I was both amused and annoyed by this film. On the first viewing I was confused: much of it was very powerful, especially the 1916 and civil war scenes. My confusion related o the treatment of de Valera, who I have always regarded as displaying great integrity, and the portrayal of Collins's terrorism, which I will come to in a minute. The following fact displays the dubiousness of the basis of this film: Director Neil Jordan displayed on the screen a quote, supposedly made by de Valera about Collins in 1966: "in the fullness of time, history will record the greatness of Collins, and it will be recorded at my expense." This quote is contained only in Tim Pat Coogan's 1990 biography of Collins: he heard it from Collins's nephew, who heard it from Joe McGrath (a former intelligence operative and sometime Minister) who supposedly heard de Valera say it. A third-hand quote produced verbatim after two or three decades. Someone else below has mentioned historical inaccuracies. I would say that what is more important is that history as it was is presented in a manner similar to the presentation of the quote - half-digested, misinterpreted and as orthodoxy. For example: the notion presented by the film that Collins started and organised the highly successful 'flying columns' which carried out devastating ambushes of enemy troops, is erroneous. The officers of the East Limerick Brigade started it, and it spread to the renowned South Tipperary Brigade, and on from there. Then there is the issue of the terrorism practiced by Collins. Was it a characteristic of the War of Independence in Ireland, and was it necessary?

Shooting of spies was certainly carried out in Ireland. It wasn't initiated by Collins, who became Minister for Finance in 1919 (NOT Minister for Intelligence, though he was Director of Intelligence in the army), in Ireland's first independent representative assembly in 750 years. Terrorism? No, it was a widely practiced act of war. The two countries were at war. But Collins, according to one intelligence expert, carried out assassinations of people whose status as spies or traitors has still not been proven.

In fact, his tendency to target his politcal opponents with his gangs during the civil war calls his whole War of Independence status into question. These facts have a tendency to be brushed under the carpet by his legions of fans and consequently by this film. So too his role in the treaty talks. It is not widely known that the terms accepted by the delegates, or terms so similar the difference is hardly worth discussing, were already on the table when the negotiations began by virtue of preliminary talks by de Valera & others. In other words what was accepted was a travesty by any standards. It not only legalised partition (and was the source of 80 years of further bloodshed) but accepted that the rest of Ireland only had status as it was conferred by Britain. Some still believe that de Valera knew that more couldn't be achieved, but there is no basis for this, and having looked at his papers, I believe this is nonsense. Indeed, there are indications (see Hopkinson, 'Green Against Green') that Collins and the head of the delegation Griffith were happy enough with the terms to conspire with Lloyd George and Churchill to blackmail the other delegates into acceptance. What is clear is that both originally favoured acceptance of the original offer - Collins because it allowed the Free State to raise an army (yippee!).

This is a technical discussion, but I wish to demonstrate how the blurring or ignoring of facts can create confusion in a historical film. A lot of people had a problem with the film but just couldn't put their finger on it. It just doesn't add up. I've no problem generally with artistic licence, but where the morality of a film rests on its facts, it needs to make sense and have logic. Overall, the acting was quite good, with one or two exceptions - the obvious one being Julia Roberts. Alan Rickman is always a shade over the top for me. Characterisation, even of Collins, was shallow. Motives weren't really explored, except to the extent of Collins saying, more or less, "I am noble because I want peace even though I am a bloody murderer but that is the Brits' fault not mine," the Brits saying "Look how evil and/or incompetent I am," and de Valera saying "I lack the courage to do what is really necessary, I am also weak and feckless and the nemesis to the charismatic hero." The film also does a grave injustice to Harry Boland, who was a far more capable and intelligent character than he was made out to be here. There's no denying that the film has power, but it's undermined by the script, which sometimes borders on the ridiculous, and seems to try to cater to the American audience (who didn't go to see it in droves). There hasn't been a film made yet about Ireland's past (that I have seen) which I would recommend, so I don't want to be too hash. But if you want to be informed about the time, read Macardle's 'The Irish Republic'.

It all looked so promising - at last, a big-budget movie about Ireland's history and actually directed and screenwritten by an Irishman! Tax breaks from the Irish government and thousands of Dubliners willing to work for free as extras gave it an added boost.

