In the Name of the Father

In the name of INNOCENCE !!

Sometimes i say to myself this can't happen to me for the simple reason that it sounds really unfair to be happening..But watching a movie like this changes all perception of right and wrong, fair and unfair.. Only thing that can be fair in this world is your HEART !!

Though Daniel Day Lewis' character is not your typical role model from the start, you know that the Heart within isn't black (more so from a scene just before he says 'In all my godforsaken life, I've never known what it was to kill somebody until now')..The transformation of Day Lewis' character from a man who wasn't responsible enough to take care of himself to a man who vows to fight for his father's name is brilliantly heartwarming!

It just pains me to see how cruel 'WE' as a species can be to not accept our mistakes, even when we know that it can make someone's life miserable than HELL!!

In all the movie is good till the time you don't think of it as someone's life being played out in front of you.As soon as you realize that,it transforms into something you cant just think of as just another brilliant movie.Instead your heart goes out to the people who actually had to go through all this..

Well directed, superbly acted, brilliant,heart breaking and heart warming at the same time !!

Those who found it beautiful can go for Hillary Swank's 2010 movie Conviction as their next choice of another heartwarming 'eye treat' !

A low-key, much-forgotten but well-executed film.

This movie is totally forgotten these days. Well, actually, if you're not native or very close to Ireland, I think the very existence and action of the IRA seems like something that ended many years ago, and it doesn't. It was a recent thing, and it still has marks on people and society. The film focuses, in particular, on the case of the “Guildford Four” and the “Maguire Seven”, which was a group of people who were accused of a bomb attack and of collaborating with the IRA, later proving to be if they were all innocent. The acquittal, however, came too late for the family patriarch, who died in prison. The accused were, almost all, related to each other, family or friendship.

I don't know the facts very well, although I did read something about the attack and the real case the film was based on, in order to better prepare myself to understand the film and be able to talk about it. As far as I can tell, the film obviously took a lot of liberties to make the story more appealing and dramatic, but nothing that is shockingly out of line with what happened.

Daniel Day Lewis was still relatively young here, but he was already showing signs of great talent. He is a focused actor and very responsible with his work, who dedicates himself to what he does and commits himself to the character. And we can see how he adapts to the character, and makes it real and believable and human. I also really enjoyed Pete Postlethwaite's work. I think it's particularly notable the way he allowed himself to age in order to play an older, physically impaired character.

Technically, the film is very worthy in its effort to portray the ordeal to which the convicts were subjected, and it does so in a very convincing and credible way. The choice of sets, filming locations and costumes contribute a lot to this. The film works very well on the environment and psyche of the characters, resulting in a dense drama, which may not please...

Oscar for Best Duo Daniel Day-Lewis and Pete Postlethwaitestrong text****

The movie tries to convey the horrors of injustice, investigation, and rulings under the pretext of emergency laws and terrorism, but the details of these laws make us laugh by today's standards, even not when the film was shown in 1993. The film exposes us to the shock that the terrorism law at this time could have exposed any innocent person for 7 days without charge, and I believe that it is still present in many countless countries on the globe.

The film talks about the true story of the Quartet of Guildford and the Seven of Maguire, a very painful human rights story whose chapters begin with the arrest of the Irish young man Gerry Conlon in England and accusing him, along with three others, of carrying out a terrorist attack to bomb a bar in Guildford.

Although Jerry is reckless and has criminal tendencies already, but through the events of the film we realize that Jerry and those with him are innocent, but the investigation and interrogation process shows that it has many impurities and corruption in how to accuse these innocent people.

In the Name of the Father, on the surface, talks about justice and the feeling of oppression in the face of injustice. The events of the film are dramatic, revolving around other topics, the most important of which is the relationship between the son and the father and how it develops, as well as how an ugly place such as prison can constitute an opportunity for Jerry to mature in a way that would not have happened if he had not been subjected to injustice.

The multiplicity and diversity of the dimensions of the film, in addition to manifestations outside the capabilities of the planet in two scenes and the performance of two actors, who gave the film great importance and a special place for me.

If there was an Oscar for best acting duo, the Daniel Day-Lewis and Pete Postlethwaite partnership would have given them blindfolded.

Th...

Tensions in Britain are running high after indiscriminate bombings in IRA defined “army pubs” in Guildford have left five people dead and scores injured. Unluckily, petty thief Gerry Conlan (Daniel Day Lewis) had been in nearby London at the time and so a combination of him splashing some unexplained cash back at home shortly thereafter and a Scotland Yard desperate for a conviction sees him and his friend Paul Hill (John Lynch) hauled from their Belfast homes and taken to London for what can only be described as a brutal interrogation. His father Guiseppe (Pete Postlethwaite) knows his son is no angel, but doubts he could be complicit in such an heinous crime so heads to his sister’s home in North London to find out what is happening. Before very long both he and “Annie” (Britta Smith) are also implicated in the atrocity, as are a few friends from a commune the men had stayed in when they first arrived. The court proceedings are fairly perfunctory with the jury all too readily believing the testimony of “Insp. Dixon” (Corin Redgrave) and so off to jail they all go. Sharing a cell, father and son try to make the best of things as the elder man gradually sickens and they are routinely shunned by their fellow inmates. When the real perpetrator of the offences (Don Baker) is apprehended for other crimes and acknowledges his role in Guildford, aspiring lawyer Gareth Pierce (Emma Thompson) demands access to police files and an appeal - and that’s where evidence begins to emerge that suggests the original convictions were not just unsafe, but that Dixon and others were entirely responsible for suppressing crucial alibi evidence. The film is an history, but not a documentary, so there is cinematic licence taken depicting the struggles of the Conlan men in jail and of their consequential legal procedures. The latter doesn’t matter so much, and the former adds much to focus the visceral nature of the drama as Gerry becomes less concerned with his own personal vindication and...