ModernChivalry.org
Main => The Library => Topic started by: Sir William on 2011-03-10, 15:48:32
-
I just caught this movie OnDemand when it hit the theaters - I thoroughly enjoyed it, although the ending was not to my liking. I'll not say more til you've seen it...but this is a movie you will WANT to see. Imagine Season of the Witch but with much better acting. This movie stars Sean Bean and Eddie Reddmayne, among others. Everyone knows Sean from LOTR, Eddie may not be as well known but he did an excellent turn in Pillars of the Earth and he was just as good here.
The weapons, armor, garb, locations, the people- all of them appropriately gritty, dirty- you definitely get the feel that this is NOT set during modern times...the fighting is brutal, as are some of the other scenes- some of which had me cringing for a bit.
http://www.blackdeathfilm.com/ (http://www.blackdeathfilm.com/)
It'll be added to the collection when it comes out on DVD.
-
Interesting, it looks like it's in a very limited theatrical release starting tomorrow? Cool. Might have to wait for the DVD though, unless it goes into wide distribution.
-
ya not sure what to think of it. might be worth seeing or might be worth washing my eyes out with bleach hehhehe
-
I will say this...we all know each other well enough to know that we have similar tastes in a lot of things, movies included. You needn't take my word for it, but I assure you- you'll not be so disappointed as you were in Robin Hood and Season of the Witch.
I await your reviews!
-
oh wait i just saw the robin hood. ug it was long and drawn out and kinda boring to some point hehehe
-
I just saw it again last weekend...I have to tell you, once you get past the inconsistencies and the expectation that its another 'Robin Hood and his Merry Men' tale, it was enjoyable. Again, looking for historicity or realism is setting oneself up for disappointment...I liked it enough to see it again and I'll probably watch it again if its on tv.
-
Yeah, I actually enjoyed the new Robin Hood. It's a little slower paced than a lot of Hollywood movies, and it presents an alternate origin story, but I thought it was cool how they worked it into the circumstances of Richard the Lionheart's death instead of having him show up in a "surprise" ending. :)
-
Right! Not sure I would've chosen Danny Huston for Richard...I've seen his work before, he's a good actor, but he lacks the charisma I would've looked for had I been casting for the part. He was about the right age and he had the bedraggled look of a man on long campaign...but then, the choice for the Marshal was decidedly underwhelming for me as well. William Hurt? Really?
I would rather have seen Liam Neeson as the Marshal...not sure about Richard. I thought Iain Glen would be good, even if he already played him a bit in KoH.
-
Ok, just finished watching Black Death and I wasn't too thrilled with it (especially the ending). The acting was good, but I wasn't exactly sure what the message was they were trying to convey (again, the ending really threw me off). Seemed like a lot of pain and suffering on all sides for what amounted to nothing in the end. Sean Bean was great (of course) and the fighting was down and dirty, but I still felt let down. :(
-
There were no happy endings except when the black plague actually ended. The young man was further disillusioned by what he saw so he gave in to his baser instincts and became a crusader against witchcraft, even though deep down he was just lashing out because he lost his love in that manner...in his grief he kept on perpetuating the fraudalent claims that it was witchcraft.
The ending is definitely not feel good, but it did tie off loose ends as far as I was concerned.
-
It wasn't so much loose ends that bugged me, I just never figured out what the point of the movie was. in the beginning, I thought it was typical Hollywood cracking on the hypocrasy and superstions of the medieval church, but then the villagers turned out to be truely evil, so I'm thinking "Ok, Ulrich may be a zealot, but he's the good guy". However, then Osmond turns crazy witch hunter/woman torturer in the end and I'm just left going, "Huh?" ???
-
I don't think there was a message to the movie...at least I didn't take away anything like that after having seen it. Other than that particular period of human history may have been a good deal darker, more dangerous than the tales would have us believe...I definitely got that.
-
Yeah, I think the Renfaire is about as close to the real thing as I'd like to get ;)
-
I honestly would like to try it one good time but as far as living like that regularly? I'm too modern...I like running water and electricity (for my video games at least lol)...and would not relish sleeping on a dirt or stone floor with any number of unwashed bodies to share it w/me...listening to nocturnal sounds, farts in the general direction, stealthy urination onto the rushes, furtive (and not-so-furtive) coupling and the like. Or sharing it w/the livestock.
But I'd be just fine on a horse on a beautiful day!