So what went wrong? First of all, we have the Oirish cliches. Take this one. Mr Collins makes a speech on a donkey cart. There were such things as platforms in early 20th century Ireland, but let that pass. Then the polis come. Collins gets down from the cart and headbutts someone. Mob take out many hurleys and start headwhacking. The whys and wherefores are a mystery here. It's the modern version of the obligatory barfight scene. For a sense of the lost dramatic potential of such a scene, read this report from England's 'Daily Mail' about a mass meeting in Ennis, Co. Clare addressed by de Valera, in 1917: "De Valera's arrival on the platform...was the signal for shattering cheers. In the square and its converging streets he faced 10,000 men; the remainder stood 'on guard' beyond the range of his commanding eye...As the cheers roared around him, De Valera held up his hand. There was instantly a dead silence...[He] himself said very little. 'I am not here to speak,' he cried. 'The time for speechmaking is over. The time to act has come!'"

And then the story. It is well known that most real lives don't translate very well to the screen, so subtelty and imagination must be applied liberally. Unfortunately, Collins's true story doesn't lend itself very well to a movie, as the story of, say, Patrick Pearse or Éamon de Valera would. Their lives had a real straightforwardness that is lacking here. Instead of fictionalising the character, which is always necessary in movies, Jordan used the actual facts and twisted them, which only usually works in history, when the historian isn't very particular about the truth. Thus, instead of being a valuable asset to the republican movement, Collins *is* the republican movement - so much for poor aul' Cathal Brugha, who organised the War of Independence, with the assistance of Richard Mulcahy and the constant involvement of de Valera, who was the senior surviving commander from the 1916 Rising. (Brugha was also a prominent 1916 survivor.) Believe it or not, Collins *was* just the 'head of a subsection', as Cathal Brugha (portrayed as a raving lunatic, naturally) famously said. One doesn't wish to underestimate Collins's role, but it was almost exclusively in intelligence. Think of how interesting a film based on Collins's espionage might have been, instead of the fruitless insistence that he was the Big Fella, he really was!

Instead of the statesman that he was (recognised all but officially as the President of the Irish Republic in America, where he toured and raised funds in 1919-20), de Valera 'becomes' a mere conniver, whose only interest is...well, it's not explained, really, but we just *know* he's evil. He also had a much greater involvement in the War of Independence than he's given credit for, and neither he nor Brugha approved of Collins's occasional 'revenge' killings. And so on.

As for the cast, the standard was poor. Neeson was alright, but the others were, frankly, atrocious. (Poor aul' Harry Boland, portrayed as a weakling by Quinn, was most definitely *not* killed in a sewer but gunned down in a hotel room by a murder gang. And why was Dev, in his 30s at the time, made to look old enough to be a grandfather? And let's not mention the woeful miscasting of Julia Roberts...)

Such a pity, really. I'm just waiting until they make a film about someone such as Dev. Someone of such real integrity, political wisdom and statesmanlike qualitites deserves a better showing than this, as do most of the other people portrayed in a skewed light by Jordan in this film. (And by the bye, merely from a dramatic standpoint, why was de Valera the principal villain, and not the British, apart from a couple of evil soldiers who were got rid of by bloody assassination or imollation? Err, weren't the Irish supposed to be fighting the British?) I think we all deserve something better, really, after so much Hollywood misinterpretation of Ireland.

It has it's moments and is beautifully photographed (by Chris Menges), but it still has script problems as well as false history. Ned Broy was not killed during the upheaval after the Irish Republican Brotherhood's formation; he lived long after. Many historical facts were sacrificed for the film. While they did make sense, they didn't make this movie a classic. Still, the character of Michael Collins is inspirational, especially if you have an interest in Irish history or are Irish yourself. The performances are first rate all around, except for Julia Roberts who I thought was expendable. In real-life history her character wasn't very important and is no more important for the film. Still, writer/director Neil Jordan makes a movie that is difficult to stop watching. I give it 7/10

A worthy yet historically romanticized uneven film. A wonderfully understated performance by Alan Rickman as de Valera. Possibly Neeson's best performance as Michael Collins. As always, Stephen Rea turns in a masterful performance. Unforgivably marred by the miscasting of Aidan Quinn and Julia Roberts; both who can't string together one authentic sentence of believable Irish dialect.

This film is a brilliant account of the life of Michael Collins. It starts with the Easter Rising of 1916 and ends with his death in 1922. Between that time he managed to negotiate the first treaty of Independence for Ireland. Liam Neeson does brilliantly as "the big fella" and Aidan Quinn also is brilliant at portraying Collin's best friend Harry Boland. Apart from these other great stars in the film are Alan Rickman, Stephen Rea, Charles Dance, Ian Hart and Julia Roberts. Unfortunately some events portrayed in the film are historically incorrect and you get the feeling they were only included to add more drama to the film.

