The King (Film Review)
At some point while watching, I thought: this is surely the cinematic equivalent of Any Two Guys slash fiction. Without, err, the slash. (Though the Hal/Falstaff subtext was certainly thick.)
What I mean is this: The King is fanfiction of fanfiction, if you like, i.e. it’s based on Shakespeare’s Henry IV and Henry V plays rather than on the history said plays are based on, and deviates from the actual story even further. Which would not be a problem if it would do so in an interesting way. Instead, it’s like that type of fanfic where one’s problematic faves are rewritten with their flaws edited out until they’re beyond recognition, lose all character in the process and have become types.
So, Hal, later Henry V: utterly lacks that core of cold calculation. Of course he’s not planning to ditch his friends and spectacularly reform, he doesn’t ditch anyone, and he tries his noble best to keep the peace with France.
Falstaff: is no braggart, but actually an experienced soldier who gives Hal wise advice, isn’t sent away, but nobly sacrifices his life at Agincourt (the winning strategy of which was his idea).
Hal’s motive for showing up at Shrewsbury to fight Harry Percy? Saving his younger brother Thomas (the only one of Hal’s brothers to make it into this version, and he doesn’t live for long) from fighting. Not that young Thomas appreciates it. Hal’s problem with his father? His father’s war-mongering, because Hal wants peace for English citizens. (Btw, Richard II gets mentioned exactly once, in a different context - when Falstaff’s military credentials are discussed, another noble says „he fought under Richard, but that was long ago“) ; even later, Catherine says „your father was an ursurper“, but other than that, we get no explanation as to why Henry IV’s claim on the throne is seen as suspect and shaky by some of the other nobles, other than „he’s a bloodthirsty jerk to his woobie son“.)
Now, it’s hard to get away from the fact that the battle of Agincourt takes place in France, not England, and what our Hal is doing there is, in modern terms, invading. Since the script wants to have its cake and it, thus following what one Northern Irish journalist diagnosed as the British complex of seeing themselves as victim and Empire both, but doesn’t really have the patience to explain the 100-Years-War, it tries to find a way around this that improves on the Bard’s tennis balls as at the ultimate French provocation. A tennis ball (singular) is still sent by the Dauphin, but there is also an assassination attempt, supposedly by the French. Which is when our reluctant hero decides that fuck it, enough is enough, he’s gonna show those French what’s what.
Shakespeare lets the unnamed Dauphin be an arrogant fop. This one is, too, but that’s not enough for a main villain, so he gets to be a creepy child murderer, too. (Sidenote: I always wonder which of King Charles‘ sons this is supposed to be. The fifth and youngest, who’d later be the Dauphin crowned by Joan of Arc, wasn’t yet Dauphin at Agincourt, but as far as I know, and I don’t claim to be an expert on the damned battle, his older brothers weren’t there, either; the highest ranking French noble was Charles d’Orleans, married, btw, to that same Isabelle who’d been Richard II’s second queen, and he got captured.)
At the very end the script finally does something neither Shakespeare nor history but its own that’s also interesting with the Hal-Catherine de Valois scene, wisely abandoning language jokes. This Catherine is a realist and knows she has no choice, but she also makes mincemeat out of Hal’s idea of himself as justified in this war, and the script supports her with the eleventh hour reveal that the supposed French assassination attempt wasn’t really a French assassination attempt but a ploy by William, Chief Justice, aka the other fatherly mentor (other than Falstaff, that is, who isn’t exactly fatherly) Hal has had so far in order to unite the country behind their new king. Since this Hal and Henry IV never have their deathbed reconciliation, the dying Henry IV couldn’t advise to „busy minds with foreign quarrels“, but at least someone here had the same idea. Just not Hal. Never Hal. He’s, like the most misunderstood innocent of them all.
And look, Timothee Chamelet and his wounded eyes impressed the hell out of me in Call me by your name, but there are characters which really should not be woobified, and Hal Plantagenet is among them.
