User reviews

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 .

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.

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

"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+)

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.

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.

Being an Australian who has been around for a number of years I am a little incensed at what seems a lack of our film makers ability to produce films which,in my opinion,depict what our history must have been like - the Ned Kelly film is no exception to this.

Ned must have been a little more threatening than the naughty boy scout that Heath Ledger portrayed and really were the police that stupid. This litany of stereotypes and clichés put me to bed only half way through and i dreamed of a holiday in North Eastern Victoria, it looked like a very nice place. I'm not sure if this was the director's intention

"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

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!

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.

They constructed this one as a kind of fantasy Man From Snowy River meets Butch Cassidy and the Sundance kid, and just for a romantic touch Ned and Joe get to play away with high class talent, the bored young wives of wealthy older men. OK, there are lots of myths about Ned Kelly, but there are also a lot of well documented facts, still leaving space for artistic creativity in producing a good historical dramaticisation. I mean, this is not the Robin Hood story, not the Arthurian legends, not Beowulf, not someone whose life is so shrouded in the mists of many many centuries past that any recreation of their life and times is 99% guesswork. It's only a couple of lifetimes ago. My own grandparents were already of school age when Ned was hanged.

So it's silly me for fancifully imagining this movie was a serious attempt to tell the Kelly story. Having recently read Peter Carey's excellent novel "The True History of the Kelly Gang" I had eagerly anticipated that this would be in similar vein. But no, the fact is that Mick Jagger's much derided 1970 Kelly was probably far closer to reality, and a better movie overall, which isn't saying a whole lot for it.

Glad it only cost me two bucks to hire the DVD! I'll give it 3/10, and that's only because some of the nice shots of the Australian bush make me feel generous.

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), directed by Gregor Jordan, brings to life the story of one of Australia's most famous historical figures, the infamous outlaw Ned Kelly. Based on Robert Drewe's novel Our Sunshine, this adaptation is a moody and atmospheric portrayal of Kelly's rise from a poor Irish immigrant to a folk hero who defied the British authorities.

**Plot and Structure** The film follows the life of Ned Kelly (Heath Ledger), who, after enduring a childhood filled with poverty, injustice, and mistreatment by the law, turns to a life of crime. With his brother Dan Kelly (Laurence Kinlan) and friends Joe Byrne (Orlando Bloom) and Steve Hart (Philip Barantini), they form the Kelly Gang. The gang's increasingly daring robberies and confrontations with the police lead them to become wanted men, culminating in the infamous final showdown at Glenrowan, a key moment in Australia's history.

The film is structured like a traditional biopic, charting Kelly's early life, his descent into crime, and his eventual status as both a criminal and a hero to the Australian people. Jordan's direction maintains a slow-burn intensity throughout, emphasizing Kelly's internal conflict between loyalty to his family and his rage against the injustices of the British colonial authorities.

**Performances** Heath Ledger delivers a brooding and powerful performance as Ned Kelly. His portrayal captures Kelly's charisma, toughness, and vulnerability, showcasing the outlaw as both a hero of the oppressed and a man deeply scarred by the hardships of his life. Ledger's physical presence and quiet intensity are the driving forces behind the film, anchoring it in an emotional and grounded reality.

Orlando Bloom as Joe Byrne brings a touch of charm and lightness to balance Ledger's brooding intensity, while Naomi Watts as Julia Cook, a landowner's wife who becomes romantically involved with Ned, adds emotional depth to the story, though her character feels underutilized in the broader narrative.

Geoffrey Rush, as the relentless police officer Francis Hare, provides a solid performance, representing the unyielding arm of the law that is determined to capture Kelly at any cost.

**Tone and Themes** "Ned Kelly" is steeped in themes of rebellion, injustice, and loyalty. The film portrays Kelly not just as a criminal, but as a symbol of resistance against the oppressive British colonial system that exploited and marginalized poor Irish immigrants. This socio-political backdrop gives the film its emotional weight, highlighting the class struggles that fuel Kelly's rebellion.

The film's tone is dark and somber, emphasizing the grim realities of life in colonial Australia. The beautiful, yet harsh, Australian landscape is used effectively to mirror Kelly's journey-wild, untamed, and unforgiving. While there are moments of action and excitement, the film is more focused on the internal and external struggles of Kelly as he tries to reconcile his desire for justice with the violent path he is forced to take.

**Visuals and Cinematography** Cinematographer Oliver Stapleton captures the rugged beauty of the Australian outback in a way that enhances the film's atmosphere. The wide, expansive shots of the landscape give the film a sense of grandeur while reinforcing the isolation and desperation of Kelly and his gang. The muted color palette, often filled with earthy tones, further emphasizes the bleakness of their situation and the harshness of life on the run.

The film's production design is also commendable, with period-appropriate costumes and settings that help immerse the audience in the historical context of the story.

Criticisms While "Ned Kelly" offers strong performances and atmospheric visuals, it occasionally falters in pacing, with some parts of the film feeling slow or stretched out. The romantic subplot with Julia Cook, while adding a softer dimension to Kelly's character, feels underdeveloped and doesn't integrate as seamlessly into the larger story as it could have.

Additionally, while the film delves into Kelly's personal motivations and hardships, it doesn't fully explore the wider political and social implications of his actions, leaving some of the broader historical context underexplored.

**Conclusion** "Ned Kelly" is a thoughtful and atmospheric retelling of the story of Australia's most iconic outlaw. While it leans more into the tragic and emotional aspects of Kelly's life than the action-packed mythology that surrounds him, it offers a nuanced look at the man behind the legend. Heath Ledger's captivating performance and the film's gritty tone make it a compelling historical drama, though its slow pacing and underdeveloped subplots may leave some viewers wanting more.

Rating: 7/10 A well-acted, visually stunning film that captures the essence of Ned Kelly's struggle against colonial oppression, "Ned Kelly" is a solid, if somewhat uneven, historical drama. Heath Ledger's powerful performance elevates the film, making it a memorable entry into the retelling of this legendary Australian story.

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.