TrueJoshNight
Truly Dreadful Film
Greenes
Please don't spend money on this.
Yash Wade
Close shines in drama with strong language, adult themes.
Anthony Iessi
You'll never get that ditty out of your head after you watch this. It's an oddity from the 1970's, more like a midnight movie actually, in which Mick Jagger makes his acting debut as the legendary Irish folk hero. Much like many of the films of this caliber, It's so kitschy that it's memorable. Mick Jagger is fantastic, and I love how it seems in almost any minute of this film, he looks like he's about to burst out dancing. The music is hilariously out of place, trying to sell this off an an American western when it is anything but, and yet that's what makes this film really charming. It feels rebellious and carefree. Unlike the Oscar-bait 2003 remake, this version of Ned Kelly truly captures the spirit of an outlaw.
David Munn
This film has been criticised too harshly, because of Mick Jagger's lack of experience as an actor and it's failure to stick to verifiable facts. But treat it as the cinematic equivalent of a folk ballad and you'll have a good time with it. Just as you wouldn't hire an opera singer to sing a folk song, you don't need a professional actor to play the lead in a rough-and-ready entertainment about a rough-and-ready character. By the time one gets to the speeded up segment that accompanies Waylon Jenning's singing of Shel Silverstein's "Blame it on the Kelly's" it becomes clear this is not a film that is intended as a serious examination of history. Like the song "The Wild Colonial Boy" which Jagger sings in one of the more memorable scenes in the movie, this is popular entertainment to be enjoyed with a few beers. Taken as such it is very enjoyable, with catchy songs, evocative cinematography and Jagger being very much the lovable, charismatic rabble-rouser he was in real-life at the time. And what matters in a folk ballad is not the truth, but the legend.
Boris Todorov
One big problem with the movie is Mick Jagger. Jagger was half-convincing, his biggest problem being that he is not exactly masculine, while Ned Kelly probably was. Otherwise, he fitted the role much better than the stunningly banal H. Ledge in the 2003 remake - that devilish glimpse in his eyes makes him a much better choice for an outlaw who goes as far as challenging the British Empire and proclaiming a fancy republic of his own. Another problem was the poor cutting - some scenes were so drastically cropped that the storyline was getting lost. Still, a far better version of the Ned Kelly legend than the 2003 edition.
atlian42
First off I wanna comment on the First User Comments diatribe on Mick Jaggers Australian Accent. If I am wrong please correct me but I believe in actuality the Real Ned Kelly's family was in fact 'Irish'.But like I said Correct me if I'm wrong.The story was decent. I think the Music in the film really made it great for me. I believe Shel Silverstein was the Writer of the tunes. I'm not sure but I think that the dude who sings the Dukes of Hazzard Theme is the guy who sang them.I don't know it may be a bit campy but I enjoy it every time as it is usually on the Satellite channel Encore every 3 or 4 months. I usually watch it, and like it.I think if you go at it with a blank slate its decent.Screw Heath Ledger man I wont even comment on his "Ned Kelly" movie. Nothing personal I just don't think he's a very good actor. I think Mick Jagger is in the words of Eric Cartman, 'Hella-cool'
