2016 RTE Drama: Rebellion - no spoilers please (mod warning in post #1)

KingBrian2

josephryan1989 wrote: »

There's no comic relief whatsoever.
A number of funny episodes happened during the Rising.
A bunch of Cumann na mBan girls armed with revolvers were guarding a British airman held prisoner in the summer house at the corner of St. Stephen's Green after he had been walking out with his sweetheart. Typical Irish women they had cake and sandwiches and tea made. While the Countess was away the airman and his female captors apparently got up to some hanky panky and when she returned she threatened the hussies with court martials!
The groundskeeper apparently negotiated a cease-fire between the British military and the rebels so he could feed the ducks before the shooting for going again.
And in the middle of the shooting and shelling on O'Connell Street men from the slums continued to visit the pubs and despite hails of bullets and shrapnel staggered home drunk without a scratch.
Many Dubliners actually came out to watch the scrap as if it was entertainment even though stray shots claimed many lives.

It was pretty epic. The fighters were finally slogging it out against the occupying force. The combatants had the sympathy of a great many people and seeing their heroes taken on the might of the bloody Imperialists was great site to behold.

Dangerous hell yeah though for the kids it must have been exciting. The soldiers with their bayonets and commanders issuing the orders against the backdrop of the unrelenting blasts of machine fire. Martial law then being imposed and the civilians disregarding the draconian laws to embrace freedom.

ectoraige

KingBrian2 wrote: »

It was pretty epic. The fighters were finally slogging it out against the occupying force. The combatants had the sympathy of a great many people and seeing their heroes taken on the might of the bloody Imperialists was great site to behold.

Dangerous hell yeah though for the kids it must have been exciting. The soldiers with their bayonets and commanders issuing the orders against the backdrop of the unrelenting blasts of machine fire. Martial law then being imposed and the civilians disregarding the draconian laws to embrace freedom.

What show was that, sounds good?

KingBrian2

ectoraige wrote: »

What show was that, sounds good?

Just describing the moment. Describing the moment.

The Rape of Lucretia

Ruth Bradley's Irish accent is poor in this. Has she lost her natural Irish accent, or is she trying, poorly, to do some specific county accent ? Sounds like an English person doing a reasonable imitation of a generic Irish one.

josephryan1989

fisgon wrote: »

"hanky-panky" with his captors - plural? Please elaborate....

The guy's name was Pratt apparently!

I hope they recreate the Battle Of Mount Street Bridge in the next episode.
If Sam Pekinpah or Sergio Leone had made a movie about the Rising it would have been epic!
Liam Cunningham have a brilliant performance as Michael Malone in Rebel Heart shooting down British Tommies until his last round.
The last stand at No.25 Northumberland Road and Clanwilliam Road has been sometimes called the Irish Thermopalyae.

The Rape of Lucretia

fisgon wrote: »

"hanky-panky" with his captors - plural? Please elaborate....

Hanky-panky as in high jinks, or hanky panky as in plumpi strumpi ?

weadick

The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »

Ruth Bradley's Irish accent is poor in this. Has she lost her natural Irish accent, or is she trying, poorly, to do some specific county accent ? Sounds like an English person doing a reasonable imitation of a generic Irish one.

Yeah sounds like a poor attempt at a Dub at doing a culchie accent. At a guess I'd say shes meant to be from the midlands, Carlow/Kilkenny area. Same flat monotone tones.

TICKLE_ME_ELMO

Pretty sure she's supposed to be from Galway. Although why I have that in my head I'm not sure. Sounds fine to me anyway.

HeidiHeidi

The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »

Ruth Bradley's Irish accent is poor in this. Has she lost her natural Irish accent, or is she trying, poorly, to do some specific county accent ? Sounds like an English person doing a reasonable imitation of a generic Irish one.

Finally got around to watching Ep 2 tonight - and have to agree and more with this comment.

Ruth Bradley's character for me is far and away the worst of the three girls. I know people are saying Charlie Murphy's character is flat, and has no lines or development, and I'd agree with that - but Ruth Bradley's just keeps trotting out clichéd line after clichéd line in that awful accent - I heard someone on the radio during the week saying it was like she was put in as an "everyman" character - trying to portray a stereotype rather than an individual. Don't know if I'm expressing that right (it's very late!) but anyway, she's bloody annoying me now.

