User Reviews (152)

Add a Review

  • Warning: Spoilers
    The story of Ned Kelly has been enshrouded in myth and exaggeration for time out of hand, and this film is no exception. What ensures Ned Kelly has a permanent place in history is the effort he went to in order to even the odds against the policemen hunting him. During several battles, he marched out wearing plates of beaten iron, off which the bullets available to police at the time would harmlessly bounce. Indeed, it is only because there were a few bright sparks among the Victorian police who noticed he hadn't plated up his legs that he was captured and hanged. The story has been told in schools and histories of Australia for so long that some permutations of the story have, ironically, become boring. The more the stories try to portray Kelly as some inhuman or superhuman monster, the less people pay attention.

    Which is where this adaptation of Our Sunshine, a novel about the Kelly legend, excels. Rather than attempting to portray a Ned Kelly who is as unfeeling as the armour he wore, the film quickly establishes him as a human being. Indeed, the reversal of the popular legend, showing the corruption of the Victorian police and the untenable situation of the colonists, goes a long way to make this film stand out from the crowd. Here, Ned Kelly is simply a human being living in a time and place where in order to be convicted of murder, one simply had to be the nearest person to the corpse when a policeman found it. No, I am not making that up. About the only area where the film errs is by exaggerating the Irish versus English mentality of the battles. While the Kelly gang were distinctly Irish, Australia has long been a place where peoples of wildly varied ethnicities have mixed together almost seamlessly (a scene with some Chinese migrants highlights this).

    Heath Ledger does an amazing job of impersonating Australia's most notorious outlaw. It is only because of the fame he has found in other films that the audience is aware they are watching Ledger and not Kelly himself. Orlando Bloom has finally found a role in which he doesn't look completely lost without his bow, and Geoffrey Rush's appearance as the leader of the police contingent at Glenrowan goes to show why he is one of the most revered actors in that desolate little island state. But it is Naomi Watts, appearing as Julia Cook, who gets a bit of a bum deal in this film. Although the film basically implies that Cook was essentially the woman in Ned Kelly's life, but you would not know that from the minimal screen time that she gets here. Indeed, a lot of the film's hundred and ten minutes feels more freeze-dried than explorative. Once the element of police corruption is established, in fact, the film rockets along so fast at times that it almost feels rushed.

    Unfortunately, most of the film's strengths are not capitalised upon. Rush barely gets more screen time than his name does in the opening and closing credits. Ditto for Watts, and the rest of the cast come off a little like mannequins. I can only conclude that another fifteen, or even thirty, minutes of footage might have fixed this. But that leads to the other problem, in that the lack of any depth or background to characters other than the titular hero leaves the events of the story with zero impact. One scene manages to do the speech-making thing well, but unfortunately, it all becomes a collage of moments with no linking after a while. If one were to believe the impression that this film creates, a matter of weeks, even days, passes between the time that Ned Kelly becomes a wanted man on the say-so of one corrupt policeman, and the infamous shootout at Glenrowan. Annoyingly, the trial and execution of Ned Kelly is not even depicted here, simply referred to in subtitles before the credits roll.

    That said, aside from some shaky camera-work at times, Ned Kelly manages to depict some exciting shootouts, and it has a good beginning. For that reason, I rated it a seven out of ten. Other critics have not been so kind, so if you're not impressed by shootouts with unusual elements (and what could more more unusual than full body armour in a colonial shootout?), then you might be better off looking elsewhere. Especially if you want a more factual account of Ned Kelly's life.
  • Before viewing Ned Kelly, my only knowledge of this Australian outlaw was that he wore a bucket on his head. Having now seen this fairly enjoyable movie about his struggle for justice in the outback, I am a little bit more clued up; but I do have to ask how much fiction has replaced fact in this telling of the legend of Ned Kelly. Was he really so righteous, or have facts been changed to make the character more sympathetic and appealing to the audience?

    Director Gregor Jordan works well with the questionably accurate script, getting good performances from his lead Heath Ledger, who impresses with his portrayal of a man fighting the system the only way he knows how. Also worthy of mention is Orlando Bloom as Ned's friend Joseph and Geoffrey Rush as top cop Francis Hare. Naomi Watts, however, is wasted as Ned's piece of posh totty in an unnecessary romantic sub-plot.

