Perfect cast and a good story

A lot more amusing than I thought it would be.

I enjoyed watching this film and would recommend other to give it a try , (as I am) but this movie, although enjoyable to watch due to the better than average acting fails to add anything new to its storyline that is all too familiar to these types of movies.

what a terribly boring film. I'm sorry but this is absolutely not deserving of best picture and will be forgotten quickly. Entertaining and engaging cinema? No. Nothing performances with flat faces and mistaking silence for subtlety.

There are some excellent, nuanced performances in this movie, particularly from the two leads, Helen Mirren and Fionnula Flanagan (an underrated character actress best known for her work in "The Others"). But by no means is this easy to watch - and it's best appreciated, whatever your view on the long-standing conflict, if you have some idea of the history first, and the passion that still surrounds Bobby Sands. Tim Pat Coogan's "The Troubles," while a mammoth volume, summarizes the death and destruction that have been visited on all three of the major players - British, Catholic, Protestant.Interestingly, Helen Mirren also starred in "Cal", another movie about the "Troubles" of Northern Ireland, playing a Protestant widow who falls in love with a Catholic man. In both movies, Mirren's character endures the unthinkable - watching the people she loves best being torn by sectarian violence. Yet in "Cal," Mirren's character is more passive, having things "happen" to her. In "Some Mother's Son", Mirren and Flanagan take action, their passion for their children stirring them to activism, right or wrong.

Obviously the other "reviewer" of this film and other films touching upon any subject related to England and its colonies (past and present) went in with an opinion already formed. If you check the other films this user has commented on, its all the same complaint that no one ever sticks up for the British. For those of you who are capable of making decisions without resorting to cheap emotional attacks, this is an interesting film and one you might consider. Make no mistake, there are no easy answers to these issues, but one would hope that as we are able avoid censoring other peoples' viewing habits by use of incendiary references to 9/11.This film is widely respected and still shown across the country at times on cable. Regardless of your personal political beliefs, it is a very interesting story that transcends the specific location of its events. Issues of honor, family, sacrifice, conflict and ambiguity flow through this film and the impression I got was much more about the struggle to come to terms with an extremely difficult situation as opposed to anything about the factual situation. Any reference to 9/11 and "glamorizing terrorists" when talking about this film is both ridiculous and offensive. Not to mention that it ignores the vast majority of the story and the difficulty of the situation on all sides. Whether or not you agree with the factual depiction, this is a very well acted and well put together film that chronicles some of the pain and anguish of a particularly unpleasant period of time and does so beautifully through its storytelling.

Just watched tonight.. well I thought it was a good movieI understand some of the previous comments and its true I am sure that this is not totally accurate to the events.. but then again.. I have watched probably thousands of british films in my life and I would not say that they are all notable for their accuracy to historical facts!I think helen mirren is so superb as an actress.. any dispute?I think we have got to get past the past... not easy but some are trying to do this. I am british but feel no sense that the british role in ireland has been healthy overall... I now live in ireland and love the place.. I have also worked in the north and in all the years here have never once felt unwelcome for my accent.Its a sad terrible thing that happened over so many years.. anyone who believes there is any black and white right and wrong in this is mistaken in my opinion.. its way too complicated.. maybe there is hope ahead of us now..

SOME MOTHER`S SON starts with some archive video of Magaret Thatcher making a speech after winning the 1979 British general election followed by a sequence of British government officials getting together with one of them saying " The rules < On Northern Ireland and terrorism have changed > have changed , the policy is now isolation , criminalization and demoralization " . This is a very strange thing to say about the situation in Northern Ireland in 1979 since despite the change in government there was no change in policy . The IRA were making a grand job isolating themselves from the mainstream nationalist community throughout the 1970s with incidents like " Bloody Friday " which were killing and maiming as many catholics as protestants . Criminalization ? Well the IRA have always been outlawed on both sides of the border since partition in 1922 , oh and convicted terrorists , loyalisist or republican , lost all political status in 1976 . Anyone found convicted of terrorist convictions after March 1976 was no longer eligible for political status within the Northern Ireland prison system . This was introduced by the Labour government`s Northern Ireland secetary Merlyn Rees not as insinuated here Thatcher`s Conservative government . As for demoralization the Provisional IRA were very much demoralized before Thatcher came into government . By 1975 they realised unification with the South wasn`t going to happen , had become embroiled in fueds with the Official IRA and loyalist terror groups while most of their members had been killed or imprisoned , not imprisoned in Long Kesh as in the early 1970s but in the new purpose built Maze with its strict regime ( Criminalization is a demoralizing thing ) while recruitment into the ranks was drying up ( If you go around blowing up innocent civilians you can expect this to happen ) , as I said Isolation , criminalization and demoralization weren`t the invention of ThatcherAnother serious factual error that leapt out at me was the court room scene. In a Northern Ireland " Diplock " court used to try people up for terrorist offences ( Remember both loyalist and republican defendants were tried this way )there`s three judges used but here we see only one who is a toffee nosed Englishman as are the defence barristers . In most cases Diplock judges were Irish , as are defence and prosecuting attorneys , but not only are most defence lawyers Irish they`re nearly all Irish catholics ! The most notorious loyalist murder gang " The Shankhill butchers " - whose idea of a good night out was to kidnap the nearest suspected catholic passerby and slowly skin him alive - where defended by a catholic lawyer , so how on earth a film that struts its credentials as being " Based on factual events " can get away with this misrepresentation of a Northern Ireland court is beyond me . There are also several iinaccurate details in geography and anachronisms like the Brits uniforms ( The polycarbide helmets they wear weren`t introduced untill 1986 ) which I couldn`t help but notice These above comments are facts which can`t be disputed . They can`t be disputed because they are facts , so I won`t put too much opinion on SOME MOTHER`S SON . It is very well acted and it was very good to see that for a brief moment Helen Mirren`s character Kathleen Quigley comes to the realisation that she`s being manipulated by the IRA / Sinn Fein but this is a brief moment in a film that`s preceeded by polemical opinion which screams " Britain is entirely responsible for the troubles " and finishes with a caption giving the names of the ten IRA/INLA hunger strikers . I guess it would have been too much to print the names of those murdered by these particular hunger strikers ?