Risingsun: You said you watched "Black Death," which in one of my all-time favorite Medieval movies, and also "Robin Hood" with Russell Crowe, which I liked, but not as much as the former. In case you haven't seen them, my two other favorite Medieval flicks are "Tristan + Isolde" (2006) and "King Arthur" (2004).
My 150 (or so) favorite movies:
http://www.imdb.com/list/ls070122364/
If we go a bit older than El Cid and The War Lord both deserve mention.
Though I myself am not really sure which Medieval film I'd call my absolute favorite.
I just finished The Court Jester, which was pretty unique.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0049096/
[deleted]
You haven't seen many others?
Seriously, it's bad.
Best: Útlaginn – The Outlaw. It's an Icelandic film based on the saga of Gisli, about a revenge feud among Icelandic farmers. It is superb. Syntinen recommended it and I tracked down the subtitled DVD (not cheap, as Icelandic postage and packing is expensive).
"Active but Odd"
Nothing beats The Name Of The Rose. That film is a work of art.
--------------------
Duty Now For The Future
I have yet to see Robin and Marian and Name of the Rose, I quite liked Flesh + Blood and The Advocate for medieval films. ironclad had an interesting cast with James Purefoy, Paul Giametti, and Aneurin Barnard before he became a sex xymbol in White Queen. And Charles Dance and Brian Cox are always good.
shareI have yet to see Robin and Marian and Name of the Rose, I quite liked Flesh + Blood and The Advocate for medieval films. ironclad had an interesting cast with James Purefoy, Paul Giametti, and Aneurin Barnard before he became a sex xymbol in White Queen. And Charles Dance and Brian Cox are always good.
shareAneurin Barnard before he became a sex symbol in White QueenHe did? I must be getting old... He looked like a child to me!
seriously why have not anyone mentioned Arn?
or (even if it's a mini show) The Pillars of the Earth.
But yea Kingdom of Heaven is really good and probably the best!
Both Arn and Kingdom of Heaven were dreadful in their depiction of 12C Outremer (I don't know enough about Sweden in that time to comment on Arn's Swedish sections). Both took their view of Outremer from Runciman's 1950s books, which have been pretty much overturned by later research, and a hefty dollop of fantasy: at the time they were made, the films were actually 50 years out of date.
"Active but Odd"
It bugs me to see Kingdom of Heaven cited as an accurate medieval film. I loved it when I first saw it, but after watching all the special features, I despise Ridley Scott and his approach to history. Which is, more or less in his own words, "I don't care about accuracy; I go with what feels right."
I don't know if he got period details right, such as weaponry and clothes, but his license re: Saladin's treatment of the conquered people just pisses me off.
In the movie, Saladin lets them all go free out of magnaminity and deep humanity. Not what happened, as far as I can tell. He did let them live, (which was nice, and better than what the European conquerers had done when they took Jerusalem,) but in order to go free, they had to pay a big ransom. Only a few could do this, and the rest were made slaves.
I may have this not quite right, so set me straight if I'm wrong. But it's what I remember from the research I did back when debating this on the K of H board.
I also couldn't stand the tiny little trees in the French landscape. I'd rather have CGI old-growth forests than the pathetic stands of overcut timber that remains in European countryside today. Yes, timber was cut in the middle ages, but there was still a lot of ancient forest left.
I used to live in the Pacific Northwest of the US, and I know the immense difference between a mature, centuries old forest and the spindly little 40 or so year old tree farms that we have now. Plus barren hillsides where grass or erosion have replaced forests.
You might want to see one before they're all gone.
I saw a movie in France in 1998. I think it was in French with a French director. Middle ages. Dark and dirty and grim, with a girl forced into sex with possibly her father. A lot of mud and riding in the rain. Brutal. Not much dialogue. I can't remember anything else about it.
It had a Bergman-ish feel to it. Oh no, was it Bergman? Or a Scandinavian?
At first I thought it was Le Bossu, which I saw that year, but that doesn't seem right at all.
Can anyone think what this movie might have been?
At first I thought it was Le Bossu, which I saw that year, but that doesn't seem right at all.
I didn't think so, but my memory is so foggy. I can't think what the movie is. There might be a son avenging his father's death, or taking his place....which is sort of like Le Busso, so I wasn't sure.
shareI've found the film I was looking for. With help from the I Need To Know board. It was Beatrice, from 1986, directed by Bertrand Tavernier.
Well, I'm 99.9% sure that's it.
Would you recommend it? I had heard of it, but it sounded like more of a sexual-and-other-kinds-of-violence-fest than a historical film, so never tried to seek it out.
shareWould you recommend it? I had heard of it, but it sounded like more of a sexual-and-other-kinds-of-violence-fest than a historical film, so never tried to seek it out. If you say it's worth while, I'll look out for it.
shareMy gut feeling is that I'd recommend it.
I saw it almost 20 years ago and it's cloaked in an Excalibur-like fog.
I'm sure my overall feeling was that it was worth seeing, even though it was disturbing. However, I really don't know how I'd feel about it if I saw it today.
Either I had a lot on my mind at the time, and so I didn't reflect much on the movie, OR it was so disturbing, I didn't want to reflect on it.
It had a ring of truth to it, for me; a feeling of authenticity. I felt like, okay, yes, the middle ages were more like this than what we see in other movies. And I was glad for that realism.
However, I also wondered how real that realism was.
So that's why this movie came to mind for this thread. I also wanted to know what you thought of it.
The Washington Post says that the movie "dubunks the chivalric dream."
At the beginning of the film, there's a statement from the director -- something like, "In the Middle Ages, there was good and there was evil, but nothing between the two."
Which seems silly. Anyway, this statement gives some idea as to his purpose in the film. Still, I don't know if his purpose was to have an accurate depiction of medieval life, or just to have a weird meditation on the nature of evil.
Kind of a highbrow pre-Quentin Tarantino? I hope not.
One of my favorite historical authors is an American named Cecelia Holland. Her early books were very brutal. Almost as much as this movie. She also seemed to want to debunk a romantic vision of the middle ages.
Roger Ebert gave it three stars. The New York Times mocked it, but the Washington Post loved it.
The user reviews are mostly glowing. One guy (?) says it's "the most convincing portrait of the middle ages ever put on film."
The script was written by Tavernier's ex-wife.
[deleted]
I like Excaliber (1981) as the best. When the men are fighting with the plate armour on foot and on horseback the action is very realistic. The fighting to take the castles was done really well and wasn't glamourized like usual as an easy thing to do from afar.
share