|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
You are in: Entertainment: Reviews | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 |
|
Friday, 11 January, 2002, 17:33 GMT
Bloody Sunday: Your views
Mural depicting the events of Bloody Sunday
Director Paul Greengrass's film Bloody Sunday depicts the events of 30 January 1972, when 14 people died after soldiers opened fire on a civil rights march in Londonderry.
Disclaimer: The BBC will put up as many of your comments as possible but we cannot guarantee that all e-mails will be published. The BBC reserves the right to edit comments that are published."Paul Greengrass and his team should be commended for a brave and moving film that shines with their honesty and integrity as it steers clear of crass generalisations and careless conclusions," says BBC News Online's Dominic Casciani. "For those reasons alone, this film stands head and shoulders above any cinematic tackling of the Troubles to date." But what do you think? Is it a fair depiction of events? Does the documentary-style camera work convey the confusion?
Bloody Sunday was without question a powerful piece of film making. It was equally irresponsible and biased in potraying the events. The author gives the impression he was a fly on the wall at all of the British Army's most intimate and important moments. All of these events were presented in impossible detail and with an air of authenticity which the author cannot possibly justify. On the other hand the role in the conflict of the protesters and IRA was skated over and the soudtrack was deliberately (?) overdubbed with confusing background noises and muffled speech.
This is too important an issue to dramatise, was it not dramatic enough?
Perhaps the Government could have saved the hundreds of millions of pounds the thirty years of inquiry has cost by just asking Mr Greengrass, he seems to have all the facts.
An incredibly moving and realistic account of the Bloody Sunday atrocity. The film-makers tried to accurately portray the characters and sequence of events in an unbiased and balanced way. The documentary-style of the film was excellent, adding gritty emotion and realism. Everyone who worked on the film should be commended for bringing such an important event to film. Definitely the best film of the troubles to date.
I would be interested in knowing the timeline of the drama, when filming took place, when the script was written etc. This documentary seems to refute McGuinness' claims that no IRA man was on the march, that no IRA weapons were on the Bogside or that any IRA weapons were discharged. Perhaps he might like to comment?
Alex Midldeton, New Zealand
Whatever the rights or wrongs of the film, it should not have been shown during the Bloody Sunday Enquiry. You would never have had a film about Harold Shipman while the jury were considering their verdict. Still, I suspect that the verdict of the enquiry was decided months ago anyway...
What I thought was particularly good about this film was the blatant honesty about the reasons behind what can create what is described as terroism. Those young angry men in Derry taking up arms, joining the IRA, at the end of the film in response to what can only be described as truely horrific murder. When will humanity ever learn the truth behind one of the most basic sayings, "You get what you give"?? We cannot keep going on with statements like "Israeli actions have got nothing to do with Islamic hatred toward the West", etc, etc. People have got to realise!
A timely reminder of the horrors of martial law, this film admirably portrays the confusion and terror of an incident that stands out in our history as a colossal error with dreadful consequences, this is an excellent and thought-provoking film that returns to centre stage a debate about freedoms that has been often overlooked.
It does not move the long-running debate on the question of who started the shooting. Cooper's moving (and entirely accurate) comment that Bloody Sunday would act as as a powerful recruiting agent for the IRA lacks any historical value because we have not been told the sequence of events that led from 1968 to 1972. In the absence of any framework within which to set the events of January '72...and their disastrous consequences...the film is a virtuoso display of the recreation of a version of history but little else.
It is certainly not mere agitprop but I feel it is an opportunity to inform and enlighten a generation who (unlike me) has no recollection of these deadful events. But as an honest non-judgemental attempt to depict those events it deserves the highest praise.
It shows what is generally known. i.e.The British soldiers overreacted, shot innocent protestors.This has been typical of them in the past as well. Then the British establishment machine covered up. Had the Civil rights march been allowed to proceed without the close presence of the Soldiers in the area, I feel that there would not have been so much trouble; the civilians could let off steam and History would now have been different. Good film!
I feel so heart broken looking at the events of Bloody Sunday, it's true what Ivan Cooper said, the British Government paved the way for the IRA to dominate the nationalist point of view. As an Irish citizen I want peace in the north, and I feel the only way to achieve this is to let the people of the six counties govern themselves, let them be independent. The British can't please a Republican people, the Republic of Ireland can't please an Unionist people. It's time to let them fend for themselves as an united independent state.
In the review you comment
..."it is difficult to vouch for the accuracy of the events."
Since Greengrass cannot validate the accuracy of his depiction, why does he insist on calling it a 'docu-drama', when it's accuracy is flawed.
