THE GENTLE GUNMAN
UK, 1952, British, 84 minutes, Black and White.
John Mills, Dirk Bogarde, Elizabeth Sellars, Robert Beatty, Joseph Tomelty, Jack Mac Gowran, Barbara Mullen.
Directed by Basil Dearden.
The Gentle Gunman is set in Ireland in 1941, but it is as topical as 1916 or 1977. The film, though brief, is a complex look at the conflicting points of view on Ireland, her occupation by the British and her freedom. The intense national feeling is conveyed, especially in the terrorism sequences. The opening terrorist scene takes place in the London tube - which brings the Irish question vividly to a non-Irish audience. In contrast, the daily lives of the people are represented in the Irish mother who lost her husband who thought he was free, until he was told he wasn't, and then loses her son. The hardness and unyielding temper of the Irish is not overlooked. But the central issue concerns two brothers; the elder of them (John Mills) has learnt that horizons widen outside Ireland and that violence does not achieve all that it hopes to. His younger brother (Dirk Bogarde) is torn between what he has been brought up on, the taunts of traitor and coward, and the admiration he has always had for his brother.
The film was made by Sir Michael Balcon's Ealing Studios when they were at their peak and is finely acted and photographed - especially the actor's expressive profiles in close-up and the bleak Irish countryside. John Mills reminds us what a versatile actor he really is. The film was produced by Michael Relph and directed by Basil Dearden, a team who worked together for years, later examples of their work being Masquerade, Women of Straw, The Assassination Bureau and The Man Who Haunted Himself. The Gentle Gunman is worth seeing.
1. What was the Irish point of view on England, its occupation of Ireland, Northern Ireland, resistance, the I.R.A.?
2. What was the English point of view? (Note: the film is framed in discussions between the Irish doctor and his English friend.) How serious and how hopeless was the situation from each point of view?
3. What did the film say about terrorism? Its effects on children (is this a fair question or does it appeal to our sentiments for children's lives?); its limitations in effective protest; the responsibilities of terrorists?
4. The Irish considered themselves at war with England, even though they were not in uniform. Does that alter the point of view in judging terrorism and reprisals?
5. Molly says her husband was happy until Shinto told him he wasn't, free until he was told he was not. While he died a true Irishman, she wishes he could have lived as a true Irishman. How did Molly's role as a mother, who thought of people before causes, affect the audience's attitude to the situation? What about Maureen and her hardness? what about Johnny, his youth, loyalty, death?
6. Why did Terry change his mind? Was he a traitor? Was he a coward?
7. The audience was meant to keep Matt central and share his enthusiasm as well as his confusion. Did he have a mind of his own or was he too much influenced by Shinto and Terry? what decision had he made at the end as he walked off with Terry?
8. What did the film show about the hardness of the Irish character -the sense of injustice; its sense of cruel justice and vengeance; its religion and its willingness for martyrs?
9. The film was set in 1941, made in 1951. Were the issues any different from 1916, 1921, 1970-71?
