Rayting:
7.3/
10 8.2K votes
Language: English
Release date: August 2000
The real life story of Dublin folk hero and criminal Martin Cahill, who pulled off two daring robberies in Ireland with his team, but attracted unwanted attention from the police, the I.R.A., the U.V.F., and members of his own team.
Similar Movies
9.0
Rocketry: The Nambi Effect 2022
7.0
Gangubai Kathiawadi 2022
7.6
Elvis 2022
8.3
Major 2022
7.4
Jhund 2022
7.1
Rescued by Ruby 2022
6.9
Jerry and Marge Go Large 2022
8.4
Kaun Pravin Tambe? 2022
User Reviews
Just had to write that one liner, but it really is. I love the gangster genre and this is the weakest entry I've seen in recent years . I have praises for everyone involved in most aspects except the most important one, the script . It is a weak story about a petty criminal. No amount of fine acting or black and white film styling can make up for a total lack of substance. I love Kevin Spacey and I hear he's gonna do another film about the general. My advice is don't waste your time.
Fmovies: Like with any movie genre, there are good gangster movies and there are bad gangster movies. If you asked me to name a good gangster movie, I'd have dozens to choose from. If you asked me to name a bad gangster movie, probably the first one to pop up in my mind is one that still has me in a sort of depression of disappointment about a week since I saw the film for the first and I promise you, the last time. That film is "The General", unrelated to the 1926 silent film of the same name. This is a very dry, very slow gangster epic that raises questions not about the story (it's more than easy to follow) but about why the filmmakers chose to make this rather flimsy endeavor.
Like "Goodfellas" (1990) and "American Gangster" (2007)—two superior mob movies—"The General" is based on real people and true events. The film revolves around an Irish criminal named Martin Cahill (Brendan Gleeson) who started his long chain of crimes stealing food as a teenager and then moving up to robbing museums and houses as an adult. Meanwhile, the police led by an inspector named Kenny (Jon Voight) try desperately and vigorously to prove just one of his crimes and convict (or kill) him.
Perhaps because it's a film in the same category as the marvelous "Goodfellas" (1990) and the first two "Godfather" films, I was expecting too much from "The General." But that may be going too easy on it. This would have been a bad film had I not seen the aforementioned masterpieces before being swamped by boredom in this oater and its far-too-stretched running time of screaming bad scenes. Let's start knocking the film by just looking at the style in which it is presented. For some reason, director John Boorman and cinematographer Seamus Deasy selected to film this movie in black-and-white while its style and presentation are clearly the elements that belong to a full-fledged color film. Now I have nothing against b/w pictures, not even ones made in modern-day times. "Schindler's List" (1993) was more than ninety percent filmed in black-and-white and it's a masterpiece. "The General", made just five years after "Schindler's List" is not. The cinematography is also far too blown out with high lighting keys that seem very distracting and give the movie a very video-game-like quality that I found simply annoying. The filmmakers were obviously going for a realist's documentary-like style, like "Schindler's List" did, but they fail by making it seem too much like a documentary and at the same time, too much like a classic-style motion picture. Performances in the film range from passable to poor. Brendan Gleeson and Jon Voight gave decent enthusiasm for their roles, but it seemed to me at times that even they were getting kind of run down by the awful screenplay from which they were quoting. The sound design is also very primitive, probably in an attempt to give it a 40s crime-noir appeal, but that also fails because again, it's made too much like a contemporary picture and seems vastly out of place.
But the worst thing that occurs is that there's not one—not one—character in the film that I felt any emotions or opinions for. In fact, for every moment of every scene, the only thought going through my head was "okay…so what?" Moments that in a better film might come across as shocking or appalling are just dull and time-consuming here. I did not sympathize or hate the Brendan Gleeson
There are few modern directors whom I respect as well as John Boorman. His biopics are always keenly observed, and he has a great eye for the comic moment. Cahill, history tells us, was a vicious thug - his only redeeming qualities, Boorman tells us, were his love for his family and comrades. Even if a few of Cahill's blemishes were airbrushed out to present him as a modern day Robin Hood, what the hell, it makes great cinema. Cahill is the perfect anti-hero, and with Boorman's decision to show us the ending at the beginning - we know that he ultimately pays the ultimate price for his crimes.