    Whilst the movie never bores, it never really excels either, leaving this reviewer feeling rather apathetic towards it, hence my just-slightly-above-average rating of 6/10.
  • A film about the legendary outlaw whose story outgrew his life , it is based on the true events of famous 19th-century Outback bandit, an authentic legend which results to be the Australian's most ambiguous outlaw. A man (Heath Ledger) called Ned Kelly and his family are mistreated by Australians guards .He turns to steal horses that had been previously robbed to him . He gets deeply drawn into crime life and eventually becomes a policemen killer . Meanwhile , he falls in love of an unhappy married woman (Naomi Watts) . He forms an Irish band (Orlando Bloom) battling the British Empire but the oppressed people called them heroes and are relentlessly pursued by an astute , stubborn official (Geoffrey Rush, winner Oscar for Shine) . You can kill a man but not a legend. When the law tried to silence him a legend was born. The British Empire branded them as outlaws. The oppressed called them heroes.

    The film is an Australian Western made completely by Aussies with action , drama , shootouts, a love story and a lot of violence. It's a pretty solid movie narrating the confrontation between the Irish rebels and the English forces and holds up very well. The essential of this picture is the outlaw hunt that results in a great load of gunplay and deaths. The movie benefits tremendously from Oliver Stapleton's (Casanova) frequently ravishing cinematography , although is sometimes dark , as film longtime is developed at night and interior scenarios. It contains a sensitive and rousing musical score by Klaus Badelt (K19 , Pirates of the Caribbean) .The motion picture was well pfotographed and competently directed by Gregor Jordan who dramatizes accurately the life of this famous outlaw and his henchmen. Before being adapted in an Australian version by Sterling (1960) and by Tony Richardson also titled Ned Kelly (1970) starred by Mick Jagger .
  • Based on the famous novel 'Our Sunshine', 'Ned Kelly' is a watchable film. The problem is the way the story is told. There have been quite a number of films based on heroic legends. Sadly, this one is no different and almost every moment of it is downright predictable.

    The strength lies in the portrayal of the characters. Kelly and his gang are portrayed as human beings rather than the typical ruthless heroes suffering from affective flattening. On the other hand, the screenplay is so fast paced that one wonders whether Jordan really rushed through it as 'Ned Kelly' certainly would have benefited more if the script was better developed (e.g. Julia Cook could have used more scenes). As a result the film looks more like a brief summary of Kelly's life. We don't even see the trial and execution of Ned Kelly.

    In the technical department, the cinematography, background score and beautiful locations deserve mention as they certainly add to the film's quality. There are some beautiful shots of the Australian landscape and the set design and few songs do give a feel of the time.

    Heath Ledger is adequate in the title role but it is Orlando Bloom who steals the show. The guy seems to be in complete form (unlike his awkward presence in films like 'Kingdom of Heaven') and does full justice to the part. Naomi Watts shines in a small role. Geoffrey Rush deserved a better part but the actor nonetheless stands out. Most of the supporting cast do well. However, some of the villainous corrupt cops come across as caricatures.

    Finally, Jordan's 'Ned Kelly' just doesn't do full justice in portraying Kelly's life. It ends up being a clichéd film and a mere summary of the legend. If one has nothing else to do, they might want to check 'Ned Kelly' out just to kill time but if one wants to learn about the legend, then this isn't the best source.
  • Those who know who know the Kelly "legend" & are hoping that this film would be an accurate depiction of his life may be disappointed with the creative license taken with this film (eg. Naomi Watt's character never existed in reality), but if you look at it purely as a piece of entertainment, it holds up pretty well. Ledgers performance in the title role is quite solid, taking the mantle of cinema's best Ned (not hard considering the previous Ned's include Yahoo Serious, Mick Jagger & former Carlton champion (Australian Rules Football) Bob Chitty, a great footballer but a poor actor. Some location shooting film in the area I live, Bacchus Marsh outside Melbourne as well as Clunes & Ballarat.
  • I walked into this movie expecting to see a legendary Australian folktale, turned into a piece of Hollywood fluff and to an extent that is what I got. However, even with the exaggerated soundtrack and the ficticious Naomi Watts character who had too large a part in the story this movie is not with out it's charms, the image of the Kelly gang in their iron suits facing an army of Victorian police at the Glenrowan Inn is an incredably striking one.

    An important detail to note is that this is most definately NOT a documentary on Ned Kelly's life, this is a Hollywood film. However as a film it is incredably slanted to Ned's point of view, he is just way too good. Details of Ned's horse theivery (which he admitted to in the Jerilderie letter) where changed to make the Victorian police seem at fault. The Victorian police were made into the oppressors of the Kelly family and force Ned to a life as an outlaw in the bush.

