To Kill a King
To Kill a King
| 16 May 2003 (USA)
To Kill a King Trailers

A recounting of the relationship between General Fairfax and Oliver Cromwell, as they try to cope with the consequences of deposing King Charles I.

Reviews
Colibel

Terrible acting, screenplay and direction.

... View More
AniInterview

Sorry, this movie sucks

... View More
Portia Hilton

Blistering performances.

... View More
Cristal

The movie really just wants to entertain people.

... View More
paul2001sw-1

Many English people know something about the civil war of the 17th century; but the politics of the period between the end of the war and the execution of the king are little known. It's to the credit of 'To Kill a King' that it explores this interval, and it's quite interesting, but the film also has some flaws. Tim Roth plays an insecure Cromwell, but surprisingly, he fails to equip his character with sufficient charisma to convince; with Fairfax and the King himself, the other two leading players in this drama, also softly spoken, there's a certain absence of passion throughout. Moreover, the too-extensive score distances the viewer from the immediacy of the story, and the screenplay samples the events of the period without giving the impression that they are unfolding in real time. It's also a shame that the drama centres on personal politics only; the religious, economic and wider ideological divisions that underpinned the conflict are barely addressed. I still enjoyed the film, but see Channel 4's dramatisation of the life of Elisabeth I to see how the politics of another era can really be brought to life.

... View More
bob the moo

The English Civil War is over and King Charles is held within his chambers as Sir Thomas Fairfax and Oliver Cromwell continue their reform of the country. With parliament bribed into returning Charles to the throne, Cromwell and Fairfax use their remaining troops to seize control and remove the king from power. As the political changes sweep the nation, personal issues and political tensions between Fairfax and Cromwell threaten to derail the movement.I didn't really watch this film to learn about history or have accuracy and really, it is just as well because, as others have said, this really isn't the place to come to for that. The plot focuses on Cromwell and Fairfax and as such, dramatic license comes into play to make this relationship central rather than the wider history of the period. To me this was a bit of a problem because I didn't know (don't know) a great deal about this part of my history and I found myself wanting the film to educate me. However partially because the delivery style made me assume it wasn't all accurate and partially because the film itself wasn't that interested. For what it wants to do though, the film held my interest as the drama unfolded. It does rather come over as history-lite but the characters worked reasonably well while Barker's direction suits the period feel.The cast are worthy enough even if they aren't brilliant. Scott and Roth worked pretty well together even if neither really got to grips with their characters beyond the superficial level. The support cast is solid with a good turn from Everett as well as Williams, Bolam and a few others. Overall this is a fairly good film that is held together thanks to the central relationship of Cromwell and Fairfax. Could have benefited from a better structure historical-wise rather than throwing in so much behind the characters (that many viewers will not have a contextual knowledge of).

... View More
angie-235

On first viewing I was not really satisfied with this film. Who could deal with such a vast subject in one film? It was clever to not tackle the whole war but concentrate on a shorter time frame. I have no knowledge of any of the actors except James Bolam. I would not have cast Rupert Everett on looks , height etc but how little that matters . He is really excellent , he uses his eyes to great effect .The King's continued belief that he will be rescued , the British people really do love him are obvious at first . It is the pain and fear in his eyes that really seals it for me .His walk to the block ( being fondled and clawed at by the commoners is obviously repellent and terrifying). There is something about the whole scene that really reflects King Charles's inner faith that this is his second wedding day ,this time to Jesus . Tim Roth plays Cromwell with a touch too many Hitler like stances but he is so much better than Richard Harris. I think many historians do think Cromwell had mental illness. The Govt. by his New Model Army reminds me of The Taliban .I would have been on the side of Parliament but like many English people welcomed back the monarchy after his rule. I have little knowledge of Fairfax but the relationship between the two is worth reading about if this film is anything to go by. The sets are fantastic ,the actual Hampton Court was worth it . I am sure that even Civil War buffs should acknowledge it's intelligence . I only wish the creators could have made a series. Things worth looking out for are the severe uniforms worn at the King's trial ,note a love of buttons ( Cromwell truly was a dictator worthy of Pinochet). The King's absolute lack of understanding the ranting man who made no sense to his perception of his place in the World.The bewilderment of Cromwell that anyone should see things other than his way. If you weren't sure on first viewing give it a second and third chance. I don't see any flirting between Charles 1st and Lady Fairfax b.t.w just a lonely man desperate for company of his class and a woman in awe of the most important man in the country in her eyes.

... View More
blue-117

I read a review of the movie to the effect that it wasn't historically accurate and it had a comment (the writer must have known it was coming...) that some would argue that it was only a film (thus artistic license was sure to be taken). What that viewer failed to see was that this film was spot on where it truly mattered - that both sides (Charles I and Cromwell) were equally and totally convinced of their 'mandate from God'.The result for Charles was that his inability to concede any power cost him his life, the cost for Cromwell was that his 'Republic' lasted only two years after his death (although some of his decisions are still felt now especially in Ulster.) So, if what you need is for Cromwell to have a broad West Country accent, don't go...if you enjoy films that have some intellectual depth to them, then I'd recommend it.

... View More