Fred, UK
The events of Bloody Sunday make me ashamed to be British and of the British army.
The drama started out as if it was going to be a well-balanced, objective portrayal of Bloody Sunday. However, it then sadly descended firstly into broad speculation and finally into anti-army propeganda. Was it a fair depiction of events? Only the paras involved and the protesters can say. Everyone else is simply attempting to be an armchair historian.
I am ashamed to have ever been a part of the British Army, even during the 1990s. It was common knowledge in my Company that a certain ex-para Captain, who I think was a Sergeant during Bloody Sunday, had "fired the first shot". Although he did not boast of this to me, many of my so called comrades thought this was fantastic and respected him all the more for it!
Claire, Britain
Just another case of taking a piece of history, and using it to slate the British! Have people forgotten the IRA are a cowardly terrorist organisation - it is obvious they were at the march, with the intent of causing bloodshed. You only need to look at the life of the IRA to see this.
All in all it is a shame that people feel the need to dig up the past!
If this film achieves anything at all, it will hopefully tone down the disgraceful remarks of the Tory opposition regarding the Saville Tribunal. The events of Bloody Sunday are still deeply inbedded within the Irish psyche to this day. Regardless of whether someone fired shots at the Paras, the fact is they shot unarmed civilians that they are supposed to protect. Such actions are not the actions of professional soldiers and should shock all British people. After all, the people who died on Bloody Sunday were British citizens.
The Saville Tribunal is not an act of appeasement of terrorists, but an inquiry into the deaths of British citizens at the hands of their own armed forces. Would not Nick Hawkins demand the same were twenty seven people shot in a demonstration in Surrey Heath?
Where too the coverage of the immediate aftermath of Bloody Sunday, with dozens of innocents wounded or slaughtered in the no-warning bombings of what became known as Bloody Friday, (otherwise known as the IRA's revenge for 'Derry)?
It's a cold house for unionists in Ulster, and getting colder with every extra few millions spent on the pointless Bloody Sunday Inquiry.
Why not an inquiry into the La Mon bombing, or the Poppy Day bomb in Enniskillen? When will they be brought to book, and indeed, will the British government ever come clean on their involvement in the Dublin and Monagahn slaughter?
Selective remembrance is counter-productive.
A powerful and emotive piece of film. It does not dwell on the question of why the first shot was fired. The film's strength and power lies in the depiction of the brutal actions of the security forces following the initial disturbances. The damning footage shows that the number of deaths and injuries could in no way be justified. The lack of any firearms found on the bodies of the deceased highlights the sheer monstrosity of the British security force's response to a Civil Rights march in Derry 1972. The main criticism with the film has to lie in the impossibly detailed conversations held between the commanding officers on that fateful day. Overall I feel this is a timely and powerful piece of film by Greengrass. Nesbitt being from the nearby town of Coleraine played his role superbly.
Nobody seems to recall the numerous atrocities committed by the IRA against Britsh service personnel and innocent civillians. Where are the films about Brighton Canary Wharf, Enniskillen etc? Why is it that if a member of the British armed forces kills an IRA operative there is a huge inquest and the civil rights brigrade plead about the injustice? But if a British soldier or civillian is killed then it passes virtually unnoticed and certainly without any inquest!
It is ludicrous that the Paras involved should have to face an inquest for their actions particularly when terrorists have recently been freed under the terms of the Good Friday agreement.
Those who complain about Bloody Sunday being partisan, what is their opinion about the Widgery Tribunal which exonerated the paratroopers and which criminalised falsely the marchers? Do they not feel this was partisan too? Do they really believe that had the paras and those who gave the orders been tried and convicted of mass murder the IRA campaign would have lasted 30 years? I doubt it would have lasted 30 minutes. It's worth remembering that this was a march for civil rights and against internment of Catholics without trial (yes there was one Protestant but he was suspected of IRA membership). There was no talk of a united Ireland or even a British withdrawal. In actual fact, people were campaigning for the same rights as were already available in other parts of the UK. One man, one vote etc. For that they were murdered by the army which is constitutionally obliged to protect them.
For many in Ireland, 30 January 1972 is the equivalent of 11 September 2001 in New York. The slaughter was of that scale. Those who ordered the Paras onto the streets of Derry and those who engineered the whitewash should be arraigned in the same court as Slobodan Milosevic for war crimes.
A great film which I think truly depicted what happened on the day. I disagree with Fred's comments above, that the film makers will not make a film about IRA bombers. The difference here is that the British Army, who's job it is to protect British citizens shot unarmed British citizens. The IRA is a terrorist group, the British Army is not.
