Andy Dufresne
Footballguy
How much higher should Serenity have been? It has a Jason of Star Command feel about it.
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
timdraft #4: Movie Category Draft (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter timschochet
- Start date
Aerial Assault
Footballguy
Post by post, I'm figuring out what the take from the ST lovers is here. Of course it's satire (and to be fair, Karma Police did say that in his post but I read right over it the first time and saw "blast" and "black comedy"). For me, satire isn't the same as comedy; there are some not-so-subtle differences. So as I said, I don't think Verhoeven intended for people to be rolling in the aisles at ST, and therefore comparing ST and Galaxy Quest doesn't work well. In any event, while GQ might have been ranked a few spots too high, its ranking is far from the atrocity that some are making it out to be.
Aerial Assault
Footballguy
Indeed. I assumed you drafted it, but you wouldn't take a risk like that in a movie draft, I deem. Yours had to have been Trip to the Moon or maybe Silent Running.
Aerial Assault
Footballguy
Is that a bad thing?
I would have had it 5-7 spots higher. Its genre blend is fascinating and the film is very, very clever.
Andy Dufresne
Footballguy
Yeah, I suppose. It probably could have gone ahead of Avatar, Silent Running, and Total Recall.
krista4
Footballguy
Nick Vermeil
Footballguy
I loved the tv show but I thought the movie went off the rails with the tone. It was way too serious and they split up the main characters in different locations. Plus they whacked a couple of characters in the most boring ways, one of them off screen for crying out loud. Serenity would have been last if I was judging.
Aerial Assault
Footballguy
Chicken dinner!!!! And in a bonus, I believe that means I just passed you, in an assuredly highly temporary state of affairs. (Trip to the Moon is a great flick and I bet you got solid value for it, too.)I planned to take it but someone beat me to it.Trip to the Moon was mine.
Time Kibitzer
Footballguy
So Tarkovsky thought people in the future would still be dressing like how they were dressing in the 70s? I can't imagine scientists in the 70s dressed like they were on their way to Studio 54 either, but that was a bit before my time so maybe I'm wrong.
If anything I would guess others would think I'm a film snob, as I hate most action/adventure films like Transformers and all these superhero films that come out every other month these days, and pretty well 90% of films that are released to mainstream theaters for that matter, but Solaris sure wouldn't make my film snob list. Though opinions are like #######s, as they say.
Last edited by a moderator:
Yankee23Fan
Fair Tax!
Khan was ranked perfectly. Well done.
timschochet
Footballguy
Yes. And Mrs. R, hopefully you'll take over dance? I have my hands full with movie parent and I presume there may be other categories yet to judge as well.
timschochet
Footballguy
I don't think it was. I say it's better than Empire, but not as good as Aliens. Aliens remains the best science fiction movie I have ever seen.
timschochet
Footballguy
My main problem with Starship Troopers was Doogie Howser in an SS uniform. I didn't read the book, but WTF?
Andy Dufresne
Footballguy
jwb
Footballguy
Oh yea, this I totally agree with. It's nowhere near a comedy, but do think they envisioned a grin or three.
Aerial Assault
Footballguy
The movie has virtually nothing to do with the book. It's one reason why the "satire" was not well-taken by many people who had read the book.
Andy Dufresne
Footballguy
Yeah, the last 10 minutes really goes off the rails. But the rest of it is really fun.
Aerial Assault
Footballguy
Probably exactly what they got from me.
It's not a bad movie and I don't even know that I would have ranked it as low as Val did, but somewhere in the past couple of hours the disrespectful sniping at Val (not from you, jwb, you're a good guy) became conflated with some sort of argument that Galaxy Quest and Wall-E should be disregarded because they're comedies, but the oh-so-hilarious Starship Troopers should have been immunized from this. All in all, I found the grumpy sniping of Val's entertaining and thoughtful writeups to make far less sense than the rankings themselves, in what I'm sure was an unintended irony.
Dr. Octopus
Footballguy
Agree. I love comedies. Galaxy Quest wasn't funny and where it tried to be it was a one note bit. There was nothing compelling about the story, the special effects were laughably bad (ok I guess it was kind of funny).It should be ranked as one of the 25 worst outer space movies.I do think Val did a decent job otherwise and had some nice analysis, but that was just shocking.
Last edited by a moderator:
John Maddens Lunchbox
Footballguy
As the judge who'll probably be up next (and will be probably even more controversial), I am tippy toeing here.....
Wall E is fine as a ranking
I loved Galaxy Quest and thought it was fun and interesting, but it is way too high here.
As for the Solaris - 1 ranking, that is a farce. I Know you haven't watched the 3 hour Russian version, but it is a masterpiece.
It is slow, long and a challenge, but give me this over that overratted POS 2001 anyday.
Overall a gob job, except for Galaxy Quest being too high, while Solaris and Silent Running are too low.
Wall E is fine as a ranking
I loved Galaxy Quest and thought it was fun and interesting, but it is way too high here.
As for the Solaris - 1 ranking, that is a farce. I Know you haven't watched the 3 hour Russian version, but it is a masterpiece.
It is slow, long and a challenge, but give me this over that overratted POS 2001 anyday.
Overall a gob job, except for Galaxy Quest being too high, while Solaris and Silent Running are too low.
John Maddens Lunchbox
Footballguy
Judging Criteria EnglandThis movie must be set and take place in England or be about English people away from home and retaining their Englishness.Looking away from period dramas where it is set in the 1800's, everyone has a nice house and a nanny called Penelope will be encouraged.Avoiding the "Oh I say" kind of Hugh Grant movies will also be encouraged.There are many regional accents which aren't of the "plum stuck in the mouth" variety, so diversity will be appreciated.If the movie has major or minor Scottish/Welsh or Irish undertones expect a low score. This is about England.If anyone drafts Trainspotting, expect a 1.The quality of the movie is a bonus, but Englishness is the most important criteria.Try to look at this from an English persons point of view, rather than an what an American thinks of England.
John Maddens Lunchbox
Footballguy
1 Point
Green Street (Hooligans)
Englishness: -
On the Positive
Nice to see a fantasy football conversation featuring Keyshawn Johnson early in the film. Shame it doesn’t relate to England.
Features several pub scenes with proper pub language.
The action from a real West Ham game is marvellous to see. Placing one of these scenes in the sporting scene category would have been a better fit for the movie.
The pub singalong football songs at least is realistic.
The grimy streets of Inner East London are a sight to see.
On the Negative – The violence is over the top brutal and borders on glorifying the stupidity on display.