On a much lighter, more frivolous note - could we either start mentioning here, or on a separate dedicated thread (á la the L/H locations thread) where scenes were shot? It's been driving me nuts trying to figure out where Elizabeth's family house is - can someone please put me out of my misery?

And all those streets where the looting happened - were they sets or real?

The train station was the fruit market behind the four courts.

There were loads of other locations that looked really familiar, but like I say it's very late and my brain is fried!

Strazdas

HeidiHeidi wrote: »

Finally got around to watching Ep 2 tonight - and have to agree and more with this comment.

Ruth Bradley's character for me is far and away the worst of the three girls. I know people are saying Charlie Murphy's character is flat, and has no lines or development, and I'd agree with that - but Ruth Bradley's just keeps trotting out clichéd line after clichéd line in that awful accent - I heard someone on the radio during the week saying it was like she was put in as an "everyman" character - trying to portray a stereotype rather than an individual. Don't know if I'm expressing that right (it's very late!) but anyway, she's bloody annoying me now.

On a much lighter, more frivolous note - could we either start mentioning here, or on a separate dedicated thread (á la the L/H locations thread) where scenes were shot? It's been driving me nuts trying to figure out where Elizabeth's family house is - can someone please put me out of my misery?

And all those streets where the looting happened - were they sets or real?

The train station was the fruit market behind the four courts.

There were loads of other locations that looked really familiar, but like I say it's very late and my brain is fried!

I notice they have a replicate of the facade of the old Liberty Hall faithfully reconstructed from photos of the era (the place where the printing press is) but I've no idea if it's merely a film set.

TICKLE_ME_ELMO

^ I completely disagree with this (about Bradley's character)

For me she's the only one of the women whose character has anything actually going on. She's obviously a staunch republican and probably had the same stuff spouted at her growing up as she's spouting now to the young boys in the school. The rebellion she's been waiting for has finally arrived and she's been sidelined by the man she idolises and out on the streets she's seeing the people don't care for her rebellion. I thought the scene where she discovered the looting was one of the best scenes of the second episode. She went from shock to sadness to disappointment to sadness to anger to resolve to carry on all in the space of one scene.

HeidiHeidi

TICKLE_ME_ELMO wrote: »

^ I completely disagree with this (about Bradley's character)

For me she's the only one of the women whose character has anything actually going on. She's obviously a staunch republican and probably had the same stuff spouted at her growing up as she's spouting now to the young boys in the school. The rebellion she's been waiting for has finally arrived and she's been sidelined by the man she idolises and out on the streets she's seeing the people don't care for her rebellion. I thought the scene where she discovered the looting was one of the best scenes of the second episode. She went from shock to sadness to disappointment to sadness to anger to resolve to carry on all in the space of one scene.

I'll concede the scene where they came on the looters - that was very well done in fairness.

But apart from that, funny how two people can watch the same thing and have diametrically opposing views on it

HeidiHeidi

TICKLE_ME_ELMO wrote: »

^ I completely disagree with this (about Bradley's character)

For me she's the only one of the women whose character has anything actually going on. She's obviously a staunch republican and probably had the same stuff spouted at her growing up as she's spouting now to the young boys in the school. The rebellion she's been waiting for has finally arrived and she's been sidelined by the man she idolises and out on the streets she's seeing the people don't care for her rebellion. I thought the scene where she discovered the looting was one of the best scenes of the second episode. She went from shock to sadness to disappointment to sadness to anger to resolve to carry on all in the space of one scene.

I'll concede the scene where they came on the looters - that was very well done in fairness. And her shock and disappointment when Pearse came out with his clanger was brilliant too.

But apart from that, funny how two people can watch the same thing and have diametrically opposed views on it

The Rape of Lucretia

Strazdas wrote: »

I notice they have a replicate of the facade of the old Liberty Hall faithfully reconstructed from photos of the era (the place where the printing press is) but I've no idea if it's merely a film set.

I think its the old fire station in Dun Laoghaire.

fisgon

Again, I think this thing about Ruth Bradley's accent is nit-picking. Have to say I didn't notice anything wrong with it. There seems to be a determination to find something, anything, bad to say about this series.

