Rob Roy

"Rob Roy" was made at a time when the success of "Dances with Wolves" and "Unforgiven" had revived interest in the traditional Western, and director Michael Caton-Jones, himself a Scot, has admitted that the film is essentially a disguised Western. It transfers what could be a classic Western plot from 19thcentury America to early 18th century Scotland, with claymores standing in for six-shooters. The hero is even a cattle drover or, as Americans would put it, a cowboy. That hero, Robert Roy MacGregor, was a real historical figure who also features in Walter Scott's novel of the same name. ("Roy" in this context was a nickname, derived from Gaelic, meaning "red-haired", but here it is treated as a second Christian name; Liam Neeson does not play the part in a red wig).

The film does not follow Scott's plot but is loosely based on the facts of the real MacGregor's life. In 1713 Rob Roy, a clan chief in the Scottish Highlands, is financially ruined by the machinations of the unscrupulous Marquess of Montrose and his villainous protégé Archibald Cunningham. (Cunningham is fictitious but Montrose was another real person). Cunningham has been described as an "aristocrat", but this is not really accurate because, for all his dandyish appearance and foppish mannerisms, he is really the illegitimate son of a prostitute and does not know who his real father is. Montrose has probably taken him under his wing because he recognises in him a kindred spirit, equally unscrupulous and even more ruthless.

When Rob Roy is unable to repay the money he owes, Montrose has him declared an outlaw, seizes his land and slaughters his cattle; Cunningham brutally rapes his wife Mary. Rob Roy and his followers, who have fled into hiding in the mountains, wage a guerrilla campaign of revenge against Montrose, stealing his cattle and other property.

This was one of two historical films with a Scottish setting made in 1995, the other being the Oscar-winning "Braveheart". The two films share one feature, namely a somewhat disapproving attitude towards homosexuality, which today makes them look rather old-fashioned, even though they were only made around twenty years ago. In "Braveheart" the future King Edward II is portrayed as stereotypically weak and effeminate, whereas here the treacherous Cunningham is gratuitously made bisexual, a lover of boys as well as women, a piece of characterisation which the scriptwriter presumably thought would make him seem all the nastier.

That said, I must say that I found "Rob Roy" a considerably better film than the much-hyped "Braveheart". Mel Gibson's epic is a reasonably entertaining adventure story, but it does have its faults, quite apart from its many historical inaccuracies. It is overlong by at least half an hour, and the acting is of a variable standard. In "Rob Roy" Caton-Jones paces the action in a more satisfactory way than does Gibson, and the acting is also a lot better. I was not too keen on Tim Roth's performance, as I felt that he made Cunningham a bit too much of a one-dimensional pantomime villain, but there are three outstanding contributions from Neeson, Jessica Lange and John Hurt.

Despite his status as Chief of Clan MacGregor, Rob Roy lives simply in a modest house which contrasts sharply with Montrose's elaborate palace. The code by which he lives is equally simple- honesty, loyalty and honour; when Montrose offers to forgive Rob's debt if Rob will testify falsely against one of Montrose's enemies, Rob indignantly refuses. Hurt's Montrose appears to be an elegant, courtly gentleman, but his surface sophistication hides a ruthless opportunist who will use other people in any way he can, provided it is to his advantage. Mary MacGregor could simply have come across as a hapless victim and little else, but Lange (who copes well with the Scottish accent) instead plays her as a tough, independent-minded woman who frequently disagrees with her husband even though she loves him dearly.

The sword-fighting scenes, particularly the climactic duel between Rob Roy and Cunningham, were well handled; the film-makers clearly realised that the Scottish claymore was a heavier weapon than the duelling rapiers more commonly seen on screen and called for a different fighting style. Overall this is a splendid, stirring historical yarn on the themes of honour, love and loyalty. 8/10

Well done, scenic, finely made film, Liam Neeson is great here and shoulda had the same basic part in Phantom Menace, he is a force of nature here. Roth is a great nasty, Hurt too. I thought the assault scene on Jessica was tough to watch but that crap did happen. The British were tyrants up in the High Heather in the 1700s even as they were in the 1300s in 'Bravehearts' day.

I see this as a bit of a forerunner to Braveheart, though they came out at about the same time, it shoulda done better at the box office and ditto at the Oscars.

***1/2, and boys...that final fight between Roth and Liam...my o my.

"Rob Roy" came out in 1995 with a couple other heroic swordplay films: "Braveheart" and "First Knight." I prefer "Rob Roy" to "Braveheart," even though the two films shouldn't really be compared since "Rob Roy" focuses on the conflict of individuals in Old Scotland and "Braveheart" focuses more on whole armies battling.