    Heath Ledger's portrayal of Ned Kelly is a fair one, he manages to depict Ned's anger at the authories rather well. Orlando Bloom's portrayal of the womanising Joe Byrne and Joel Edgerton's Aaron Sherrit, betrayer of the Kelly gang, were nowhere near Oscar worthy, but still good. Naomi Watt's character was unnecessary and seemed only added to provide a love interest for Ned.

    Overall Ned Kelly is a generally good film. The acting is good, but the storyline leaves a lot to be desired, far too black and white for a film based on true events. However, the film does have it's moments, the final showdown at the Glenrowan Inn was a particulary well crafted scene. An interesting side note is that Dan Kelly's death in not actually shown, perhaps this was fuelled by the rumour that he did not perish in the Glenrowan siege but escaped and fled to a new life in Queensland.

    6 of of 10
  • Well, you can see where this is heading by the statement in the preview of an innocent man! Kelly was an outlaw, pure and simple. A cattle thief and horse stealer. And yes, many of the rest of the population of NE Victoria were too, and most were oppressed by the mainly Irish constabulary. So if one can excuse the poetic licence presumably to sell the film in the US market you will find a reasonable representation of the time and place so well done for that. Rush, as always is an absolute star as one of the head police and Ledger was good in the lead role.

    So I found this quite a watchable version and certainly superior to the Mick Jagger effort.
  • "Ned Kelly" tells the story of an Aussie folk hero/outlaw of the title name with hot properties Ledger and Bloom leading the way and Watts and Rush tagging along behind with minimal roles. A technically and artistically well done biopic drama which never really manages to choose between bigger-than-life heroics or gritty/edgy reality as it waffles back and forth trying to be all things to all people, this film creates a portrait of a poor man's Robin Hood in the austere environs of 1870's Australia who really wasn't all that interesting. With lukewarm critical reviews, heaped praise from young females, and no awards outside Australia, "Ned Kelly" is a mediocre watch best saved for fans of the players or those with an interest in the Kelly Aussie legend. Those interested in quality Aussie cinema might want to check out "Rabbit Proof Fence" or "Japanese Story" which do much more with much less. (C+)
  • Due to reading bad reviews and being told by friends that they couldn't believe how bad it was, I didn't go and see this film at the cinema. After watching it on DVD, I have to say I regret that now. I'm not saying it is brilliant, but I would venture to say that it is a good movie. I enjoyed it.

    People have skulls thicker than Ned's helmet if they go to see a movie like this and expect it to be a documentary. If you read up the actual history behind most movies based on historical figures, there is usually a huge difference between the fact and the fictional portrayal. I don't think Ganghis Kahn has ever once been portrayed even remotely close to historical fact. What kind of man Ned Kelly actually was is a matter of debate, and quite passionate it seems. In spite of the efforts of governments and some historians, Ned Kelly has become a legend. Legends are stories, and stories say as much about those who tell and listen to them as they do about the actual figure himself. Ned Kelly has become such a popular identity because he does represent that aspect of Australian culture that doesn't trust or accept authority. A society in which there is no dissent or challenge to authority is crazier and more dangerous than any bushranger.

    So not expecting this to be an accurate recreation of the historical Kelly gang, I actually found it a surprisingly unencumbered and refreshing movie. It was sentimental and romantic, but thankfully not anywhere as cheesy as it could have been; for my fellow Australians, watch 'The Lighthorseman' and you will see what I mean (it is a pity the way that story was treated so poorly). Perhaps the love affair business could have been forsaken for a bit more detail in other areas, such as the shooting of the troopers. Ironically, I actually enjoyed the movie because of that, because it would be those details that most of the focus on Ned's story would dwell. And they are the details of the story that are best discovered by reading the different viewpoints given by the various historians.

    This movie was always going to have a hard time, having make a compromise of appealing to a global movie market (to pay the pills) and the legend as it means to Australians; perhaps a little of Ned's spirit is in this movie, because I think it rebelled against people's expectations, and unfortunately missed both targets. Fortunately it made for an enjoyable quirk of a film. For me it was an unexpected kind of movie about Ned, and that is why I liked it. Orlando Bloom's performance did a lot for the movie too - he really added something. I think he would have enjoyed being the monster instead of the pretty elf, for a change.

    When you consider some other movies that are far worse than this one, your opinion of this movie should be reconsidered. Send me this on DVD for christmas rather than Croc Dundee or The Man From Snowy River anytime.
  • I watched this on the movies with my girlfriend at the time and I can say that I didn't have the best time mainly because I didn't know about Ned Kelly or his story.