Agree that the scene with the looters was powerful, it showed the conflict between some working class Dubs who couldn't care less about the Rising, and the idealism of the rebels.

Another criticism I have heard of this show is the Downton Abbey comparison. I have read this more than once on this thread. Again, that is just lazy, because they both have people in period dress they must be the same. They have little in common. Nor is Rebellion a soap opera, as others have said, it bears absolutely no relation to any of the usual soap opera tropes and clichés.

Someone else claimed that it was a West Brit production. Seriously!? Whatever the fcuk that means.

If people genuinely don't like this series, and have good reasons for it, then fine. But can we please stop desperately trying to find any small reason to pick holes in the production? It is Irish, goes the thought process then it must be sh1te. I think that this is a subconscious thing for a lot of us, a kind of embedded inferiority complex.

This is exactly the kind of series that will get rave reviews in Britain and the US when it is shown.

The Rape of Lucretia

fisgon wrote: »

Again, I think this thing about Ruth Bradley's accent is nit-picking. Have to say I didn't notice anything wrong with it. There seems to be a determination to find something, anything, bad to say about this series.

Overall I'm in favour of it.

Sure, accent is a small thing. And only we Irish people would notice it. But if she isnt playing a historical character that would garner criticism if she didnt attempt the correct regional accent, then why do one that come across as a bum note to our ears ?

TICKLE_ME_ELMO

The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »

Overall I'm in favour of it.

Sure, accent is a small thing. And only we Irish people would notice it. But if she isnt playing a historical character that would garner criticism if she didnt attempt the correct regional accent, then why do one that come across as a bum note to our ears ?

Probably because if everyone had Dublin accents people would have had a whinge about that too.

weadick

fisgon wrote: »

Again, I think this thing about Ruth Bradley's accent is nit-picking. Have to say I didn't notice anything wrong with it. There seems to be a determination to find something, anything, bad to say about this series.

Agree that the scene with the looters was powerful, it showed the conflict between some working class Dubs who couldn't care less about the Rising, and the idealism of the rebels.

Another criticism I have heard of this show is the Downton Abbey comparison. I have read this more than once on this thread. Again, that is just lazy, because they both have people in period dress they must be the same. They have little in common. Nor is Rebellion a soap opera, as others have said, it bears absolutely no relation to any of the usual soap opera tropes and clichés.

Someone else claimed that it was a West Brit production. Seriously!? Whatever the fcuk that means.

If people genuinely don't like this series, and have good reasons for it, then fine. But can we please stop desperately trying to find any small reason to pick holes in the production? It is Irish, goes the thought process then it must be sh1te. I think that this is a subconscious thing for a lot of us, a kind of embedded inferiority complex.

This is exactly the kind of series that will get rave reviews in Britain and the US when it is shown.

Well a good reason to be highly critical if it is because it cost 6 MILLION to make, by a state run TV station. At a time when a friend of mines mother had to sit on a trolley for 17 hours in A+E after having a stroke. She since passed away. Just because something is Irish and telling an important story it doesn't mean we should just look on it with blinkered vision, quite the opposite. Stuff like accents, set design, script, characterisation, costumes, language, etc are all hugely important. People are paid well to get these things right.

josephryan1989

The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »

I think its the old fire station in Dun Laoghaire.

I hope they show the facade getting blasted point blank by the Helga. There are two photos printed in most books about the Rising showing the building before and after. The British at first believed it was the rebel HQ but it was actually empty at the time. One of the shells struck the railway bridge over the Liffey and the clang was heard across the city.

TICKLE_ME_ELMO

weadick wrote: »

Well a good reason to be highly critical if it is because it cost 6 MILLION to make, by a state run TV station. At a time when a friend of mines mother had to sit on a trolley for 17 hours in A+E after having a stroke. She since passed away. Just because something is Irish and telling an important story it doesn't mean we should just look on it with blinkered vision, quite the opposite. Stuff like accents, set design, script, characterisation, costumes, language, etc are all hugely important. People are paid well to get these things right.

They could have paid all our water charges with the cost of this thing!! Rabble rabble!

