The King (2019): Feels Like a Pilot to a Show

Image result for the king poster

      The best thing I can say about “The King” is it made me want to read more about the “Hundred Years’ War.” The film is adapted from Henry IV and Henry V written by William Shakespeare. I haven’t seen the plays but this story did a great job of sparking that interest and honestly, I wish it had just chosen one of the plays. There is a lot of story in this film and it does feel like we don’t get the full picture of what is going on. I would say if you like historical dramas, it is worth checking out, just don’t go in expecting anything great. There isn’t enough story fleshed out so it feels like the pilot of a show versus a complete film.

The film was directed and co-wrote by David Michôd with his other co-writer being Joel Edgerton.

The story follows Prince “Hal” and his rise to power after the death of his father King Henry IV and the politics surrounding his rise in the Hundred Years’ War.

SPOILERS ahead

The Pros:

The Action – The fight sequences that exist are fantastic. The war is brutal and we see characters we know die as well as different tactics being used on the battlefield. The action really brings you into this brutal world, which honestly keeps the film from sucking.

The Cinematography – The cinematography is beautiful in this film. I’ve come to expect this from Netflix, so this is more of the same but the wide sweeping shots of France and England really give scale to the war and battles.

The Politics – The politics could have been expanded upon more but I love that we see that the United Kingdom isn’t united and just how complicated the war for power and control is. I would have preferred more politics, especially getting more of the French point of view, but what we see in the court with Henry IV is intriguing and I liked the different voices represented on King Henry IV’s council.

Okay/Con:

Historical Accuracy – This is a film adapted from a play that was already changing history, so when adapting Shakespeare I don’t expect historical accuracy. All the same I would have liked to see characters developed further. There is so much within history to pull from and not much was done in how the characters were presented or the screen time they received.

The Cons:

The Role of Catherine – Catherine convinces “Hal” that his Justice Gascoigne lied about the assassin and he believes her. We don’t see any of her perspective prior to this and when the conflict starts so “Hal” suddenly trusting her comes out of nowhere. This was a waste as since this is adaptation, she could have played a much bigger role in the narrative and in turn we could have been given reasons earlier to know she is trustworthy.

Underdeveloped Reasons for the War – Beyond Hal’s father having been fighting for territory we don’t really get any reason for the invasion of France beyond the false assassination attempt. There is so much history here that I wanted to hear why France and England had been at war. I wanted more reasons and history and this film did not give it.

For such a fascinating time in history I would have loved more history and context. This a film that chose to keep things simple with the characters and in the process we don’t get the deeper motivations of what drives them, and that hurts the film. The film isn’t historical because Shakespeare himself shaped history to tell his dramas, and this story adapted from his stories is no difference. This is a case where the nuance of history would have strengthened the narrative. We are asked to assume to so much or given the base of motivation. This is enough for the film to be fine, but isn’t good or great. It needed more than great action and cinematography.

Final Score: 7.5 / 10