    But since this is a biopic, it's important to at least know what to expect from the character.

    I don't know if the manner the events are told are true, or if it everything is fictional. But the way Ned Kelly is portrayed as a hero and a fighter for justice really makes me want to believe everything is true. I don't think he's portrayed as a redneck criminal or thief, but that's just my opinion.

    This is a solid Western-type movie for everybody's tastes. Heath Ledger is great as always and the sexy Naomi Watts charms the screen.

    Give this movie a chance if it airs on cable. Otherwise, I don't think I could recommend it.
  • I saw this at the premiere in Melbourne

    It is shallow, two-dimensional, unaffecting and, hard to believe given the subject matter, boring. The actors are passable, but they didn't have much to work with given the very plodding and unimpressive script. For those who might have worried that Ned Kelly would be over-intellectualised, you can take comfort in the fact that this telling of the story is utterly without any literary depth at all, told entirely on the surface and full of central casting standards. However, it doesn't work as a popcorn film either. Its pacing is too off-kilter and its craft is too lacking to satisfy even on the level of a mundane actioner.

    I very much doubt Gregor Jordan could sit back and say to himself "this is the best I could have done with the material".

    Ned Kelly is a fascinating figure, and equally so is the national response to him. Possibly folk genius, possibly class warrior, possibly psychopath and probably all these things, he has dominated Australian true mythology for over 120 years. Once again, his story has failed miserably on the big screen.

    Such is life.
  • I'm sure that not many people outside of Australia have ever heard of the legend of Ned Kelly. I once saw a documentary about the man, but that's the only time I once saw or heard anything about him. And I guess that this might be the biggest problem this movie will have to face. No-one knows anything about it and probably not many people will care about the subject.

    The movie tells the story of Ned Kelly's life. The Irish immigrant has lived in north-west Victoria all his life, but has never been very welcome by the authorities. The police always accuses him of everything they can think of and they keep harassing his family. When Kelly is fed up with the way everything goes, he forms a gang with his brother and two other men. They start robbing banks and even hijack an entire town for 3 days. All this violence leads to a man hunt organized by the police and when they kill three policemen, they are outlawed. Finally they take over a pub in Glenrowan, where they have a party with all the visitors, waiting for a train full of police to derail at a part of the track that they tore up. But the train is able to stop in time because someone warns them and what will follow is a battle on life and death between the police and the four gunmen...

    It's very hard to tell whether all of what is shown in the movie is true or false. I guess nobody really knows, because there will always be two camps who will each tell their own truth: one camp says he was a hero, some kind of Robin Hood, the others will say he was an ordinary criminal, a murderer and a thief. I really couldn't tell you which of them is right, perhaps both are, but what I can tell you is that the facts in the movie as well as is the documentary were about the same.

    This movie was a nice addition to the documentary I once saw and I really enjoyed the performances of all the actors. Heath Ledger, Orlando Bloom, Naomi Watts, Geoffrey Rush are all actors who are pretty well known, but even the lesser known actors show in this production that they all know what good acting should look like. I really enjoyed this movie and I give it a 7.5/10
  • By all accounts, this version of the story of Edward Kelly, outlaw, reflects the latest historical consensus on the facts and background of his case. Heath Ledger is quite eloquent, using a fine script, but he's lost in the darkness of a badly photographed picture, to judge by the DVD, which should offer the best possible images. Unless they were acting at the express command of the producer or the director, the Lighting Director and the Director of Photography should be tasked to swim for Tasmania. Over 80 per cent of the film is so dark you cannot tell who is on the screen or what they are doing. Many of the rest are so extremely backlit that Ledger could be wearing a clown nose and no one would know. As a result, we never see the whites of the eyes of the actors except in the biggest setpieces. A pretty good movie could have been made from this script. This, however, is a mediocre audiobook.
  • From the very beginning, the political theme of this film is so obvious and heavy handed, that the outcome is entirely predictable. Any good textbook on writing screenplays will advise layering of characters, incorporating character arcs, and three act structure. In this film you will find none of that. The police are the baddies, and consequently are shown as shallow, incompetent and cowards. It never seems to occur to the makers of this film that police might be honourable citizens who see joining the police as a good way to contribute to the wellbeing of society.

    The viewer gets no opportunity to make up his or her mind on whether Ned Kelly is a good guy or a ruthless villain. The film opens with him being arrested for stealing a horse, but we get no clue as to his guilt or innocence. We see him walk through the door of a gaol, but only know that he has been inside for three years when we hear this much later in some dialogue.

