How do you rate movies?
Do you base them solely off your enjoyment, or do you also consider the technical side of things? Are we so biased that our choice doesn’t really matter anyway? Who even gets to decide what makes a good movie? Is it a bunch of old, white men sitting in a dark room determined who paid them enough for the honor? Where are their credentials?
My ramblings are over. If you’ve been visiting my blog long enough, you’ll start to see a trend. I go off on a tangent that may or may not be related to why you actually clicked on the blog. Today’s I think makes sense though.
Also, welcome to my first official movie review. I’ve been doing book reviews for a while now, but as I move to writing scripts - which sadly means that I must start watching more movies - I thought I’d share my overly opinionated thoughts here. What other reasons are there for starting a blog? Isn’t it where we just write whatever we want and feel overly important in the words that we slap up on the internet? I feel so very important.
Now back to your regularly scheduled programming.
First off, let me start by saying that I did not enjoy The King. It was not what I expected. At least not what I saw in the Netflix trailer that I happened to let play for about two seconds. The pacing was slow, I didn’t understand half of what was going on, and the ending was the sharp edge of disappointment. I’ve had enough angst with unsatisfied, painful endings after The Rise of Skywalker, I don’t need this to become a trend.
And here is where the rant makes sense….
Technically, the movie was really well done. So, do I tell you guys I would rate this movie a 33 for my tastes or more in the 60s for skill? It’s a tough call.
A historical drama, The King, follows the crowning and major,military win for Henry V. Okay… this isn’t someone that’s been covered a lot in the genre. I was excited. Surely this was up my alley - I have a thing for the British royalty - but it lacked a strong emotional line. Mix that with the confusing parts and I ended up nodding off for portions of it.
Here’s where it went well though. Mixing in Shakespeare's Henry dramas, the movie is steeped in a lot of facts. The fight scenes, death of his closest council, and following execution of the French prisoners all seem to be factually based. Personally, I appreciated the fight scenes. They feel relevant in a time when movies are pushed to be dramatic and less realistic. That might be coming to an end though. What could be more realistic, then two boys flailing on the ground, fighting for their lives?
But do I like long, drawn out historical dramas that lack meat to sink my teeth into?
Not one little bit.
If I can’t get behind the character than there’s no reason for me to be watching the movie. So right after Henry V tries to save his brother, which turns out to be for not a day later, I was done. I didn’t care that he turned his life around. I didn’t care that he went to war… a whole other thing that makes my blood boil. He stops being the boy fighting the system and just becomes every other monarch.
I hate to say this, but I felt like this movie was written for history professors or old white men. Oh well… For production though, I think the movie was well made with a lot of time spent on the little details. I appreciate the accuracy of the wardrobe and the plot. I appreciated a lot of the shots. They were dynamic and drew you into the heart of the fighting. But all of that still lacked emotion.
Happy Watching
Love Kait