Frodo is an American and there is a lot of US accents here.
Far too much explaining of things ie we are aiming at a foreign market
Some of the characters are far too one dimensional, let alone two.
The writing is atrocious at times as well. The Frodo walking into the Times and therefore being an undercover journo is ludicrous. The brother of lead thug being a former thug etc.
Another movie that was retitled for a foreign audience from Green Street to Green Street Hooligans or just plain Hooligans in some territories.
Quality of Movie – Fares very badly with a 46% rating on Rotten Tomatoes and while this movie has its moments, it is not a good piece of filmmaking. It definitely has strong strands of England here, but it is packaged in a turd. The movie could have cut several scenes that tried to play a rivalry within the group, which was a pointless sidetrack to the action.
Other comments – Hard to see Frodo not trudging his way to Mordor here. Unfortunately Elijah Wood is miscast. Badly. The 2nd lead Charlie Hunnan is even worse. At no stage does he offer any depth to his character, nor is he believable as a teacher and leader of the gang.
Overall Ranking for this category – This is a movie that had the potential to be very good, but with bad leads, poor writing and stupid plot points all ultimately leading to a terrible finale, there is only one place for this movie. The bottom. No doubt it has wonderful parts of England and English culture, but it is also clichéd, moronic in its scripting and an affront to decent film making. 41%.
Green Street (Hooligans)
Englishness: -
On the Positive
Nice to see a fantasy football conversation featuring Keyshawn Johnson early in the film. Shame it doesn’t relate to England.
Features several pub scenes with proper pub language.
The action from a real West Ham game is marvellous to see. Placing one of these scenes in the sporting scene category would have been a better fit for the movie.
The pub singalong football songs at least is realistic.
The grimy streets of Inner East London are a sight to see.
On the Negative – The violence is over the top brutal and borders on glorifying the stupidity on display.
Frodo is an American and there is a lot of US accents here.
Far too much explaining of things ie we are aiming at a foreign market
Some of the characters are far too one dimensional, let alone two.
The writing is atrocious at times as well. The Frodo walking into the Times and therefore being an undercover journo is ludicrous. The brother of lead thug being a former thug etc.
Another movie that was retitled for a foreign audience from Green Street to Green Street Hooligans or just plain Hooligans in some territories.
Quality of Movie – Fares very badly with a 46% rating on Rotten Tomatoes and while this movie has its moments, it is not a good piece of filmmaking. It definitely has strong strands of England here, but it is packaged in a turd. The movie could have cut several scenes that tried to play a rivalry within the group, which was a pointless sidetrack to the action.
Other comments – Hard to see Frodo not trudging his way to Mordor here. Unfortunately Elijah Wood is miscast. Badly. The 2nd lead Charlie Hunnan is even worse. At no stage does he offer any depth to his character, nor is he believable as a teacher and leader of the gang.
Overall Ranking for this category – This is a movie that had the potential to be very good, but with bad leads, poor writing and stupid plot points all ultimately leading to a terrible finale, there is only one place for this movie. The bottom. No doubt it has wonderful parts of England and English culture, but it is also clichéd, moronic in its scripting and an affront to decent film making. 41%.
John Maddens Lunchbox
Footballguy
2 Points
Harry Potter and the Philosopher's (Sorcerer's) Stone
Englishness: -
On the Positive – Has an excellent, mainly English cast and its early settings are true English suburbia. The school scenes are intended to align like the posh English schools, although they translate to any basically any rich school
On the Negative – Once we get to Hogwarts, apart from the voices we are transferred to Narnia or whatever the #### this place is like. Monsters, witches, warlocks and whatever the #### is going on here. Englishness flies out the window and we are dealing with Goblins and evil pitchforks or whatever the #### is happening.
Quality of Movie – This scores an 80% on the rotten tomatoes meter and the critical reviews of this movie have it right in my opinion. If you aren’t into the books you are going to be bored by it. I fell asleep 3 times trying to watch this and kept having to go back to where I dozed off. I just didn’t care. Don’t get me wrong, my wife and 3 eldest kids get off on this in ways I just don’t understand. They have been through the full set of movies at least 4 times, read the books countless times etc.
Other comments - For a start the title of this movie was not the English version. That was Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone (same as the book). Apparently studios deemed that American
Audiences were too stupid to know what a Philosopher was, despite the core audience having read the book as the Philosophers Stone.
Overall Ranking for this category – I applaud the drafter to taking a risk with this pick, but I just cannot reward it. The movie does not hit my G-Spot and the Englishness is superfluous to the magic, goblins and whatever else is going on here. This movie was going to be the lowest score until I watched Green Street at the end. Overall score of 58%.
Harry Potter and the Philosopher's (Sorcerer's) Stone
Englishness: -
On the Positive – Has an excellent, mainly English cast and its early settings are true English suburbia. The school scenes are intended to align like the posh English schools, although they translate to any basically any rich school
On the Negative – Once we get to Hogwarts, apart from the voices we are transferred to Narnia or whatever the #### this place is like. Monsters, witches, warlocks and whatever the #### is going on here. Englishness flies out the window and we are dealing with Goblins and evil pitchforks or whatever the #### is happening.
Quality of Movie – This scores an 80% on the rotten tomatoes meter and the critical reviews of this movie have it right in my opinion. If you aren’t into the books you are going to be bored by it. I fell asleep 3 times trying to watch this and kept having to go back to where I dozed off. I just didn’t care. Don’t get me wrong, my wife and 3 eldest kids get off on this in ways I just don’t understand. They have been through the full set of movies at least 4 times, read the books countless times etc.
Other comments - For a start the title of this movie was not the English version. That was Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone (same as the book). Apparently studios deemed that American
Audiences were too stupid to know what a Philosopher was, despite the core audience having read the book as the Philosophers Stone.
Overall Ranking for this category – I applaud the drafter to taking a risk with this pick, but I just cannot reward it. The movie does not hit my G-Spot and the Englishness is superfluous to the magic, goblins and whatever else is going on here. This movie was going to be the lowest score until I watched Green Street at the end. Overall score of 58%.
Nick Vermeil
Footballguy
Nice detail so far here.
John Maddens Lunchbox
Footballguy
3 Points
Performance
Englishness: -
On the Positive –
Once Mick Jagger is introduced the movie gets better.
The numerous naked bodies on display are quite nice to look at.
There are lots of English accents
There are some nice themes.
Jagger looks and sounds great in this.
On the Negative – The gangster scenes at the beginning are terrible. Poorly acted, unconvincing and ultimately pointless. What part of England is this movie supposed to represent?