    This film contains many shots of Ned looking at the camera with a serious expression. I found the film a real chore to watch. It is the direction for modern films, and this one put me off watching any more.
  • "Ned Kelly" is a straight-forward re-telling of the legendary Australian who has a powerful symbolism as both an outlaw and a revolutionary.

    It is not based on the award-winning novel by Peter Carey, "True History of the Ned Kelly Gang," because the rights to that were taken by the Irish Neil Jordan to the consternation of nationalists who rallied around this adaptation of Robert Drewe's "Our Sunshine." But, oddly, though Drewe is listed as a co-producer, this chronological narrative by first-timer John M. McDonagh flattens out the power of the novella's focus on the final three-days' battle that's as important to Australia as "Remember the Alamo!" is to Texans.

    Director Gregor Jordan particularly undercuts the core of Kelly's transformation in the public imagination from petty criminal to charismatic Robin Hood to uprising leader against injustice by barely letting Heath Ledger dictate a few lines of the so-called 'Jerilderie Letter' perhaps because it is the powerful centerpiece of the voice of the Carey book. Ledger's basso voice-over connectors do resonate.

    Jordan opts for portends of the key confrontation that will only be caught by those familiar with the legend -- Kelly idly looking through an illustrated book about body armor, the loading up of the infamous train that will carry the police to the attack, and Geoffrey Rush replaying his Inspector Javert, but with only implications of a "Les Miserables" back story.

    Jordan presides over an excellent recreation of the milieu of the time. There's a strong visual evocation in the art and set direction of time, place, and geography, especially with Oliver Stapleton's beautiful cinematography. The social class differences between descendants of POMmies (Prisoners of his Majesty) and their British overlords, are documented starkly, particularly in carrying over the Irish vs. British conflict to another continent (though the bland music score misses a real opportunity to illustrate that, with only a couple of traditional Celtic songs literally stuck in).

    Non-Aussie Orlando Bloom makes quite a dashing Joe Byrne, Kelly's best friend, attracting Rachel Griffiths in a somewhat silly cameo, and many other recognizable Australian actors pass through.

    Unfortunately, Naomi Watts and Ledger can be added to the lengthy list of real-life lovers who evince little reel chemistry -- did that only work to our benefit for Bogart/Bacall and Tracy/Hepburn?
  • Ned Kelly never hit theatres where I live and kept its publicity to a minimum when it was released. It was so low-key that is completely slipped under my radar, in spite of having big blockbuster names gracing its cast list. Overall, I found it to be a good film. It didn't look too promising in the beginning--it is very slow in all respects--but picks up in both action and emotion about halfway through. The last fifteen minutes or so are fantastically handled and very touching. I also liked the writing that took the form of a great and realistic dialogue.

    The problems I had with the film were mostly in the plot, and particularly plot holes, like "Why would he do that?" and "How could that person know that?". But Ned Kelly is based on a true story and supposedly stays fairly accurate to the events in the life of the real Australian outlaw Ned Kelly, so I can only trust the film to depict things that were already there. As in, maybe it WASN'T explained in Kelly's life how a certain person could know a certain thing, or why one of the bandits did the things they did. I'll give the filmmakers the benefit of doubt on this one. Another problem that most people seem to have with the film and that is unforgivable is the allocation of weight placed on the different characters. The brilliant Geoffrey Rush as the head policeman chasing after Ned Kelly and his bandits is something of an untapped source; he doesn't get nearly enough screen-time and his character isn't nearly explored enough. We want to know what drives him, more than his profession, to go after Ned Kelly with gigantic police contingent. No satisfying explanation is ever really offered and Rush's character ends up one-dimensional and his struggle emotionless.

    We feel for Ned Kelly's gang of bandits, but we're not with them every step of the way as the film fails in establishing a true "hero-feeling". The closest we come to feeling this way is when Ned gives one of his pep-talks to the hostages in the banks he robs, urging people to fight the "coppers" and resist the harsh rule. That's nice and all, but it's not enough. I felt more for the characters during the last ten minutes than I did throughout the entire film.
  • To bad that this movie only turned out average, because i feel that the story had a lot of potential, a lot of heroic moments and such that there weren't taken advantage off, and generally the movie got boring at times because it felt like all the action had been cut off, which was the thing that dissapointed me the most, it ends up with a movie that follows this gang, but the movie lacks intensity so you don't really feel with them, maybe if you saw their suffering more you would get closer with the head characters.