TICKLE_ME_ELMO

Also, as far as I can find out online the BAI gave a grand total of €400,000 to this production. They didn't foot the entire €6 million. I am having trouble finding where else it came from but I assume Sundance coughed up a bit of cash for it too.

Strazdas

TICKLE_ME_ELMO wrote: »

Also, as far as I can find out online the BAI gave a grand total of €400,000 to this production. They didn't foot the entire €6 million. I am having trouble finding where else it came from but I assume Sundance coughed up a bit of cash for it too.

Sundance have come up with 50% I believe, so they are big players in it (read it somewhere this week).

fisgon

weadick wrote: »

Well a good reason to be highly critical if it is because it cost 6 MILLION to make, by a state run TV station. At a time when a friend of mines mother had to sit on a trolley for 17 hours in A+E after having a stroke. She since passed away.QUOTE]

Seriously? You are drawing a connection between the making of Rebellion and the death of your friend's mother. Just have a think about that, for a second, maybe see if that makes any sense whatsoever....

Secondly, 6 million is not a lot for a TV series. 1916 is an important milestone in our history, and if RTE is going to do it, then they should spend money on it to do it properly. If it is done well - and I think it is - they will make that money back by selling it to the US, Britain, Australia. It is even something non-English speaking countries would buy.

So we now have had the West Brit argument, the Downton Abbey argument, the soap opera argument, the Ruth Bradley's accent argument, and now the "Rebellion is responsible for people sitting on trolleys" argument. Anyone else got something they want to blame Rebellion for?

iguana

Well what it does have in common with Downton Abbey (other than the time period) is that it looks good and is mostly well acted but is unfortunately under-written. Unlike Downton Abbey it has no moments of sparkling wit and genuine characterisation that make you want to stick with it in spite of itself. But on the other hand it is mostly historically accurate which Downton was infuriatingly not. And we'll probably avoid the terrifying and exciting foiled plot to throw a bowl of slop on a general that was Downton's main allusion to the Rising.

Strazdas

iguana wrote: »

Well what it does have in common with Downton Abbey (other than the time period) is that it looks good and is mostly well acted but is unfortunately under-written. Unlike Downton Abbey it has no moments of sparkling wit and genuine characterisation that make you want to stick with it in spite of itself. But on the other hand it is mostly historically accurate which Downton was infuriatingly not. And we'll probably avoid the terrifying and exciting foiled plot to throw a bowl of slop on a general that was Downton's main allusion to the Rising.

I think one of the other main comparisons to Downton is that it is character driven and not plot driven ie. the emphasis is on the characters' lives rather than the actual events that are happening around them. I'm not sure I'd agree that the characterisation isn't working though, there have only been two episodes and so far, so good.

iguana

Two episodes into Downton and I felt I understood many of the characters. Two episodes into this and it's still tell rather than show when it comes to what's going on inside anyone's head. Downton started out wonderfully, like a modern day Upstairs Downstairs, but started going down hill toward the end of the first season and maintained that trajectory right through to the end. Maybe Rebellion will do the opposite. Afaik, there is a second series planned and I am already more curious about what happens to these characters after the Rising than I am in what's going on now.

(The mooted second series also answers the question as to why the series is called Rebellion rather than Rising, if the Rising is just what happens in the first of several series.)

iguana

From what I've read recently Sundance only came on board after a lot of the work on this series was completed. If they stay on board for season 2, they may have a bigger creative impact. Which, considering the high quality of so many of their other series, may be a very good thing.

TICKLE_ME_ELMO

Interesting to note that TV3 and TG4 both were given funding by the BAI for their own 1916 series.
Can't remember which is which but one is a "time travellers land in the middle of it and desperately try not to derail history" and the other focuses on the imaginary trials of the leaders if they had been tried instead of executed.

So possibly something for everyone there or at worst two more things for people to have a moan about.

Strazdas

iguana wrote: »

Two episodes into Downton and I felt I understood many of the characters. Two episodes into this and it's still tell rather than show when it comes to what's going on inside anyone's head. Downton started out wonderfully, like a modern day Upstairs Downstairs, but started going down hill toward the end of the first season and maintained that trajectory right through to the end. Maybe Rebellion will do the opposite. Afaik, there is a second series planned and I am already more curious about what happens to these characters after the Rising than I am in what's going on now.

