Bloody Sunday

A film about human rights, which don't simply fall from the sky, even in the oldest European democracy. Practically everything - the performances, expressive techniques, and editing - is subordinated to a documentary approach, as if we were watching archival television footage of a demonstration. The shaky camera moves from place to place, creating the impression of a war reporter's work. This is an example of a politically engaged film, based on a true event. Overall impression: 85%. (12/07/2006)

Incredibly intense. In the center of the action, Greengrass presents us with a bloody reflection of reality. A drizzly Derry, dynamic camerawork, precise James Nesbitt (a goodie who doesn’t slip into cliché is like gold dust these days) and realistic action. The strange editing style goes against modern approaches, but the fade-outs work perfectly. Political points to the IRA. - Listen, you can’t just leave them lying around her like pieces of meat! - There’s no room for them ! (10/08/2015)

A very documentary and realistic account of the events running up to Black Sunday on January 30th, 1972; an event that fueled the IRA’s cause... The movie follows (without judging) how all of the parties involved saw things. Greengrass for the first time showed that he is not only a very able screenwriter, but also a very talented director whose style of shaky directing and camera sucks you into the action. Despite being very strong with lots of powerful moments, the ending could have been drawn out a little longer, letting it sink in better, like in United 93. (26/03/2005)

Before Paul Greengrass embarked on his filmmaking career, he worked as a political observer, focusing his global scale attention mostly on Northern Ireland. It was during this time that he gathered an incredible amount of facts and personal knowledge that he later transferred into this film. Right from the beginning, strong political incorrectness is apparent as one of the involved parties clearly "loses," but it's not the director's fault. With documentary-like impartiality, the film reconstructs events hour by hour (later almost minute by minute) and presents them in an incredibly unbearable and brutally authentic atmosphere. It quickly, succinctly, and very clearly showcases the stance of both sides. Moreover, he divides the plot into thirds, with the first literally squeezing the viewer with anticipation of real hell, the second raising the question "Why?" and the final "mourning of the dead" is, in my opinion, one of the most emotionally charged moments in the history of cinema. Its lack of sentiment puts even Steven Spielberg's film endings to shame. When I saw the mention of the queen, honors, and the number of those punished in the closing credits, which I read with teary eyes (seriously!), I was truly speechless! (20/09/2005)

An impressively crafted “documentary”, extremely raw and sparingly shot. It’s not wonder that after this, they watned Paul Greengrass for Bourne, where unlike Bloody Sunday he had an attractive movie cover of a fictional hero, so it was fun, because this film, from a cinema point of view, is not fun, it's excruciatingly long and extremely volatile. As a probe into history, it is impressive, and as far as its narrative value is concerned, there is nothing to complain about. But to make it into a nearly two-hour film, with a cameraman bouncing around the set most of the time with a handheld camera, that's a living hell. (24/09/2017)