Outlaw King : Le Roi hors-la-loi

The older generation of Scottish nobles tired of war and surrendered to the English King Edward, but the younger generation only surrendered reluctantly. After his father's death, Robert the Bruce (with a reasonable claim to the Scottish throne) led a rebellion, with multiple victories and losses, in battles small and big.

There are too many minor Scottish leaders who joined the cause, only to be slaughtered in the battles. (I can't call them cannon fodder - cannons had yet to be invented.)

The film is spectacular on the big screen, especially the large-battle scenes. I saw it in a 2000-seat theatre at the Toronto International Film Festival. I'm not sure it will translate well to TV, unless you have something like a 70-inch beast.

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.

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.

Outlaw King is a eminently enjoyable film. The acting is serviceable, but the costumes, period sets, and cinematography is world-class. The battle scenes are realistic to the point a few may find certain ones too much so. The story works and it's not meant to be any kind of definitive history lesson which it is not. That would be a different movie and would likely be too long eschewing much of the entertainment factor which is the point here. It gets the gist of something historical and makes it interesting and highly entertaining. I think it's well worth watching.

This was a legitimately moving and entertaining movie. The acting is absolutely fantastic, the cinematography is impeccable and the practical effects are undeniably realistic.