Hollywood Knights: The Lion in Winter

“What family doesn’t have its ups and downs?”

The Lion in Winter (1968) was a movie I only discovered a few years ago, but has quickly become one of my favorite films. This film has played a major role in my studies, as it helped to take my passing interest in the Plantagenets and turn it into an obsession. As such it makes a great starting point for my first movie review. Please bear with me, I am not a professional film critic and have no real authority on the subject. It may take me several reviews to really hit my stride, and maybe at that point I will revisit this film.

The criteria by which I will grade films will differ from many critics to better fit the point of this blog. While entertainment obviously takes precedence when talking about film, historical accuracy, costuming, and action sequences will also play major roles in my grading. The criteria are as follows:

·         Plot: Does the story make sense? Does it flow well? Is it original?

·         Cast: Are there notable actors? Do they act well? Is the dialogue good?

·         Cinematography: How does the film look? Are the special effects good?

·         Music/Sound: Is the music good? Does it fit the film? Is the audio of good quality?

·         Historical Accuracy: Is the film realistic? Were events portrayed correctly? There shouldn’t be much nit-picking here.

·         Costuming: Are the costumes historically likely? Do they reflect the characters well? Do they look good?

·         Action: Are the fights well choreographed? Do they capture the spirit of historical combat?

·         Overall: The average score for the film.

Plot: 9/10

The Plantagenets conspire ruthlessly to achieve their ends, leading the story on a winding and unpredictable course. The story is original, and fits neatly together with the earlier Becket (1964), featuring Peter O’Toole in his first turn as Henry II.

                Henry struggles with his wife, Eleanor of Aquitaine (Katherine Hepburn), his sons Richard (Anthony Hopkins), Geoffrey (John Castle), and John (Nigel Terry), his mistress Alais (Jane Merrow), and his rival King Philip of France (Timothy Dalton) while trying to determine who is to inherit the throne to his massive empire. While this may sound confusing, the movie is actually quite simple and easy to follow. The plot makes complete sense, and motivations are well defined throughout the film.

Cast: 8/10

                Peter O’Toole and Katherine Hepburn were both major stars at the time of this film, and both were nominated for Oscars (Hepburn tied for best leading actress and O’Toole lost for best leading actor). These two had incredible chemistry and deftly portrayed the love/hate relationship of Henry and Eleanor. The dialogue between these two alternates between vicious and heartwarming, often in a matter of seconds. These two alone make this a worthwhile film.

                Sir Anthony Hopkins delivers a very strong performance as Richard, bringing an intensity that stands in stark defiance of the blustery King Henry. Timothy Dalton also impresses as King Philip, appearing every bit the prideful young monarch he was written to be. John Castle seems to have captured the emotionless Geoffrey he was supposed to portray, but I feel his performance could be improved upon. And Nigel Terry played his role perfectly, even if this version of John is less than compelling.

                All in all, the important characters are expertly played, and the other characters are at least convincing.

 Cinematography: 7/10

                This film looks fantastic. I am continually shocked by the quality of the cinematography from the 1970s and earlier, and it seems that so many movies since then have not lived up to their standard. Almost every shot is carefully framed and dramatically lit. There are a few wide-angle shots in the film that include too much random action to really interest the viewer. But, in a world of high-definition, this film has to lose at least a little bit just for showing its age, but not so much as to bore younger audiences just because of the way it looks.

Music/Sound: 4/10

                This is one of the weak points of the film, at least for me. There are moments of what should be excitement or action which remain completely silent. And when the music kicks in, it seems to me to be a distraction. The music often seems overly dramatic and suddenly loud. For the most part the sound effects are appropriate, but those moments of silence are glaring, and sound effects for large moments of action seem cheesy.

Accuracy: 9/10

Yes, the story is fictional. But it is incredibly well-researched. The story deftly captures the personalities of Henry II, Eleanor of Aquitaine, and Richard as they have been passed down to us through history. And aside from several minor anachronisms (Christmas trees, syphilis, paper), everything seems authentically medieval. This is partly achieved by filming on location in southern France and in Ireland, in monasteries and castles. Importantly, there is nothing that is glaringly inaccurate, except for perhaps that there was not a Christmas Court that particular year. But again, this is a fictional event. It is true that the young Prince Henry died early, that Eleanor, Richard, and Geoffrey all had rebelled against their father, and that the familial relationships between them were strained. And Richard's sexuality is still hotly debated, with current opinion swinging more toward him having been homosexual.

Action: 3/10

                There are only three instances of “action” in this film: a beach ambush in the beginning, a fight between two guards, and a brief fight between Henry and all three of his sons. Mostly, this score is low because the fights were painfully boring.

The ambush was shot entirely in wide angle and was slow paced, but wasn’t in any way important to the plot anyway.

The fight between the guards had no excitement, but at least benefited from ending in a realistic manner: two men wrestling on the ground and one ultimately stabbing the other with a dagger.

And the “fight” between Henry and his sons was mostly just twitching. I don’t think Richard ever actually moved, and the other two hid behind him while Henry tried to appear as if he was thrusting.

Total: 6.9/10

Ultimately this film is much better than its overall rating. The poor combat brought down the score, but this movie is not an action movie at all and you probably shouldn’t watch it if that’s all you’re looking for. While the score might end up being lower than some future films, it will probably be one of the best posted, and is highly recommended.


Written by Shelby Harris