netflix Outlaw King

Free

IZ ADMIN
Joined
Sep 21, 2018
Messages
43,694
Location
Moonbase Caligula
SL Rez
2008
Joined SLU
2009
SLU Posts
55565
Who else watched?

I enjoyed it. About as much as I can enjoy a film that's nearly beginning to end violent destruction, killing, and the Middle-Age politics of royalty. Acting was top-notch. Locations and sets looked beautiful. Filmwork wasn't anything much to speak of, but wasn't horrible. Or shaky cam!

On the historical truthiness, I have little to say. I don't know this part of "British" history, so they could have claimed Robert marched into England and took the crown with 50 fighting men and a machine gun made of wood, and I'd be "sounds plausible..." I appreciated it ended on an up note (for the Scots), though maybe a bit too close to a happily-ever after epilogue.

*spoilers* 300 years later, a Scot takes the throne of Scotland and England as James I, which I guess is the ultimate win? *spoilers*
 
  • 1Like
Reactions: Lucifer

Free

IZ ADMIN
Joined
Sep 21, 2018
Messages
43,694
Location
Moonbase Caligula
SL Rez
2008
Joined SLU
2009
SLU Posts
55565
Might help to post the trailer for those who think this is about Jesse James or something...

 
  • 1Like
Reactions: Kalel

Lucifer

Gonnae no dae that, jist gonnae no.
Joined
Sep 20, 2018
Messages
83
Location
Paisley, Cradle of the Stewarts
SL Rez
2005
Joined SLU
in the dimdark days of prehistory
I must admit to being pleasantly surprised... well more than pleasantly to be honest.

After the ahistorical shitfest that was Braveheart, I honestly didn't hold out much hope for Outlaw King.

I'm glad to say I was wrong, much to my surprise Chris Pine was outstanding as The Bruce, and his accent was spot on. The costumes, weapons and gear were historically accurate, There wasn't a poor performance in any of the cast. The battle scenes were suitably gory, muddy and brutal.

The historical facts were pretty much followed with no great liberties taken.
Finally Land o the Leal, and Scots Wha Hea at the closing credits were utter perfection.

Fucking splendid movie.

"What's my fucking name?"
"Douglas"
STAB
Awesome.
 
  • 1Like
  • 1Rainbow 🌈
Reactions: Free and Cristiano

Free

IZ ADMIN
Joined
Sep 21, 2018
Messages
43,694
Location
Moonbase Caligula
SL Rez
2008
Joined SLU
2009
SLU Posts
55565
That Black Douglas guy was CRAZY.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions: Lucifer

Lucifer

Gonnae no dae that, jist gonnae no.
Joined
Sep 20, 2018
Messages
83
Location
Paisley, Cradle of the Stewarts
SL Rez
2005
Joined SLU
in the dimdark days of prehistory

Lucifer

Gonnae no dae that, jist gonnae no.
Joined
Sep 20, 2018
Messages
83
Location
Paisley, Cradle of the Stewarts
SL Rez
2005
Joined SLU
in the dimdark days of prehistory
So, I've read and watched a few reviews of this movie since watching it, and those approaching it from a perspective of historical accuracy and authenticity all loved it.

Then I look at the reviews by film critics, and I just shake my head at some of the shit they traipse out.

I've seen reviewrs call Douglas an unbelievable character, FFS, Douglas led a charge UPHILL to win one battle, and once took a castle by subterfucge disguising himself as a cow (I shit you not). If anything the fevered genuis who was Douglas was downplayed. As I said above the English were terrified of him and not without reason.

The most laughable criticism was in a review by Variety. ..
The Robert the Bruce portrayed here is an inconsistent character, surrendering one moment, stabbing his rival in the face the next; marrying for political advantage rather than romance, then making sensitive love to his bride an indeterminate time later; running from conflict when he is outnumbered, only to orchestrate an improbable confrontation in which roughly 500 Scots face off against more than 3,000 English troops
Seriously? This idiot reviewer would rather that the portrayal of the Bruce wasn;'t historically accurate. Furthermore NONE of these actions were inconsistent. Bruce pursued the throne with a single minded determination, and yes, historically he was allied to Edward when he saw him as a route to the throne, killed Comyn when he was a threat to his ambitions, yes, his marriage was a political one, which did flower later. And yes, at Louden Hill 600 lightly armed Scots utterly destroyed 3000 well armed and armoured English knights.

All that shit was accurate and true (Except for Edward II being present in Scotland at any point after the Battle of Stirling.) But no, reality isn't good enough for these fucking nuggets.

Fucking film reviewers who don't know their history.

Oh, and also I see shit like this a lot. (quoting Indiewire, but I've seen this sentiment on several reviews)..
A gritty and scattershot “Braveheart” spinoff that will make you — through gritted teeth — concede that Mel Gibson did it better,
NO, JUST NO.

Some reviewers just need to fuck off and die.

(Or at least research the history the movies they review are based on to save them talking out of their fucking arses)
 
  • 1Thanks
Reactions: Ryanna Enfield

Free

IZ ADMIN
Joined
Sep 21, 2018
Messages
43,694
Location
Moonbase Caligula
SL Rez
2008
Joined SLU
2009
SLU Posts
55565