This entry was originally posted at https://selenak.dreamwidth.org/1370008.html. Comment there or here, as you wish.
What I mean is this: The King is fanfiction of fanfiction, if you like, i.e. it’s based on Shakespeare’s Henry IV and Henry V plays rather than on the history said plays are based on, and deviates from the actual story even further. Which would not be a problem if it would do so in an interesting way. Instead, it’s like that type of fanfic where one’s problematic faves are rewritten with their flaws edited out until they’re beyond recognition, lose all character in the process and have become types.
So, Hal, later Henry V: utterly lacks that core of cold calculation. Of course he’s not planning to ditch his friends and spectacularly reform, he doesn’t ditch anyone, and he tries his noble best to keep the peace with France.
Falstaff: is no braggart, but actually an experienced soldier who gives Hal wise advice, isn’t sent away, but nobly sacrifices his life at Agincourt (the winning strategy of which was his idea).
Hal’s motive for showing up at Shrewsbury to fight Harry Percy? Saving his younger brother Thomas (the only one of Hal’s brothers to make it into this version, and he doesn’t live for long) from fighting. Not that young Thomas appreciates it. Hal’s problem with his father? His father’s war-mongering, because Hal wants peace for English citizens. (Btw, Richard II gets mentioned exactly once, in a different context - when Falstaff’s military credentials are discussed, another noble says „he fought under Richard, but that was long ago“) ; even later, Catherine says „your father was an ursurper“, but other than that, we get no explanation as to why Henry IV’s claim on the throne is seen as suspect and shaky by some of the other nobles, other than „he’s a bloodthirsty jerk to his woobie son“.)
Now, it’s hard to get away from the fact that the battle of Agincourt takes place in France, not England, and what our Hal is doing there is, in modern terms, invading. Since the script wants to have its cake and it, thus following what one Northern Irish journalist diagnosed as the British complex of seeing themselves as victim and Empire both, but doesn’t really have the patience to explain the 100-Years-War, it tries to find a way around this that improves on the Bard’s tennis balls as at the ultimate French provocation. A tennis ball (singular) is still sent by the Dauphin, but there is also an assassination attempt, supposedly by the French. Which is when our reluctant hero decides that fuck it, enough is enough, he’s gonna show those French what’s what.
Shakespeare lets the unnamed Dauphin be an arrogant fop. This one is, too, but that’s not enough for a main villain, so he gets to be a creepy child murderer, too. (Sidenote: I always wonder which of King Charles‘ sons this is supposed to be. The fifth and youngest, who’d later be the Dauphin crowned by Joan of Arc, wasn’t yet Dauphin at Agincourt, but as far as I know, and I don’t claim to be an expert on the damned battle, his older brothers weren’t there, either; the highest ranking French noble was Charles d’Orleans, married, btw, to that same Isabelle who’d been Richard II’s second queen, and he got captured.)
At the very end the script finally does something neither Shakespeare nor history but its own that’s also interesting with the Hal-Catherine de Valois scene, wisely abandoning language jokes. This Catherine is a realist and knows she has no choice, but she also makes mincemeat out of Hal’s idea of himself as justified in this war, and the script supports her with the eleventh hour reveal that the supposed French assassination attempt wasn’t really a French assassination attempt but a ploy by William, Chief Justice, aka the other fatherly mentor (other than Falstaff, that is, who isn’t exactly fatherly) Hal has had so far in order to unite the country behind their new king. Since this Hal and Henry IV never have their deathbed reconciliation, the dying Henry IV couldn’t advise to „busy minds with foreign quarrels“, but at least someone here had the same idea. Just not Hal. Never Hal. He’s, like the most misunderstood innocent of them all.
And look, Timothee Chamelet and his wounded eyes impressed the hell out of me in Call me by your name, but there are characters which really should not be woobified, and Hal Plantagenet is among them.
This entry was originally posted at https://selenak.dreamwidth.org/1370008.html. Comment there or here, as you wish.