(The mooted second series also answers the question as to why the series is called Rebellion rather than Rising, if the Rising is just what happens in the first of several series.)

I'd agree that Downton started very strongly (and was helped by having an opening 90 minute episode, which was almost a movie in itself). Rebellion is definitely hampered by being both a fictitious melodrama concentrating on the lives of it's main characters but having to depict the actual events of the Rising too, which is something Downton wasn't handicapped by.

I'm still not buying the line put out by quite a few critics this week that Rebellion had a strong opening episode followed by a very disappointing second one. I would say let's wait and see the next three episodes before coming to a judgement on the merits of the second one, we've no idea where the story is going for many of the principle characters (RTE have done a very good job of keeping spoilers to a minimum before each episode).

TICKLE_ME_ELMO

I think Downton was good in the first series but it declined something awful after that. If we're going to accuse anything of being soapy melodrama it's Downton Abbey.

The problem with trying to set fictional characters against an historic background is getting the balance right. Having all the characters literally caught up in the Rising means having to give a lot, maybe too much, over to the history at the expense of the fiction. If anyone watched the Danish program 1864 last year they gave practically 2 whole episodes over to the fictional characters before throwing them into the history. Not being familiar with Danish history I didn't know exactly what was coming for them but I knew the characters well enough to care and be worried for them.

Giving the central characters in Rebellion a closer bond in the first episode would have made it easier to establish them, I think. The way they did it though seemed to be trying to establish them all separately and then bring them together as the fighting starts. There were just too many of them to do this. As it is I'm still not sure who some of them are or what their relationships to the other characters are. I know the point of the guy from Belfast is to show the thing from as many possible angles but who is he? Why has his missus suddenly appeared? What's the point of Elizabeth's brother? They could have combined both characters into one there.

Anyway... It probably sounds like I'm contradicting myself when I defend the show then have a rant about what I don't like. I just think while I would have preferred some things done differently I don't think it's anywhere near as bad as some are saying.

iguana

Strazdas wrote: »

I'm still not buying the line put out by quite a few critics this week that Rebellion had a strong opening episode followed by a very disappointing second one.

That's what just about everyone I have spoken to in real life has said about the series and how I feel too. Not that that is unusual on a tv show. For example my favourite tv show at the moment, The Americans has a reasonably strong pilot, followed by a weaker couple of episodes before it hits it's stride in the fourth episode. I think most shows follow that pattern. Though with only 5 episodes, Rebellion has much less room for weak episodes.

Strazdas

iguana wrote: »

That's what just about everyone I have spoken to in real life has said about the series and how I feel too. Not that that is unusual on a tv show. For example my favourite tv show at the moment, The Americans has a reasonably strong pilot, followed by a weaker couple of episodes before it hits it's stride in the fourth episode. I think most shows follow that pattern. Though with only 5 episodes, Rebellion has much less room for weak episodes.

It will be very interesting to see the ratings for the third episode. The ratings climbed from week 1 to week 2. If the general consensus is that the second episode was very disappointing, then you would expect the ratings to drop as viewers start to lose interest.

However if the ratings remain steady or continue to climb, it would suggest it's just a small and vocal minority who had a problem with the episode....we should have the figures within 48 hours.

iguana

I think a lot of the jump between ep1 and ep2 was that a lot of people didn't realise it was coming out so soon. I wonder what the figures are like if Player viewings are included.

josephryan1989

iguana wrote: »

Two episodes into Downton and I felt I understood many of the characters. Two episodes into this and it's still tell rather than show when it comes to what's going on inside anyone's head. Downton started out wonderfully, like a modern day Upstairs Downstairs, but started going down hill toward the end of the first season and maintained that trajectory right through to the end. Maybe Rebellion will do the opposite. Afaik, there is a second series planned and I am already more curious about what happens to these characters after the Rising than I am in what's going on now.

(The mooted second series also answers the question as to why the series is called Rebellion rather than Rising, if the Rising is just what happens in the first of several series.)