The acting of the 2 foreign female leads is well, let’s just say their looks are what got them these roles .
Quality of Movie – Gets 83% on the rotten tomatoes meter and the bad reviews can’t seem to take the experimental edge of the movie. I have to agree with them. Ebert states
Other comments – Nice sex scenes to start this movie off. Then we get weird noises in a court room on top of the action and lots of psychedelic moments. This movie probably worked better back in the day than it does now, although like the Velvet Underground it has a wide sphere of influence. And just like Velvet Underground, I didn’t get into it.
Overall Ranking for this category – I’m all for experimentalism and movies that try to be different, especially when they hit my sweet spot. When they don’t however they are going to be inferior to a normal movie with flaws. As far as the English theme goes, there is seeing London in the 60s, sort of like Austin Powers, except without the groovy moments. The lack of cohesion and stupid gangster moments cost this movie a lot of points. This movie reminded me of Nuns on the Run and that’s not a good thing. I just wished they’d made the Fox character, anything except a ####### gangster. Overall score of 60%
Performance
Englishness: -
On the Positive –
Once Mick Jagger is introduced the movie gets better.
The numerous naked bodies on display are quite nice to look at.
There are lots of English accents
There are some nice themes.
Jagger looks and sounds great in this.
On the Negative – The gangster scenes at the beginning are terrible. Poorly acted, unconvincing and ultimately pointless. What part of England is this movie supposed to represent?
The acting of the 2 foreign female leads is well, let’s just say their looks are what got them these roles .
Quality of Movie – Gets 83% on the rotten tomatoes meter and the bad reviews can’t seem to take the experimental edge of the movie. I have to agree with them. Ebert states
The Experimentalism works at times, especially when the magic mushrooms hit, but overall the movie needed more development.
Other comments – Nice sex scenes to start this movie off. Then we get weird noises in a court room on top of the action and lots of psychedelic moments. This movie probably worked better back in the day than it does now, although like the Velvet Underground it has a wide sphere of influence. And just like Velvet Underground, I didn’t get into it.
Overall Ranking for this category – I’m all for experimentalism and movies that try to be different, especially when they hit my sweet spot. When they don’t however they are going to be inferior to a normal movie with flaws. As far as the English theme goes, there is seeing London in the 60s, sort of like Austin Powers, except without the groovy moments. The lack of cohesion and stupid gangster moments cost this movie a lot of points. This movie reminded me of Nuns on the Run and that’s not a good thing. I just wished they’d made the Fox character, anything except a ####### gangster. Overall score of 60%
Dr. Octopus
Footballguy
I don't think anyone acted disrespectfully towards him, except to express shock at some of the rankings and he was the one that claimed (incorrectly) that people dismissed those selections because they were comedies. At least 7 people made the same statement of surpise at one particular ranking, so it wasnt like the comment was out of left field. The movies themselves may have been disrespected but no one claimed he was deranged or anything and truth be told, he's the judge and he's well within his rights to rank them anyway he wants.Plus he has to live with the person that chose Galaxy Quest, and not with us, so can't blame the guy.Probably exactly what they got from me.
John Maddens Lunchbox
Footballguy
4 Points
The Ladykillers
Englishness: -
On the Positive –
Has a star cast and Guinness shines in the role of chief villain.
The sweet little old lady act is well performed and the writing is sharp and clever in places
.
On the Negative – Herbert Lom is a major character who of course was not English having escaped there when he was 22. Of course he adapted very quickly having appeared in 25 films before this, but obviously still has an accent.
The movie is really hoky and its farcical elements don’t really stand the test of time.
Not really depicting natural gangsters in a realistic manner and some of the performances are flat and 2 dimensional.
Quality of Movie – Gets a 100% on the rotten tomatoes meter from the 20 critics who reviewed it. The key question for me here is whether a comedy from 1955 still has relevancy in 2013. Is it funny? In my opinion this movie is a product of its time and is dated in so many ways. Did I laugh, yes, but I didn’t find the movie funny overall. Some of the acting is terrible, some of the plot movements ludicrous.
Other comments – I presume the drafter was selecting the 1955 film and not the Hanks/Coens 2004 collaboration. If it was the latter, well it would get a 1. The drafter also wrote “Brit Flick”, which is not correct. It was English (In case I haven’t made that clear lol)
Overall Ranking for this category – There isn’t much grit or realism here and the black comedy aspects are dated. Would work well as a stage play, but I didn’t really learn anything about England or being English here. Obviously influential as the Coens attempted the remake with Hanks and co. This is not the worst choice for the category, but ranks lows anyway. It was a good attempt at a high rating, but alas it is not for this judge. Overall score of 64%.
The Ladykillers
Englishness: -
On the Positive –
Has a star cast and Guinness shines in the role of chief villain.
The sweet little old lady act is well performed and the writing is sharp and clever in places
.
On the Negative – Herbert Lom is a major character who of course was not English having escaped there when he was 22. Of course he adapted very quickly having appeared in 25 films before this, but obviously still has an accent.
The movie is really hoky and its farcical elements don’t really stand the test of time.
Not really depicting natural gangsters in a realistic manner and some of the performances are flat and 2 dimensional.
Quality of Movie – Gets a 100% on the rotten tomatoes meter from the 20 critics who reviewed it. The key question for me here is whether a comedy from 1955 still has relevancy in 2013. Is it funny? In my opinion this movie is a product of its time and is dated in so many ways. Did I laugh, yes, but I didn’t find the movie funny overall. Some of the acting is terrible, some of the plot movements ludicrous.
Other comments – I presume the drafter was selecting the 1955 film and not the Hanks/Coens 2004 collaboration. If it was the latter, well it would get a 1. The drafter also wrote “Brit Flick”, which is not correct. It was English (In case I haven’t made that clear lol)
Overall Ranking for this category – There isn’t much grit or realism here and the black comedy aspects are dated. Would work well as a stage play, but I didn’t really learn anything about England or being English here. Obviously influential as the Coens attempted the remake with Hanks and co. This is not the worst choice for the category, but ranks lows anyway. It was a good attempt at a high rating, but alas it is not for this judge. Overall score of 64%.
John Maddens Lunchbox
Footballguy
More in a few hours....
timschochet
Footballguy
I love the detail as always, JML, but I think you missed the boat on Performance. I first saw it in a midnight showing in college, and I loved it ever since. Nicholas Roeg's first masterpiece.
John Maddens Lunchbox
Footballguy
As your pick, I expect you to defend it, but tell me those gangster scenes aren't appalling. About as convincing as Frodo being a tough guy.