    The movie spends more time on portraying the villains, the police force, and they are very obvious portrayed as the bad guys here, and they are the bad guys no doubt about that, but i think more time should have been spend on showing what it was really like to be among the opressed people at this time, and the story have got the potential to display a man who had the power and desire to stand against the englishmen who ruled the country at the times, it's actually one of these typical heroic stories we see portrayed often, but we love them everytime if it's done to perfection, sadly this is not the case in this movie, so considering the potential of the movie i can only conclude that i expected this movie to be more than it is.

    Besides this the acting is pretty good, although i wished we had seen more to Naomi Watts.

    On a last comment i can only say that the language is very annoying, this australian or irish or what it is is very annoying, and i couldn't understand much of it, thnx god for danish subs i guess.

    6/10
  • Warning: Spoilers
    A few of us went to check out Ned Kelly a few days ago, and more

    or less got what we expected. For those that are unfamiliar with

    the story of Australia's most famous Bushranger ('outlaw'), Ned

    Kelly lived in country Victoria (south-eastern Australia) between

    1854 and 1880. The son of Irish immigrants, his family was

    singled out for attention by the local police.

    <Spoilers in this next paragraph!>

    After killing a few policeman while being hunted down for horse

    stealing, a huge sum was placed on his head. Rather than lie low,

    the Kelly gang resorted to robbing banks etc. Ned was eventually

    captured at the siege of Glenrowan, the other gang members

    killed. He was hung at the Old Melbourne Gaol in 1880 amongst

    considerable opposition. Since then Ned has become an Australian icon, due in no small part to the fact that the police force

    at the time was highly corrupt and had (initially) persecuted his

    family somewhat unjustifiably. For one last bit of trivia, in recent

    times, sketchy evidence has come forward suggesting that it was

    actually Ned's brother Dan that was captured at Glenrowan, and

    that Ned escaped.

    <Spoilers end here>

    That said, this film takes huge liberties with the truth, and writes a

    fair bit of its own history too in order to provide a completely

    unobjective look at the history behind these events. The story is

    fine as a work of fiction, but it needs to be stressed that the real

    story is not nearly so black-and-white. Ned's family was known to

    police because his father was a criminal, and Ned did kill several

    policemen. It is hardly arguable that the police could let this matter

    lie and let a 'cop killer' go.

    Heath Ledger and Orlando Bloom do a great job with the script

    they are given and provide very solid performances. Those of you

    not native to Australia may enjoy some of the _many_ shots of

    native flora and fauna that litter the movie too.

    While I was entertained, I did find that, even as a work of fiction, the

    one-sidedness of the 'good vs. evil' in the story was too much to

    swallow. It would have been better if the script had taken some

    more shades of grey into account (as the real characters no doubt

    had!)

    Overall I give this a 6/10.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    SPOILERS Each country and time has it's own legends. In the American West there are countless cowboys who broke the law yet who are revered. In England we have the fictional Robin Hood who represented the medieval times and the idea of taking from the rich and giving to the poor. In Australia, they have Ned Kelly. A figure stone of Australian history, Kelly is a tricky subject to handle. In 2003's adaptation of Robert Drewe's "Our Sunshine" though, director Gregor Jordan and actor Heath Ledger have created a solid and well constructed presentation of the legend.

    Like so many Irish in the Australian colony, Ned Kelly (Ledger) and his family suffer from the bullying of the police. After stopping one of these drunken officers from hurting the family, Ned is declared an outlaw and goes on the run. Now, as an outlaw, with his brother Dan (Laurence Kinlan) and friends Joe Byrne (Orlando Bloom) and Steve Hart (Phil Barantini), Kelly's gang roam the Australian outback trying to get justice and the release of Kelly's imprisoned mother.

    Based on such a tricky subject, "Ned Kelly" could easily have folded in on itself to become a hideous mess. It survived though and although not without flaws, it is a decent enough film to watch.

    Perhaps the biggest reason for the film's final copy being good is that the main stars perform admirably. Sidestepping the 'play it by numbers' performance of Geoffrey Rush (an amazing actor who often gives the impression that he's not trying), the film is saved because both Heath Ledger and Orlando Bloom give the performances of their lifetimes (to present). Bloom in particular as Kelly's friend Byrne is a surprise. Not the finest actor by any stretch of the imagination, in fact he's often awful, Bloom is superb as the loyal Joe Byrne who stands by Kelly to the end and never gives in.

