|
|
Rating:  - A Tedious Account of the English Civil War
To Kill A King is a tedious account of an argument between Oliver Cromwell and one of his subordinates, Lord Fairfax, over whether or not to execute King Charles I. The film views like an obscure British television show of the sort that is sometimes still shown on Masterpiece Theater. Alright for history buffs, but otherwise avoid.
Rating:  - Enjoyed this movie
Our family greatly enjoys historically based movies such as this one. My teenage boys have viewed it numerous times. Great acting, costuming, story and interesting plot. Would definitely recommend this one.
Rating: - emotionally-moving perfection
This is an extraordinary and emotionally-moving historical drama, one of the best films I've seen in recent years, a beautiful symphony of actors, direction, cinematography, script, costumes, music, editing and direction. There isn't a false note anywhere. Not many films can boast that. The cast is uniformly close to perfection, particularly Dougray Scott(playing Sir Thomas Fairfax) and the beautiful Olivia Williams (as his wife Lady Anne.) Their realistic emotional interplay, with their characters almost painfully at odds at times, is breathtaking to behold, helped by a very literate script.
The film concentrates on the bond--almost a mutual love--bewteen Fairfax and Oliver Cromwell, and the interplay of Lady Anne to this bond. Never do the historical aspects of the film overshadow the emotional aspects. That's a difficult balancing act, and only a few great directors (notably David Lean) have been able to pull it off successfully. I would add this film to that list. It deserves to be seen by a wide audience.
My only small gripe is that the DVD doesn't have any subtitles to choose from; there are times when the dialogue is difficult to understand--at least from this American viewer's point of view. British audiences would probably have no problem with it.
Rating: - Okay Drama Looks Great
Don't be fooled by the fact that this didn't get released in theaters and has an anemic trailor -- it's an impressively lavish production. Scott's a bit of a cipher as Fairfax, but Roth is quite good as Cromwell. (He looks a lot like Danny Bonaduce here, do you notce?)
Rating: - Movies about war, what are they for?
"To Kill a King" takes some of the finest acting I've seen lately and sets it adrift in a movie filled with pointless expository dialogue, incomprehensible political maneuvering, and a plot that was - incredibly - nonexistent. How can you take one of the most dramatic events in English - nay, European - nay, World! History, and turn it into a movie about....
What was this movie about? Seriously, I still have no idea. Um, war is hell? No, that's not it. Down with the king? Close, but still not there. The mysterious bonds that form between two men thrown together in adverse circumstances who, once their common cause is achieved, suddenly find themselves inexplicably at odds, staring at each other in confusion across a vast ideological chasm? Ooohhh, right, that must be it.
Now, here's a hint: if you're going to make a movie about two friends who turn against each other, there are two things you should probably make a point of showing: 1) Why they're friends in the first place, and 2) Why they're not friends anymore. "To Kill a King" does neither. We're told, not shown, how close Thomas Fairfax and Oliver Cromwell have become while leading the Civil War against King Charles I. Later, we see plenty of Cromwell glowering angrily behind Fairfax's back, but we never manage to quite figure out what got his panties into such a bunch. The two men are shoved into uncomfortable archetypes: the noble and naïve Fairfax, the bitter, Machiavellian, megalomaniacal Cromwell. It's hard to believe these two ever agreed on what color uniforms to wear, much less on how to overthrow a government.
None of this is the fault of the two lead actors. Dougray Scott as Fairfax and Tim Roth as Cromwell are brilliant, even within the limits of their awkward dialogue. Olivia Williams does a fine job looking distressed for most of the movie, and Rupert Everett turns in his best "Stuart King" impersonation as Charles I. I wish they'd all been given more to do; I wish more had been made of the actual historical events this movie is supposedly based on; I wish I actually cared more.
There was one moment, early in the movie, that opened a too-brief door on what "To Kill a King" could have been. Fairfax, furious over the duplicitous dealings of Parliament, bellows that he will gather his troops again and fight another war to bring justice. We see just a flash of Cromwell's usually dour face as it lights up in a grin - not a malicious or smug grin, but a boyish expression of pure delight at the thought of fighting again with his best friend at his side. (Kudos to Roth for this amazing scene.) In those few seconds I had a glimpse of the love that must have once existed between these two men. Even a few more such moments would have gone a long way towards redeeming this movie.
|
|