There were moments that tantalised into a much better movie, especially when Jagger is on screen, but hey it's the 60s man, let's experiment.
Wouldn't be the first psychedelic movie that had ambitions above its station.
Obviously this movie was viewed at a crucial stage of your development and influenced you extremely. Maybe the same would have occurred if I'd watched it at the same age.
Val Rannous
Footballguy
Maybe you have to spliff up first.
John Maddens Lunchbox
Footballguy
5 Points
The Iron Lady
Englishness: -
On the Positive – We see England through the 50s, 70s & 80s as we go through the life of Margaret Thatcher
It doesn’t skip over the less nice aspects of Thatchers policies, although more confrontation would have been nice.
There are wonderful understated performances from the supporting cast.
On the Negative
Meryl Streep is obviously not English, but you wouldn’t know it as she once again seamlessly steps into character.
Despite the plaudits, this film would be better off without her. It is a distracting and showy role and you can’t help thinking “it’s Streep marvellously playing Margaret Thatcher”, rather than just watching Thatcher
The story is told in a jumbled fashion and focusing on the dementia of an old lady missing her husband is not the story that needs to be told when we are dealing with Thatcher.
Despite showing the protest, riots and bombings, the film is a fence sitter that uses the illness of an old lady to try and garner sympathy, without giving something to those who support her policies and style.
Quality of Movie – This movie rightly got panned by Rotten Tomatoes with a 52% rating. Although Streep is a distraction, it’s the storyline, directing and writing that is the fundamental problem here.
Why not focus on the ladies strengths instead of watching a senile old lady remember things? Either show her to be the hero of the Conservatives, or show her to be the destroyer of the working classes. You can do both if you want to go for a balanced approach, but the movie needed more clarity.
Other comments – I personally thought the girl playing the young Margaret Thatcher was much more convincing than Ms Streep, and for this movie to work it needed to be told in a more straightforward fashion.
Overall Ranking for this category – This one is one of the poorer rated movies on this list and although I enjoyed the supporting performances more than Streep, it is no doubt another great performance from the wonderful actress. Unfortunately it is difficult to focus on the Thatcher character in the 70s and 80s. The scenes we see of England on fire, riots and little scenes like the opening when she buys the milk are what lift this from the bottom few. I really would have wanted to watch a Thatcher picture that took a side, or was told in a more chronological order, despite my bitter opinion of her policies and the destruction they caused to individuals, towns and cities. She was a great leader, who is worth admiring or hating. This movie doesn’t do her justice. Overall score of 66%.
The Iron Lady
Englishness: -
On the Positive – We see England through the 50s, 70s & 80s as we go through the life of Margaret Thatcher
It doesn’t skip over the less nice aspects of Thatchers policies, although more confrontation would have been nice.
There are wonderful understated performances from the supporting cast.
On the Negative
Meryl Streep is obviously not English, but you wouldn’t know it as she once again seamlessly steps into character.
Despite the plaudits, this film would be better off without her. It is a distracting and showy role and you can’t help thinking “it’s Streep marvellously playing Margaret Thatcher”, rather than just watching Thatcher
The story is told in a jumbled fashion and focusing on the dementia of an old lady missing her husband is not the story that needs to be told when we are dealing with Thatcher.
Despite showing the protest, riots and bombings, the film is a fence sitter that uses the illness of an old lady to try and garner sympathy, without giving something to those who support her policies and style.
Quality of Movie – This movie rightly got panned by Rotten Tomatoes with a 52% rating. Although Streep is a distraction, it’s the storyline, directing and writing that is the fundamental problem here.
Why not focus on the ladies strengths instead of watching a senile old lady remember things? Either show her to be the hero of the Conservatives, or show her to be the destroyer of the working classes. You can do both if you want to go for a balanced approach, but the movie needed more clarity.
Other comments – I personally thought the girl playing the young Margaret Thatcher was much more convincing than Ms Streep, and for this movie to work it needed to be told in a more straightforward fashion.
Overall Ranking for this category – This one is one of the poorer rated movies on this list and although I enjoyed the supporting performances more than Streep, it is no doubt another great performance from the wonderful actress. Unfortunately it is difficult to focus on the Thatcher character in the 70s and 80s. The scenes we see of England on fire, riots and little scenes like the opening when she buys the milk are what lift this from the bottom few. I really would have wanted to watch a Thatcher picture that took a side, or was told in a more chronological order, despite my bitter opinion of her policies and the destruction they caused to individuals, towns and cities. She was a great leader, who is worth admiring or hating. This movie doesn’t do her justice. Overall score of 66%.
Last edited by a moderator:
John Maddens Lunchbox
Footballguy
6 Points
The Long Good Friday
Englishness: -
On The Positive
There is loads of energy in this movie, primarily coming from Hoskins. There is good character analysis of the lead mainly and there is definitely an east London vibe to this
On the Negative – That ####### soundtrack. Loud, dated and annoying. Quite a few racist comments get through here. Maybe not unusual for 1980, but they are terrible now.
Not sure I really needed to see a lengthy Bob Hoskins shower scene either.
Quality of Movie – Gets 95% on the Rotten Tomatoes website with 1 rotten vote who gives a thoughtful review and focuses on the amateur camerawork and the lack of depth. Personally I found Hoskins over the top. The cockney geezer angle is tired and worn out, although this was made in 1980 so I’ll cut it some slack. I wish Guy Ritchie didn’t watch this movie and base the most part of his career on this kind of stuff.
Other comments - My god that soundtrack and background music is terrible. It drowns out the action and ruins several key segments. Features a pub sequence which gets it bonus points. Features a young Pierce Brosnan as well.
Overall Ranking for this category – This would have ranked higher if it wasn’t for that damned soundtrack and music. The movie has excellent moments and very dated moments, it is England, albeit the cockney part which features too often in movies. Overall score gets boost because of the little details, but drops in most other areas. Score of 67 points.
The Long Good Friday
Englishness: -
On The Positive
There is loads of energy in this movie, primarily coming from Hoskins. There is good character analysis of the lead mainly and there is definitely an east London vibe to this
On the Negative – That ####### soundtrack. Loud, dated and annoying. Quite a few racist comments get through here. Maybe not unusual for 1980, but they are terrible now.
Not sure I really needed to see a lengthy Bob Hoskins shower scene either.