No point in harping on about the use of monochrome photography. I don't particularly think it matters - it just makes me wish I was watching Casablanca. But the principal actors are perfect. Brendan Gleeson and Adrian Dunbar make a fine pairing, and Jon Voight as Cahill's nemesis, Inspector Ned Kenny, is surprisingly good at the Irish accent, and back to his best form as an actor.
Boorman, although not as prolific, deserves to be regarded alongside Scorsese, Coppola and Kubrik for his insight into humanity and the sometimes strange bonds that result. No other modern directors do this as well as the above mentioned.
The General fmovies. Being Irish-American, I can tell this; there's an old joke about an Irishman who washes ashore of a new country and asks the first person he sees, "What kind of government do they have here?" The person tells him, and the Irishman responds, "Well, whatever it is, I'm against it." Martin Cahill, from what I know, would seem to share that sentiment, but not out of any political bent; indeed, he's all the more fascinating for being completely apolitical. He just rails against any government that, by definition, is there to ensure he can't make a living at the thing he likes to do the most; steal from the rich.
John Boorman's portrayal of Cahill, nicknamed THE GENERAL(the title of this movie), portrays him as the thug he can be, not only in his viciousness(the famous pool table scene), but also his selfishness(as soon as he's successful, the only "poor" he gives to after robbing the rich is himself and the rest of the gang), yet allows him his delusions of grandeur; after all, isn't that all we often have to fall back on? Of course, Cahill is quite talented at what he does, using ingenuity as much as brute force to get what he wants, like going to talk to police inspector Ned Kenny(Jon Voight) while his men are robbing a bank, not just to keep Kenny occupied, but to give himself an alibi(the look on Voight's face when he realizes he's been set up is alone worth the price of admission).
Brendan Gleeson, a regular in Irish movies(and recently seen in LAKE PLACID), makes everything Cahill does seem somehow normal, even his habit of hiding his face with his hand when he wants to avoid unpleasantness, or the fact that he lives with both his wife and her sister(Maria Doyle Kennedy and Angeline Ball, from THE COMMITMENTS), even, of course, his job. Obviously, we're not supposed to like Cahill, but like Inspector Kenny, we develop a sneaking admiration for him just the same(if there's a flaw, it's we see Kenny sinking to the level of Cahill once by punching him out, but we don't see the character arc there).
Boorman is obviously a great visual director(much has been made of the black-and-white photography - too much, in my humble opinion - while not enough has been made of his use of quick fades, which lend it a dreamlike quality), but he needs a good story to engage him. When he doesn't have it, like in BEYOND RANGOON or - sad to say, for me for the most part - DELIVERANCE, it's all empty. When he does have it, like in POINT BLANK or HOPE AND GLORY, it's engaging and compelling, and he has a great story here(isn't it funny that while he's know for his visual work, his best films, like this and HOPE AND GLORY, he also wrote?). A terrific biopic.
Boorman if nothing else is a good story teller. As a director, his greatest triumph came early in his career with Deliverance. Yet as a writer, he has brought us quality films such as Excalibur, and Hope & Glory. His adaptation of the Paul Williams novel is straight forward and without frills. Martin Cahill had many aspects to his life that could have easily become the fodder for an over zealous director. Rather than seeking to build a "background" story out of his love triangle, Boorman handles it with style and two scenes. The movie is meant to tell you about the rise and fall of Martin Cahill with a watchful eye to the social and political forces in Ireland. Boorman does just that. The scenes are well thought out and the acting solid. While this movie never hit the critical radar in America, it was praised both in Britain and at Cannes. When your in the mood for a story of a gangster who became a populist hero, take a look at this film. But if you want swift action scenes and graphic violence, it may be time for another viewing of Bonnie and Clyde.
Brendan Gleeson's performance as notorious Irish master criminal Martin "The General" Cahill is a small miracle. Alternating between a brash swagger and a sullen fatalism, Gleeson utterly transforms himself (I love how he hides his face simply by cocking his head down and shielding it with his hand, peeking out between splayed fingers) into the charismatic thief. Director and screenwriter John Boorman, who delighted in revealing that he had once been robbed of a gold record by the real-life Cahill (he references it anecdotally in the film) has done some of his best work here, creating a totally engrossing character study that includes tense robberies, playful confrontations with the police, and eyebrow-raising relationships, but he never forgets to maintain the delicate balance between the light-hearted (and light-fingered) humor and the danger and desperation inherent in a high-profile life of crime.