Автор: Geoff Pevere
There's a scene in The Wind That Shakes the Barley, director Ken Loach's Palme d'Or winning film about the founding of the Irish Republican Army, in which Cillian Murphy, playing a rebel, is required to execute a teenage boy accused of treason against the cause. Murphy's intensity during the scene is palpable, almost painful, and it's a pivotal point in his character's personal and political development.
It also hit close to home. Literally. Loach, the veteran socialist director from Britain, made the film in the Republic of Ireland's County Cork, where Murphy, an ascending star known to most for his roles in movies like 28 Days Later... and Batman Begins, was born and raised.
In Toronto to attend the North American premiere of the movie, the 30-year-old actor sat down with the Star to discuss the experience of making a political film on his home ground.
I understand the film has done extremely well in Ireland as well as Britain—but that it's also been pretty savagely attacked by the right-wing press in both countries. Were you surprised by this?
I knew that it would make an impact in Ireland, that a lot of people would feel strongly about it, but I didn't expect it to be taken on board so much. It became a very important film for everyone to see in Ireland.
It's a highly political film. It's not easy watching. You have to apply yourself to it. For it to become the success that it has in Ireland is, I think, a very encouraging sign. Given that it's only two generations ago that this took place, and it runs very deep back home still.
The sort of knee-jerk reaction in Britain's right-wing press was inevitable; I wouldn't expect anything but that from those publications. They're always histrionic ...
Also, a lot of the people who spoke about the film in the British press hadn't actually seen it. A lot of them are just Loach naysayers. But the interesting thing was, nobody contested the factual events portrayed in the film. Nobody contested whether the British Black and Tan regiments or the auxiliaries carried out atrocities.
And there's an easy retort to all the claims laid at its feet. The film is obviously not anti-British. It's anti- the policies of the British administration of the time. It's also not pro-IRA because it's showing how every democratic road that the rebels had gone down had been crushed by the British. That's what happens to people when their parliament is banned, when speaking about parliament is banned, when speaking their language is banned, when playing their own native games is banned. People resort to violence.
So I was pleased. A bit of controversy is good. Anything that gets people exercised is good. History is there to be learned from, surely.
The film is based on events that took place in 1918 in Cork, where you're from. It was also made there. Are people there still aware of these events?
We learned about them in school, very much so about 1916 (when the Easter Rising led to the brief occupation of the Dublin Post Office building).
The War of Independence (1919–21) was sort of glossed over in school, because it's more painful, I think. I don't come from a politicized family but it had touched my family. My grandfather was shot at by the Black and Tans when he was playing the fiddle, and I had a distant cousin who was killed. He was a rebel in a Flying Column (IRA active service unit).
Everyone (in Cork) has connections to that period. It split families down the middle. There are people to this day who won't speak about it. A lot of legend and mythology has grown up about the civil war that is not quite reliable. And people still have very opposing points of view on its outcome.
But it's a pivotal point in our shared history. Both of the Irish main political parties trace their roots back to this fracture. It caused the creation of Northern Ireland and caused the creation of the IRA, so it was a very important time. And in Europe at the time, revolution was in the air, such as in Russia. People forget that. They were very radical times.
What was most appealing about the project? The script? The subject? The setting? Or working with Ken Loach?
I think working with Ken was the primary thing. The way he works, you don't get a script to begin with. All I knew was that it was a film set in Cork about the war of independence, and that it followed the story of two brothers. I knew Ken's politics and that it would probably be controversial, but I was up for that.
I was living at home during the shoot. Staying in the bedroom that I grew up in. Shooting around areas that I'd run around as a kid. It was very special.
Tell me about shooting the scene where you execute the teenage traitor on the hill. You seem genuinely distressed.
To think there are people who say that scene glorifies the IRA! How in the hell does that glorify the IRA? Shooting a 16-year-old kid in cold blood?
Ken's method is to shoot everything chronologically. And prior to the scene, we had spent a lot of time, like a week, in this sort of boot camp environment. I look back on it and see he had very subtly put myself and the kid playing that part together—and we got along very well.
And I didn't know walking up that hill that day that (the scene) was actually going to happen. It was just really hard. There wasn't much acting involved. The atmosphere up on the hill was distressing.
That's a very unusual way of directing. How does Loach compare with other filmmakers you've worked with?
He's out on his own in the way he works. It's very, very unique. And it's obviously been born out of a process of elimination. In the very beginning, he may have made films the way people normally do, which is set around this kind of hierarchical system. It's all about compartmentalizing. It's all about the talent and the crew.
Ken, I think, little by little got rid of that, managed to pare it down. There are no marks. No lights. He doesn't say "Action!" or "Cut!" There are no (location) trailers. The camera is inevitably 20 feet away, shooting with a long lens.
Everything is to facilitate the performance. With Ken, it's like a private moment. He will have the crew turn around. Sometimes he won't even look at you, just trust what he's hearing. It's just blissful as an actor. In terms of his notes and how he directs you, it's a very gentle manoeuvring towards something through discussion. A lot of finding it through (multiple) takes, as well. I wish every film could be shot like that. And he's been at it for over 40 years.
He's 70 years of age this year, and the energy with which he controls the whole thing is unbelievable. People would do anything for him. Superlatives—they don't serve the purpose they're designed for with Ken.
You've worked with your fellow Irishman Neil Jordan (Breakfast on Pluto) and now this film about Irish history. How important is it for you to make movies that reflect your own culture?
I'm Irish and it's important to me. But Liam Neeson said to me once, "You should be not an Irish actor. You're an actor who's Irish. Actor first and Irish second."
I think that's important, too. You can go and make the American studio pictures, but still come home and make good stories.
I'll only do an Irish film the way I'll only do an American film—if I think it's worthwhile.
| 