Sandra, UK
This programme was the worse kind of simplistic revisionism. By concentrating on the events of that Bloody Sunday it seemed to be saying that the British army was nasty and stupid and that is why Northern Ireland has the problems that it does. Anyone who knows anything about Irish history knows that the situation in Northern Ireland is far more complicated and bloody than that.
Firstly, I would like to address "Anon, UK". Why should you be ashamed to be British and ashamed of the British Army? Men from this army give their lives for their country and saved countless others in the 30+ years they have served in Northern Ireland. Only in Britain do armed forces get frowned upon for using extreme force! Look at other countries including Israel and the USA were extreme force is used when their security forces come under attack, no questions are asked with their policies. The British army responded like any other under the circumstances in which they were attacked. What response did the gunmen, petrol bombers and stone-throwers expect when attacking an armed force? Secondly, the film itself can be seen as more propaganda for the Sinn Fein/Republican movement, depicting the British as mindless killers, when in fact it was these men that licensed the bombing and killing campaigns throughout the UK. Where are the films and documentaries portraying these people as the murderers, showing the countless family¿s they have destroyed?
Lastly, how can such a film be made when an investigation into what - actually - happened on that day is still taking place?
Perhaps the film-maker could have saved the British taxpayer £100m+? After all, the film attempts to portray the 'truth', making the Saville Inquiry redundant. However, I for one feel that the film prejudices the Inquiry and undermines its authority. The due process of law must be fulfilled if the facts are to be ascertained - if indeed they will ever be ascertainable. A film-maker does not have the ability to do this, and should tread very carefully, if he should tread at all, into issues that are still debatable and still raise high emotions. The Saville Inquiry must carry - and must be accepted as carrying more authority and more respect than a docu-drama if its conclusions are to be binding and accepted.
Further, if 'Anon' feels so ashamed of what he witnessed, then I would appeal to him to atone for this by forwarding himself and his opinions and observations to the Inquiry. If he is prepared to forward these unqualified opinions here, then he should be prepared to do so at the Inquiry. I would be more ashamed to have that knowledge and then potentially pervert the course of justice by not acting on it.
Edmund Gordon Galloway, Rep of Ireland
It was obvious before the film started which side the maker's sympathies lied. The casting of current TV darling James Nesbitt on the Irish side and type-cast bad guy Tim Piggott-Smith on the British side set the tone perfectly. It could almost have been made by the Americans such was the view portrayed of the evil oppressive British instigating the violence against those poor heroic Irish freedom fighters. The truth is that only one person knows for sure who started it; the person that fired the first shot. Who that was, we will never know, and as such, a film of this nature should portray a balanced un-biased view.
It's a shame the accuracy of the events didn't match the authenticity of the visual imagery.
A lot of these reviews seem to be saying that the film showed the British Army firing the first shot on Bloody Sunday. One of the things I noticed was that they didn't show who fired it, or even comment on who did. They simply took the witness testimonies from the Widgery tribunal in 1972 and made a screenplay. Some of the witnesses said they saw men with guns who were sent away by the marchers, that's why they showed a few people with guns, but they didn't make the film as IRA propoganda, or in an attempt to influence the Saville inquiry. The film only showed what the inquiry has already heard from the civillian witnesses who testified all last year in the Guildhall. This year they are supposed to hear from the soldiers.
The judges have no real powers, the inquiry will not find anyone guilty, they will just say that the soldiers shouldn't have fired and will probably point the finger at the commanders on the day. No one will go to prison for their actions on Bloody Sunday.
On the other hand, the use of hand-held cameras does highlight the chaotic nature of urban riots and it is not surprising that once the first shot was fired (wherever it came from) there would be a reaction from the paras. If this film is actually taken to be close to the 'truth' then it is interesting to note that the IRA did indeed fire at the troops while the shooting was going on. Notwithstanding that, there is still no excuse for firing at individuals that have not been postively been identified as hostile targets, which not all of the victims could have been.
Just what we need when we are trying to wipe out terrorism and bond the people of Northern Ireland; a biased account of an unfortunate event that took place 30 years ago. Well Done Mr Nesbitt, I hope you're proud!
The usual anti-British drivel. Yes, of course, Bloody Sunday was a horrifying mess. But are we ever going to hear a thing about the civil rights of the 2000 + murdered by the IRA? James Nesbitt shoud hang his head in shame.
Many people are saying that Bloody Sunday should be left in the past where it belongs and that people are dragging it out to give the IRA the moral high ground. No, the victims and their families do not want it dragged out and for the IRA to have to moral ground. All they want is justice and recognition from the British Government that a great wrong was done that day.