This is definetly a film worth watching and the DVD is even better, featuring a documentary on the real Michael Collins.

Liam Neeson dominates this biographical picture of the life of Michael Collins and the ultimate sacrifice he made to bring Ireland both freedom and peace. Freedom from the British Empire and peace to bring about some healing. Freedom they got, peace is still a dubious proposition in that country where they're still fighting the issues of the Reformation and Countereformation.

The years covered are from 1916's Easter Rebellion until 1922 when Ireland was hip deep in a bloody civil war that ended only with exhaustion. Collins develops the strategy the prototype of urban guerrilla warfare. It's been used ever since in every part of the globe by whomever insurgents are.

Having seen enough violence and caused enough of it Collins was sent by President Eamon DeValera as part of the negotiating team for a peace treaty. What they brought back was Dominion status for Ireland with the six Northern counties opting to remain in the British Empire and that King George V would be sovereign in Ireland. Collins saw it as a chance for the country to rest and heal with DeValera it was all or nothing. That split led to the civil war in Ireland far more bloody than the Rebellion as the casualties were 100% Irish.

Playing DeValera is Alan Rickman and he fleshes out DeValera as the rather uptight manipulator of events and people that he was in real life. Julia Roberts who does not master an Irish brogue plays the woman in Collins's life whom he was going to marry. But casting Roberts was probably made strictly for box office.

The details are fudged, but if you watch Michael Collins you'll get an idea from the film and from Neeson's performance of what the man was about and the sacrifice he made.

For me as a fan of Ireland, having read the history of the Irish and having visited the island several times, this is a compelling piece of contemporary history. With a cast of names, all quite a bit younger, it was nice to see it again. The film reflects the true story quite well, and is grippingly directed to boot.

Since the whole story is set in the years (1916-1922), the film doesn't seem dusty either, despite being 28 years old by now. Liam Neeson and Alan Rickman are convincing all along the line, Julia Roberts is more of a supporting character who doesn't leave a lasting impression. But it is also more about politics, patriotism and the great dream of freedom. A detailed examination of the person Michael Collins, in which the early phase of the "IRA" is retold with good action and archive footage worth seeing. It moved me and gave me interesting background knowledge.

Anyone interested in contemporary Irish history should not miss this highlight.

------------ Conclusion: Excellent.

Watched 'Michael Collins' as someone intrigued by the subject, an important and interesting one but difficult to translate to film, who loves a lot of biopics (regardless of how true to the facts they are) and as a big long-time admirer of Liam Neeson and especially Alan Rickman. Will admit to being wary of the casting of Julia Roberts, whose performance was, and still is, near-universally panned, and the wildly divisive opinions on the film made me conflicted.

'Michael Collins' did turn out to be a worthwhile film. It is far from perfect and could have been better, one of those films to judge as an overall film instead of something historically inaccurate and it is not surprising that the critical reaction is so mixed. With that being said, 'Michael Collins' takes a difficult to bring to film subject and highly interesting man and does so bravely, while making a film that has a lot of good qualities.

Sure, 'Michael Collins' can feel under-explored and simplified, having the British point of view included would have given it more depth and made things more balanced, and the character writing is somewhat black and white (the unsubtly negative and speculative writing for De Valera being one of the primary ones).

It loses lustre too after the signing of the treaty and while most of the acting is good, not everybody comes off well. Aiden Quinn is a bit bland, but the film's worst asset is a completely lost and out of place Julia Roberts' (cast mainly as a box office draw) performance being awful beyond description, one of the worst accents ever being one of the least of its problems.

However, Liam Neeson is excellent, bringing ounces of charm and also ounces of menace, to stop Collins from being a complete saint or vilified. Superbly cast too is Alan Rickman, who manages to give what could have been a cartoonish caricature in the wrong hands depth and nuance and like he was trying to move away from giving De Valera just one side and not the other. It is they are their chemistry where 'Michael Collins' is most compelling. Stephen Rea and Ian Hart impress too.

Visually, 'Michael Collins' looks great, the scenery and production design and evocative and beautiful on the eyes and the photography enhances that qualities. The music score rouses the spirits and touches the soul, never once intruding or being at odds with the film's tone. The script is thought-provoking and doesn't try to put it on too thick with the politics, one is moved and inspired. The very well-intended story generally is compelling, with an especially impressively photographed and staged opening Easter Uprising sequence, and there is an effort to be even-handed. It is directed assuredly by Neil Jordan, whose heart was definitely in the right place and he seems at home with the material, and the film does make one intrigued in reading further about Irish independence and Collins himself.