Quality of Movie – Gets 95% on the Rotten Tomatoes website with 1 rotten vote who gives a thoughtful review and focuses on the amateur camerawork and the lack of depth. Personally I found Hoskins over the top. The cockney geezer angle is tired and worn out, although this was made in 1980 so I’ll cut it some slack. I wish Guy Ritchie didn’t watch this movie and base the most part of his career on this kind of stuff.
Other comments - My god that soundtrack and background music is terrible. It drowns out the action and ruins several key segments. Features a pub sequence which gets it bonus points. Features a young Pierce Brosnan as well.
Overall Ranking for this category – This would have ranked higher if it wasn’t for that damned soundtrack and music. The movie has excellent moments and very dated moments, it is England, albeit the cockney part which features too often in movies. Overall score gets boost because of the little details, but drops in most other areas. Score of 67 points.
John Maddens Lunchbox
Footballguy
7 Points
Layer Cake
Englishness: -
On the Positive
Top notch performance from Craig and sharp direction from Matthew Vaughan.
It is set in England and features numerous cockney/wide boy performances
On the Negative – This was made at the height of the British gangster movies following Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels, which surprisingly wasn’t picked. Layer Cake needed to stand out in this flooded genre. It does enough, but has flaws.
Quality of Movie – Gets an 81% on the rotten tomatoes meter, which is fairly low compared to some of the other movies here, but it has ambition, direction and a great breakout performance from Daniel Craig. I enjoyed it, but it wasn’t terribly original. Sienna Miller looks at her hottest.
Other comments – Hard not to watch this without thinking of Daniel Craig as James Bond. Gets bonus points for the She Sells Sanctuary placement early on.
A young Tom Hardy appears as well.
Overall Ranking for this category – This is English, but so what. It does enough to be an English movie, but not enough to distinguish itself in this field. It is an enjoyable movie, but without Daniel Craig it would be just another Danny Dyer movie. Overall score of 68%
Layer Cake
Englishness: -
On the Positive
Top notch performance from Craig and sharp direction from Matthew Vaughan.
It is set in England and features numerous cockney/wide boy performances
On the Negative – This was made at the height of the British gangster movies following Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels, which surprisingly wasn’t picked. Layer Cake needed to stand out in this flooded genre. It does enough, but has flaws.
Quality of Movie – Gets an 81% on the rotten tomatoes meter, which is fairly low compared to some of the other movies here, but it has ambition, direction and a great breakout performance from Daniel Craig. I enjoyed it, but it wasn’t terribly original. Sienna Miller looks at her hottest.
Other comments – Hard not to watch this without thinking of Daniel Craig as James Bond. Gets bonus points for the She Sells Sanctuary placement early on.
A young Tom Hardy appears as well.
Overall Ranking for this category – This is English, but so what. It does enough to be an English movie, but not enough to distinguish itself in this field. It is an enjoyable movie, but without Daniel Craig it would be just another Danny Dyer movie. Overall score of 68%
John Maddens Lunchbox
Footballguy
8 Points
Chariots of Fire
Englishness: -
On the Positive Side. The movie gives a clear portrayal of the Toffs that reside at the major Uni’s and the pomp and ceremony there within, especially when focusing on Abrahams and the struggles of outsiders to get into the elite groups.
On the Negative side. This is another movie that dwells on the upper class system and another historical drama. The major downside here however is that one of the 2 lead characters and the heart of the movie, Eric Lidell, is Scottish, hence the nickname “The Flying Scotsman” and not English. He was also born (and died) in China. He has been honoured in memorium in both Edinburgh and China, funnily enough not in England. The other major character Harold Abrahams had a Russian/Polish/Lithuanian father and a Welsh mother. Although Abrahams is English and encouraged to be by his father, his breeding stock knocks him down a few points on the English scale. Even Abrahams trainer is a foreigner. The only Englishmen on screen are the pompous elite and Lords and Ladies.
Quality of Movie. Has a Rotten Tomatoes score of 85%, with a surprising number of critical dissenters. I enjoyed it on rewatching it, although not as much as when it was released
Other comments. If this were a British category, this would have ranked much higher, but because England is the given topic it has to drop points. The Olympic squad was British, not English (I think I’ve made that point very clear)
Overall Ranking for this category. This is a great movie for the British category, less so for England, especially when the focus is on a non Englishmen. This movie is lucky to get 8 points given the significant negatives here and as I give this an overall score of 68%
Chariots of Fire
Englishness: -
On the Positive Side. The movie gives a clear portrayal of the Toffs that reside at the major Uni’s and the pomp and ceremony there within, especially when focusing on Abrahams and the struggles of outsiders to get into the elite groups.
On the Negative side. This is another movie that dwells on the upper class system and another historical drama. The major downside here however is that one of the 2 lead characters and the heart of the movie, Eric Lidell, is Scottish, hence the nickname “The Flying Scotsman” and not English. He was also born (and died) in China. He has been honoured in memorium in both Edinburgh and China, funnily enough not in England. The other major character Harold Abrahams had a Russian/Polish/Lithuanian father and a Welsh mother. Although Abrahams is English and encouraged to be by his father, his breeding stock knocks him down a few points on the English scale. Even Abrahams trainer is a foreigner. The only Englishmen on screen are the pompous elite and Lords and Ladies.
Quality of Movie. Has a Rotten Tomatoes score of 85%, with a surprising number of critical dissenters. I enjoyed it on rewatching it, although not as much as when it was released
Other comments. If this were a British category, this would have ranked much higher, but because England is the given topic it has to drop points. The Olympic squad was British, not English (I think I’ve made that point very clear)
Overall Ranking for this category. This is a great movie for the British category, less so for England, especially when the focus is on a non Englishmen. This movie is lucky to get 8 points given the significant negatives here and as I give this an overall score of 68%
John Maddens Lunchbox
Footballguy
9 Points
Kinky Boots
Englishness: -
On the Positive -
Featuring Northampton as its home base and an English cast.
Gritty working class towns and people are on display in a modern setting.
On the Negative – Apart from the quality of the movie, not much really can be said against this part of the film. English enough, but doesn’t go into much depth about anything, including its Englishness
Quality of Movie. Has a rotten tomatoes ranking of 57%, with many decrying it’s formulaic approach and contrived plot points, especially as it’s “based” on a true story. I have to agree with those complaints. The movie seemingly doesn’t want to offend anyway, but be quirky and daring at the same time. It just doesn’t work overall. The cast don’t seem to be stretched with the exception of an excellent and versatile Chiwetel Ejiofor as Lola/Simon. I can’t put my finger on it, but this movie is missing something. My guess is that the writing is sub par, the screenplay is lacking quality and the lead is bland.