It stank of mis-representation and worse, bias. The BBC must be rubbing its hands with glee. The true facts of the day will NEVER be known, as parties from both sides still have much mileage to gain from its events. Do they really believe all those troops behaved in that manner and that McGuinness and cohorts never fired a shot? Unbelieveable.
I thought the film was good for what it was, an adaptation of a historical event...accuracy is never a strong point of such dramatisations.
A constant theme in many of the comments above is "Why not make a film about Enniskillen/La Mon/Claudy etc.'
While these are shocking atrocities, the IRA has always admitted they were to blame. If the British army had conceded they shot and killed unarmed civilians in cold blood in Derry that day, this film would never have been necessary.
The film wasn't too far off the mark - I was there on the day and remember clearly the sequence of events. I felt the film captured the essence of mood, atmosphere and political context of that day. It is important for this film to be shown now - the Saville Inquiry is a long, painful process for all of the innocent people who have been affected by Bloody Sunday - myself included in my own small way. This film has allowed the story of that day's events to be told in a fairly accurate manner. To those who moan about one-sidedness I say, have you ever seen the film Schindler's List? Was that partisan? If the truth is one-sided then so be it!
As for all of the atrocities committed by the IRA - these were investigated at the time and had the full might of the security services deployed to bring the perpetrators to justice - but not so in the many cases of murder by the security forces.Congratulations to the producers of this film - it exceeded my expectations - and well done James Nesbitt - your finest two hours!
For those people demanding inquires into IRA bombings such as Brighton, Enniskillen and La Mon the only response is that these have already taken pace. There were police investigations and in some cases Crown court trials and convictions. The British state at the time of Bloody Sunday refused to accept responsibility for what went wrong and shifted the blame for the deaths onto the dead themselves. That is why the Saville inquiry is so important, to allow the British public to finally see what was done to their fellow citizens, by the state.
Sean Fallon, Ireland
I find it very depressing reading some of the above comments regarding the screening of "Bloody Sunday". What happened was the deliberate murder or 14 individuals; 14 criminal acts. The above exercises in self-denial say more about the contributor's own prejudices than about any notions of fair play or respect for the due process of law. As Mrs Thatcher once said, "murder is murder is murder". So please don't attempt to defend blatant murder!
I cannot help but feel sickened at the comments of some of the contributors so far. The fact was that the 13 people shot dead were NOT IRA members and they were NOT carrying weapons. I wonder if the British army had used such lethal and shameful force during the recent race riots in England would the same excuses be being made? I think not. As ever double standards are applied to the treatment of civilians of in Northern Ireland compared to those in England.
A really excellent film - it is about time that the British Army owned up to what actually happened on that day. The same of course goes for the IRA and Loyalists who are responsible for similar atrocities and I would hope that similar films are now planned to highlight the plight of the victims of Bloody Friday, Claudy - they after all are the only ones who really count.
Seems as though peoples view of 'bias' depends on which 'side' you are on.
Shame the opening described the location as 'City of Derry'. Oops, would it not have been better to use both names i.e. Derry/Londonderry?
It's little subtle things like that that can spoil the bigger things alas.
It's hard enough for Protestants to deal with Bloody Sunday anyway!
The film must not be held as an accurate account of events, not even a rough template. It was a sad misrepresentation of events and was especially unfair to the British Security Forces involved. Known events were glossed over to try to make a story line which, deliberately, was unjust. Were it anyone else but the Army, they would have grounds for legal action. It is sad that they must endure the slanders made on them in this film. British soldiers have made huge sacrifices in keeping the two sides apart. The film was a disgraceful piece of propoagnda and completely biased. Those who take this film as a realistic set of events must be wholly misguided.
It should be obvious by the split of the comments made here that the film was partisan.
It is also depressing knowing that most people will take the version of events as depicting what actually happened on that day. The whole point of the film is to shame British people. Don't give into this blatant racism.
Anyone would think that Derry was a really peace loving town until this event. How come then that the Bogside had become a virtual no go area before the march?
People should also remember what happened to the two army corporals - Derek Howe & David Wood - who were murdered at an IRA funeral riot before pontificating on how the paras should have acted. Would you gamble with your life?
As a citizen of Derry (now living in the UK) I found the film very powerful and emotional. Many people on this forum have been critical, asking where are the films about later atrocities. In no way defending later incidents, the key difference with Bloody Sunday is that what happened amounted to state sponsored killing of 14 unarmed civilians which was then covered up by the Widgery tribunal. The Paras had been drafted in specially to show the 'Derry young hoolidans' who was boss at what was a civil rights march.
In Britain's long and painful involvement in Ireland, this was one of its darkest days and one of which it should be
truly ashamed.
