Una verdadera historia de David v Goliat sobre cómo Robert The Bruce, el gran rey escocés del siglo XIV, utilizó astucia y valentía para derrotar y repeler al ejército inglés.Una verdadera historia de David v Goliat sobre cómo Robert The Bruce, el gran rey escocés del siglo XIV, utilizó astucia y valentía para derrotar y repeler al ejército inglés.Una verdadera historia de David v Goliat sobre cómo Robert The Bruce, el gran rey escocés del siglo XIV, utilizó astucia y valentía para derrotar y repeler al ejército inglés.
- Premios
- 2 nominaciones en total
Opiniones destacadas
Much criticism of this film points at the 'cramming' of a good chunk of 3 years in The Wars of Scottish Independence, into a film less than 2 hours long. The film starts off in 1304 with the siege of Stirling Castle, which features the spectacular tracking shots that help define the exquisite use of cinematography throughout the films duration. Is it crammed? To an extent yes, but it is a film, and a historical one that requires prior knowledge; as a result, viewers are either gripped, in the story or emotionally tied to the characters, or not. The film does take certain liberties with historical accuracy, namely certain events either merged together or moved around on the timeline - all in aid of dramatic effect. Nonetheless this does not shadow the realism that does exist, especially in terms of the savagery of warfare and intrigue. As well as the superb set pieces and costume designs that accompany the productions heavy attention to detail.
Although it is understandable how many get lost within the story, it skips much character building and connections between each fighting scene, in sacrifice for fitting in several important confrontations, especially the end pitched Battle of Loudoun Hill - in which Bruce achieves his astonishing victory. In this case, perhaps a mini-series or a two-parter would have quelled these disappointments. But perhaps not have matched the explosive, intense, almost breath-taking at times, nature of this film.
Overall Outlaw King is a fine addition to the family of historical films, and perhaps one the best medieval ones yet. It should be taken for what it is, not what it could have been; a quick, brief search on Wikipedia would work a treat for anyone looking to get a better estimation of this film. 9/10.
Although it is understandable how many get lost within the story, it skips much character building and connections between each fighting scene, in sacrifice for fitting in several important confrontations, especially the end pitched Battle of Loudoun Hill - in which Bruce achieves his astonishing victory. In this case, perhaps a mini-series or a two-parter would have quelled these disappointments. But perhaps not have matched the explosive, intense, almost breath-taking at times, nature of this film.
Overall Outlaw King is a fine addition to the family of historical films, and perhaps one the best medieval ones yet. It should be taken for what it is, not what it could have been; a quick, brief search on Wikipedia would work a treat for anyone looking to get a better estimation of this film. 9/10.
Expecting to see a historical movie, your expectation represents the start point. High, skeptical, mix of hope and doubts. But this film is the best answer. For impecable cinematography, for admirable performances, for Chris Pine beautiful job and for atmosphere who seems be the ideal spice in this case. Sure, it is, in same measure, too short and too long. It is far to be the second part for "Braveheart".But it gives more than yours expectations. A great story, impressive fight and battle scenes, care for details and a powerful, convincing lesson about fundamental values. In the age of blockbusters, it is a "must see ". For the force to remind old fashion historical movies in the clothes of present tools. So, more than a nice surprise.
I was told this is worth watching, and it was. Basically a continued story after Braveheart, this was well done and had good battle scenes and emotion. A great role for Chris Pine, and quite different from anything I've seen him in.
So I had no idea what this was going to be about, but the movie works even without any previous knowledge. Actually even if you haven't seen Braveheart, you will get thrown into circumstances that you will get very quickly. Maybe not have seen Braveheart works better for some, because they won't compare the two movies, no matter when they play time wise in History.
Having said all that, Chris Pine is really relishing in a role that is quite difficult to pull off. He has to be tough yet show a "softer" side too. Especially when it comes to his wife. Now how much of this is accurate, I can't tell, because I'm not read up on the details of what actually happened. I'm guessing that the bigger events/fights are more or less accurate. There is blood, there is a bit of nudity and there is a lot of fighting with swords ... if that sounds like "fun" to you, the movie will be entertaining. And you will also learn a little bit of actual history
Having said all that, Chris Pine is really relishing in a role that is quite difficult to pull off. He has to be tough yet show a "softer" side too. Especially when it comes to his wife. Now how much of this is accurate, I can't tell, because I'm not read up on the details of what actually happened. I'm guessing that the bigger events/fights are more or less accurate. There is blood, there is a bit of nudity and there is a lot of fighting with swords ... if that sounds like "fun" to you, the movie will be entertaining. And you will also learn a little bit of actual history
As a Scot I can say that I found this film superb, great acting, scenery as expected stunning and the filmography amazing. Even the accent of Chris Pine was spot on and the storyline fantastic. The negative Joe's will do their usual and look for the faults as they do in every film rather than having watched someone they like but still feel the need to pick a fault, so ignore these as the film is brilliant in every way (and no I don't work on it, or was an extra)
¿Sabías que…?
- TriviaThe first nine minutes of the film is one continuous choreographed tracking shot, beginning with a closeup on a candle flame, to oaths of fealty, to a duel and finishing with the firing of a trebuchet on a castle.
- ErroresIn the film, Elizabeth de Burgh is married to Robert the Bruce as a part of his submission to England in 1304. In reality, Robert and Elizabeth were married two years earlier having met at the English court.
- Citas
Robert Bruce, Earl of Carrick: You could fight for God, or country, or family. I do not care, so long as you fight!
- Créditos curiososFilmed on location entirely in Scotland (according to the borders of 1320)
- Versiones alternativasFollowing a screening of the film at the Toronto International Film Festival, director David Mackenzie decided to cut 20 minutes from the film. Among the scenes cut was a battle scene set against the backdrop of a waterfall, an eight minute chase sequence and an encounter between Robert the Bruce and William Wallace in the woods.
- ConexionesFeatured in CTV News at Six Toronto: Episode dated 5 September 2018 (2018)
Selecciones populares
Inicia sesión para calificar y agrega a la lista de videos para obtener recomendaciones personalizadas
- How long is Outlaw King?Con tecnología de Alexa
Detalles
- Fecha de lanzamiento
- Países de origen
- Sitios oficiales
- Idiomas
- También se conoce como
- Outlaw/King
- Locaciones de filmación
- Productoras
- Ver más créditos de la compañía en IMDbPro
Taquilla
- Presupuesto
- USD 120,000,000 (estimado)
- Tiempo de ejecución
- 2h 1min(121 min)
- Color
- Mezcla de sonido
- Relación de aspecto
- 2.39 : 1
Contribuir a esta página
Sugiere una edición o agrega el contenido que falta





