Michael Collins (Film)

Estudios Irlandeses, 2007

2005

2021

During his four-decade film career, Academy Award-winning writer/director Neil Jordan has transcended conventions and crossed national boundaries to create an oeuvre of critically acclaimed films in a variety of genres. However, despite his reputation as an internationally recognized author and filmmaker whose projects have received financing from both American and European production companies, Jordan has come under fire as the quintessential example of the “schizophrenic identity” of Irish directors who migrate to Hollywood after local success, a filmmaker who, according to Michael Patrick Gillespie, has seen his Irish cinematic sensibilities “continually fighting against ingestion into a larger American ethos.”1 Regardless of such critiques, Jordan has remained, first and foremost, an Irish artist, injecting his interpretations of the struggle for Irish identity into both his films and fiction directly and metaphorically, traits that position him as a seminal figure for understan...

2003

"In the following article, some films produced with the support of Bord Scannán na hÉireann (The Irish Film Board) since its reconstitution in 1993 are examined in light of the work of global anthropologist Arjun Appadurai and his theory of global cultural flows. The article suggests that cinema, primarily of Hollywood origin, has had a notable influence on the development of Irish society and Irish film. Contemporary Irish film itself also reflects the failure of Irish history to excite the imagination of Ireland's youth as effectively as the seductive depictions of America's past as mediated through the Western and gangster films. Indeed, films made in Ireland today reflect the influence of both these genres. However, as the key to the Hollywood continuity style of film-making is its own self-effacement, this has sometimes been reflected in the effacement of people, politics and place in contemporary Irish film as film-makers endeavor to attract a global audience for their work. Films considered include The Boy From Mercury (Martin Duffy, 1996), Nora (Pat Murphy, 1999), Circle of Friends (Pat O'Connor, 1993), Dancing at Lughnasa (Pat O'Connor, 1998), Saltwater (Conor McPherson, 1999), Ailsa (Paddy Breathnach, 1993), I Went Down (Paddy Breathnach, 1997), The Disappearance of Finbar (Sue Clayton, 1994/95), When Brendan Met Trudy (Kieron Walsh, 2000), High Boot Benny (Joe Comerford, 1993), Broken Harvest (Maurice O’Callaghan, 1993), The Boxer (Jim Sheridan, 1998), Some Mother’s Son (Terry George, 1996), Nothing Personal (Thaddeus O’Sullivan, 1994/95), and Sweety Barrett (Stephen Bradley, 1998)."

This article demonstrates that two films of the 1990s portraying historical figures central to the mythologies of their respective nations - Neil Jordan’s Michael Collins (1996) and Shekhar Kapur’s Elizabeth (1998) - present their contentious versions of history analogically, via the conventional modes of encoding and representing gender identified by Laura Mulvey and others. Michael Collins can make an argument about the fate of twentieth-century Ireland in terms enabled by contemporary discussions about gender and desire in homosocial configurations. The character Michael Collins is understood as the bearer of spectatorial gaze and will; murdered, he represents the extinguishing of the spectatorial identity and of a potential future for the new-born Irish state. The character of Elizabeth I likewise embodies the fate of England. Woman’s ‘natural’ filmic place is the frozen, two-dimensional realm of the fetish, and so the final image of Elizabeth represents a relief that is both narrative and symbolic: woman rightly placed - the Queen be-fetished - implies the success of the nation beyond the film. The historical argument made in Elizabeth is therefore made in quintessentially cinematic terms: the story of the young female ruler becomes an illustration of the fate of woman herself in narrative cinema.

Irish intercultural cinema looks at the development of a cinematic genre which focuses on issues of Irish migrancy but is produced outside of Ireland. The essay has as its focus the cultural landscape of Irish-Australia. The essay uses methodologies of ethnographic and documentary theory plus textual analysis of film and written texts to establish a throughline of Irish intercultural film. The essay begins by contextualising the place of the Irish diaspora within the creation of Irish identity globally. The discussion around migrancy is widened to consider the place of memory and intergenerational tensions within not just the Irish migrant population, but also within the diverse cultures which comprise the contemporary Australian landscape. The historical development of intercultural cinema is then explored internationally within a context of colonial, gender and class struggles in the '70's and '80's. The term intercultural cinema has its origins in the Third Cinema of Argentinians Solanas and Getino in the '70's and covers those films which deal with issues involving two countries or cultures. The term was refined by Laura Marks in 2000 and further developed by Hamid Naficy in 2001 in his discussion of accented cinema which narrows its definition to include the politics of production within its definition. The paper then traces the development of Irish intercultural cinema from its beginnings in England in the '70's with Thaddeus O'Sullivan through to Nicola Bruce and others including Enda Murray in the present day. The essay concludes by bringing these various strands together to see where intercultural film might have a place in today's globalised cultural landscape. Common traits within intercultural film such as the notion of place, autobiographical film and personal identity are explored using examples of intercultural filmmaking from around the globe. These commonalities point to a way forward for the future of a sustainable multicultural film culture.

This article applies theories of humour (incongruity, superiority, relief) to a reading of the films Irish Jam (John Eyres, 2006) and The Guard (John Michael McDonagh, 2011) in order to interrogate their depiction of racial, national and cultural stereotypes and differences. Both films combine elements of humour in their portrayal of the " fish out of water " experiences of the African-American male leads in Ireland. Through this we see three consequences: the incongruity of the protagonists' experiences, both in terms of their expectations of Ireland and the expectations the Irish have of them; the superiority felt by certain locals, and, thus vicariously, by audience members for recognising moments of (what they consider) ignorance or racism; humour being used to relieve the tensions of interacting with the Other. I argue that the different uses of humour in these films function as a social corrective in their interrogation of racist ideologies. However, the films play it safe by taking their protagonists out of America, allowing the discussion of race to unfold in Ireland where whiteness holds a unique status (as simultaneously nonwhite because of the historical discrimination the Irish faced), and racial and national differentiation can be conflated. Equally, the films ultimately remain conservative in their interrogation of racism, confronting certain stereotypes while perpetuating others. In this article I examine Irish Jam (John Eyres, 2006) and The Guard (John Michael McDonagh, 2011), two films with African-American male leads who, for very different reasons, find themselves in Ireland. While both films portray " fish out of water " experiences for these characters, they approach this narrative in different ways, perhaps reflective of the production context for each film. John Eyres, the British (with dual United States citizenship) director and cowriter of Irish Jam, previously directed and produced several films largely in the action, thriller and horror genres. On the other hand, The Guard was the feature debut, and something of an auteur effort, from British-Irish writer-director John Michael McDonagh. Equally, Irish Jam, which was made on an approximately $11 million budget, was a straight-to-DVD release, primarily for American audiences, with average ratings, while The Guard, with an estimated $6 million budget, had a theatrical release and was well received, particularly in Ireland. However, while the circumstances of each film are quite different, both ultimately use various types of humour—according to each film's style—to frame race and nation—the focus of this article. While the humour used in these films is perhaps made possible (or more acceptable) by the unique status of Irish whiteness as non taboo (discussed subsequently), many of the typical elements key to humour, including surprise, fear or tension, and feelings of superiority, are also easily linked with experiencing cultural difference—a differentiation often linked with race. Ultimately, I suggest that humour is used in these films as a type of conservative social corrective for the treatment of both racial and national difference.

2007