Other comments. This is in my opinion one of the worst movies here, and not because it is bad, but because I was bored by it. For the non demanding film goer it would be perfectly fine, but when you watch enough film you can see the movie clichés and the attempt to “tick all the boxes”. The Full Monty displays the regional parts of England brilliantly, this movie just is too safe.
Overall Ranking for this category. It scores reasonably strong on the English factor, despite the fact that you don’t really learn anything about anyone in this cast that is terribly deep. You could place this movie in a lot of places and it wouldn’t matter. This movie has moved around in the bottom half in my rankings as I compare its Englishness with the other films, against the Period drama ####e and posh people and the overall quality of the movie, but it finally ends up here. An overall score of 69%
Kinky Boots
Englishness: -
On the Positive -
Featuring Northampton as its home base and an English cast.
Gritty working class towns and people are on display in a modern setting.
On the Negative – Apart from the quality of the movie, not much really can be said against this part of the film. English enough, but doesn’t go into much depth about anything, including its Englishness
Quality of Movie. Has a rotten tomatoes ranking of 57%, with many decrying it’s formulaic approach and contrived plot points, especially as it’s “based” on a true story. I have to agree with those complaints. The movie seemingly doesn’t want to offend anyway, but be quirky and daring at the same time. It just doesn’t work overall. The cast don’t seem to be stretched with the exception of an excellent and versatile Chiwetel Ejiofor as Lola/Simon. I can’t put my finger on it, but this movie is missing something. My guess is that the writing is sub par, the screenplay is lacking quality and the lead is bland.
Other comments. This is in my opinion one of the worst movies here, and not because it is bad, but because I was bored by it. For the non demanding film goer it would be perfectly fine, but when you watch enough film you can see the movie clichés and the attempt to “tick all the boxes”. The Full Monty displays the regional parts of England brilliantly, this movie just is too safe.
Overall Ranking for this category. It scores reasonably strong on the English factor, despite the fact that you don’t really learn anything about anyone in this cast that is terribly deep. You could place this movie in a lot of places and it wouldn’t matter. This movie has moved around in the bottom half in my rankings as I compare its Englishness with the other films, against the Period drama ####e and posh people and the overall quality of the movie, but it finally ends up here. An overall score of 69%
John Maddens Lunchbox
Footballguy
10 Points
Alfie
Englishness: -
On the Positive –
Features a wonderful and cheeky Michael Caine in full form.
Features a pub scene and brawl
Alfie getting his comeuppance is deserved.
On the Negative – The talking to camera gets annoying, as does Alfie’s self absorbed ways.
Some of the acting from the supporting cast is awful.
Plenty of stereotypes on display here
Shelley Winters is given prominent billing, but barely appears and obviously isn’t English.
The trail of destruction left in Alfie’s wake is disgusting, but it’s aright guvna eh?
Quality of Movie – Gets 100% on the rotten tomatoes meter from its 24 reviewers. This movie is held together by Michael Caine. Without him, this film is nothing. How a viewer feels, depends on whether sympathy is felt for the Caine character. I took him as a vainglorious ******* and felt no sympathy at all for him.
Other comments – Cockney, Cockney, Cockney. It may be charming to the foreigner, but nothing is more played out in film than the cheeky, charming, gobby Cockney and while Caine does it better than anybody, it is boring for those of us who’ve seen in a 1000 times.
Overall Ranking for this category – If this were for performances in an English film, Caine would be right up there, but this category is more than that. Offers little insight into more than just one cockney geezer. It’s interesting to see the era portrayed on film, but this film is about Caine’s Alfie, rather than a part of England. Overall score of 70%
Alfie
Englishness: -
On the Positive –
Features a wonderful and cheeky Michael Caine in full form.
Features a pub scene and brawl
Alfie getting his comeuppance is deserved.
On the Negative – The talking to camera gets annoying, as does Alfie’s self absorbed ways.
Some of the acting from the supporting cast is awful.
Plenty of stereotypes on display here
Shelley Winters is given prominent billing, but barely appears and obviously isn’t English.
The trail of destruction left in Alfie’s wake is disgusting, but it’s aright guvna eh?
Quality of Movie – Gets 100% on the rotten tomatoes meter from its 24 reviewers. This movie is held together by Michael Caine. Without him, this film is nothing. How a viewer feels, depends on whether sympathy is felt for the Caine character. I took him as a vainglorious ******* and felt no sympathy at all for him.
Other comments – Cockney, Cockney, Cockney. It may be charming to the foreigner, but nothing is more played out in film than the cheeky, charming, gobby Cockney and while Caine does it better than anybody, it is boring for those of us who’ve seen in a 1000 times.
Overall Ranking for this category – If this were for performances in an English film, Caine would be right up there, but this category is more than that. Offers little insight into more than just one cockney geezer. It’s interesting to see the era portrayed on film, but this film is about Caine’s Alfie, rather than a part of England. Overall score of 70%
John Maddens Lunchbox
Footballguy
11 Points.
Becket
Englishness: -
On the Positive –
Fascinating to see a real treatment of the peasants by the Royals as Henry seeks shelter in a hut. Peter O’Toole gives a standout performance as Henry II
Always interesting to see the Saxon/Norman rivalry as an undercurrent throughout.
On the Negative – Gets bogged down in the 2nd half when the movie concentrates on Becket.
Richard Burton is Welsh, not English so that is a negative.
Once again we are in the higher circles of “England”, but we do see little glimpses into the commoner.
Quality of Movie - Gets 75% on the rotten tomatoes meter. With ¼ of the critics against the film.
This movie is about 30 minutes too long and Burton is out-acted by O’Toole on a grand scale. It’s not that Burton is a bad actor, it’s just that he is too morose in this role.
Other comments – I presume this is the 1964 version of the film, rather than the 1923 silent version of the film. Fascinating to see essentially the Lion in Summer, after the Lion in Winter. Henry II was an interesting king alright with Peter O’Toole playing the role in both films. This is the lesser film though.
Overall Ranking for this category – While an interesting film, which does tell me a little about England in the 12th century, it is a flawed film that carries on a bit too long. It’s compatriot film, the Lion in Winter is a better vehicle for both Henry II and this category. Not a bad movie by any stretch it nevertheless scores 71%
Becket
Englishness: -
On the Positive –
Fascinating to see a real treatment of the peasants by the Royals as Henry seeks shelter in a hut. Peter O’Toole gives a standout performance as Henry II
Always interesting to see the Saxon/Norman rivalry as an undercurrent throughout.
