Cromwell (1970)

Cromwell is a typical 70's grand costume movie with a huge task at hand, and a very flawed, if not blatantly dubious result achieved in the end. Richard Harris may seem a great actor, but he surely overperformed and overdid at almost every angle of his portrayal of Oliver Cromwell - he rants, he screams, he sweats and he screams a lot, but finally exaggerates a whole thing to the point of hilarious parody. Alec Guinness made a very decent job as KIng Charles I but he sometimes seems a bit hazy, detached and rather cold, so a bigger depth is expected from such a complicated figure, instead we see a very one-sided character here. Not much must be said about young Timothy Dalton who played Prince Rupert, and man, did he overplay! He did a fibe first-class parody of laughable level. and little merit. This movie tried to pack many events into a 120-minute span and surely failed - what we see is a rush through some battles, with a very low quality battle scenes in fact, we see a very galloping tour via very serious things, totally omitting several important events altogether. What we have as a finished product is a very shallow and rather weak broth instead of a very thick and strong liquor it was supposed to become

A wonderful film which ranks with El Cid as one of the best historical blockbusters ever made. I've mentioned before that imaginative "B" directors often turn out staid and uninspired "A" work. This hasn't happened here. True, some critics feel that the non-battle scenes lack power, but I found them far more interesting and forceful. The inner action of men's minds, the crackle, dart and thrust of their speech, their motives, aspirations, stubborn beliefs and hidden agenda formed for me a richer panorama, a far more fascinating vista than the mere brute clash of iron against steel.The acting is well-night perfect with both Guinness and Harris superbly cast as contrasting king and conqueror. It is these two powerful players, both giving the performances of their lives, who rightly dominate the action. The director's script — following history itself — brilliantly thrusts them center stage and cleverly keeps them there until the inexorable end. It's hard to keep audience interest alive when the outcome of the plot is so well-known, but Hughes manages to work up such sympathy and suspense, we concentrate all our attention on events as they unfold so fascinatingly before our eyes. The sets, the costumes, the rich details and panoply of court and parliamentary life are alone so gripping — and beautiful to behold — that occasionally historical events seem like an intrusion! And that is exactly the right approach for a writer- director to take, crowding our hearts with such an abundance of inspiring and abhorrent images and ideas, there is no time to reflect. In Hughes' hands history is always vigorously alive, never static or blandly familiar, — let alone moribund or dull.

It's a bit awkward to see Irishman Richard Harris spitting venom and turning against his king at the idea England hiring on Irish mercenaries and bowing to a Catholic Queen, but he puts in a very fun performance in this little-represented section of history. The film plays its cards too soon with the pacing though, bringing us the most exciting action, scenery, battle scenes and dramatic panache early on and then ending on more of a somber courtroom whimper. Nicely, the film stays apolitical and presents both sides with some sympathy. Alec Guiness really shines as King Charles I, managing to play the role as bumbling and arrogant yet sympathetic as extremely courageous to the end and as an unfortunate product of his time. It's really interesting to see Michael Jayston playing one of the more vehement revolutionaries in this film, especially considering the next year he'd get his big starring role as the very pro-establishment titular character NICHOLAS AND ALEXANDRA, a very similar film about the end of a European Monarchy.CROMWELL is unfairly forgotten these days, especially considering it is quite lavish, somewhat realistic in terms of production design and battle tactics, and features excellent performances by a whole host of familiar British performers like Timothy Dalton, Jack Gwillim, Douglas Wilmer, Charles Gray, Frank Finlay, and a lot of other actors I recognized from "Doctor Who". B-movie stalwart Ian McCulloch is credited though I failed to identify him, maybe as he was so young at the time and, like everyone else in the film, difficult to recognize under wigs and heavy makeup.

Altogether I felt that this film was rather enjoyable, well put together and was very helpful at developing my understanding of Cromwell as a figure and the events that surrounded him. I believe Richard Harris performed his role very well too as a decisive, passionate, and capable Oliver Cromwell; this is how I envisioned him. Though in parts some of the historical content is distorted in order to make it more dramatic for audience satisfaction (such as the inclusion of Cromwell in the arrest of the five MP's) I think despite its flaws it shows an good representation of the key events involving Oliver Cromwell in mid 17th century England.