Hunger (DVD)

...specifically it follows Bobby Sands’ hunger strike. It’s not the first film on the Hunger Strikes, there have been two others: _Some Mother’s Son_ starring Helen Mirren and John Lynch; and _H3_ which I haven’t seen but it was written by one of the hunger strikers, Laurence McKeown, who went on to found the Belfast film festival as well. Hunger is probably the best known of the three and the most critically acclaimed, however, contrasting it with ...
...been achieved and the last hunger strike was a shambles. He calls a meeting with his priest and after a famous 17 minute one-take scene of the two characters debating with each other over the ethics of hunger strike and the republican cause Sands makes up his mind and goes through with it.

The film then follows the gruelling 66 days of self-starvation.

==My Opinion==

===The Facts===

This is my ... more

Hunger is a film portraying the imprisonment of republican prisoners in Northern Ireland’s Maze prison in the early 80’s and more specifically it follows Bobby Sands’ hunger strike. It’s not the first film on the Hunger Strikes, there have been two others: Some Mother’s Son starring Helen Mirren and John Lynch; and H3 which I haven’t seen but it was written by one of the hunger strikers, Laurence McKeown, who went on to found the Belfast film festival as well. Hunger is probably the best known of the three and the most critically acclaimed, however, contrasting it with Some Mother’s Son only I can’t say it is the best.

The Story

The film begins with the morning routine of Raymond Lohan. He cools his bruised knuckles in the sink and stares at his worn down, depressed face. He eats his breakfast in silence and before leaving he checks underneath his car for anything suspicious as his wife looks on anxiously from the house. We then that Lohan is prison officer at the Maze.

A new prisoner, Davey, is brought into the prison. An I.R.A. member he refuses as part of the organisations policy and principle to wear the normal prison uniform. Declaring himself a legal combatant of a war who wishes to be treated as a prisoner-of-war and not as a criminal. The prison officers are clearly used to such a response and without indication Davey strips naked and is given only a blanket and is led to his cell. Here he meets Gerry who has been inside for some time and the prison cell they are to share has it’s walls covered in faeces and maggots wiggling about on the floor. The furniture consists of two mattresses only and Gerry is a skinny, long-haired and bearded yet defiant man wrapped in a blanket clearly a bit odd due to the conditions.

The film then follows their lives in the prison. The brutalities and humiliation their put through by the prison officers. The squalid conditions of the prison and also their determination to prevail. We first meet Sands when all the men are rounded up and made to walk a gauntlet of vicious riot police and are then taken to have their hair forcibly cut and cleaned. Sands comes out fighting and fights back against Lohan but is held down by other officers. During a visiting day in the prison when all the prisoners are in one room we meet Bobby Sands properly as he looks on as Davey and Gerry smuggle stuff into the prison from their visitors.

Bobby decides that not enough is being done. After 4 years of the dirty protest nothing has been achieved and the last hunger strike was a shambles. He calls a meeting with his priest and after a famous 17 minute one-take scene of the two characters debating with each other over the ethics of hunger strike and the republican cause Sands makes up his mind and goes through with it.

The film then follows the gruelling 66 days of self-starvation.

My Opinion

The Facts

This is my major complaint with this film. While I’ll not go as far as to say that it’s all style and no substance; it’s definitely lacking on the substance. The film is about an important historical event and yet it really doesn’t give you enough information. For instance the very beginning of the film isn’t as I’ve said Raymond Lohan getting on with his morning it’s in fact a woman banging a bin lid off the ground. Now all we see here is the woman banging the bin lid off the ground repeatedly and the camera then zooms in on the blurry lid quickly banging up and down. Now after this we never see that woman again, we are never told why that woman was doing that or given any indication of the point of that scene. The fact is that whenever a hunger striker died and now on the anniversary of their deaths in some areas people went out and started banging bin lids and making noise. I know that because I live in Northern Ireland and you learn bits and pieces about what went on and I’ve watched the odd documentary on the event but if this film is to be released internationally as it has been to some extent you have to tell people what’s going on.

What really got to me was the motivations and the context of the hunger strike was never laid out. You’re thrown in to this film with a presumption that you know a vast amount about the event. When we first encounter the prison the dirty protest is well under way. Excrement is all over the walls and to be fair through Davey we do learn that they’re naked because they refuse to be treated like criminals. The dirty protest arose because whenever prisoners were leaving their cells to empty their chamber pots or take a shower they were attacked and abused by prison officers so eventually the prisoners just refused to leave their cell. Now we see the prisoners being abused when they leave the cells and see them fighting every time they’re made to leave but the layman is just not given enough information. Now I know for a fact that people will watch this film and come away thinking that Bobby Sands went on Hunger strike until his demands of a united Ireland were met. I know this’ll happen because I know stupid people who think that at the minute. The thing is this film almost gives you that impression or that the strike was just a reaction to behaviour of prison officers. Sands in justifying himself to the priest repeatedly says stuff like “I love my country” but what Sands was striking for, was I suppose in a general sense the republican movement but the hunger strike and dirty protests had five demands

1. The right not to wear a prison uniform;
2. The right not to do prison work;
3. The right of free association with other prisoners, and to organise educational and recreational pursuits;
4. The right to one visit, one letter and one parcel per week;
5. Full restoration of remission lost through protest.

