ada
the leading man is my tpye
Teddie Blake
The movie turns out to be a little better than the average. Starting from a romantic formula often seen in the cinema, it ends in the most predictable (and somewhat bland) way.
Lela
The tone of this movie is interesting -- the stakes are both dramatic and high, but it's balanced with a lot of fun, tongue and cheek dialogue.
CherryBlossomBoy
This is a very interesting and very well made reenactment of the famous Battle of Hastings and the events around it. It takes its time to bring the whole medieval period closer to the viewer, introduces various characters that may or may not have necessarily existed but are here very useful in conducing the sentiment and the point of view of a common man of the ages.Acting and cinematography are very good. Directing not so good. Obviously great effort was undertaken to conceal the low budget, which is a good thing, but it also gives a pretty claustrophobic viewing experience (for instance, there are too many close-ups) and at times unconvincing and static battle scenes.What is really annoying, however, is the bias the story of William's conquest is told with. It paints pictures of poor "true Englishmen", Saxon Englishmen, suffering horrors of defeat at hands of merciless, almost inhumane, Norman invaders who came uninvited to harass peaceful sedentary civilization. As if Saxons themselves, a couple of centuries prior, didn't do exactly the same thing to Romano-Celtic population on the Island. Should we pity them? I'm not quite sure.But the series wants us to do just that - to identify with one side. And while it makes for some really poignant scenes worth watching, it also makes for a poor history show. The dialog is also sometimes abhorrently naive or inane, completely devoid of humor at that. It would have been so much better show if they didn't turn it into a litany of a loser.
Jonathan Dore
For me, this film was a success because it captured that horrified sense of loss not only of a battle, or of lives, but of a whole culture and the 650-year history that had produced it. The decision to focus only on the ordinary foot-soldiers (to the extent that none of the three leaders had a single line to speak, and William did not even appear on screen) was a good one, since it allowed the story to represent the fate of peoples instead of just the fate of kings. The narration, in a good imitation of the style of Anglo-Saxon epic poetry, was mournful and measured, and the revelation of the narrator's identity at the end nicely rounded out one thread of the story. Despite the constant bloodletting, the characters were attractive: Leofric the happy-go-lucky coward who does the right thing in the end; Hrothgar the weary general always trying to rally his weary men for one more fight; and Snorri the captured Viking who becomes a mainstay of the English at Hastings. The final stages at Hastings reminded me of the poem commemorating another English defeat, 75 years before:"Thought shall be harder, heart shall be keener / Spirit shall be greater, as our might lessens." (The Battle of Maldon, 991)
altquark
I'm going to give this 9 out of 10 - only because I'm unsure how exactly historically accurate this was - but it WAS about 90% accurate. I'm also knocking some off for being a little strangely anti-norman - I'm not sure exactly what that was all about, but I'll explain this.However, first of all - who ever is wondering why there are no Lord of the Rings elves or wizards - this is a HISTORICAL DOCUMENTARY. Its not a fantasy, and it portrays the MIDDLE AGES (though why the History Channel calls it "Middle Earth" is a little strange). I'm also unsure with the "Orc" references - it seemed a little bit of a stretch and lots of wikipedia editing it seems to get those references.However, as a student of the run-up to the Battle of Hastings, I found the movie entertaining and certainly an interesting perspective. There are a number of books - one of which is called "1066 the Battle of Hastings" which talks about the battle in the perspective of an average commoner of Anglo-Saxon England - and to be honest I was hoping for a little more of that perspective BEFORE the battles. But I guess that would have made the movie a little longer and a little drier.Now, the battle scenes aren't exactly totally gruesome - but they are gruesome enough. What comes across is that this is a violent time and men were thrust into battle with very little training or expectation of what to expect.Not sure with the portrayal of either of the Kings - one wasn't even shown, and the other was really very strange - a little too fantasy-like...OK - spoiler alert, for those who don't know the history of England and Great Britain...Yes, the Normans were French. Yes, they invaded and beat the Anglo-Saxons. Yes, they were brutal and "laid waste" villages and towns. Yes, they ended up "owning huge tracts of land for the next thousand years" etc etc But what was PAINFULLY missing from this documentary was the fact that the Norman Invaders became so INTEGRATED with Anglo-saxons that within one lifetime, England was changed forever. What was missing was the fact that prior to 1066, England was a number of warring shires - and that William, by conquering Britain, united the people under a single banner and created the first true monarchy of England, which links the British Monarchy for the next 1,000 years. What was missing was the fact that 1066 was the last time anyone successfully invaded England - that all technology, tools and foundations of defense stemmed directly from this new "invader".I missed the politics of what led up to the Battle of Hastings. What should have occurred was that they should have followed the tapestry from beginning to end. I was saddened to not see Halleys Comet even make an appearance in the movie (one of the most important "portents" and one which was in the Bayeaux Tapestry).I'm giving this a high mark, because more historical based movies should be made - knowing where we come from is always important. But, like my old history master used to say on my report card "could do better"...
Ernst Wiltmann
The angle of telling the historical story from the fighting man's perspective, was suspensefully implemented. I witnessed the view of the invading Vikings, shared their long journey via the North Atlantic , the excitement of pillaging the anglo -saxon villages, and their thirst for a adventures battles. The main focus however was on the anglo - saxon peasants, who had to leave their homesteads and their loved ones behind, to fight the invaders. Expecting an attack from William the Conquerer from Normandy they had to guard the Sussex Coast. When News arrived, that a mighty Viking force was attacking the Midlands, 200 miles north. Imagine untrained farmers turned soldiers with few professional soldiers (the Kings Guard)commanding them, it was quite an archivement to cover that distance in 4 days, with only dirt path's in that direction. The old roman cobblestone streets run mostly east - west. The hardship of it, is illustrated in great detail, specially when you have watched the extras of the DVD, before you have watched the movie series. This is what I recommend to all viewers. After having seen the extra features, you will appreciate the movie more. Footwear, food, clothing and weaponry really round up the " you have been there " feeling. No Superheroes, or corny over-dramatized characters, just real people trying to survive. The battles however are graphic, nothing for the fainthearted. With fear, panic, cut of limbs, the movie is also not without humor. I remember the Stamford Bridge Battle scene, where eager soldiers from the rear ranks and file pushing the frontline without caution, where an "ole battle hand" in front kept swearing at them, going into certain slaughter. I haven't seen anything like that, so authentic in a period peace battle. King Herold,King Harald and William the Conquerer, take a backstage in this film, it's all about the common fighting man. A very interesting approach, that worked very well in this movie. A refreshing detour from the "300" type of making history movies. The movie is 4 hours short, more than 2 hours are of it spend for the 3 great battles: Midland, Stamford Bridge and Hastings. Yes, the anglo - saxons had to march all the 200 miles back to meet another enemy at Hastings, telling more would spoil the movie. I feel fortunate to own a region free DVD player, otherwise I couldn't see all the great historical movies from europe. There is nothing like this movie here in north America.
