The complicated cinematic legacy of Ned Kelly | Little White Lies

The com­pli­cat­ed cin­e­mat­ic lega­cy of Ned Kelly

26 Feb 2020

Words by Justine Smith

A man with long hair and a beard, wearing a yellow jacket, in an outdoor setting.
A man with long hair and a beard, wearing a yellow jacket, in an outdoor setting.
A fabled Aus­tralian out­law has been por­trayed by every­one from Mick Jag­ger to Heath Ledger – with wild­ly vary­ing results.

Often cit­ed as the first ever fea­ture-length film, today only a dozen min­utes of 1906’s The Sto­ry of the Kel­ly Gang sur­vive. Among these frag­ments is a brief sequence depict­ing Ned Kelly’s most infa­mous moment: dur­ing a face-off with police, the out­law emerged from his hide­out in a crude hand­made suit of armour; an appari­tion likened to a ghost or a dev­il by eye­wit­ness­es. In the few clips avail­able, this sec­tion of the film buck­les and burns, enhanc­ing the eeri­ness of the picture.

There have, of course, been many cin­e­mat­ic biogra­phies of the epony­mous Aus­tralian bushranger in the inter­ven­ing cen­tu­ry and a bit, each reflect­ing the era in which it was cre­at­ed. When the 1906 film was first screened, Kelly’s leg­end was a mat­ter of recent his­to­ry: he had been killed for his crimes less than 30 years pri­or; his broth­er and moth­er were still liv­ing. Con­sid­ered a bushranger film” – an Aussie west­ern about ex-cons who hid in the bush and com­mit­ted rob­beries to make a liv­ing – the film res­onat­ed with audi­ences, help­ing to fur­ther bol­ster the thriv­ing Aus­tralian film indus­try. Much in the same spir­it as Bon­nie and Clyde or Robin Hood, bushrangers were per­ceived as anti-author­i­tar­i­an folk heroes who took only from the rich and powerful.

The pop­u­lar­i­ty of The Sto­ry of the Kel­ly Gang gave the author­i­ties cause for con­cern over the poten­tial neg­a­tive social impact of bushranger films, and the genre was banned around 1911-12 (not all ter­ri­to­ries banned it at the same time). This was a crip­pling blow to a bur­geon­ing indus­try, tak­ing decades to over­come. Indeed, the ban was begrudg­ing­ly lift­ed in 1942 with the release of When the Kellys Rode (orig­i­nal­ly shot in 1934).

Over the next few decades, the Ned Kel­ly sto­ry con­tin­ued to evolve on screen. The Glen­rowan Affair was released in 1951 to minor con­tro­ver­sy, as some dis­tant mem­bers of the Kel­ly clan were still alive and not too pleased with the per­sis­tent min­ing of Ned’s lega­cy. The film was also con­sid­ered awful – one crit­ic described it as, This near-unen­durable stretch of laboured, ama­teur­ish film­mak­ing is some­thing that the devel­op­ing Aus­tralian film indus­try will wish to forget-swiftly.”

The next notable adap­ta­tion arrived in 1970, with direc­tor Tony Richard­son cast­ing Mick Jag­ger in the title role. A genre-bust­ing film that promi­nent­ly fea­tures musi­cal sequences – and the first Kel­ly film to be shot in colour – Ned Kel­ly was plagued with con­tro­ver­sy and pro­duc­tion issues from the get-go. While shot in Aus­tralia, the film was a British pro­duc­tion and sur­viv­ing mem­bers of the Kel­ly fam­i­ly were unhap­py with the cast­ing choic­es. The film was plagued with on-set injuries and ill­ness­es, too, and by its pre­mière both Richard­son and Jag­ger had dis­owned it.

Richardson’s film rep­re­sents a fresh approach to the movie west­ern, although it was less suc­cess­ful than con­tem­po­rary attempts by the likes of Sam Peck­in­pah and Robert Alt­man. Rather than adher­ing to an objec­tive his­tor­i­cal record, 1970’s Ned Kel­ly inte­grates ele­ments of the mod­ern world, reflect­ed in the cast­ing of Jag­ger (who, frankly, is not par­tic­u­lar­ly good). Yet the film’s melan­choly tone and glacial pac­ing serve to sub­vert the roman­ti­cism of the era, treat­ing Kelly’s life and expe­ri­ence as mundane.

It was over 30 years before the next notable Ned Kel­ly film, a $30 mil­lion pres­tige pic star­ring Heath Ledger, Orlan­do Bloom, Nao­mi Watts and Geof­frey Rush, and told from the per­spec­tives of both Kel­ly and the author­i­ties who are out to get him. Lack­ing humour and grit­ti­ness, the film often feels like a cash-in on the suc­cess of the 1990s and ear­ly 2000s epics like Glad­i­a­tor and Braveheart.

While Richardson’s anar­chic, post-mod­ern biopic taps into a cer­tain revi­sion­ism inspired by the coun­ter­cul­ture move­ment of its day, direc­tor Gre­gor Jor­dan and screen­writer John Michael McDon­agh strip away the mythol­o­gy sur­round­ing Kel­ly. The film attempts to human­ise Ned and his gang, if only because they’re nice work­ing-class lads – it might as well have the sub­ti­tle The Man Behind the Bucket’.

Now there’s True His­to­ry of the Kel­ly Gang from Snow­town and Mac­beth direc­tor Justin Kurzel. This is very much a post-The Propo­si­tion bushranger film, with Kurzel lean­ing hard into the grime and vio­lence. Heav­i­ly focused on the bru­tal­i­ty of the bush and soured with exis­ten­tial rage, True His­to­ry offer a deep­er reflec­tion on the state of a world that has embraced anger as jus­ti­fi­able and pro­duc­tive. It is cer­tain­ly not a glam­orous por­trait of Kelly.

In a world deal­ing with the ram­i­fi­ca­tions of tox­ic mas­culin­i­ty and a reluc­tance to let go of a roman­tic view of the way things used to be, Kurzel’s film treads a care­ful line that nei­ther endors­es nor con­demns Kel­ly. He’s not cel­e­brat­ed as a hero or con­demned as a vil­lain; he becomes more of a sign­post of con­tem­po­rary nation­al­ist iden­ti­ty strug­gling to estab­lish itself in a swift­ly chang­ing world. As the ground­ing myths of nation­al iden­ti­ty begin to lose their pow­er, films like True His­to­ry of the Kel­ly Gang demand that view­ers reflect on where, col­lec­tive­ly, we come from and where we’re going. What is it about Ned Kel­ly that gripped a nation over one hun­dred years ago, and what role will his sto­ry have in shap­ing its future?

You might like