 |
 |
|
 |
 |
|
  The Wind that Shakes the BarleyBy Daniel JohnsonJul 16, 2007 The Wind that Shakes the Barley is the rare film about war without amplification, and that bare realism is hard to watch. Based on real events that began in 1919, it follows a band of Irishmen as they react to British occupation by first forming an underground resistance movement (the early Irish Republican Army) and finally waging guerilla war against their oppressors. At the heart of the story are two brothers, Damien (Cillian Murphy) and Teddy (Padraic Delaney), who come to the same side of the conflict from different paths, only to be torn apart again when disagreement about the best way forward breaks out within the movement (the disagreement eventually led to the Irish Civil War). Like Batman Begins (in which Murphy co-starred), The Wind That Shakes the Barley is a genesis picture which plays up the humble origins of mighty events so that ordinary people can empathize with the courage and risk involved. Anybody already familiar with Murphy (28 Days Later, Red Eye) knows the guy can act. But the part of Damien, an initially reluctant, but ultimately zealous, revolutionary, is a role he was born for. Murphy uses the translucent blue eyes that infuse all of his roles with a mystical severity to show both the fragility and determination behind the character and the struggle he was a part of. Director Ken Loach lets the film breathe, giving every stage of the progression from citizen to militiaman to sectarian time to happen organically. It's a story about fragility; of ideals, movements, personal bonds and, especially, our bodies. Loach finds a way to make the spare amounts of violence shown sickening by understatement. Something as commonplace in war movies as a soldier's rifle butt to the face is lent a stark brutality. The effect is that, when someone is actually shot and dies, it seems devastating. Loach, who is British, has a clear socialist political agenda in all of his films. But The Wind that Shakes the Barley goes beyond mere apologetics for the IRA. It's an examination of idealism itself; how political opinions can come to take precedence over family and if, and at what point, compromise is the same thing as capitulation. The film takes sides only long enough to win our sympathy for the resistance so that, when it splinters apart in heartbreaking detail, the true ambiguity of the conflict can show through - not Britain vs. Ireland, but brother against brother.
|
||