The Damned United

[Bluemoon115]

Even my dad, who hates football films ("Always too fuckin soppy and never seem remotely realistic") reckons it was a brilliant film, which got everything right and took him back to the good old days.

-- Sat Sep 18, 2010 10:56 pm --


I think they're both good in their own way. The film is a lighter, easier watch that gives you a bit of swaering, story etc.

The book gives you a glimpse into the demons that Clough had, and felt, and you saw what possibly drove him to success. It's almost an invasion into his mind.

It is very much an invasion into his mind, and that is its problem in a way. For someone who figured so prominently only recently, and whose widow and children are still here, it was an uncomfortable read. Plus, to relay such dark thoughts with no substance at all was dangerous territory.

In a way I agree.

But if you accept that it was just a novel, an idea someone had about a man's thoughts and visions, and nothing more, then it's fine.

I think it's the only way to write it, without making the book just another wishy washy bore-fest of a football novel.

 

[bluwes]

Sheen to play Baconface in ten years time in," cnuts united" sure he can do a scots accent or just slur his words

 

[mackenzie]

It is very much an invasion into his mind, and that is its problem in a way. For someone who figured so prominently only recently, and whose widow and children are still here, it was an uncomfortable read. Plus, to relay such dark thoughts with no substance at all was dangerous territory.

In a way I agree.

But if you accept that it was just a novel, an idea someone had about a man's thoughts and visions, and nothing more, then it's fine.

I think it's the only way to write it, without making the book just another wishy washy bore-fest of a football novel.

I agree it was a very powerful book, despite my reservations in hindsight.

Without the book there would have been no film, so for that alone I am thankful.

 

[Anonymous]

I decided not to read the book or watch the film when Brians wife said this...

<a class="postlink" href="http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/books/news/brian-cloughs-widow-angered-by-book-397273.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-enter ... 97273.html</a>

I admire Cloughie too much and would only have been angered by his portrayal.

 

[Bobby4Mayor]

Revie's a former blue, so it was tough to see him portrayed in such a negative light. Still a good film though

 

[Gosford Blue]

It was okay, not great. I've seen a lot better football movies. Dave Mackay supposedly sued the film makers for his negative portrayal in the movie.

 

[Dyed Petya]

It was okay, not great. I've seen a lot better football movies. Dave Mackay supposedly sued the film makers for his negative portrayal in the movie.

I've not seen the movie. Apparently, though, the BBC Radio Midalnds football reporter Pat Murphy, who dealt with Clough on a regular basis when Cloughie was managing Forest, said there were 17 significnt factual errors in the film. One was that Mackay was still one of Clough's players at Derby when he took over as manager following Clough's resignation.

Mackay was actually managing Forest, having originally left Derby to become manager of Swindon. I hadn't heard that Mackay had taken legal action but he may have done. I think the implication of him still being at Derby is that he undermined the player protests following Clough's departure and stabbed Cough in the back to get the job, which is completely wrong.

I know that Johnny Giles took legal action over the book and won. Giles was portrayed in the book as very bitter at being passed over for the Leeds job and scheming to get Clough sacked. That's how a lot of football people assumed it happened, because Revie on leaving said that Giles should take over, but Giles has always denied it.

The book is fascinating and very, very dark - a great piece of work by David Peace. The problem with it is that it's fiction, but when you write a work of fiction based on real people, readers assume it's a factual account. It isn't made clear enough that it's basically speculation by the author based only on a factual outline that's in the public domain.

 

[Gary James]

The book is fascinating and very, very dark - a great piece of work by David Peace. The problem with it is that it's fiction, but when you write a work of fiction based on real people, readers assume it's a factual account. It isn't made clear enough that it's basically speculation by the author based only on a factual outline that's in the public domain.

I enjoyed both the book & film. I enjoyed the film more because it seemed closer to the truth than the book but, as said above, it has to be stressed that it is a work of fiction. The story may be based on factual events but it is not fact.

No one can possibly know what Clough and Taylor said to each other when they were in private, so it's all supposition. This is the same with the fictional account of Mercer & Allison and any other similar work.

In some ways it is a bit like the film Titanic. Sure the ship hit an iceberg and sank, no one can dispute that (though I guess some will have a conspiracy theory), but what was said privately between the passengers who died (and their own personal journeys) will never be known.

Personally, I take the Clough film and see it as a very entertaining story of a football manager. It gives us the popular image of Clough but can't possibly show us the real Clough.

 

[Young_TomO]

top film this

 

[Mike N]

I bet Giles was happy that the actor who played him was a six footer!

Oh and it looks like Sheen knows his way round a football as well, very impressive turn and shot in the film.