Agree about outlaw king, I really liked it. It was like a better version (considerably more historically accurate?) of brave heart.It wasn't bad (I liked outlaw king better). If you want a historically completely accurate movie, you will always be disappointed.
And the nastiness of Henry was there.
At a couple of points he didn't mind executing prisoners or friends. At Agincourt he had the noble prisoners executed, which the men didn't want to do as they would lose the ransom.Agree about outlaw king, I really liked it. It was like a better version (considerably more historically accurate?) of brave heart.
But did this movie show Henry to be nasty? I thought it portrayed him as sensitive, yet tough when he needs to be, medieval version of one of the Jonas bro’s.
And was Henry nasty in real life? I don’t know much about him. What specifically made him so?
Dan Howard covered it nicely already. A few things to add - you are correct, to the best of our knowledge, Henry was not handwringing about casus belli for the invasion of France. It is a ridiculous invention by scriptwriters in tune with political correctness nowadays.That was the most annoying thing to me. I will admit I don't know much about medieval history, but I always thought that monarchs of the time were eager for any opportunity to expand their lands and prestige or to enrich themselves. So, I would think that most kings and leaders would be on the lookout for any casus belli that could give their conquests and wars legitimacy. In the movie, Henry is the opposite, no? Isn't Henry V known as a great warrior-king? Didn't he relish combat? Didn't most of the nobility back then?
And the battle of Agincourt as portrayed was largely inaccurate, right? I never saw a single stake mounted in the ground protecting the archers. And I thought the English enjoyed the high ground, I thought the French charged uphill.... do I have it wrong?
One scene that I actually did really enjoy was the one on one melee between Henry and Percy. I don’t think that ever actually took place (?) but I thought it was a cool and imo a believable fighting scene.Dan Howard covered it nicely already. A few things to add - you are correct, to the best of our knowledge, Henry was not handwringing about casus belli for the invasion of France. It is a ridiculous invention by scriptwriters in tune with political correctness nowadays.
I did not see any stakes or archers behind them either. Some think this was a tactic borrowed from Battle of Nicopolis some 20 years earlier; in any event, it was quite successful. Dan Howard also correctly points out the ridiculousness of having already outnumbered army waiting in the forest while handful of English men at arms apparently easily defeated two waves of French armored cavalry.
BTW, there were three waves of French cavalry contingents who piled on each other, getting bogged down in melee. I did not see Genovese crossbowmen on the field. Henry’s speech was laughable - why not use Shakespearean stuff if they already decided to use Falstaff (the actor was a cliche and a half, in my opinion, I do not get the praise for his “acting” at all)? Too much use of “f” word in medieval times. What is up with Henry’s “on me” cry leading into battle - it’s like something out of Call if Duty. Longbows could fire rapidly but not half a mile away as this seems to indicate. The film failed miserably in all aspects, as far as I am concerned. “The Outlaw King” was far from great, but it had some redeeming qualities unlike this disaster.
|Similar History Discussions||History Forum||Date|
|Superb Watch Film The Hunger Games Mockingjay Part 1 Full Movie||General History|
|Filmmaking doesn't get any better than this||Movies / Television|
|Ned Finley or WS Scales- Early North Carolina filmmaking||Culture / Arts|
|Most kicking battle reenactment in film||Movies / Television|