Essentially they wanted to be treated as prisoners-of-war. This Special Category of prisoner existed before 1976 and was returned to some extent after the hunger strikes. It was important because at the time the whole republican movement was being demonised and censored whilst they saw themselves as fighting a war against an oppressive force. It must be remembered that it had always been claimed and has recently been proven that the a large section of the R.U.C., the prison officers and some of the army especially the B-specials during this period were involved in mass persecution of Catholic civilians and were colluding with loyalist paramilitaries who went about committing whole-sale murder on the Catholic population. The I.R.A.’s hands were not clean of civilian murder but they came about in 1968 after of ‘The Battle of the Bogside’ in Derry as a defending force and because of the desperate position Catholic citizens were put in. The police couldn’t be trusted or turned to anymore and so they had to set up their own viable organisation to defend themselves. To be demonised and then put at the mercy of the people who weren’t doing much better themselves left a bitter taste. This is shown to some extent by the prison officer with U.D.A. tattooed on his knuckles but how many people in say France know who exactly the U.D.A. are? Does everyone on Ciao know who the U.D.A are? Another example of Steve McQueen failing to deliver the facts but piling on the glitz and artsy fartsy stuff.

Many of the prisoners had also been interned, this meant they were arrested and jailed without trial or were jailed as a result of a Diplock court hearing. Diplock courts were courts that had no jury. Both internship and Diplock courts would be incompatible with the Human Rights Act 1998 and whilst internship has been abandoned Diplock courts are still possible. Of course the brutality suffered in prison was also a reason but this film doesn’t explore or even mention enough of these reasons. Lots of scenes of people staring a being very depressed are all well and good from an artistic point of view but McQueen’s not giving the full story. Something Some Mother’s Son was better at doing.

The hunger strikes also brought a lot of international attention to the Northern Ireland situation because despite what this film portrays when Bobby Sands decided to go on hunger strike he didn’t just cut himself off from society and lie in a bed forgotten by the world. Bobby Sands ran for election and was elected MP for Fermanagh and South Tyrone. Bobby Sands was a Member of Parliament and that is massive! And that is completely ignored by this film. It’s part of the reason why Bobby Sands is so famous and such an important character. He was the only prisoner to ever be elected MP and due to a new law that was brought in after the event it is now impossible for a long-term prisoner to do such again. The fact that Sands was elected showed the massive support he had from the nationalist community and how opposed they were to the criminalisation of such men. It gave the I.R.A. prisoners that legitimacy they were denied.

Note I say prisoners because Sands wasn’t the only one to go on hunger strike. Nor was he the only one to die. Does Steve McQueen know this? He didn’t seem to think it worth a mention in the actual film until it came up as writing on the screen at the end as if an after thought. 23 men went on hunger strike ten of them died. I think it’s almost disrespectful that the other nine men were ignored for the majority of this film. Not all of the hunger strikers were I.R.A. prisoners also. 4 were members of the I.N.L.A 3 of which died. Some Mother’s Son didn’t just stick to Bobby Sands as if he was some celebrity selling point at the expense of the others. It explored everything, it wasn’t all comprehensive but it was a damn sight better than this film.

Helen Mirren was the mother of one of the hunger striker’s in Some Mother’s Son and she portrays this woman fighting to keep her son alive and shows the anguish the families of the strikers went through. In this film Bobby Sands’ parents act as if they’ve got something wrong with them. They say very little, especially the father and they just stare a lot quietly. Raymond Lohan’s mother does have something wrong with her and doesn’t react to anything at all. I didn’t get this. Surely you would want to show the effect the event had on everyone rather than having these cardboard emotionless characters?

Hunger Strikes in Irish History

I would just like to also mention the poignancy of hunger strike in the context of Ireland. Hunger striking is part of Irish culture and existed long before 1981 as a means of protest amongst Irish people. The Irish monks were the cataloguers of ancient Irish history. St. Finnian was one such monk in the fifth century and having learned of a chief called Tuan MacCarell who is said to have been as old as the land he went to the chief’s house in Donegal. Tuan would not let him in and so St. Finnian went on hunger strike outside his house until he was allowed admittance and Tuan told him the history of early Ireland which makes up ‘The Book of the Dun Cow’ which lies in the Royal Irish Academy in Dublin.

Another example occurs in the 6th Century in Meath. Hugh Greary was a chief who killed one of the officers of the High King at the time, Diarmuid Mac Cearbhaill. Hugh’s brother was the bishop and when Diarmuid caught and was about to kill Hugh but all the clerics in the area went on hunger strike for Hugh’s life as he had been given sanctuary by them before he was captured.

In more modern times Terence MacSwiney the Lord Mayor of Cork went on hunger strike with 11 other republican prisoners during the Irish War of Independence because he had been interned. He died after 74 days. The longest hunger strikes ever in human history were that of the other Cork prisoners who survived 94 days. ‘’’94 days!’’’

