So this one is kind of a funny story. You see, I first saw part of The Lion in Winter years ago when I was too young to fully appreciate sophisticated movies (I think this was back when I as still a ginormous Star Wars nerd, I'm not proud of those days). I remember seeing maybe the first twenty minutes or so, and being disappointed to find out that despite the Midieval Setting it wasn't full of epic swordfights and exciting action but rather a story of political intrigue with a lot of talking.
Being the way I was then, I ended up leaving as soon as I realized that there wasn't going to be much action. The film began with a sword fight, a jousting tournament, and an epic battle scene, but it ended up being more about a small group of characters in one castle and their interactions. Now, years later, in light of Terrence Towles Canote's British Invaders Blogathon, I have been inspired to dig out that same copy of the film and give it another chance. Was it worth it? I think it was.
It is 1183, and Christmas is approaching. The aging King Henry II (Peter O'Toole) is trying to decide who will take his place when he dies. He organizes a family reunion to which he invites his three sons Richard (Anthony Hopkins), Geoffrey (John Castle), and John (Nigel Terry). Also invited is Henry's wife Eleanor (Katharine Hepburn) who has been imprisoned and is only released for the holidays, his mistress Alais (Jane Merrow), and her brother Philip II (Timothy Dalton) who also happens to be the King of France.
Unfortunately, neither Henry nor Eleanor can agree on who should take over, and before long tensions begin to rise. Soon the three sons are forming alliances with and double-crossing each other in the hopes of taking the throne. Philip finds opportunities to take advantage of the mounting conflict. Eleanor and Henry end up in a complicated relationship that constantly veers between rekindling their old love and plotting against each other, while Alais is caught in the middle of it all.
Now, I'll confess, it is a very complicated story, and I suspect that you may have to watch the film multiple times to fully understand everything. You really do have to be on your toes or else you may lose track over who is scheming against who, but it is really a very well-executed piece. The characters play nicely off of each other, each one has a distinctive personality, and there's plenty of great scenery and amazing sets for the castle where much of the narrative is set.
Peter O'Toole is incredibly convincing playing the aging Henry II, which is a pretty remarkable feat given he was only 36 at the time, and this was just a few years after his breakout role in Lawrence of Arabia. Katharine Hepburn is equally strong as his scheming wife, balancing those romantic and sinister qualities so that you're never sure whether to love her or fear her. Same goes for each of the sons (I honestly had no idea until the credits rolled that was a young Anthony Hopkins as Richard). Really, it's just great acting all around.
I'm glad I decided to give this film another go. Considering the complexities maybe it's for the better I left early on the first time round, since I probably wouldn't have understood it. However, there is a strange charm to the whole thing, even if it's not easy to follow. If you'd like a clever Medieval narrative drawing less from fantasy and more from history with less focus on sword fights and more emphasis on character, this is for you.
I love this movie. It's one of my favorites, if only for Peter and Katherine. There's a lot of "double" talk as my mother would say. Lots of dialogue. It has a special significance for me now since I've done a detailed ancestry project of my husband who I found is a direct descendant of Eleanor of Aquitaine and Henry II.
ReplyDeleteWow, that's quite the lineage. I'd be pretty excited if I found out I knew someone who was descended from a British Monarch.
DeleteThis film includes two things I love: a historical romp and Peter O'Toole (one of the greatest British actors of all time - at least according to my dad, the world's greatest armchair critic!). No excuse for not having seen it then!
ReplyDeletePeter O'Toole was a very talented actor. Not very many people get to start their career with a nomination for Best Actor in a Leading Role (in a film that managed to take seven Oscars) and then go on to continue starring in movies like this.
DeleteAlways wanted to see this one. I wonder how many films we'd like if we just gave them another chance...
ReplyDeleteThat's an interesting question, and I'm not entirely sure. That might actually make a good exercise, take a bunch of movies that you didn't enjoy as a kid and watch them over the course of a week and see if they get any better.
DeleteThe Lion in Winter certainly wouldn't be the first time this happened. I had something similar with V for Vendetta.
It's always interesting to me that critics so often throw certain adjectives around over and over whenever they want to dismiss a film: "talky" and "stagy" are two pretty common ones. I hear both of them whenever people talk about The Lion in Winter or films like it. For me, personally, "talky" doesn't have to be a sin so long as the talk's witty, insightful, or just plain fun. And while I still haven't gotten to see The Lion in Winter all the way through, I did catch a half hour or so during a channel-surfing session and had a good time. Still remains to be seen as to whether I'll like the whole thing.
ReplyDeleteHave to admit, I'm also inclined to like The Lion in Winter if only for the sole reason that for once, it's the woman who's cast opposite a man twenty-five years younger than herself and you're expected to just go with it. It's almost always the other way around.
Great review and I'm glad you joined the blogathon so I could discover your blog. Lots of fascinating stuff here.
Of course there's nothing wrong with a film being "talky". Twelve Angry Men, My Dinner With Andre, Reservoir Dogs and Before Sunrise are all films driven mostly by people talking which still manage to be compelling.
DeleteIt didn't occur to me how much older Hepburn would have been compared to Peter O'Toole. That is an interesting fact, combined with the way Hepburn is easily able to compete with O'Toole.
Thank you for finding my blog. Perhaps you'd like to join in on my August blogathon.
I have always loved The Lion in Winter, but you are right. It is a very complicated film! I have seen it many times and every time that I do I still find something new. I think it's the performances that make it so enjoyable. The entire cast was in top form. Anyway, thanks for taking part in the blogathon!
ReplyDeleteI have a feeling I'll probably have to watch the film at least five or six times before I really get anywhere close to understanding it in full, but of course the performances are a big part of what made it so interesting. There was something fascinating about the way O'Toole and Hepburn could be rekindling their old love one moment and then suddenly stabbing each other in the back the next.
DeleteI'm glad you enjoyed this film because I love it - mainly for Katharine, but I learnd to love Peter later as well. The best part of your review was "you may lose track of who is scheming against who"!
ReplyDeleteDon't forget to read my contribution to the blogathon! :)
Greetings!
http://www.criticaretro.blogspot.com.br/2014/08/a-caixa-magica-magic-box-1951.html