-
i smell bull@#$. hehehe i'm not that far into it but one guy said something about Crecy being the first time they used long bows. hahaha
-
Maybe you misheard them when they meant to say cannons? ;)
-
nope they said longbows, cause they said the French couldn't reach them.
it was ok for what it was. no historical accuracy at all but mindless entertainment :) all things come full circle so it shows. always shows how evil can have its hold over the weak minded or even show the sins of the believer.
it did seem like it was more of a made for TV movie or a Sci Fi movie than one for film in theaters.
-
Probably because it was an indie flick and not a big budget Hollywood mishmash. So none of the costumes, armor or weapons was in-period? I thought otherwise but I've still got a lot to learn so...
As for the longbow comment, I missed that but it wouldn't be that out of place...how many people currently know what 'Waterloo' means or how it is significant? That sort of martial ignorance I would take to be quite applicable...imho.
-
Black Death review (the currently unpublisized version)
It was an interesting film. I thought it was trying to deliver a message that religions were like plagues, and best to be avoided by isolation. There was a strong anti Catholic feeling in it, much like Ridley Scott’s film. The attempt to display how pain or the threat of can change anyone’s belief was interesting, but wouldn’t support the Warrior Monks’ sacrifice at Hattin in 1187.
The story takes place after the demise of the Templar Order, and the lead character sports items hinting he’s a member of a powerful Order (by his cape maybe a Hospitaller, but more likely a Dominican: they did have a militant arm at one time) as attested by the difference of the Abby to his presence.
During this time, under Pope Gregory XI, Hospitallers and Dominicans were used to promote the inquisitorial pursuit of heretics in Europe. (see: The Papacy and the Levant, 1204-1571: The thirteenth and fourteenth centuries By Kenneth Meyer Setton, or Gregory XI bio)
So maybe he was…..all I know is, if my horse were stolen, there’d be a lot of local villages pretending to be large piles of kindling!
The young monk follows the reverse route of experience than Brother Cadfael. It was asking too much of him to make those vows, and the “enemy” plays on that fact. On the other hand you have Brother Ulrich’s character; hardened by life’s events, and he chooses a path much like some of the historical Warrior Monks did. (loss of family, a chance to exercise your skills/trade in the pursuit of an idea larger than one’s self)
Some of the events led me to say that if you make an example in a harsh way with someone, you quiet possibly harden the resolve of those you’re trying to “win” over. (See the Knights in the cage, or the young monk, who ended up displaying just this line of thinking)
It was a “No Brainer” that they’d kill any knight who turned faiths, because to set him free, was to risk retaliation when he returned with a larger army. It was also to prove to the young monk, that even the strongest would break, to save their skins, and that faith had no deep found roots.
Seeing the young monk give up the cloth, so to speak, and live a life of violence is not exactly the same as what Ulrich did. Ulrich was a trained soldier from the beginning, plying his skills in the cause of the faith. The monk/turned warrior, learned violence to exact revenge for what occurred years before. Although in pursuit of the aims of the Church, his was motivated by revenge, and not piety.
All in all I liked the movie.
-
Excellent review and very well expressed. I readily agree with your perspective of the film! Well done! :)
-
Thank you Sir Brian for your kind appraisal. For those that don't know who Brother Cadfael is, this is a former crusader turned CSI monk in a BBC series. It's fairly good viewing, and beats any reality TV show currently forced in your faces, except for maybe WIPEOUT. ;) :P
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cadfael (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cadfael)
-
hahaah wipe-out, my son and i watch that all the time.
-
We watched an episode of Cadfael and liked it, so I bought the DVD set. Now we just need to find some time to sit down and watch them all. Probably when we're done with Game of Thrones. :)
-
ehheeh
-
Game of Thrones is epic...and I love/hate the books. Love them for the incredible tale it weaves, the engaging and sympathetic characters (and villains), the mythology behind the story is detailed, and interesting in and of itself...but I really hate how some of my favorite characters turned out. I'll leave it at that.
The HBO series is going to focus on one book per season so for now, we have 4 more seasons to look forward to. I'm currently re-reading the series, now I'm on Book IV. Great read, if any of you have the time.
-
Do the books have as much inane gratuitous sex as the series? :-\
-
I'd say yes...but it is more evenly spaced in the books...because the books themselves are rather lengthy, the 'love' scenes, such as they are, tend to be more like footnotes. The author is more circumspect w/regard to coitus, leaving most of it to the reader's imagination, unlike the show which visualizes it for you.
It is funny you should mention it...what drew me to the show was that they were unafraid, unabashed to show that sort of thing. I've always found it odd in books and movies when they attempt to leave that out. For me, that takes away from the whole suspension of belief phenomenon; some movies there's no need for it, but when you're developing an all-encompassing story with human characters, it makes it more believable if they're more like regular people and not gods, per se. They get it right for the most part I'd say. ;)