Of course I’m not saying that McQueen should have included all this but I find it very interesting that there is an historical precedent for the hunger strikes in Irish history.

Why Four Stars?

Despite a lot of criticism of the film’s neglecting of the facts it is a finely executed film of the story it chose to tell. As I complain that it’s all style and no substance I can’t help but admire the style. It’s the director, Steve McQueen’s, first film and he has won wide acclaim and a BAFTA. Initially an artist, I can’t say I fancy his artwork and you can find some of his stuff here: http://mariangoodman.com/mg/nyc.html . The cinematography and the direction in this film is astounding. Despite what he hasn’t done, what he has done is capture the humanity in the prisons on both sides. Raymond Lohan’s morning routine and his anxious wife and the crying riot police officer hiding from the violence on the one side and on the other we have the excellent scene were an officer with a power houe goes from cell to cell washing the excrement from the walls only to pause in amazement in one as the prisoners have made a massive spiral on one wall from their own filth. (Yes this film does have a big spirally crap on the wall.) The brutality isn’t ignored and it’s a very violent film. The naked bodies of the prisoners are constantly beaten and treated inhumanely by the prison guards and on the outside revenge is taken against the prisoner officers. Sands in the later stages of his strike starts to hallucinate about his younger self and we have that Some Mother’s Son idea.

It also has so much emotion in it. You feel sorry for all these people as a result of what McQueen has done and Sands’ last days are heart-wrenching stuff and this is where the genius of the film lies.

Amazingly for an artsy-fartsy film it doesn’t drag and it isn’t overly long. Two things I expected when I heard an artist was making it and looked at McQueen’s art. Though I do think it could have done with being a bit longer with a bit more material.

Michael Flassbender as Bobby Sands was tremendous. The man’s a fantastic actor and really outdone himself here. He went on a crash diet to portray Bobby Sands and he realy looks the part. He is disgustingly thin and the make-up effects or what I hope are make-up effects of the sores he contracts from not eaten look awful (in a good way). Fassbender has been in Band of Brothers before and 300 both of which I’ve seen but I can’t think of who he was in them. He is also going to be in Quentin Tarantino’s new film Inglorious Basterds . The 17 minute dialogue scene is something that I can’t say I was looking forward to. Taken in one shot I expected to be a bit bored but it was really good and the dialogue excellent. I think we can see Enda Walsh’s influence on the writing here as the dialogue definitely has that Irish touch that not to be rude but I don’t think McQueen is capable of. They engage on trivial matters at first and then focus in on the issue of the strike but even at the beginning there’s that subtext and we know Bobby’s made up his mind. Liam Cuningham plays the priest and Cunningham is fantastic actor who just doesn’t get enough roles that he deserves. If Liam Cunningham was the lead in a film I’d watch it, I don’t care what it’s about. The main cast is actually quite small with only the other two prisoners Davey and Gerry and the prison officer Raymond Lohan. Lohan was played by Stuart Graham an actor I Haven’t heard of but one who should go places from here.

It’s a film largely devoid of music except for a piano repeatedly and slowly playing the same note or two over and over which worked quite well.

Overall

If you were to take this film as a film on a fictional event I would probably react a lot better to it but the fact that’s it’s based on actual events and actual events that have had a massive effect on Northern Ireland (the Anglo-Irish Agreement is thought to be one of the major outcomes of the Hunger Strike) taints it. That’s why I expect that it has done so well in the U.K. and got such reactions. I just feel McQueen made a film about a serious event and sat on the fence and you really loose a lot of credibility in my eyes if you sit on the fence. Everyone’s heard the saying that goes something like “Some people live, other people just survive.” People who sit on the fence all the time only survive. No-one is like, that everyone has something to say about such events. Honestly a large part of me supports the hunger strikers and I can see what they were trying to do and it was admirable. My fear is that McQueen as this new modern artist just chose the Hunger Strike as the subject of his piece as he knew it was a sensitive subject that’d get him attention. Like they say that you can’t make a film about the Holocaust without winning awards no matter how bad it is. In the interviews he says he’s amazed how uncontroversial the film was on its release. Amazed! You didn’t say anything man.

There was some prisoners
Their cell was dirty
They got beaten a lot
Bobby Sands talks to a priest about going on hunger strike
Bobby Sands went on hunger strike.
The End.

That’s all he’s put into the film. Beautifully laid out but come on…. You didn’t explore the motivations and the context enough. People called it brave but I personally think this is a cowards way of telling the story. He tentatively approaches the issues but he always shies away. An excellent film in isolation but I think I still prefer Some Mother’s Son . What McQueen should have done was just make a film about prison life in Northern Ireland because that’s what he done well and leave the bigger stuff alone.

One last thing, B.J. Hogg who plays Big Mervin in Give My Head Peace plays the U.D.A. prison guy in it.

I was going to write about the extras but I think this review is too long as it is.
 

...less