The Uprising

Warning: Extreme Violence including beheading executions and showing executed head on a stick. NOT FOR KIDS, REPEAT NOT FOR KIDS! Mentions of family death (e.g. Black Death). Also some portrayals of SA in the 13th century.

I didn’t know what I was preparing myself for when I first saw the trailer. On the surface from the trailers and comments, it looked like a movie that would rise up and stand up against there oppressor. I went to see it because of the themes and Andrew Garfield. However, this movie goes way beyond the surface of those themes and shows the rise and fall from both sides and for the most part they convey this accurately.

The language/historical time period was represented well. A lot of times when I see a time period presented in a film, the language and worldbuilding is inconsistent. While in one case, the speech is accurate to the time period, the next scene would have modern language and that’s where the inconsistencies come from and it takes me out of the film/the enjoyment all together. In this film, however, the scriptwriters are able to understand what period we want to be in and the language (e.g. thy and pray) they used in that time period is represented well in my opinion. It kept me engaged in the worldbuilding of the movie. The time they spent to make sure the actors were able to portray these historical characters was respectful/dignified and I could see this effort pay off throughout the movie in how they wanted the tone to go. The scriptwriting for the time period they wanted to go worked in this case and is something that should be continually represented in future historical dramatizations down the road.

Oh man, the action scenes are intense I won’t lie. There’s barbarism on both sides, but the action scenes are integrated well. While yes, we do see some of the violence and question Is that really necessary? In that era of time, unfortunately violence such as executions, beheading (full warning: don’t watch this movie on a full stomach or eating), and archery were common. However, the focus does focus on the fall and rise of both sides. Ploughman and his men demand fair treatment/equality start off valiantly, we see over the course of the film how far they are willing to go, which includes separating a royal advisor for King Richard of England. There’s a moral line drawn in how far you are willing to go in order to achieve peace/equality and this theme corresponds to the film and both sides. The turning point turns to when King Richard allows them to do what they need to do in order to achieve justice. This, unfortunately allows for execution of royal advisors, which trust you will not want a full stomach for this scene. All I could think was this is barbaric and no, don’t show that! Yes, its part of the time, but still. However, the violence is done well as it raises the stakes in this film and it would’ve been easy to mention these scenes post the chaos, what the filmmakers truly wanted us to see the nature of how barbaric people can get, even with temporary power.

Now, King Richard of England on the other hand, his men first hand are making the calls and we are led to believe he wants his people to be heard. However, its not until we see the knights ready with there arrows that he had other plans. The manipulation sets Ploughman and his men up to be executed brutally. The cruelty the knights show towards their own people before and after the treaty is brutal. From the taxes post the Black Death, to the knights forcefully feeling up women’s skirts, shows the worst in how people that work for powerful figures can manipulate that power and feel untouchable. It’s unsettling, but did happen in the past and present. The violence they show, along with the villagers is no mercy. The minute King Richard shows his true colors, everything breaks loose and no one is safe. The set up of the score as it slowly dawns on everyone the fate they are facing is terrible. No matter what side your own, the violence is set up to show that all sides aren’t good or bad, but rather people who did what they had to do to survive. Yes, its brutal but wasn’t meant to shock the viewers but to understand the severity of people pushed too far on both sides, including Ploughman.

The performances were outstanding. From Garfield, Norman Wood, and Katherine Waterston, everyone really invested and grounded themselves in the role they were given and did these historical characters justice. Garfield’s layers of rage to grief were amazing. The way he was able to convey multiple emotions with not words but from body language is hard to do. I don’t see a lot of live action pieces have that range and to see them incorporate these subtle body cues were chilling to see. The way his voice is able to change from rage from wanting to be heard to the settle conversation he has with Waterston. Garfield’s character shows so much range and these are roles he should continue to go with because he is able to shine. Waterston, on my god the scene where she looks at the aftermath of the attack. Her eyes tell a story of betrayal and hurt as King Richard of England is screaming at her. No words were said, but I could see the story/words she wanted to speak. It’s brilliant acting and she shines as this historical character. Joan was at odds with her advisors/son. She wanted what was best and prayed for her son to be a good king and for peace. However, the result is devastating and I can see the pain and hurt in her eyes. Waterston tells a whole story with her voice and the range she shows through the body language is top notch! Wood as well has a great range from a frightful boy to the manipulation/true colors. Norman was born to play King Richard and surprised me with the turn his character takes, which ultimately leads to King Richard’s demise as he is haunted throughout the rest of his life thanks to Ploughman’s decree in sparing him. The performances are top notch and should be commended.

However, the one issue I had was the directing style. The camera was shaky a lot for the film. While this did work for the action scenes as we get to see all of the angles possible in the intensity of the action, the quiet scenes there was still shaking and I was confused as to why that was necessary. The shakiness wasn’t necessary and I wish the editors/directors looked back and edited those shaky moments in the quiet scenes so the audience didn’t have struggle at times to keep up. It made my eyes dizzy towards the beginning and despite it getting better, I wish the camera would’ve been still through those moments as it would allow us to engage in the scene and have us see the strategy these “advisors” were willing to do in order to get the villagers off there backs. The directing style in this film for me was inconsistent.

Finally, the score felt off towards the end. A lot of the score were placed well in the movie, some moments we had a score that you would believe would be at the end of the film but then another scene would occur. If they were trying to set up our false hope, it worked. However, the score placement at times felt off and I wish they would’ve used notes that indicate that yes, there is hope, but don’t be fooled as it’s a set up. The pacing for me didn’t match up with the score and the film could’ve been a lot better had the directing style not shake towards those quiet conversation scenes and the score matched the tone of the movie, particularly the ending.

Overall, this is a film that does justice to the time piece and highly recommend to everyone who is a fan of Garfield or historical dramatization pieces.