The Lion in Winter (2003)

King Henry II (Patrick Stewart) keeps his wife, Eleanor (Glenn Close) locked away in the towers because of her frequent attempts to overthrow him. With Eleanor out of the way he can have his dalliances with his young mistress (Yuliya Vysotskaya).The film was directed by Andrei Konchalovsky ("Tango and Cash"). It was filmed on location at Spiš Castle in eastern Slovakia, which serves as a nice replacement for 12th century England.Glenn Close received a great deal of praise for this role, far more than her counterpart (Stewart) did. This is probably fair. While both are great, Close went the extra mile, and her raw emotions really shine through. Stewart tends to get a bit melodramatic.

It's been a long time since I saw the "original" (film, that is), but I think this version stands up very well. The script, of course, is sumptuous, and the actors clearly enjoy themselves with it. The production also seems less stagey than what I remember of the 1968 version, something which is often difficult to achieve on the small screen.For me, Glenn Close's Eleanor was superb - possibly even better than Hepburn's; but I'd have to see the original again to make sure. She interprets the transitions between scheming power-broker, desolate prisoner and wistful "ex" with a naturalness that I don't remember in the original, yet somehow still manages to deliver the comic lines (and there are plenty) with the timing of a master. And there were only a couple of occasions when I detected any hint of Hepburn's shadow.As for Henry: I like Patrick Stewart a lot, but I'm not sure this was his role. He's always seemed a little brittle when it comes to passion; and if there's one thing Henry was, it was passionate. There are also times when he comes across as declamatory (probably the Shakespearean training) and, while O'Toole could probably be accused of the same thing, I missed his energy. It's also plain that he is older than Close, when in fact Henry was 11 years younger than Eleanor (and that was a lot in those days). That said, he makes a good fist of it; and some of the exchanges between the two of them are memorable.Where this production really scores though is in its drawing of the smaller characters. I hardly even remember what the sons were like in the original, but here they all have distinct personas; with Andrew Howard's Richard the standout. Rafe Spall even manages to flesh out the character of John - by James Goldman's own admission, the worst written of all of them - and John Light's unloved, Machiavellian Geoffrey is perfectly believable. Johnathan Rhys-Myers' ambivalent Philip also hints at the savvy of a man who would go on to become one of France's greatest kings. Only Yuliya Vysotskaya, as Alys, seemed slightly weak - too timid for a princess of France for me - but that probably has more to do with the script than anything.Maybe I'm just a sucker for historical drama, but I thought this was an excellent (and brave, considering the original) effort at depicting two of the most powerful and interesting figures of their time.9/10

I never saw the 1968 version with Katharine Hepburn although I will later. Glenn Close is illuminating as Eleanor of Aquitane with a range that runs from comedy to tragedy. Sir Patrick Stewart OBE plays her King Henry II. He is brilliant in this role and this project is a labor of love with his wife and producer Wendy Nuess Stewart. Stewart's well-known as a Shakespearean actor before he became famous for another role. Unlike Shakespeare, The Lion in Winter is more enjoyable because there isn't iambic pentameter. The cast is great. Stewart and Close are remarkable as the estranged couple and parents of three sons, Richard; Jeffrey; and John who are nothing but disappointments to their parents. They're after their father's throne. But the film really belongs to Stewart and Close because their performances stand out so well.

...not quite as good as the original with Peter O'Toole and Katherine Hepburn. The acting isn't quite up to par for the majority of the cast. The emotional side of the characters did not come through in the performances, even during dialog that one would normally expect to see some sort of outburst. Patrick Stewart and Glenn Close play their parts excellently, as usual. However, their timing and delivery pale in comparison to that of Peter and Kate. Throw in a supporting cast that includes Anthony Hopkins(Richard) and Timothy Dalton(Phillip) and you can see why this film earned Kate an Oscar. All in all a good effort, but I'll stick with the original recipe.