Ned Kelly (Ledger), the infamous Australian outlaw and legend. Sort of like Robin Hood, with a mix of Billy the Kid, Australians love the legend of how he stood up against the English aristocratic oppression, and united the lower classes to change Australia forever. The fact that the lower classes of the time were around 70% immigrant criminals seems to be casually skimmed around by this film. Indeed, quite a few so called `facts' in this film are, on reflection, a tad dubious.

I suppose the suspicions should have been aroused when, in the opening credits, it was claimed that this film is based upon the book, `Our Sunshine'. If ever a romanticized version of truth could be seen in a name for a book, there it was. This wasn't going to be a historical epic, but just an adaptation of one of many dubious legends of Ned Kelly, albeit a harsh and sporadically brutal version.

Unfortunately, Ned Kelly is nothing more than an overblown Hallmark channel `real life historical drama' wannabe! The story plods along at an alarming rate (alarming because never has a film plodded so slowly!) The feeling of numbness after the two hours of pure drivel brought back memories of Costner's awful Wyatt Earp all those years ago. Simply put, nothing happens in the film, but it takes a long time getting to that nothing. This would possibly have been a tad more bearable if the performances were good (because the direction sure as heck wasn't). However, unless you are looking to play a game of spot the worst Oirish accent, then you're gonna be disappointed. Between that, the game of `Who has the stupidest beard?', `Spot the obvious backstabber!' (clue, they are all ginger for some reason), and `Nature in Australia.including lions', it is an experience similar to flicking through Hallmark, The History Channel, Discovery Channel, and Neighbours whilst suffering a huge hangover. Yup, nature pops up a lot, as to fill even more time (possibly an attempt to look arty), the film keeps showing pointless wildlife shots, and once all the native species are shown, here's a circus to allow for a camel and a lion (which is used during one fight to try to make us actually feel more sorry for the lion than the massacred people).

This is a turgid, emotionless piece of historical fluff which should have gone straight to TV. There isn't even one good word I can say about this film. Even the usually fantastic Rush seems embarrassed to be here. When one of the characters comments that there is only 2 bullets left for him and his pal, I myself was wishing I had a gun to blow any memory of this film out of my head!
Would you say this review is positive or negative?
OPTIONS:
- negative
- positive
negative
Ned Kelly (Ledger), den ökände australiensiske fredlöse och legenden. Ungefär som Robin Hood, med en blandning av Billy the Kid, älskar australier legenden om hur han stod upp mot det engelska aristokratiska förtrycket, och enade de lägre klasserna för att förändra Australien för alltid. Det faktum att de lägre klasserna på den tiden var runt 70% invandrarbrottslingar verkar vara nonchalant skumma runt av denna film. Faktum är att en hel del så kallade fakta i den här filmen, efter eftertanke, är en smula tvivelaktiga. Jag antar att misstankarna borde ha väckts när det i inledningsanförandena hävdades att denna film är baserad på boken, `Our Sunshine'. Om man någonsin kunde se en romantiserad version av sanningen i ett namn på en bok, så fanns den där. Detta skulle inte bli ett historiskt epos, utan bara en anpassning av en av många tvivelaktiga legender om Ned Kelly, om än en hård och sporadiskt brutal version. Tyvärr är Ned Kelly inget annat än en överblåst Hallmark-kanal som wannabe. Berättelsen plöjer med en alarmerande takt (larmerande för att aldrig har en film plöjt så långsamt!) Känslan av domningar efter de två timmarna av rent dravel väckte minnen av Costners hemska Wyatt Earp för alla dessa år sedan. Enkelt uttryckt händer ingenting i filmen, men det tar lång tid att komma till det där ingenting. Detta skulle möjligen ha varit lite mer uthärdligt om föreställningarna var bra (eftersom riktningen säkert som tusan inte var). Men om du inte vill spela ett spel med den värsta oiriska accenten, då kommer du att bli besviken. Mellan det, spelet om "Vem har det dummaste skägget? ', `Spot den uppenbara baktalaren!' (clue, de är alla ingefära av någon anledning), och `Nature i Australien.inklusive lejon', det är en upplevelse som liknar snärta genom Hallmark, The History Channel, Discovery Channel, och grannar medan lider en enorm baksmälla. Japp, naturen dyker upp en hel del, som för att fylla ännu mer tid (möjligen ett försök att se arty), filmen fortsätter att visa meningslösa vilda skott, och när alla inhemska arter visas, här är en cirkus för att tillåta en kamel och ett lejon (som används under en kamp för att försöka få oss att faktiskt tycka mer synd om lejonet än de massakrerade människor). Det här är en saftig, känslolös bit av historisk fluff som borde ha gått direkt till TV. Det finns inte ens ett bra ord jag kan säga om filmen. Även den oftast fantastiska Rush verkar generad över att vara här. När en av karaktärerna kommenterar att det bara finns 2 kulor kvar för honom och hans kompis, önskade jag själv att jag hade en pistol för att blåsa något minne av denna film ur mitt huvud! Skulle ni säga att denna recension är positiv eller negativ? ALTERNATIV: - negativ - positiv
Ned Kelly (Ledger), the notorious Australian outlaw and legend. Much like Robin Hood, with a mixture of Billy the Kid, Australians love the legend of how he stood up to English aristocratic oppression, uniting the lower classes to change Australia forever. The fact that the lower classes at the time were around 70% immigrant criminals seems to be casually shady around this film. In fact, a lot of so-called facts in this film, after reflection, are somewhat questionable. I suppose the suspicions should have been raised when it was claimed in the opening speeches that this film is based on the book, 'Our Sunshine'. If you could ever see a romanticized version of the truth in a name of a book, it was there. This would not be a historical epic, but only an adaptation of one of many questionable legends of Ned Kelly, albeit a harsh and sporadic brutal version. Unfortunately, Ned Kelly is nothing more than an overblown Hallmark channel like wannabe. The story plows at an alarming rate (alarming to never have a film plowed so slowly!) The feeling of numbness after the two hours of pure drooling aroused memories of Costner's terrible Wyatt Earp all these years ago. Simply put, nothing happens in the film, but it takes a long time to get to that nothing. This would possibly have been a little more bearable if the performances were good (because the direction surely as hell was not). But if you don't want to play a game with the worst Oirian accent, then you will be disappointed. Between that, the game of "Who has the stupidest beard? 'Spot the obvious slanderer!' (clue, they are all ginger for some reason), and `Nature in Australia.including lions', it is an experience similar to flick through Hallmark, The History Channel, Discovery Channel, and neighbors while suffering a huge hangover. Yep, nature shows up a lot, as to fill even more time (possibly an attempt to see arty), the film continues to show meaningless wild shots, and when all native species appear, here is a circus to allow a camel and a lion (used during a struggle to try to make us actually feel more sorry for the lion than the massacred people). This is a juicy, unfeeling piece of historical fluff that should have gone straight to television. There's not even a good word I can say about the movie. Even the usually amazing Rush seems embarrassed to be here. When one of the characters comments that there are only 2 bullets left for him and his friend, I myself wished I had a gun to blow any memory of this film out of my head! Would you say that this review is positive or negative? ALTERNATIVE: - negative - positive
negativ
negative