    The film of "Ned Kelly" is obviously about the headline character though and as Kelly, Heath Ledger has come of age. Ledger has given some good performances over the years. His performance in "The Patriot" for example is the one saving grace in that otherwise abomination of a movie. It is as Ned Kelly however that Ledger has found his home. An Australian by birth, Ledger is rumoured to have been cast for the role because he was exactly the same height and shape as Kelly (he tried on Kelly's original armour), at times though through such superb acting, you wonder if he isn't actually the reincarnation of the character. Ledger is brilliant in the role and the actor might as well retire now because it's doubtful he will ever shake off the mantle of this character and will always be remembered as Kelly.

    Aside from the acting and your general every day special effects, the most important thing about this film is it's script. Based on a novel by Robert Drewe, "Ned Kelly" is a brilliantly written film with entertaining moments and tension throughout. There are definite flaws with the script admittedly. The resolution of a few characters plots and the decision not to explore certain avenues, but in regard to the important characters of Kelly and his gang, the story covers all the right topics and leaves us happily satisfied. In fact, if there is one complaint, it is that the film doesn't finish with the traditional historical blurb of what happens to the surviving characters. Still, this is a minor flaw since so much of the film is so well made.

    Ned Kelly is an important figure in Australia. Not known that well anywhere else, the character stands up for justice just like so many other major figures (real and fictional) have in world history. Made into a film, his story could so easily have been destroyed and badly made. Luckily however, the film of the outlaw is both well written and well acted. It's plot doesn't cover every potential angle, and there are definite flaws in the film over all, but for simple historical entertainment, you can't go far wrong with this.
  • There are few films that leave me with the feeling that Gregor Jordan's 'Ned Kelly' film did. Initially I had heard only half hearted recommendations, and decided to see it for myself. Since then, I have acquired both the video and soundtrack, and have to say that after several viewings, I am still very impressed with the underlying character of this film. It is also wonderful to see something Australian! I appreciate its down to earth quality, that if you ask me is a rarity, as well as the absence of tackiness that takes away from so many films. This film proves that you don't necessarily require fancy costumes and a glamorous set that absorbs how many millions of dollars to make a point. The cast was a bonus, including a variety of well known, and might I add, good looking people who did well to slip into the role of such unique characters. It is interesting to note, that much of the criticism regarding this film has been about who played what, and how they only said so many lines. However, if any criticism is due, it should constructively focus on the fact that a number of basic elements of the original events were excluded. In reality, these functioned to made it the hallmark that it is in Australian history. For example, on a closer examination it can be discovered that there was much, much more to the relationship between Joe Byrne and Aaron Sheritt, and that this was in fact responsible for many more of the final outcomes for the gang than were explored in the film. Also overlooked was the fact that it was not only Aaron Sheritt's efforts alone, that provided the Victorian police with their insights into the unfolding mystery. Yes, this is their interpretation of the story, and it is understandable that true stories require sensationalism and at times the modification of the original plot to grab the viewers attention. I feel that in this case, this is the only limitation. However, I can accept that perhaps historical accuracy is only of significance to those who have a particular interest in the realistic events behind a situation. It certainly inspired me to look more closely. So, watch it and decide for yourself. You might not like it at all, thats your opinion, and thats fine. Maybe it is a film that appeals largely to an Australian audience? For me, I'd call it a breath of fresh air!
  • vicky96119 November 2006
    I have just watched Ned Kelly and found it to be a very dark-sad movie- but after reading the history of the man turned legend-i found the movie as true to character-but as the director stated-it was his own depiction and not quoted by book-I found that Heath Ledger & Orlando Bloom made the characters believable. Ned felt wrongly convicted because of his station in life & took matters in to his own hands-but stayed true to family, mates & his convictions-i compared this movie to that of Braveheart or Robin hood-trying to sort out between the fiction and the facts everyone has their own feelings or opinions about things-it's all on the viewers perception-so in my opinion-i found this movie one of the better ones i've seen in a while.
  • I have an excellent idea for a film. Let's take a story about someone who has been persecuted by the laws of their country all their life and due to his bad relations with the authorities, his family is arrested and charged with a crime they did not commit. Let's say that this person then gets together a makeshift posse and fights back which results in many lawmen dead and gun fire battles that will blazen the screen.

    With out plot now set, now we should try and get two young leads to ensure the teenage ticket buyers. I know, maybe Heath Ledger (A Knight's Tale) and the red-hot Orlando Bloom (Lord of the Rings). To add some credibility to the film, let's now try and grab an international star - someone who is both known to the public and has won over the critics. I know, Geoffery Rush, hot off The Pirates of the Caribbean. Now with just one more piece to fill, that being the love interest, let's try and nab another scorching superstar, say, Naomi Watts who has been nominated for Academy Awards in recent history and is also coming off a critically revered film in 21 Grams. So, let's put all this together and try and wrap it up in a true story to add authenticity. There! Pure movie magic that is impossible to fail.