The location cinematography of the Scottish Highlands is breathtaking (and superior to "Braveheart"). Liam Neeson and Jessica Lange are fine in the roles of Rob Roy and his wife. The sword-fighting (between individuals) ranks with the best in cinematic history. The film also possesses a very realistic vibe -- no anachronisms or campy humor here; the pic really helps one realize what life was like in rural Scotland 300 years ago.

What works best, to my mind, is Tim Roth's exceptional performance as Rob Roy's foppish-but-deadly nemesis. This is a villain you love to loathe. The Roth character is so foppish that he appears somewhat effeminate; but this is merely disguise as he's actually a ruthless master swordsman. Surely this is one of film's top villains ever (It doesn't sound right to say "good villain," does it?).

On the downside, the story doesn't have a lot of drive from beginning to end unlike, say, "Last of the Mohicans." Your attention may wander at points. Of course this may not be an entirely bad thing in light of the schizophrenic editing of many films post-"Armageddon" (1998). In other words, the leisurely pace can be refreshing.

There are aspects not appropriate for children: Sexual brutality (a rape scene) and vulgarity (a man shoves his fingers up a woman's nightgown); as well as blatant love-making. There are also overt scenes of, believe it or not, urination; many may regard this as needless, but (for me) it helped drive home the point of what everyday life was like back then, e.g. Where do you pee if you're living in a shack out in the hills? Or, in the middle of the night, if there's no upstairs bathroom?

The story's lack of drive prevents "Rob Roy" from attaining true greatness in my mind, but the positive aspects noted above certainly achieve greatness and there are several memorable scenes.

The film runs 2 hours, 19 minutes, and was shot entirely in Scotland.

GRADE: B+

This is a very good, under-rated action/drama/and slightly historical movie.

The basic story concerns Rob Roy's borrowing of 1000 pounds, its theft, and the problems it causes for his family and indirectly his clansmen.

Cunningham( Tim Roth) is an amazing villain and character in this story. Brutally cold and if you watch his face he seems to be able to turn his eyes off and look completely evil.

Rob Roy (Liam Neeson) is excellent too, but i think the writers used the word "honour" 1 too many times.

The rest of the cast is strong, and the whole movie is very well acted and filmed.

The Action is exciting and the sword play very realistic, but not too gory. The story is good and you really want Rob to win.

All in all just shy of a classic.

Rob Roy is directed by Michael Caton-Jones and written by Alan Sharp. It stars Liam Neeson, Jessica Lange, John Hurt, Tim Roth, Eric Stoltz, Andrew Keir and Brian Cox. Music is by Carter Burwell and cinematography by Karl Walter Lindenlaub.

Neeson is Rob Roy MacGregor, an 18th Century Scottish historical figure who borrows £1,000 from the Marquis of Montrose (Hurt) with the plan to improve his clan's way of life. But the money is stolen in transit by the dastardly Archibald Cunnigham (Roth), so unable to repay the loan, Roy is forced to live as an outlaw. From such seeds are legends born.

Beautifully shot on location in parts of the Scottish Highlands, Rob Roy somewhat got lost in the slip stream of Mel Gibson's Braveheart. A shame, for although not as epic or as rousing as Gibson's Oscar grabber, Caton-Jones' film is a different and more reflective type of historical piece. Thematically the film is a play on virtues, in fact it's a trumpet playing fanfare for such. Honesty, honour, loyalty, fidelity and love nestle in nicely with the wonderful landscapes, born out by Sharp's intelligent script. But that's not to say that the director hasn't got the requisite thrust of stirring adventure within, he has, and Rob Roy rewards in that department as well. The films crowning glory is a climatic sword fight, no tricks or hard to believe heroics, just an expertly shot long sequence that's choreographed sublimely by William Hobbs and Robert G. Goodwin. While Carter Burwell's score sits nice with the visual treats - even if the Gaelic strains within the orchestration sound more Irish than Scottish...

Cast work well. Although Neeson looks the part as the robust Roy, there's no need for being dashing here, character calls for strength of mind and body, as well as emotional fortitude with the love of his family, and thus Neeson plays it with ease. Lange, an interesting casting choice as the missus, shorn of make up, yet still naturally sexy, she gives Mary MacGregor believable strength. However, it's undeniably Tim Roth's movie, part effeminate fop, part calculating bastard, his villainous turn as Archibald Cunningham has to be seen to be believed. He was rightly nominated for an Academy Award for his efforts. The rest impact well, Cox and Hurt, great pros as always, and Stoltz too isn't found wanting. There's some iffy accents at times, so what's new there? And if I'm to be churlish, then it often feels wrong in period. Yet they are small complaints in what is otherwise a smart and lovely splinter from the swashbuckling tree. 8/10