On the Negative – Gets bogged down in the 2nd half when the movie concentrates on Becket.
Richard Burton is Welsh, not English so that is a negative.
Once again we are in the higher circles of “England”, but we do see little glimpses into the commoner.
Quality of Movie - Gets 75% on the rotten tomatoes meter. With ¼ of the critics against the film.
This movie is about 30 minutes too long and Burton is out-acted by O’Toole on a grand scale. It’s not that Burton is a bad actor, it’s just that he is too morose in this role.
Other comments – I presume this is the 1964 version of the film, rather than the 1923 silent version of the film. Fascinating to see essentially the Lion in Summer, after the Lion in Winter. Henry II was an interesting king alright with Peter O’Toole playing the role in both films. This is the lesser film though.
Overall Ranking for this category – While an interesting film, which does tell me a little about England in the 12th century, it is a flawed film that carries on a bit too long. It’s compatriot film, the Lion in Winter is a better vehicle for both Henry II and this category. Not a bad movie by any stretch it nevertheless scores 71%
Val Rannous
Footballguy
Drat, I thought I had pegged your criteria spot on. It wasn't period, it was diverse regional England, and had no americanized viewpoints. Plus Chiwetel Ejiofor rocks.
jwb
Footballguy
as the guy who picked this late, I am very happy with my 11 points, and I totally agree with this. I love the film, but it does overstay its welcome.
John Maddens Lunchbox
Footballguy
12 Points
Gosford Park
Englishness: -
On the Positive
Spends 80 odd minutes setting up the murder mystery at the heart of the movie, which is an extraordinary patient way to set it up. We get to know the characters well by then heightening the whodunit aspect of the film.
Ryan Phillippe has a very good Scottish accent, which of course isn’t England, although it falls apart on occasion.
On the Negative.
Once again features the lord and ladies groups and is set in the past (1930s here). Directed by Robert Altman, obviously American and his take on the English class system, but once again too much focus is placed on the posh boys and girls. Of course one of the featured “commoners” has to be Scottish in the Kelly McDonald character
Quality of Movie – Scores 86% on the Rotten Tomatoes meter, which is lower than films that have received this amount of praise. The criticism focuses on the movie being too clever or boring. I found the movie with far too many moments that just do not belong in the time setting and the Americanisms that do not suit an “English” film from Altman are distracting. The frequent profanity appears out of place as well. The ending of the movie was disappointing as well.
Other comments – Allegedly inspired Downton Abbey, but set well after that. Maggie Smith appears, surprise, surprise as the pompous and stuck up rich lady.
Overall Ranking for this category – This was a hard one to place as there are good moments here, but the outsiders look into English culture from Altman occasionally misses its target . Once again the look into the lives of the lords and ladies is boring for an English movie. We see lots of servants discussion, but it veers into the cliché on several occasions. Overall Score 72.
Gosford Park
Englishness: -
On the Positive
Spends 80 odd minutes setting up the murder mystery at the heart of the movie, which is an extraordinary patient way to set it up. We get to know the characters well by then heightening the whodunit aspect of the film.
Ryan Phillippe has a very good Scottish accent, which of course isn’t England, although it falls apart on occasion.
On the Negative.
Once again features the lord and ladies groups and is set in the past (1930s here). Directed by Robert Altman, obviously American and his take on the English class system, but once again too much focus is placed on the posh boys and girls. Of course one of the featured “commoners” has to be Scottish in the Kelly McDonald character
Quality of Movie – Scores 86% on the Rotten Tomatoes meter, which is lower than films that have received this amount of praise. The criticism focuses on the movie being too clever or boring. I found the movie with far too many moments that just do not belong in the time setting and the Americanisms that do not suit an “English” film from Altman are distracting. The frequent profanity appears out of place as well. The ending of the movie was disappointing as well.
Other comments – Allegedly inspired Downton Abbey, but set well after that. Maggie Smith appears, surprise, surprise as the pompous and stuck up rich lady.
Overall Ranking for this category – This was a hard one to place as there are good moments here, but the outsiders look into English culture from Altman occasionally misses its target . Once again the look into the lives of the lords and ladies is boring for an English movie. We see lots of servants discussion, but it veers into the cliché on several occasions. Overall Score 72.
John Maddens Lunchbox
Footballguy
You did read the criteria 100% correctly, you just picked the wrong movie as you'll see by the movies coming up.
As I mentioned I disliked the safety this movie takes a lot, and the lead actor. The only reason it got 9 points is that you got everything else correct.
John Maddens Lunchbox
Footballguy
13 Points
The Remains of the Day
Englishness: -
On the Positive –The cast is fantastic and brilliant in their roles.
Has a lot of repressed sexuality, especially from Thompson and Hopkins.
English through and through, with a cameo from some foreigners.
It is a well directed and well written movie full of class.
On the Negative – Another of the lords and ladies set, with its period drama and how the affluent live life in their gigantic mansions. Obviously Hopkins as the observing Butler is hardly affluent, but it’s the circles the movie revolves in.
Hopkins is Welsh and Christopher Reeve American and they are 2 of the primary actors in this. Hopkins does plum it up for the role.
Hugh Grant, surprise surprise appears as an effete Englishman.
Emma Thompson and Anthony Hopkins age over 20 years during the movie and while the clothes are right, the actors barely look different.
Quality of Movie – Gets 97% on rotten tomatoes, with only 1 dissenting voice. Gets praised for being the kind of period drama that Merchant Ivory make very well and while this is all true, one yearns for something different.
Other comments – Fox Hunting as it appears here is very English, but only for the rah rah toffs. An excellent backdrop to the events leading up to the 2nd world war. Does feature a pub scene in ye olde days
Overall Ranking for this category – This is a quality movie and English, but again we are only entering the lives of those in and around the elite. People may be surprised to realise that the large majority of English people are not rich, nor do they serve the upper class. The performances are top notch, but doing I really need to see another movie where the stiff upper lip gets in the way of some serious shagging? Overall score of 74
The Remains of the Day
Englishness: -
On the Positive –The cast is fantastic and brilliant in their roles.
Has a lot of repressed sexuality, especially from Thompson and Hopkins.
English through and through, with a cameo from some foreigners.
It is a well directed and well written movie full of class.
On the Negative – Another of the lords and ladies set, with its period drama and how the affluent live life in their gigantic mansions. Obviously Hopkins as the observing Butler is hardly affluent, but it’s the circles the movie revolves in.
Hopkins is Welsh and Christopher Reeve American and they are 2 of the primary actors in this. Hopkins does plum it up for the role.
