ozthegreatat42330
Danish director Gabriel Axel sets out to tell the real history of the sixth century King of Jutland(Denmark) moving away from the Anglesized version of the story by Shakespeare and giving a better feeling version. I, like many people was not sure what to expect when I ordered the DVD, having just seen the American title (Royal Deceit) and being fascinated by it. Little did I know what treat was in store. Gabriel Byrne again proves why he is one of our busier actors today as the malevolent Fenge, plotting treachery behind every smile. And Christian Bale is just outstanding as the supposed mad second son of the dead King of Jutland. Helen Mirren is up to her usual standards as the queen, and Kate Beckinsale is always a delight, especially in this role, so different than her characters in "Underworld" and "Van Helsing." It is also a pleasure to see Brian Cox ("X-Men II) in one of his rare good guy roles. It is not a big or a long film, but a well crafted, tightly directed gem of a film, especially for those whose tastes run to the historical.
Draconian Clown
I loved this movie! It is for all of us who suffered through compulsory Shakespeare in school. The needless suffering of intentionally disastrous endings marked Shakespeare's tragedies. Those stories were so horribly sad on every level that they reduced life and all its ambitions to an expectation of sorrowful failure. Everyone dies for little or no reason. I totally hated that crap! This is apparently a story related to Hamlet. I never knew it existed. I noticed the similarities straight away and kept anticipating needless tragedy. Needless tragedy never came. I don't know if I would have liked it if not for my knowledge of Shakespeare's Hamlet and my general contempt for needless tragedy.The story followed an almost fable-like formula. It was production on the fly with a great economy of scale. That is to say the scenes had just enough to carry the story and no more. The fight scenes and swordplay are very different from today's carefully choreographed, terribly graphic violence. During one of the fight scenes, I wondered if this scrappy, badly improvised fighting was actually more realistic than what we normally get from big productions. All the real fights I have seen looked nothing like a movie fight due to the considerable clumsiness of the fighters.This movie had witty and clever moments. I thought they fit well within the main context of a revenge plot. Of course, they could have spent more money and had a larger production but why bother? I think it would be cool if Royal Deceit could run this summer in place of Shakespeare in the Park's Hamlet. It could make people happy for a change.This reminded me of some delightful Viking tales I discovered decades ago. Tales of individual heroism, conquest, love and so on. Fables are fun! And finally something not completely nihilistic from IFC. What a relief that was.
tbolic
I saw this movie twice on TV while I was back home in Europe. I just loved it! Even though it was a rather long movie (cannot remember now was it 2 or 3 hours long). The story, a spin-off on Hamlet appealed to me more than the actual Hamlet. To support that, all the actors did their best.But, after I came to US, I wanted to see it again and I rented the "Royal Deceit". First when I saw that it is 89 minutes long I was surprised because I remembered it as a long movie. Then more surprises followed - bad ones. The 89 (or 85) minute versions are just simply butchered! The 89 min version starts with the narrative in which they explain what happens before we get in the village and see the Amled acting as he does. Narative is a pretty sorry substitute for a superb acting at the beginning of the 3 hour long movie - and in that version no one gives you on the plate what is going on. It is not only the beginning that was cut - there are scenes cut out in all the important parts of the film. The 3 hour version has an additional charm that one discovers for him/herself what is going on.In short, if you can, find the 3 hour version to see it. The 89 minute version is just a big time spoiler of a very good film - everything that weaves the story together is cut out. Another example how editing can undermine great acting and a script.
David Matthews
When I got over the initial surprise of what this movie was,(for some reason the writers of the blurb on the tape packaging don't want you to know), I found myself enjoying it.This is not Shakespeare's Hamlet, with poetry, dramatic speeches and opportunities for showy histrionics but a steadily paced re-telling of the original Norse legend.It's not for everybody but I found the combination of bleak Jutland scenery, calm voice-over narration and the momentum of the Royal intrigues fascinating and hypnotic.Good acting by the principals.
AD
