WakenPayne If you're an Australian then you would have heard the name Ned Kelly. He's an extremely famous historical figure that fought the corrupt law in his day and kind of became the Aussie Robin Hood, I've even visited the jail where he was hanged and looked at the cell where he was kept. With that said I am a little foggy on the details, lets just say I'm probably the least educated an Aussie can get when it comes to this guy (save for actually visiting Melbourne Jail) and this movie is not kind to the uninitiated on this topic. For one thing, the soundtrack is god awful - There's this kind of country/rock singer who starts singing about the Kelly gang and it's just not good. What perplexes me is that they got Mick Jagger to act but not to do something about the soundtrack - I mean if The Rolling Stones released a song, it would be weird but it would also be decent promotional material for the movie considering their popularity at the time. Oh and Mick Jagger never once is convincing in his role, his Irish accent is awful and in terms of emoting it's either the wrong delivery (the last line is threatening a judge, whereas he makes it sound like he's making plans for a party or something) or it's non-existent. The pacing is also pretty choppy, I had to ask for context behind where we are in the story... With that said I'll go onto the good things. The cinematography is actually decent enough and if you sit through this movie enough to get to the final gunfight it is actually... expertly done, it aims for realism and succeeds but the framing, the editing, pretty much everything about that scene is worth at least tracking down a clip of it. While I have seen worse the end result is extremely forgettable, I've heard of a high budget Heath Ledger movie made in 2005 that looks better or if you want to find something more obscure and detailed the 6 hour mini-series The Last Outlaw I've heard is also pretty good. All in all, this is a movie I'll eventually forget I even saw it in a matter of weeks.

nicodemusweb When I saw this film in Sydney when it first came out I thought it was a mini-masterpiece. Always a big fan of Tony Richardson and surprised by Jagger's brilliant interpretation of an Aussie legend. It came across as very 'real', almost a Gothic riff on an enigmatic criminal who created his own metal armor to ward off bullets.The soundtrack was quiet, haunting. but when I rented it in NYC to turn some friends on to it, I found that the film was spoiled by a dopey country and western soundtrack, (ned was from Ireland not the Midwest United States) awful garbage by Waylon Jennings.Dear Mr Jennings, I'll pay you twice what the U.S. distributors paid you to take your hideous noise off this (originally superb) film.

bamptonj The criticism this film seems to receive every few years is quite intense. After viewing it, however, I feel that the comments made by the most vocal of critics are unwarranted.Had the movie been an entire work of fiction and the Ned Kelly saga made up as an original screenplay, then many may have applauded this movie. The movie can definitely be enjoyed as a work of cinematic art, but obviously as an ode or anthology to the life of such an important Australian historical identity it can do nothing but fail in the telling of Ned Kelly's story. Hopefully, however, Neil Jordan's upcoming offering may get closer in creating such a testament.On cinematic terms, NED KELLY it is somewhat enthralling, though it does fail to hit the high-note. For this, I can pinpoint no one particular error so it must instead be a combination of many. People will want to know whether Jagger acts well. Surprisingly, I think this is hard question to answer, but it is the least of our worries here.The direction is rather adequate, though some scenes are quite nicely photographed -especially the end shoot-out. The editing at the start is quite impressive. The first major miscalculation, of course, are the problems encountered when casting a slim, Englishman as the sturdy protagonist who is supposed to be an overwhelming 6'4 Irish-Australian. This miscasting is confounded with Jagger's pathetic attempt at a full-grown beard which makes our hero - or anti-hero - look Amish. The trailer's claim that `if Ned Kelly were alive today.he'd probably be Mick Jagger', therefore, is quite arguable.There is also an over-abundance of soundtrack music. I have no reservations about that. Most of lyrics to the folky, country soundtrack act as direct commentary to the proceedings of the story we see or are asides that relate directly to it. Almost instantaneously it becomes repetitious and highly corny.The biggest problem is, however, the lack of any serious character development. The film concentrates mainly on Ned and gives a little consideration to Dan, Steve and Joe, who in reality were as much a part of the gang as Ned was. The development is so negligent that barely even lip service is paid to identity of several key characters. You can be forgiven for not knowing that the man shot in the groin was actually a member of the Kelly gang!In conclusion, the film gives itself no chance of a being remembered as a classic. It would be nice, perhaps, if the film had of been directed by an Australian. No, forget that. A Victorian.

John Seal This potted history of the infamous Australian outlaw benefits tremendously from Gerry Fisher's frequently ravishing photography but is ultimately doomed by its paint by numbers screenplay and the star turn by Mick Jagger (who reportedly dismissed the film as a "load of s**t"). Frankly, a bearded Jagger speaking in a weak brogue reminded me more of Warwick Davis in the Leprechaun series than it did of a legendary Robin Hood style badman. Shel Silverstein's faux-folk songs haven't aged well either.