They can't block out the light in here.

Rating: 8/10 (21 March 2006)

I am quickly becoming aware of the power that Jim Sheridan has behind the camera as well as in crafting genuine non-Hollywood films. As I watched In the Name of the Father unfold, I continually was impressed by the passionate camera angles, the conviction of the characters, and Sheridan's ability not to sway from his own personal heritage. From the opening sequences of this film to the amazing direction to the dedicated actors, I knew that In the Name of the Father was going to be more than just your typical political "courtroom" drama. It wasn't until the film was finished that I realized Sheridan's power. I speak very highly of him in the opening of this review because I believe that if any other director would have been at the helm of this project that the final cut would not have been as immaculate. Typically with films of this nature we, as audience members, fall prey to there needing to be some sympathy for the opposing country. The British did unfairly treat the Irish in this film, but I believe any other director would have chosen a neutral ground instead of forging headfirst like Sheridan chose to do. I believe any other director would have focused more perversely on the courtroom drama aspect of this film instead of the compelling family epic that was being forged within the walls of Gerry's prison. Due to Sheridan, the masterpiece known as In the Name of the Father was crafted with genuine passion and superb direction.
For a film of this high of emotion and intensity to work, there needed to be key players involved that knew how to handle the truthfulness of it all. Sheridan hit a bulls-eye with Daniel Day-Lewis in the key role of Gerry Conlon (which I think most directors do when they choose to hire one of our greatest cinematic heroes), but it was the surprise performance by the typical secondary character actor Pete Postlethwaite that shook me to the core. I have seen quite a bit of films that used the talent of Pete Postlethwaite, but I must admit, this is the first time that I have seen him take control of his character and give it his full devotion. Perhaps it was the dedication that Daniel Day-Lewis had to his character that rubbed onto the other actors, or again, maybe it was just the skillful direction of Jim Sheridan, but I will be the first to say that Postlethwaite stole this film. He didn't just capture the individual scenes in which he was present, but he embodied this entire film. Postlethwaite's father figure was there for his son, he put himself in danger for his son, and most importantly he taught his son the truth of the world. He was phenomenal in the small role that eventually captured the entire film. It is the belief of this reviewer that Pete should have been awarded for an Oscar for this role, instead of Tommy Lee Jones. I was also impressed with John Lynch whom I had only seen in some smaller roles since this. He fully embodied the frightened youth that didn't know better than to finger his friends to save his life. Then there was Emma Thompson. She was subtle in this film. Her role was short, sweet, and to the point, which I think is another prime example of why Sheridan's direction is so acute.
I have not read Proved Innocent, but I do not think that Sheridan went too far off course with his adaptation. The story is what kept me glued to the screen. I knew from the awards that In the Name of the Father was honored with that it was great in the direction and acting respects, but it wasn't until I watched the entire film that I realized the power of the story. We don't watch Gerry grow up. We don't see his dysfunctional relationship with his father. We don't see the impeding chaos in Britain. We don't see a lot of back items that would have taken this film into the three-hour zone. Instead, Sheridan crops the film into three distinct moments. Those are Gerry prior to jail, Gerry and his father in jail, and finally, Gerry gaining the wisdom from his father. I enjoyed the fact that Sheridan didn't focus so intently on the trial, but instead the growth of Gerry and the developing relationship between him and father. It was like watching a child grow before our eyes. The only disappointment that I had with the overall story was the quickness of the ending. I do believe Sheridan could have traveled it out for another twenty minutes to give us the full effect of the climactic courtroom scene, or those moments when Gerry decides to learn about British law himself. I just felt that the last half-hour seemed to fly by because there were so many loose ends to tighten.
Overall, I thought this film (despite the quickness of the ending) was engrossing to watch and exciting to see. It frightened me to watch it in a post-9/11 world because it makes us question our current government's hastiness to find answers and make executive decisions. It makes you wonder about the detainees of Iraq and if we, as a nation, are not discovering that our government is jailing the innocent. Sheridan successfully brings the emotions of aggravation and frustration to the peak of the screen with the events surrounding the Conlon family. He makes you feel for these innocent bystanders living in a corrupt nation. It made me happy to have the father that I currently have and appreciate the wisdom that he has handed down to me. Family is one of the most important elements in your life, and I believe that what Sheridan was trying to demonstrate with this film is that until you accept that, you will never find stability and security.
Grade: **** out of *****