Harrison Ford and Brad Pitt. On paper, it was the ultimate cinematic layup. You had the world's biggest movie star and the industry’s fastest-rising heartthrob sharing the screen in a gritty, high-stakes IRA thriller. Yet, when people talk about The Devil’s Own movie, they usually lead with the behind-the-scenes chaos rather than the film itself.
It’s a weird one.
The 1997 film, directed by Alan J. Pakula, was essentially a "two-hander" that couldn't decide which hand it wanted to use. Was it a Harrison Ford moral-dilemma drama? Or a Brad Pitt action-hero breakout? Honestly, the tension between those two vibes is exactly what makes it fascinating nearly thirty years later.
The Script That Wasn't Really There
Most movies start with a script. This one started with a concept and two massive egos—or at least two massive sets of expectations. Brad Pitt had signed on to play Frankie McGuire, a young IRA member who travels to New York to buy shoulder-fired missiles. He ends up living in the home of Tom O'Meara (Harrison Ford), a veteran NYPD cop who has no idea his houseguest is a wanted terrorist.
Sounds like a solid hook, right? The problem was that the script was a "work in progress" for basically the entire shoot. Pitt famously told Rolling Stone before the movie even came out that it was a "disaster" and "the most irresponsible bit of filmmaking—if you can even call it that—that I’ve ever seen." He eventually walked back some of those comments, but the damage was done.
The production was a revolving door of writers. Kevin Jarre wrote the initial draft, but David Aaron Cohen and Vincent Guane were brought in later. Even Robert Towne—the guy who wrote Chinatown—did uncredited polishes to try and make Ford’s character more substantial. Because, let's be real, you don’t hire Harrison Ford to just be the "clueless roommate." He needed hero moments. This led to a constant tug-of-war. If Frankie got a cool scene, Tom needed one too.
Why the Portrayal of the IRA Caused a Stir
Movies about the "Troubles" in Northern Ireland are always a minefield. The Devil’s Own movie jumped right into the center of it. Pitt spent a lot of time in Belfast practicing his accent, which, to be fair, is actually pretty decent compared to some of the Hollywood attempts we’ve seen over the years. He wanted the film to be a nuanced look at why a person turns to violence.
🔗 Read more: How Old Is Paul Heyman? The Real Story of Wrestling’s Greatest Mind
However, American audiences in the late 90s weren't always ready for a "sympathetic terrorist" protagonist. The film depicts Frankie as a victim of trauma—specifically witnessing his father’s murder at the dinner table as a child. This backstory is meant to humanize him, making his mission to buy Stinger missiles feel like a tragic necessity rather than pure villainy.
Critics like Roger Ebert noted that the film struggled to balance this empathy with the reality of Frankie's actions. It’s a movie that wants to be a thriller but keeps getting interrupted by a character study. It doesn't quite have the political grit of something like In the Name of the Father, yet it’s way too somber to be a standard blockbuster.
A Technical Look at Alan J. Pakula’s Direction
Alan J. Pakula was a legend. We’re talking about the man who gave us All the President's Men and Klute. He knew how to film paranoia. In The Devil’s Own movie, you can see his fingerprints in the way the New York streets are lit—shadowy, slightly oppressive, and very grounded.
There’s a specific texture to 90s film stock that you just don't get with digital. The cinematography by Gordon Willis (yes, the Godfather cinematographer) is arguably the best thing about the movie. Even if the plot feels a bit thin in places, the movie looks expensive and important. Every interior shot in the O'Meara household feels warm and domestic, which contrasts sharply with the cold, steel-blue tones of the docks where the illegal weapon deals go down.
The pacing is deliberate. Some might say slow. It takes its time establishing the bond between the two men. They drink beer. They play pool. They talk about family. It’s a slow-burn bromance that you know is going to end in a bloodbath.
The Clashing Archetypes: Ford vs. Pitt
Watching this movie today is like watching a passing of the torch that got stuck halfway.
💡 You might also like: Howie Mandel Cupcake Picture: What Really Happened With That Viral Post
- Harrison Ford (Tom O'Meara): This is peak "Grumpy Harrison." He’s the moral compass. He represents the American ideal of law and order. He’s a guy who refuses to shoot a criminal in the back, even when it’s the "easy" thing to do.
