True History of the Kelly Gang

Bon film !

Takes a classic bit of Aussie history/fable and writes a new version with some similarities. Entertaining enough and rather poetic. Shot well, but quite up and down in terms of performances, altogether okay. If you're looking for a Hollywood blockbuster version of Ned Kelly's story, this isn't it! Likely to frustrate the hell out of anyone that reveres Ned Kelly and the story as told, which greatly amuses me and adds to this movie's charm. Overall quite good.

Mackay jumps out of the screen with his almost 0 percent pure muscle physique and anamalistic introduction. Both madening and enlightening mackay pulls a performance that stuns and takes viwers into the soul of a desperate man with a will to not be beaten down. Cinematography is beautiful as always with davis a stunning and wild mother whilst young ned is also extraordinary. Dont miss it

Despite the bad reviews for this film. I still preserved since the caliber of Mr Kurzel's past works are way beyond his peers. Sadly I was very wrong. This is camp satirical rubbish 101. But don't take my word for it. Go waste 2hrs of your life you'll regret.

How does a film like this get a green light? As a Kelly historian and an appreciator of Carey's novel upon which this film claims to be based, the final outcome of Kurzel's failed attempt does a disservice to both Carey and Australian history. I reckon he'd be lucky to get a job directing Neighbours episodes after this embarrassment.

Found this tricky to follow at times. And it kept bothering me that Ned was blonde and beardless!

Worst ned kelly film ever! Wouldn't recommend to anyone

Have the makers of this film have any clout? Are their skull cavities being covertly invaded by memory cell-eating worms? We see far too many flaws & fictional boolshyt one after another & so on in this rout. l take it the only thing that make sense of their "true story" is that this flick is obviously about another Kelly gang in another parallel universe, where names & faces do things differently.

If they had drawn out the first half, with Ned Kelly as a kid hanging out with Russell Crowe, then you've got a pretty good movie on your hands. I really like what I've seen of George MacKay so far, so I was excited for the second half that covers Kelly as an adult, but rarely have I seen a movie go so far off the rails. Forget that it's historical fantasy. What starts off as a pretty good movie just suddenly becomes unnecessarily hard to follow, pretentiously artsy, surreal, silly, and absurd. Scenes that contain what should be tragic are instead farcical and unintentionally funny, which is all the more bizarre being that the first thirty minutes are so are strong. Mostly I'm irritated that it was such a bait and switch, because had the beginning been as weak as the rest of the movie I wouldn't have gotten invested enough to needlessly see it through to the end.

Not much to recommend it. I gave it 6! Why? Loyalty to an Australian movie? Sadly it is part of what's wrong with Aust movies. Govt supported (federal AND states, which have bureaucratic hide-bound regulations on content). Was this the director's first film? Looked like it. Far too long at 124 mins. I frequently looked at my watch, which is NOT a good thing. Funereal sound track made me want to leave. In fact I almost did half way through because the plot was getting nowhere. The first half with young Ned was to me unnecessary and the all too brief role of 'our Rusty' Crowe the only good part. Ned is known for his bad guy stuff, of which in the second half there is little. The female clothing stuff?! Where did THAT come from? A very seld-indulgent movie. Directors who do that show contempt for their audiences. I will lower my score to 2.