I was worried it might prove impossible for me to give MICHAEL COLLINS an even-handed review. I've been dying to see the movie for weeks. I thrilled at the idea of Liam Neeson portraying Michael Collins, one of the heroes of the Irish Revolution. I relished the thought of Alan Rickman as Eamon de Valera, the first president of the Irish Republic. I expected BRAVEHEART in the 20th century.

And the beginning of the MICHAEL COLLINS *completely* blew me away, too. After a brief introductory dialogue scene, we are taken to the streets, British soldiers running to barricades with arms and supplies. The camera pans to reveal cannon firing at a columned building. Before the identifying titles appeared on the screen, I knew where I was. Dublin General Post Office -- Easter 1916. I felt the breath flee my lungs. The uprising of that Easter morning is legend; a focal point of Irish history; the beginning of the end of 700 years of British rule. I have been to the GPO and have had dreams in which I witnessed the event. Suddenly it was happening on the screen before me! The tears streamed freely down my face.

So do you see why I worried I might not be the most impartial judge of the merits of MICHAEL COLLINS?

Let me reassure you though. The two hours of MICHAEL COLLINS gave me plenty of time to regain my composure and adopt a more objective eye. I still came out of the movie loving it, but not as much as I had hoped. There are a number of reasons for that. But first let me tell you why this movie is great.

Liam Neeson, obviously, is at the top of the list. He makes Michael Collins likable, believable and only one size larger than life. Whereas Mel Gibson's portrayal of William Wallace in BRAVEHEART slid steadily toward mythos, Neeson never lets you doubt that Collins is a real person -- and yet a hero -- every step of the way.

Alan Rickman is *PERFECT!* as Eamonn de Valera. (Rickman's done a lot of great roles, the most notable of the past year being the Colonel in SENSE & SENSIBILITY.) Not only does he look like de Valera, but he conveys the slow, thoughtful demeanor of the statesman. Think of him as "Spock" to Michael Collins' "Kirk." But he is so much more. de Valera was as complex as his times and Rickman bears out these complexities effortlessly. When de Valera's relationship to Collins suddenly changes, you wonder, "Why?" But, thanks to Rickman, you never doubt de Valera could do what he does.

Aidin Quinn is great, too, as Collins' right-hand man, Harry Boland. My hat goes off to him for holding the Irish accent so well (unlike some of his co-stars; see below). Stephen Rea (from THE CRYING GAME) turns in his usual strong performance, as G-man, Ned Broy.

Neil Jordan directed MICHAEL COLLINS. He's an Irish director who made his name in the U.S. with THE CRYING GAME and brought Tom Cruise back from the dead in INTERVIEW WITH THE VAMPIRE. I imagine MICHAEL COLLINS is to Jordan as MALCOLM X was to Spike Lee. Both are big Hollywood pictures about complex political figures made by directors who became famous with independent productions. (Hm. There are even some similarities between Michael Collins and Malcolm X, if you think about it.)

Jordan has made a movie rich in both action and drama. And I don't have to tell you it is well-edited and visually compelling. He handles the complexities of Michael Collins' character with great insight. I mean, Michael Collins headed the Irish Republican Army in a war of terrorism against the British government -- the same kind of war that goes on in Northern Ireland today. Can a terrorist be a hero? I reviled his actions, but I understood his predicament. Jordan shows us the irony that Michael Collins killed to end the killing, chose "freedom to achieve freedom" and died trying to remove the gun from Irish politics.

My partner, Greg Murray, called MICHAEL COLLINS a "no-nonsense movie," in that it moved quickly and never looked back. This is true, but I thought there was plenty of nonsense. After an hour or so of intermittently fleeing the Black and Tans (the elite British paramilitaries), I was feeling little winded. Jordan sometimes uses music to falsely create suspense and drama. And that music sometimes is annoying -- Hollywoodized treatments of traditional jigs and reels. Also, as the end of the movie drew near, the characters seemed prone to little speeches that weren't as genuine as the rapid-fire dialogue of earlier.

Furthermore, the complexities of history prevent the movie from having a totally satisfying ending. As with any movie about a Celt struggling against the British, you pass a certain point where the good times end and the betrayal and martyrdom begin. BRAVEHEART had this pattern, and its endgame was heartrending. MICHAEL COLLINS has the pattern, too, but the emotions of the ending are confused because the enemy shifts. The war against Britain ends with the Treaty of 1921 and the creation of the Irish Free State. With that the Irish Civil War begins between the supporters of the Free State and those who reject the Treaty in favor of a fully separate and sovereign Irish republic. Collins heads the Free State forces and finds himself pitted against Eamon de Valera and the Irish Republican Army -- in other words, his very own people. Neil Jordan does an admirable job of explaining why this happens, but the turn of events doesn't make the best "movie sense." Having your brother hand you over to your enemy makes strong movie sense. Defeating your enemy only to have your brother suddenly turn against you makes less movie sense. But what can you do? History is history.

The absolute, bottom-rung, backed-up-toilet worst thing about MICHAEL COLLINS was Julia Roberts as the title character's love interest. Julia Roberts? What the hell were they thinking when they cast that one? Didn't they see MARY REILLY? She tried to pretend to be Irish in that, too, and failed horribly. She is simply incapable of keeping up a consistent Irish accent. Maybe it was a cynical grab for marquee value. But do they really think Julia Roberts has the same kind of draw she did four years ago? I don't know. A *real* Irish actress would have been better.

I've done a little bit of checking into the history behind MICHAEL COLLINS and found some misplaced emphasis. For instance, the war against Great Britian from 1919-1921 was fought on a broader scale than the movie depicts. The movie leads you to believe that The Troubles took place almost exclusively within Dublin. Also, the movie paints Michael Collins as solely responsible for the Treaty of 1921. Collins was definitely influential but the leader of the delegation to London was Arthur Griffith, a statesman who appears only in a few scenes. In one of them, he is in the Dail (the Irish parliament), defending the treaty and, apparently, its bearer, Michael Collins. In reality, Griffith was defending himself as well. Nevertheless, I'm sure the dramatic import was historically the same -- Michael Collins felt responsible for his part in bringing on the Irish Civil War.

Another point of emphasis that may or may not be warranted is the demonization of Eamon de Valera. de Valera is portrayed as the prime instigator of the civil war and the mastermind behind the ambush that killed Michael Collins. The film closes with a quote from de Valera in 1966 (which I repeat loosely here): "It is my opinion that in the fullness of time, history will record the greatness of Michael Collins and that greatness will be recorded at my expense." Is the expense de Valera conceived equal to the indictment Neil Jordan levels at him? I don't know.

This is where my familiarity with Irish history trails off and my review must draw to an end. I'd like to hear from anyone who discovers historical inaccuracies in the movie.

As for the rest of you who know zip about Irish history, know this. MICHAEL COLLINS is an enjoyable film about a driven man who defeated the world's largest empire. It has action and pathos and some fine performances. Yes, Julia Roberts grates on the nerves and some scenes get a bit overblown. Just hide your eyes for those parts. It's otherwise worth your while.

previous | subscribe | movies | next

Mike's Midnight Movie Reviews
© copyright 1995-1998 Michael J. Doyle