- Brad Pitt (Frankie McGuire): He’s the wildcard. He’s all kinetic energy and suppressed rage. This was the era where Pitt was trying to prove he was more than just a pretty face from Legends of the Fall.
The conflict arises because Tom can't understand Frankie’s "war," and Frankie can't understand Tom’s "rules." When Tom finally discovers the money and the weapons hidden in his basement, the movie shifts from a domestic drama into a chase film. But it’s a sad chase. Neither man really wants to kill the other, which adds a layer of genuine tragedy that most action movies skip over.
The Production Nightmares Everyone Remembers
It’s impossible to discuss The Devil’s Own movie without mentioning the budget. It ballooned to nearly $90 million, which was a massive sum in 1997. Much of that went to the stars’ salaries and the constant rewrites.
There were rumors of the two leads clashing on set, though Ford has mostly stayed classy about it, usually attributing the friction to the lack of a finished script. When you have two "Alpha" actors and no roadmap, people get defensive about their characters. Ford reportedly wanted the story to be more about the cop’s moral awakening, while Pitt wanted to keep the focus on the Irish political struggle.
The ending was also a major point of contention. Without spoiling it for the three people who haven't seen it, the finale underwent several iterations. They needed an ending that felt "Hollywood" enough to satisfy the studio but "real" enough to satisfy the actors. What we got was something in the middle—functional, but maybe not as impactful as it could have been.
Is It Actually a Good Movie?
Honestly? It's better than its reputation suggests.
It’s not a masterpiece, but it’s a very solid "adult" thriller. We don't really get movies like this anymore—mid-budget (well, mid-budget for the stars) dramas that rely on dialogue and tension rather than CGI explosions.
📖 Related: Austin & Ally Maddie Ziegler Episode: What Really Happened in Homework & Hidden Talents
- The Acting: Both leads are actually great. Ford does the "weary integrity" thing better than anyone in history. Pitt is charismatic and genuinely tragic.
- The Score: James Horner’s Celtic-infused score is beautiful. It adds a layer of mourning to the whole affair.
- The Stakes: They feel personal. It’s not about saving the world; it’s about a man trying to save his house and his conscience.
The film serves as a time capsule of a specific moment in Hollywood. It was a time when you could build a movie entirely around star power, even if you didn't have a finished plot on day one of shooting.
Lessons From The Devil's Own
If you're a film student or just a buff, there’s a lot to learn here about the "star system." The movie is a case study in how competing visions can blur a film's focus. However, it also shows that high-level craft—from the lighting to the acting—can carry a weak narrative quite a long way.
The movie deals with the idea of "The Troubles" coming to American soil, a theme that would be handled very differently in a post-9/11 world. In 1997, there was still a certain romanticism attached to the "rebel" archetype that doesn't fly as easily today.
Actionable Insights for Viewers
If you’re planning on revisiting The Devil’s Own movie, or watching it for the first time, keep these things in mind to get the most out of the experience:
- Look past the plot holes: Focus on the chemistry between Ford and Pitt. The "father-son" dynamic they develop early on is the real heart of the film.
- Pay attention to the lighting: Gordon Willis is a master of using darkness to tell a story. Notice how the shadows in the O'Meara house grow deeper as the truth comes out.
- Compare it to other IRA films: Watch it alongside The Crying Game or ’71 to see how Hollywood’s lens differs from European perspectives on the conflict.
- Context matters: Remember that this came out just a year before the Good Friday Agreement. The political climate was shifting even as the film was being edited.
The film may have been born in chaos, but it remains a compelling look at two men caught between their duty and their friendship. It’s a reminder that even "disaster" productions can produce something worth watching.
To truly understand the legacy of this era of filmmaking, your next step should be to look into the filmography of Alan J. Pakula. Specifically, watch The Parallax View or All the President's Men. Seeing those films will help you understand the "prestige thriller" DNA he tried to inject into this production. You might also find it interesting to read Brad Pitt’s full 1997 interview to see just how much the industry has changed regarding how actors talk about their own projects during a press junket.