    What? It's already been done you say? Ned Kelly? What the hell was Ned Kelly?

    Alright, enough fun. Ned Kelly was released in 2003 and indeed starred Ledger, Watts, Bloom and Rush in the roles mentioned above. The story was about the Australian outlaw who robbed banks and eventually had control over a whole town as what seemed to be the entire Australian police force raining down upon them. Using body armor, the fugitives come out ahead in a battle that is Australia's equivalent to the American OK Corral, but eventually are overpowered due to sheer numbers. Ledger plays the title role of Kelly who after a stint in prison resulting in being provoked by a copper, becomes a free man only to find the prejudice against his family as a result of his fathers actions are still resonating strongly amongst those in uniform. When an over anxious cop tires to make moves on a female member of the Kelly household, he ends up bloodied but alive and uses the sympathy from other officers to lead an all out attack on Kelly and his band of outlaws.

    Directed by Gregor Jordan who directed the wonderfully misunderstood Buffalo Soldiers (2001), Ned Kelly is a mess of a film. Not since Sam Raimi's The Quick and the Dead has such a talented cast been put to such poor use in trying to tell a story that should have the audience cheering in the aisles with every fallen corrupt baddie. However, the development of the characters and the overall interest in the story doesn't lead one to care either way who wins out in the end. Jordan wastes an opportunity he may never see again in having such star power sharing the screen at the same time – especially the underused Watts who has a part in the film so underdeveloped that putting her name on the films poster should result in a false advertising suit. Geoffrey Rush seems to sleepwalk through his role as Francais Hare, the head copper who leads the troops into battle against the young Kelly gang. Uninterested and misunderstood, this is Rush's worst paycheck choice since Mystery Men (1999).

    If the fact that you never saw Ned Kelly advertised or on the marquee at your local theatre surprises you, maybe you will be completely bewildered to find out that the movie had been made once before in 1970. Tony Richardson solicited the aide of acting newbee Mick Jagger in the lead role over 30 years ago, which begs the question, who was barking for this remake in the first place? (That is rhetorical as I imagine it was the same people who thought the remake of Get Carter with Sly Stallone was a good idea too).

    For all the names you will read on the DVD box, Ned Kelly is one to stay away from. Which is a shame really. I imagine that the story (based on the book Our Sunshine by Robert Drewe) is a remarkable one of a young man – Kelly was 25 years old when caught – who was endeared by the countrymen while being hunted by the police. The epilogue reads that despite 32,000 signatures, Ned Kelly was hung for his crimes in 1880, and that is nothing to shake a stick at…I bet less that 32,000 people actually went to the theatres to see this failure.

    www.gregsrants.com
  • The performances were superb, the costumes delivered a unique feeling for the period and being a Victorian Living Historian, I was impressed with the accuracy of weaponry and attention to detail.

    I wouldn't say you need any knowledge of the Kelly saga to stay with the flow of this movie but to comprehend the happenings and attitudes of the time you will require a bit of basic historical knowledge. Do not expect, as some rather silly people do, any of the characters to have the Auzzie accent as we know it, it was, at that time, a country during infancy.

    OK, the story had some elements of fiction but these are required for a wider following of the film. Gregor Jordan said in the extra feature on the DVD that he wanted his movie to 'inspire an interest', and that is exactly what happened with me so this movie gets the thumbs up here.

    See it and you WILL NOT be sorry
  • Ned Kelly (2003, Dir. Gregor Jordan)

    After getting threatened by Kelly's friends and family, Constable Fitzpatrick (Paramore) places the blame on Ned Kelly (Ledger) and exaggerates what happened. With the biggest ever award available, Kelly and his gang set into the wild, to remain hidden from everyone who seeks them. Even if it means having his family arrested, the Kelly Gang stay hidden and plan a way to get their names cleared.

    Interesting story of Ned Kelly, played well by Heath Ledger. Took a while for the film to get going, with the conclusion really hooking you in. The supporting characters were well played by Orlando Bloom and Geoffrey Rush. Naomi Watts brought to us an interesting character, but one which really the film could have done without.

    He said what a lucky fellow I am to be with such a beauty as you. – Joe Bryne (Orlando Bloom)

    Too lucky, if you ask me. – Aaron Sherritt (Joel Edgerton)
  • meako197323 September 2003
    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!
An error has occured. Please try again.