Concluding, interesting and worthwhile. 7/10 Bethany Cox

I'm surprised to see so many praise Neesons work n this film. He wasn't that good & his Cork accent leaves a lot to be desired, Brendan Gleeson did a far better job at playing Collins in the film, The Treaty( a must see for anybody who enjoyed Michael Collins). It is also by Neesons own admission that Gleeson portrayed Collins better. I recall reading at the time Neeson said " Gleeson was the true Michael Collins" or something to that effect. Also, I do not feel that the film goes overboard with its views of De Valera. The one scene that it maybe does is when it is strongly suggested that he plays an active role in the killing of Collins. It is widely believed in Ireland that De Valera did not have an active part in his killing. But other than that, there is little that could be faulted with his treatment of DeValera. It is true that he left Ireland during the bloodiest stages of the war & that he refused to negotiate the treaty himself without giving a satisfactory explanation to his people.

After reading through the comments here, I am appalled at the number of people who are willing to take this as gospel - please don't!! The scenes of the Rising and the Civil War are quite accurate (barring such things as carbombs, which someone else has already mentioned) though grossly oversimplified. Kitty Kiernan does not deserve the major part she has been given in this film - Michael Collins was never that interested in women. I have to stress, as someone else has, that there were the Auxiliaries as well as the Black and Tans (so called incidentally, because there were not enough field uniforms to go round, so they were a hodge-podge of different uniforms), and the Auxiliaries, the officiers, were discernably worse than the rank and file. Also, the fighting did nto affect most of the country. A note on the casting - the character of Kitty Kiernan was nto that big, though I think she was given more screen time as she was played by Julia Roberts. Someone tell this woman that she CANNOT do accents. Alan Rickman was more Sheriff of Nottingham than de Valera. Aiden Quinn as Harry Boland wasn't bad, though I would have to quibble about the character, but I feel that is more the fault of the writers than him. And lastly, sorry though I am to say it, Liam Neeson doesn't even compare to Brendan Gleeson's performance as Collins in 1992's The Treaty, even his accent wasn't quite right. For those who would like to know what really happened, I would recomment 'The Treaty', Tim Pat Coogan's biography (though he is a tad biased) and T. Ryle Dwyer's 'Big Fellow, Long Fellow', which is a joint biography of de Valera and Collins. This film is a real disappointment. I would have to repeat Bono's statement - 'I'm sick of Irish Americans come up to me, and tell me about the Revolution back home ... that the majority of people in my country don't want', which, unfortunately are the kind of sentiments that this film has engendered.

It`s near impossible to be objective about political violence in Ireland but why when given the opportunity to make the definitive film about 20th century Ireland the film makers decide to shoot themselves in the foot ?

What I hate about this film is it`s pathetic attempt to be two sided . No one is shown to be an out and out villian even though extreme violence was frequently used by both sides. This maybe seen by some as being objective and two sided but strikes me as a cop out , and a cowardly one at that. I`d have no problem with the Brits being shown as the bad guys , they did commit atrocities in Ireland at this time , of that there`s no dispute , but couldn`t have the first half of the film concentrated on this more ? Likewise there was just as many violent atrocities commited by Irishmen on Irishmen following the creation of the Irish free state. Couldn`t the second half have been far more brutal in showing De Valera to be a political opportunist only interested in power and using the lives of Irish patriots in order to get it ?

Most unforgivable of all is the dilemma faced by the real life Collins of creating an independant Ireland without causing a war with the unionists in the North. Oh yes the majority of people in Northen Ireland want to remain British and a sizable minority would violently oppose a breakaway. Never once does this limp biopic point out that partition is the only optition Collins had to avert an Irish bloodbath. We see Collins going to meet the British government , then it cuts to the next scene a few months later where Collins returns to Dublin with a deal that has split Ireland in two. There is no exposition or explanation as to why Collins HAD TO negotiate partition. Instead Neil Jordan and Co decide it`s a better idea making a film that concentrates on a love triangle.

So what does this piece of Hollywood garbage actually tell us ? Only that Michael Collins called lots of people " Gobs**** " , that Alan Rickman can certainly act , that Julia Roberts and Aidan Quinn certainly can`t , and that Stephan Rae would make a good James Bond.