Hugh Grant, surprise surprise appears as an effete Englishman.
Emma Thompson and Anthony Hopkins age over 20 years during the movie and while the clothes are right, the actors barely look different.
Quality of Movie – Gets 97% on rotten tomatoes, with only 1 dissenting voice. Gets praised for being the kind of period drama that Merchant Ivory make very well and while this is all true, one yearns for something different.
Other comments – Fox Hunting as it appears here is very English, but only for the rah rah toffs. An excellent backdrop to the events leading up to the 2nd world war. Does feature a pub scene in ye olde days
Overall Ranking for this category – This is a quality movie and English, but again we are only entering the lives of those in and around the elite. People may be surprised to realise that the large majority of English people are not rich, nor do they serve the upper class. The performances are top notch, but doing I really need to see another movie where the stiff upper lip gets in the way of some serious shagging? Overall score of 74
John Maddens Lunchbox
Footballguy
14 Points
Four Lions
Englishness: -
On the Positive – The dialects of Northern British Muslims is absolutely spot on, as are the subtle characteristics. This is probably as close a look as we’ll ever get to the lives of people who are prepared to commit mass atrocities. It pulls no punches, has depth and yet there is a soul to this movie. The scenes in Pakistan have a realistic feel to them, as our idiots go on training camp and are too stupid to be let in.
On the Negative – The subject matter is dark and not for everyone. Some of the characters are just too stupid to be real and to truly work as a dark comedy there should have been a more sombre ending.
Quality of Movie – Gets 81% on the Rotten Tomatoes movies, but this is a wonderful satire into the lives of Northern Muslim British men. It has flaws, plot holes and little bits that stop it rating as the classic it could have been. We get to see England all around this movie as we delve into more than just the muslims lives.
Other comments – Wonderfully explores the dynamics of a group of idiots, who happen to be terrorists in this movie. Scarily the target of this event was the London Marathon, eerily 3 years before the events in Boston. These terrorists really don’t know what they are doing.
Overall Ranking for this category – This was probably the hardest film for me to rank overall. We definitely get a look at English culture as we rarely see in film. Over the last 30 years the muslim community in England has grown exponentially and are very prominent in certain towns. This movie taps into parts of that and it must be applauded for that. It also is not anywhere near the best film on this list and has a lot of amateurish aspects throughout. Overall score of 75%
Four Lions
Englishness: -
On the Positive – The dialects of Northern British Muslims is absolutely spot on, as are the subtle characteristics. This is probably as close a look as we’ll ever get to the lives of people who are prepared to commit mass atrocities. It pulls no punches, has depth and yet there is a soul to this movie. The scenes in Pakistan have a realistic feel to them, as our idiots go on training camp and are too stupid to be let in.
On the Negative – The subject matter is dark and not for everyone. Some of the characters are just too stupid to be real and to truly work as a dark comedy there should have been a more sombre ending.
Quality of Movie – Gets 81% on the Rotten Tomatoes movies, but this is a wonderful satire into the lives of Northern Muslim British men. It has flaws, plot holes and little bits that stop it rating as the classic it could have been. We get to see England all around this movie as we delve into more than just the muslims lives.
Other comments – Wonderfully explores the dynamics of a group of idiots, who happen to be terrorists in this movie. Scarily the target of this event was the London Marathon, eerily 3 years before the events in Boston. These terrorists really don’t know what they are doing.
Overall Ranking for this category – This was probably the hardest film for me to rank overall. We definitely get a look at English culture as we rarely see in film. Over the last 30 years the muslim community in England has grown exponentially and are very prominent in certain towns. This movie taps into parts of that and it must be applauded for that. It also is not anywhere near the best film on this list and has a lot of amateurish aspects throughout. Overall score of 75%
John Maddens Lunchbox
Footballguy
15 Points
The Lion In Winter
Englishness: -
On the Positive
The performances are wonderful and the focus on the bygone royalties was a plus.
This was in the days when parts of France were technically English.
On the Negative –
Features Katherine Hepburn and Anthony Hopkins in 2 of the lead roles. She is American and he is Welsh. Not very English there. Peter O’Toole is English enough though.
Looks and feels dated, not because in is set in the 12th century, but the film making, style and action are from a bygone era.
Didn’t really learn much about the English here, just monarchies in General and the infighting and bitterness there within. Not exclusively limited to the English throne.
Quality of Movie – Scores 96% on the Rotten Tomatoes meter and the one negative review is 2 very short sentences (boring, but good acting). The quality is there though and I enjoyed it. Obviously based on a play with the minimal sets and the lengthy dialog, but that is a good thing here.
Other comments– I had never seen this, but I don’t mind a historical drama as long as its not one of those clichéd 1800 lords and lady ones. As this is set in 1183, I got into it a lot more. They must have been giving away Oscars though if Hepburn wins for this. The role is showy and flash and she does it well, but an Oscar?
Overall Ranking - for this category I have to punish this movie for using Katherine Hepburn and Anthony Hopkins in their natural voices and the fact it doesn’t teach us much about England, just the infighting within the Monarcy. On the other side it is a very good movie and there is just enough there for it to qualify for the English section. An overall score of 76
The Lion In Winter
Englishness: -
On the Positive
The performances are wonderful and the focus on the bygone royalties was a plus.
This was in the days when parts of France were technically English.
On the Negative –
Features Katherine Hepburn and Anthony Hopkins in 2 of the lead roles. She is American and he is Welsh. Not very English there. Peter O’Toole is English enough though.
Looks and feels dated, not because in is set in the 12th century, but the film making, style and action are from a bygone era.
Didn’t really learn much about the English here, just monarchies in General and the infighting and bitterness there within. Not exclusively limited to the English throne.
Quality of Movie – Scores 96% on the Rotten Tomatoes meter and the one negative review is 2 very short sentences (boring, but good acting). The quality is there though and I enjoyed it. Obviously based on a play with the minimal sets and the lengthy dialog, but that is a good thing here.
Other comments– I had never seen this, but I don’t mind a historical drama as long as its not one of those clichéd 1800 lords and lady ones. As this is set in 1183, I got into it a lot more. They must have been giving away Oscars though if Hepburn wins for this. The role is showy and flash and she does it well, but an Oscar?
Overall Ranking - for this category I have to punish this movie for using Katherine Hepburn and Anthony Hopkins in their natural voices and the fact it doesn’t teach us much about England, just the infighting within the Monarcy. On the other side it is a very good movie and there is just enough there for it to qualify for the English section. An overall score of 76
Similar threads