The choice of Rebellion is apt as a second series would probably cover 1917-1921 when the rebels are released from prison, Sinn Féin starts organizing for the 1918 election, the Conscription Crisis and the War of Independence breaks out in 1919 and continues until 1921. I would imagine if the brothers Jimmy and Arthur Mahon survive the Rising they later join the IRA, take part in assassinations and go down the country to organize flying columns which gives the writers to introduce people like Dan Breen, Tom Barry and Ernie O'Malley. Harry Butler and Stephen Duffy Lyons become converts to Republicanism and rub shoulders as fictional elected politicians with real figures such as Eamon De Valera, Michael Collins and others.

A third series would probably show how brother is against brother and old friends and comrades part over the Treaty and turn on each other and how the survivors are embittered and guilt ridden and disappointed with the Free State. The anti-Treaty characters will see themselves as rebels once again and the Pro-Treaty characters will take the same view as the British did in the first series.

The female characters unfortunately will end up taking supporting roles because the female participants in the War of Independence and Civil War played the role of nurses, cooks, weapon and message couriers and brave widows rather than public speakers, politicians, assassins and military commanders. Frances, Elizabeth and May are just inevitably going to be the squeeze of one or other of the male characters as they fight together and fall out over politics.

TCDStudent1

TICKLE_ME_ELMO wrote: »

Giving the central characters in Rebellion a closer bond in the first episode would have made it easier to establish them, I think. The way they did it though seemed to be trying to establish them all separately and then bring them together as the fighting starts. There were just too many of them to do this. As it is I'm still not sure who some of them are or what their relationships to the other characters are. I know the point of the guy from Belfast is to show the thing from as many possible angles but who is he? Why has his missus suddenly appeared? What's the point of Elizabeth's brother?

The point of Elizabeth's brother is to have a character that just isn't interested in politics and war.
The Belfast guy (George) and his fiancée have added nothing to the series so far though

Strazdas

iguana wrote: »

I think a lot of the jump between ep1 and ep2 was that a lot of people didn't realise it was coming out so soon. I wonder what the figures are like if Player viewings are included.

For the first episode (620k viewers), 45k watched on RTE1+1 and 48k on RTE Player within a day or two.

The ratings for the third episode should be very informative : if the figures hold steady or continue to grow, then the show is a big hit with viewers.

TICKLE_ME_ELMO

TCDStudent1 wrote: »

The point of Elizabeth's brother is to have a character that just isn't interested in politics and war.
The Belfast guy (George) and his fiancée have added nothing to the series so far though

May's not interested in politics or war though. The brother is unnecessary, in my opinion, and they didn't do a great job of establishing his relationship with Elizabeth to make us care about him in that respect either.

josephryan1989

The character of Elizabeth Butler apart from being much younger and upper class and engaged to be married on Easter Monday, seems to be inspired by the real life Helen Moloney who was the daughter of a grocer from Henry Street. She was an actress in the Abbey Theatre, knew Constance Markievicz, was James Connolly's secretary and witnessed the shooting of Constable O'Brien at the gate of Dublin Castle. She was on the roof of the City Hall when Sean Connolly, a fellow Abbey actor, the man who shot O'Brien was himself killed by a British bullet through the head and cradled him in her arms as he died.

Strazdas

josephryan1989 wrote: »

The character of Elizabeth Butler apart from being much younger and upper class and engaged to be married on Easter Monday, seems to be inspired by the real life Helen Moloney who was the daughter of a grocer from Henry Street. She was an actress in the Abbey Theatre, knew Constance Markievicz, was James Connolly's secretary and witnessed the shooting of Constable O'Brien at the gate of Dublin Castle. She was on the roof of the City Hall when Sean Connolly, a fellow Abbey actor, the man who shot O'Brien was himself killed by a British bullet through the head and cradled him in her arms as he died.

One thing that hasn't been directly alluded to in the script is that Elizabeth and her family are Anglo Irish Protestants, which is an interesting angle to the story : she's motivated primarily by her socialist beliefs.

Lisha

Strazdas wrote: »

One thing that hasn't been directly alluded to in the script is that Elizabeth and her family are Anglo Irish Protestants, which is an interesting angle to the story : she's motivated primarily by her socialist beliefs.

