good back-story, and good acting

A film with more than the usual spoiler issues. Talking about it in any detail feels akin to handing you a gift-wrapped present and saying, "I hope you like it -- It's a thriller about a diabolical secret experiment."

This is a gorgeous movie made by a gorgeous spirit.

The movie turns out to be a little better than the average. Starting from a romantic formula often seen in the cinema, it ends in the most predictable (and somewhat bland) way.

It's been done so many times before, I didn't have high expectations going into this film. I have to now say, it's one of the best war action drama thrillers!This film is brilliant in every aspect; directing, screenplay, cinematography, editing and acting. My only critique would be some loose plot issues and I would have liked to see some more character development.Aside from that, a fun thrilling ride that is a must see film. It's a 9/10 from me.

This movie manages to be thrilling throughout as the character tries to survive the Troubles. However, the last 20 minutes or so unnecessarily overcomplicates the plot with contrived twists. Also, a more minor flaw, but the characters could've been developed a bit more.I appreciate the realism in many of the parts of the movie, such as the inept bomb handler. Handling bombs isn't always easy.+ Thrilling+ Realism to itFlawed plot in last 20 minutesCharacters could be a little betterI can't give it the best rating, so I'll give it a 7.

'71 is a decent movie with a reasonably well developed storyline and a terrific cast. The actors in this movie are small, but their performances certainly are not, Jack O' Connell features in one of his first major roles, his talent as an actor are very visible, he shows a vast amount of dedication to his character. It never really gets exciting, that was my main issue, I was never put at the edge of my seat, eyes glued to the screen anxiously, there's never really any big moments that will pull you in. I never felt truly concerned for Gary, one reason is because he was underdeveloped as a character, we learn very little about him throughout the movie, another being that he is never put in danger that we do not feel he can get himself out of, there's always a sense of hope, it's never too extreme. While the performances are strong, '71 lacks any real excitement that one would expect from a war film, and for that I could not recommend it. A young British soldier finds himself in deep trouble when he's separated from his unit in Belfast. Best Performance: Jack O'Connell

Set in 1971, a year before the infamous Bloody Sunday tragedy, '71 tells the story of a young British soldier Gary Hook (Jack O'Connell) sent to Northern Ireland on active service, who becomes involved in an exercise designed to protect the Royal Ulster Constabulary as they raid a Catholic house, much to the local residents' anger. Hook gets separated from his fellow-soldiers and eventually gets lost in the back streets of Belfast. He is eventually rescued, but in the process discovers the seamy truth about daily life during the Irish Troubles.Filmed in and around the streets of Yorkshire, Yanin Demange's film has a newsy feel to it; this is chiefly due to the use of a hand-held camera that photographs the action in jerky style, with fast cutting and an emphasis on incident rather than characterization. This approach works well on one level, as it emphasizes the atmosphere of perpetual danger prevailing in Belfast at that time, where no one - not least the citizens themselves - knew who their friends were. Loyalties perpetually shifted, despite the religious divisions and the prevailing antipathy towards the British soldiers, who were often regarded (especially by the Catholic population) as representatives of the colonizing power.On the other hand, the film has little real sense of socio- historical context. The action plays out like a gangster thriller, with several sequences of physical violence interspersed with (the mostly male) cast swearing at any and every opportunity. We never really discover why people actually behaved as they did during the early Seventies; why the troops were brought in; and whether the troops' presence at that time differed from other periods in Irish history (for example, in the action leading up to and following the 1916 Rebellion). It seems that Demange has sacrificed analysis in favor of action and incident.As a result, we are left with a film that despite its title seems curiously ahistorical. Its subject-matter could refer to any internecine conflict past and present; while the characters' reactions tend towards the predictable. '71 represents a missed opportunity; viewers wanting to find out more about Irish history might be better advised to watch ODD MAN OUT (1946) or THE CRYING GAME (1992).