To say that the film is biased, or flawed is just another contentious point. The fact still remains that 14 unarmed, and innocent people were killed by the British Army. This film was a brilliant pointer for people to start to make their minds up, and not the final verdict.
It will never be possible to accurately depict what happened on that fateful day. Although as a representation of what might have happened it was very thought provoking. Personally I feel sorry for both the Paras and the people of Derry. Let us not forget how Bloody Sunday emerged. It was the British Government of the time pampering to Unionism in Stormont, who were not prepared to put up with descent from a gravely discriminated against nationalist minority. The paras were the unionist and British government's puppets, the people of Derry were the sufferers.
As an Ulster Protestant living outside the Province I found the documentary sorely lacking in background detail concerning the security situation prior to Bloody Sunday. However regarding the day itself I thought it was an accurate portrayal of brutal, unprofessional and mismanaged British military forces running amok and in turn making a very bad situation in Northern Ireland a thousand times worse for the civilian population caught in the middle. An important contribution to the peace process and to the need for reassessment of our bitter angry history.
Whatever the accuracy or otherwise of the film, it will always appear to be contentious because it appears to show the unprovoked murder of fourteen civillians by agents of the Crown. However, apart from four lines of text at the beginning, no effort is made to place the film in context. The Paras were coming to the end of a long tour which had seen a huge escalation in violence. Over fifty members of the security forces had been killed in 1970 by bombings, shootings, and attacks, including some from the unit of the paras policing the march on Bloody Sunday. Those depicted in the film as rioting would themselves have thrown rocks and petrol bombs at the same soldiers on several other occasions leading up to Bloody Sunday.
Although not trying to justify the actions of the soldiers, I think that some consideration should be made of what had happened to them up until that point. Constant tension, fear, anxiety, pain at the loss of friends. Fatigue from six months of patrols, regular tests of self control when facing rioters throwing petrol bombs...
All the people of NI are aware that occasionally members of the police or army go over the edge and kill or assault members of the public, and those of banned organisations, but few people stop to feel symapthy for the soldiers and policemen. When the uniform is removed, they are only human, and the bitterness, resentment, and anger that they feel cannot be contained forever. It is they, at least in part, that we should feel sorry for.
In response to Andrew Middleton's comments, Bloody Sunday is not a Catholic and Protestant problem, but an Irish and British incident, so do not try to sectarianise it.
The argument has been highlighted that it was not right to show the film during the Saville Enquiry but this is only taking place because of the farce that was Widgery. Years later it simply became too obvious to the British Government that you cannot fabricate the events of an day which affected so many people. The film was excellent - very powerful indeed and the hand-held cameras added to the sense of panic and confusion that reigned on the day. There can be no doubting the integrity of the director who gave an account of events that has since been supported by members of the Parachute Regiment on TV documentaries. James Nesbitt should be commended for his depiction of Ivan Cooper and it is to be hoped that more people can forget their differences for long enough to bring a bit of stability and understanding to our community.
I am saddened that the rights to this film have now been sold to the US. They are famous for believing everything told to them on TV, with their sympathy for the Irish (stemming from a belief that half of them are Irish) this can only spur them on to continue filling the coffers of the IRA - despite their rantings of how despicable terrorism is after September 11.
A thought provoking dramatisation of the events on Bloody Sunday. One issue which should have been given more attention is the resentment of the people toward Stormont and hardline Unionist rule which denied them basic rights. This would have demonstarted why a group of people led by Ivan Cooper, a Protestant Civil rights activist and politician, defied an order not to march. Those who seek to dismiss the film as IRA propaganda are talking nonsense. The film alludes to the greatest tradegy of the day in that Derry proved a fertile recruiting ground for the IRA after the days events.
Those also that seek to berate the film on lack of balance should direct themselves to the CAIN Bloody Sunday website and also the Widgery Report and compare and contrast.
To all the comments above I say watch "SUNDAY" on to be broadcast on Channel 4 on Monday 28th - having seen it here in Derry it provides the context and humanity that Bloody Sunday does not.
|
|
See also:
 Internet links:
The BBC is not responsible for the content of external internet sites Top Reviews stories now:
Links to more Reviews stories are at the foot of the page.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Links to more Reviews stories
|
 |
|
^^ Back to top News Front Page | World | UK | UK Politics | Business | Sci/Tech | Health | Education | Entertainment | Talking Point | In Depth | AudioVideo ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- To BBC Sport>> | To BBC Weather>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- © MMIII | News Sources | Privacy ~RS~a~RS~international~RS~q~RS~~RS~z~RS~39~RS~)
|
E-mail this story to a friend