Fifty Dead Men Walking (2008) *1/2
The Irish troubles have proved a reliable subject ground for films, some good good, some great, some blah. Fifty Dead Men Walking certainly does not benefit from me recently seeing Steve McQueen's great Hunger. That film took its subject matter seriously; it was elegant and full of artistic integrity. This film, sadly, is not.
And that really is a shame, given the story this film has to tell. Based on the true life experiences of Martin McGartland. McGartland was a small time crook, who when captured and faced with prison was persuaded by Special Branch to inform on the IRA. He eventually moved his way up through their ranks until he was eventually discovered. He managed to escape the IRA by jumping out of a third story window, saved by passers by before anyone else could get to him. He survived an assassination attempt while hiding in Canada, and is still hiding today. The internal conflict for Martin, of informing on old friends with the British, is plumbed, but rarely convincingly. Jim Sturgess plays McGartland. His performance is solid, but nothing special. He spends most of the movie conversing with Fergus (Ben Kingsley), his Special Branch contact.
His IRA friends, and old mate Sean (Kevin Zegar, who's performance is good), Mickey, and Rosena Brown (Rose McGowan) are dedicated to the cause. Meanwhile, Martin seems conflicted depending on the situation. The troubles are a complex conflict. Atrocities are committed on both sides. The British have long held Northern Ireland under an oppressive thumb. Catholics rarely were afforded any kind of opportunity, while the planted protestants more or less ran the show. Catholics are the minority in Northern Ireland. Vicious British and Protestant gang action was naturally met with vicious Catholic action, in the form of the IRA. That cycle of violence continued unabated for decades. Fifty Dead Men Walking wants to give a history lesson, but gets too preoccupied with portraying McGartland as an unquestioned hero. It does give some mandatory scenes and conversations telling why the IRA exists, but it feels tacked on. Especially considering that the film really is something of a puff piece for the Brits. An ending blurb tells us that an inquiry found that during the 70s and 80s the British were found to have committed some atrocities. That feels cheap and diversionary after what we've just seen.
Nevertheless, the situation is so complicated that I should return to reviewing this movie according to its cinematic merits. Director Kari Skogland (The Stone Angel) seems a poor choice to direct what should be a gritty character piece. She is. The film so desperately wants to be cool that it ends up making its subject matter cliché. It could all be true, but it feels cliché. Its almost as if Skogland was directing a different movie all together. It wants to be some kind of Scorsese crime thriller, but fails. The camera-work tries to be gritty with hand-held shots, a la Bloody Sunday. Elsewhere, Skogland pumps her awful choices for a soundtrack.
This complex story deserves a serious film. Instead this one is just so, so poorly directed it's infuriating and finally completely off putting. This is a dark and conflicted plot that Skogland seems to think she can make into a fluffy romp. Sure nasty things happen, but having it wiped away by usually awful pop music is frustrating. In the end everything becomes too standard, too familiar, too cliché. That this story deserved to be handled better, makes the movie worse. The movie might find an audience, with the rising star in Sturgess, and its desperate attempts to be audience friendly. Hunger, on the other hand will likely be left to sit in the wings. That's unfortunate - that great film has all the answers why this one is not. Truly a massive disappointment.
