Fifty Dead Men Walking Movie Trailer

With a title like Fifty Dead Men Walking, starring Ben Kingsley and Rose McGowan, you might think this is a zombie movie. This is actually something much different, and it's already made the rounds on the festival circuit with an eye on major theatres.

This is based on the true story of a young Irishman who finds himself recruited by the British Police to spy on the Irish Republican Army back in the late eighties. He supplies information to the British government right up until the IRA discovers his secret. Repeatedly beaten and near death, our young Irishman throws himself from a tower window and escaped into hiding, where he remains today. Check out the trailer.

If you're in the mood for much more recent historical drama, this might be just what you're looking for. Jump on into our comments section and tell us what you think. Thanks for watching!

Fifty Dead Men Walking Cast: Ben Kingsley, Jim Sturgess, Kevin Zegers, Natalie Press, Rose McGowan

Fifty Dead Men Walking movie trailer provided by TVA Films. Fifty Dead Men Walking is scheduled to hit US theaters in 2009. Fifty Dead Men Walking is directed by Kari Skogland.

Category:

Film & Animation

Tags:

• Fifty
• Dead
• Men
• Walking
• Movie
• Trailer
• Official
• 2009
• True
• Story
• Ben
• Kingsley
• Jim
• Sturgess
• Rose
• McGowan

[LaserSvensken970107]

goto 0:47 to skip that bitch

[XxXIRISHSNIPER]

he is not irish that ended when he helped the british

[ruairidhkee]

@keveydaking As I say - warnings or not, they were murderers. They set out to murder British security forces. That's terrorism, like it or not. And examples? Here we go: Jean McConville, Christopher O'Kane, Paul Daly, Gareth O'Connor, Matthew Burns, Edmund McCoy, Joseph O'Connor...I could go on and on. Of course, half the time these people were murdered not for any good reason, but because they were getting in the way of the IRA's drug-running and cigarette-smuggling scheme. Not great, huh?

[keveydaking]

@ruairidhkee they didnt set out to kill, if they did they wouldnt give warnings now would they? protests started before the 70's btw. and give me one case when they murdered a catholic that wasnt in a bomb with a warning, or where they were biased judges or were they were british informers?

[ruairidhkee]

@keveydaking Warnings or not, the IRA set out to kill and destroy. The IRA in Northern Ireland came into force as soon as partition occurred - and nothing was achieved until the 1970s - when PEACEFUL protesters started. Make the connection. It's not that hard. And since you haven't answered my other question, I shall ask once more: if there was widespread Catholic support for the IRA, why did the terrorists continue to murder them as well? Or do I assume you can't think of an excuse for this?

[keveydaking]

@ruairidhkee they bombed them with warnings, they didnt set out to kill just to blow up public buildings. the peaceful protestors achieved nothing when they protested they were beaten back time after time, and even fired upon one year.... it was only after the IRA came into action that anything was achieved.

[ruairidhkee]

@keveydaking They were pure and utter terrorist atrocities, the IRA bombed innocent civilians - that's not OK, and not necessary. The IRA are not to be thanked for bringing about civil rights; it was the peaceful protesters who achieved this. Haven't you learnt anything from history? Terrorism never achieves its aims. And if the IRA had large Catholic support, why did they continue to murder Roman Catholic civilians? Face it: the IRA made no sense however you looked at it - and it still doesn't!

[keveydaking]

@ruairidhkee terrorist atrocities are not OK, but these aren't terrorist atrocities. They were indeed necessary, we would still be 2nd class if it werent for them. And they definetly did have a large catholic support, especially after events like bloody sunday

[ruairidhkee]

@keveydaking So enlighten me, please. What reasons were there behind the IRA killing innocent Catholics? Terrorist atrocities were OK, were they? Hmm, not my view - and not the view of most of the sensible people of Northern Ireland, or the rest of the UK, today. The IRA were not necessary - all they did was to use the excuses presented like 'discrimination' so they could achieve a united Ireland - something that the majority of Northern Irish people did not want!

[keveydaking]

@ruairidhkee they wanted to kill british forces for a reason. yes there were come killings of catholics but not for no damn reason. all we had to do was get treated fairly and none of this would have happened. if we were getting treated like our protestant equivalent prior to the troubles none of this would be necessary. of course the british government and army had no intention of quality. if not for the IRA, today we would still be treated like crap

[ruairidhkee]

@keveydaking The IRA didn't do a very good job at protecting then, did they? Look at the brutal murders of Catholics by the IRA. If they tried to protect them, they kinda failed. Accept it - the IRA were murderous terrorists, nothing more. It still amazes me that even in the UK, there are some people who think that terrorism is an acceptable path. The IRA were never legitimate, they were a terrorist force whose aim was to kill any British security forces. Nothing more, nothing less. Terrorists.

[keveydaking]

@ruairidhkee its funny seeing as when the IRA took action one of their aims was to 'protect the nationalist community' And nationalists didnt dislike the police due to them representing the british state, take the initial deployment of british soldiers. catholics welcomed them, tensions grew once the british army, as well as the police, treated catholics like crap