The priest and smart ass brother alluded to the marriage being a mixed religion one, I thought

KingBrian2

josephryan1989 wrote: »

The choice of Rebellion is apt as a second series would probably cover 1917-1921 when the rebels are released from prison, Sinn Féin starts organizing for the 1918 election, the Conscription Crisis and the War of Independence breaks out in 1919 and continues until 1921. I would imagine if the brothers Jimmy and Arthur Mahon survive the Rising they later join the IRA, take part in assassinations and go down the country to organize flying columns which gives the writers to introduce people like Dan Breen, Tom Barry and Ernie O'Malley. Harry Butler and Stephen Duffy Lyons become converts to Republicanism and rub shoulders as fictional elected politicians with real figures such as Eamon De Valera, Michael Collins and others.

A third series would probably show how brother is against brother and old friends and comrades part over the Treaty and turn on each other and how the survivors are embittered and guilt ridden and disappointed with the Free State. The anti-Treaty characters will see themselves as rebels once again and the Pro-Treaty characters will take the same view as the British did in the first series.

The female characters unfortunately will end up taking supporting roles because the female participants in the War of Independence and Civil War played the role of nurses, cooks, weapon and message couriers and brave widows rather than public speakers, politicians, assassins and military commanders. Frances, Elizabeth and May are just inevitably going to be the squeeze of one or other of the male characters as they fight together and fall out over politics.

A little irritated they did not depict the 1913 Lockout more than was on offer. I know there had been some shows about it decades ago but I would have liked them give that event a good update. Bloody Sunday, Larkin dressing as a women and sneaking into the Imperial Hotel. I mean the material writes itself.

josephryan1989

Strazdas wrote: »

One thing that hasn't been directly alluded to in the script is that Elizabeth and her family are Anglo Irish Protestants, which is an interesting angle to the story : she's motivated primarily by her socialist beliefs.

Socialists or Anglo-Irish Protestants who were Irish revolutionaries were relegated to the fringes when middle class Catholics swelled the ranks and were basically written out of the narrative because they didn't fit into the Irish Nationalist Catholic orthodoxy and triumphalism which took over subsequently.

josephryan1989

KingBrian2 wrote: »

A little irritated they did not depict the 1913 Lockout more than was on offer. I know there had been some shows about it decades ago but I would have liked them give that event a good update. Bloody Sunday, Larkin dressing as a women and sneaking into the Imperial Hotel. I mean the material writes itself.

You are right.
The Lockout as well as the Home Rule Crisis is a key event which radicalized Connolly and his followers toward physical force socialist republicanism.
The business tycoon and politician William Martin Murphy, a key Home Rule supporter, was the enemy of both Connolly, the radical socialist, and Pearse, who saw him as the epitome of the Anglicized Ireland he wanted to replace with a purified Gaelic Catholic Ireland.
The series neglected to explain this background by simply focusing narrowly on the outbreak of World War I instead before jumping forward to the eve of the Rising.

kabakuyu

Not just civilians looting.Some of the biggest looters were British Army members, staff officers were concerned with the level of looting by troops and wanted the looted goods returned.It was remarked that they would have been shot if they had been in France.

Robert Barton who arrived in Dublin shortly after the rising started is portrayed in the series by the cop from L/H.

http://www.bureauofmilitaryhistory.ie/reels/bmh/BMH.WS0979.pdf

lukin

Execution Amon Goeth style that was.

The guy who is playing Collins may have the accent, but im not sure he can bring the charisma or personality to the role that Brendan Gleeson or Liam Neeson did

Dev the ould cowardly cute hoor shirking. Now there's a surprise.

Steppenwolfe

I presume that was the pacifist Francis Sheehy Skeffington that was 'executed' there. No explanation what so ever?

Civil Joe

Steppenwolfe wrote: »

I presume that was the pacifist Francis Sheehy Skeffington that was 'executed' there. No explanation what so ever?

It's very poor tbh. Confusing, trite and de facto revisionist

Steppenwolfe

Steppenwolfe wrote: »

I presume that was the pacifist Francis Sheehy Skeffington that was 'executed' there. No explanation what so ever?

No and given the sacrifice this man made it is really bad form. Perhaps though they could have executed many unknowns?